|
talons05
Nov 27, 2001, 9:55 PM
Post #26 of 65
(4636 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 23, 2001
Posts: 1435
|
Newbie, I am done trying to help you. I hope you finally listen before you end up as a puddle at the bottom of some cliff. You are ignorant not because you don't know the info, but because you refuse to accept the fact that there are others here more knowledgeable than yourself on this subject. Good luck ever finding any good climbers willing to go out with you.
AW
|
|
|
|
|
jds100
Nov 28, 2001, 11:27 PM
Post #27 of 65
(4636 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 5, 2001
Posts: 1008
|
Newbie: thanks for your most recent posts on this forum. I've found them most enlightening. I wasn't before, but now I'm sure: you are in fact a dick.
Austin: nice try with this guy, but they're gonna need a much bigger set of calipers to measure an asshole this size.
[ This Message was edited by: jds100 on 2001-11-28 15:29 ]
|
|
|
|
|
talons05
Nov 28, 2001, 11:55 PM
Post #28 of 65
(4636 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 23, 2001
Posts: 1435
|
Haha. Ok jeff.
AW
|
|
|
|
|
addiroids
Nov 29, 2001, 1:58 AM
Post #29 of 65
(4636 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 11, 2001
Posts: 1046
|
Newbie, you are a f*cking moron. Seriously listen to those dudes (atg200 etc) who gave you advice. Real climbing isn't about numbers and kN. It is about not dieing. Learn to place gear properly. Place it when ever you want. Carry 20 slings with 2 biners on them each to clip in. Don't be a dumbass.
"Climb like you are soloing.
Protect like you may fall at any moment."
And my own:
Figure that half of your placements are totally crap, the other half are questionable. Climb accordingly!
TRADitionally yours,
Addiroids
|
|
|
|
|
newbieclimber
Nov 29, 2001, 2:16 AM
Post #30 of 65
(4636 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 9, 2001
Posts: 129
|
unfortunately directions given on this forum about how often to place gear so that your system of protection will keep you from decking were much like your pearl of wisdom:
"place it when ever you want."
or the one I liked best:
"place it whenever you come to a good stance or rest spot"
certainly none of which can even qualify as intelligent advice. my primary concern is to learn how often I need to place gear so that if I fall my system of protection will keep me from decking. that requires that a climber constantly be aware of how good the placements are and hence make a judgement on the forces they can be expected to withstand, how far above the last piece she is and the resulting forces that will be generated by a fall from that height, and an awareness of how much rope is out and how much force that will disipate.
i am aware that more frequent placements need to occur at the start of a pitch but "frequent" is a very subjective term. more frequent relative to what baseline? does it mean every 1ft? every 10 ft.? does it depend on your body weight? height? no one here seems to know and that makes me wonder about the sanity of the people that are trad climbing on this site. maybe that is just the natural process of cleaning out the gene pool.
if you dont understand the forces invovled in trad climbing how can you ever know whether your system of protection will keep you off the deck if you fall? and if you cant build such a system can you really consider yourself a trad climber? just plugging in gear and getting to the top of a pitch doesnt mean you built a safe system. as far as you know you were soloing.
[ This Message was edited by: newbieclimber on 2001-11-28 18:40 ]
|
|
|
|
|
wigglestick
Nov 29, 2001, 4:35 PM
Post #31 of 65
(4636 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 27, 2001
Posts: 1235
|
Place pro so that your fall factor does not exceed 1.0. It is as simple as that. Yes that means that if you are at the top of a 50m pitch and your last piece was at 25m, and you placed it well and it can withstand 2000 lbs of force than you can take the big ride and the piece will hold. You might hit the ground because of rope stretch but are assuming you are higher up on a multipitch route.
But that also means that if you are 5 feet above the belay that you had better have a bomber piece at 2.5 feet from the belay. Are you starting to get it. The actual distance is not what matters it is the fall factor.
Now when you find a route that allows you to place pro is such an anal retentive way than let me know. Other than places with splitter cracks like Indian creek, your placement options will be limited. So you have to use your best judgement. And that we cannot help you with.
|
|
|
|
|
newbieclimber
Nov 29, 2001, 5:13 PM
Post #32 of 65
(4636 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 9, 2001
Posts: 129
|
Place pro so that your fall factor does not exceed 1.0. It is as simple as that.(wigglestick)
wrong. fall factor is just the the length of rope out divided by the distance fallen. that completely ignores how much force your gear can withstand. if your gear is poor and can withstand only 1000 lbs of force the spacing of your gear will be different than if the gear is fairly bomber and can withstand 2000 lbs of force. since the force on your gear is directly proportional to the distance you fall you can space out your pro twice as far when your gear can withstand 2000 lbs of force verses 1000 lbs of force.
next!
[ This Message was edited by: newbieclimber on 2001-11-29 09:21 ]
|
|
|
|
|
wigglestick
Nov 29, 2001, 5:32 PM
Post #33 of 65
(4636 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 27, 2001
Posts: 1235
|
Sorry newbie but you are wrong and this is the last time I am going to bother explaining it to you. The force you apply to your gear is not proportional to the distance you fall. It is proportional to the fall factor. A fall of fall factor 1.0 regard less of if it is a 50 meter fall or a 5 meter fall places pretty close to the same force on the gear. That is the magic of the dynamic cord. Besides, I was using the value of 2000 lbs per your original post
Quote:assuming your pro will withstand up to 2000 lbs of force, what is the correct spacing of pro on a 165 ft. pitch so that it will prevent you from decking in case you fall?
Pinscar- I think you forgot to carry the one or misused the laplace transform. I come up with a value of 6.6456348 feet per placement. FYI
[ This Message was edited by: wigglestick on 2001-11-29 09:39 ]
[ This Message was edited by: wigglestick on 2001-11-29 09:41 ]
|
|
|
|
|
talons05
Nov 29, 2001, 6:53 PM
Post #34 of 65
(4636 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 23, 2001
Posts: 1435
|
Newbie "i've never done a trad lead in my life" climber:
'"place it whenever you come to a good stance or rest spot"
certainly none of which can even qualify as intelligent advice.'
You fool. You have never climbed trad, so of course you have no idea what he is talking about. Unless you can hang from a sloping crimper with no foot support long enough to get in a solid cam or hex placement, then you aren't going to make a placement from that spot, whether it's necessary or not. I can't wait to hear the story of your first trad lead on 5.6 when you have to go and post in the "Accidents and Injuries" forum.
AW
|
|
|
|
|
newbieclimber
Dec 1, 2001, 4:58 AM
Post #35 of 65
(4636 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 9, 2001
Posts: 129
|
"The force you apply to your gear is not proportional to the distance you fall. It is proportional to the fall factor." (wigglestick)
correct (though with a given amount of rope out the force you apply to your gear is also proportional to the distance you fall). however advising climbers that building a safe system involves nothing more than keeping your fall fators under 1 is wrong. that is the same as the advice given in a previous post which said you only needed to place gear just often enough so that the length of the rope plus rope stretch did not reach the ground. its wrong because the forces generated by less than factor 1 falls are more than enough to rip out gear with a holding power of 2000 lbs.
"Besides, I was using the value of 2000 lbs per your original post." (wigglestick)
really? then how should you space your gear if all your protection has a holding power of 2500 lbs.
next!
[ This Message was edited by: newbieclimber on 2001-12-02 01:00 ]
|
|
|
|
|
naturalhigh
Dec 3, 2001, 7:24 AM
Post #36 of 65
(4636 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 24, 2001
Posts: 131
|
I think I can make this simple. When leading, YOU DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH FORCE YOUR GEAR WILL HOLD. So we can, therefore, dispense with all the numbers concerning holding power and such, being purely academic and irrelevent to the field. Pure and simple, experience shows that gear can hold when placed properly, and sometimes not. Therefore, it is a bit of a crap shoot, but we just have to do the best we can.
Moving on. We have the fall factor to consider, plus the fact that we wish to design a system that won't allow us to deck. Regarding how often to space pro to prevent decking I refer you to the earlier post with the very nice pictures. Of course, like others have mentioned, you just might not be able to place pro at that height. Crack filled with moss, climbing a clean face with no pro opportunities, unable to place pro since you are relying on both hands to hold you to the wall, etc. Such a stretch, where you can't place pro for time w/o falling is called being RUNOUT. IT HAPPENS
Now, let's look at fall factor. According to your earlier post, fall factor 2 is not the highest fall factor. Really? Let's see, assuming you climb a full pitch of 50m (using meters since real calculations are done in meters and kN, not feet and pounds) and don't place any pro, except at the belay, and then peel off, you will fall 100m before the rope begins to stretch. Now, last time I checked, 100m/50m = 2. In fact, if you can think of a way to generate a fall factor greater than 2 (not accounting for the minor increase due to rope stretch, which doesn't really count anyways (which would be btw, using the fall distance acheived at halfway point of stretch, be equal to 2.05, assuming 10% stretch)), then I'll give you the Noble Prize. Please, in your next post, show me your calculation that gives you a fall factor greater than 2.
So, let's see. We have told you the proper distances to place gear, down to giving you precise numbers even. You have been warned that this is not always possible, and to adjust accordingly (ie improvise on the spot... it's called thinking). In addition, you are right to mistrust your gear! It could fail you! If that's a big worry, go sit at home a watch tv or take up underwater basket weaving; it'll be safer.
To sum up how to place pro on a trad route:
*Place gear often early, spacing out as you climb higher.
*Also place gear when you it is easiest to do so, conserving your energy when on a difficult stretch.
*Learn to read the rock and understand how solid a placement is - PRACTICE THIS.
*Find an experienced trad climber to show you the ropes. How do you know they know what they're doing? They are still alive.
Next!
|
|
|
|
|
wigglestick
Dec 3, 2001, 3:37 PM
Post #37 of 65
(4636 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 27, 2001
Posts: 1235
|
I don't mean to defend Newbieclimber but I will take that nobel prize if it is still up for grabs.
Imagine this you have a belay station set up and you start to lead above it. You are 20 feet above your belayer and have no protection in yet. You fall and since your belayer was so nervous about this very scenario she begins to yard in rope so that you don't fall as far. So while you are falling she pulls in 5 feet of slack. So the total distance you fall is 20+15=35 feet. However there is now only 15 feet of rope out which means your fall factor=35/15=2.33!!! Not very likely scenario but it could happen. Belayers take note. Taking in that extra slack is not doing anybody any favors.
|
|
|
|
|
darkside
Dec 3, 2001, 6:28 PM
Post #38 of 65
(4636 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 15, 2001
Posts: 1687
|
Good point wigglestick. very true but newbie will disagree anyway.
Newbie you are obviously a moron who will not heed advise but here's some anyway: go climb sport or boulder.
If you want to place gear try every foot and with a little luck maybe some of the placements will hold.
BTW weight and force are not the same. Force is an effect resulting from mass moving over a distance, in this case(climbing)the formula is
FORCE = MASS X GRAVITY
Mass and weight are not the same, as mass is a constant while weight is dependant on gravity. When a man goes to the moon he weighs less but his mass remains unchanged. Gravity has changed. When a climber falls his mass does not change, his weight does not change, gravity does not change: the distance he falls may change and therefore the force he exerts on the pro may change. It would seem you don't understand this subtle point of physics anymore than trad.
NEXT.
Grant
|
|
|
|
|
newbieclimber
Dec 3, 2001, 7:12 PM
Post #39 of 65
(4636 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 9, 2001
Posts: 129
|
"When leading, YOU DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH FORCE YOUR GEAR WILL HOLD. So we can, therefore, dispense with all the numbers concerning holding power and such, being purely academic and irrelevent to the field. Pure and simple, experience shows that gear can hold when placed properly, and sometimes not." (naturalhigh)
wrong. clearly as a starting point it would be unwise to assume your gear can withstand more force than the rated strength. even though you can never know with certainty what forces your gear will be able to withstand before pulling out of the rock you can make educated assumptions up to what forces you have a near certainty it will hold. in fact if you are unable to do that you probably shouldnt be trad climbing at all.
as for your disdain for numbers and holding powers as being irrelevant and academic i for one am happy that companies like black diamond take those numbers very seriously when testing their gear.
assuming that all your gear has a holding power of 2000 lbs is a good place to start. those placements would all be fairly bomber a long as your gear is rated higher than that. it makes sense that you should know how often to place pro when your gear is good so that if you have to place some gear that is less than bomber you will know how much sooner you need to place the next piece.
"BTW weight and force are not the same." (darkside)
i never said they were. i said weight is a force. generally, a force on a body is given by the equation:
F = ma
where m=mass and a=acceleration
weight is given by the equation
W = mg
where g is the acceleration of gravity.
"Force is an effect resulting from mass moving over a distance, in this case(climbing)the formula is
FORCE = MASS X GRAVITY" (darkside)
wrong. so if a climber is hanging from her gear and is not moving you are saying there is no force on her gear since no mass is moving? a mass can be at rest and forces can still be acting on it. "work" on the other hand is the result of a force applied over a distance. also notice that your formula for force is actually the formula for weight yet you argue that force and weight are not the same.
next!
[ This Message was edited by: newbieclimber on 2001-12-03 12:37 ]
|
|
|
|
|
jds100
Dec 3, 2001, 7:42 PM
Post #40 of 65
(4636 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 5, 2001
Posts: 1008
|
It's already been established that Newbie is a complete prick and idiot (a perfect example of why first-cousins shouldn't marry), so this is in response to Wigglestick.
I'm not sure, but I think you're scenario for a 2.33 factor fall isn't quite correct. I might not understand all the math, but I, too, thought a Factor 2 fall was the max, so... I think that if the belayer somehow miraculously draws in 5 feet of rope in the initial milisecond of the otherwise 20 foot fall, that reduces the length of the rope that's out, but not the actual length above the last piece of pro, which is still 20 feet, and still the denominator in the equation, I think. Thus: (20+15=35)/20, and that's less than a Factor 2 fall (1.75). Your equation uses the length of the rope that's out as the denominator, not the actual height above the last piece of pro.
Did I use the wrong number for the denominator? If I am correct, then I apologize for the loss of the Nobel Prize, but there are still plenty of other categories.
Now, let's all click our heels together, and try to send Newbie back to Kansas for some appropriate trad climbing.
|
|
|
|
|
newbieclimber
Dec 3, 2001, 7:50 PM
Post #41 of 65
(4636 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 9, 2001
Posts: 129
|
"I might not understand all the math, but I, too, thought a Factor 2 fall was the max.."
fall factor is the distance fallen divided by the length of rope between the belayer and the climber. the length of rope out when the climber begins to decelerate is important because it is what absorbs a lot of the force. it does not matter whether the length of rope is above the last piece or not. all of the rope between the belayer and the climber is available to absorb the force of the fall. if you believe that only the rope between the last piece and the climber absorbs the forces of the fall then you must believe there is no tension applied to the rope between the last piece and the belayer. if that were the case then the belayer could unhook the belay device and walk away and the climber wouldn't hit the deck.
[ This Message was edited by: newbieclimber on 2001-12-03 12:07 ]
|
|
|
|
|
jds100
Dec 3, 2001, 7:54 PM
Post #42 of 65
(4636 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 5, 2001
Posts: 1008
|
By the way, for anyone other than the arrogant a$$hole who started this forum, I believe the ratings on the gear -the numbers expressing "strength", etc.- refer to breakage of the component materials, and have nothing to do with how the piece will perfom on the rock. Obvious to most, but not all, is the fact that there are different types of rock, and even the same chunk of rock can be less secure from one season to the next.
This trad gear is made of materials that in and of themselves will not break, up to the stated loads; the numbers have nothing to do with the quality of the rock, nor with the quality of the actual placement -use- of the piece of gear. The climber has to know the rock, and how to properly and effectively place the gear.
The premise, question and scenario that the SmugOne started with are all false. That's why everyone has had to work so hard to answer the question: because we had to redefine it first.
Kansas, Kansas, Kansas....
[ This Message was edited by: jds100 on 2001-12-03 11:56 ]
|
|
|
|
|
jds100
Dec 3, 2001, 8:02 PM
Post #43 of 65
(4636 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 5, 2001
Posts: 1008
|
The response by Smug-n-Arrogant, above, has nothing to do with explaining why a Factor 2 Fall is or is not the maximum Fall Factor. There is no question as to the length of rope between the belayer and the climber.
Wiggle: my question is what part of the matrix is the correct denominator in the equation?
|
|
|
|
|
wigglestick
Dec 3, 2001, 8:02 PM
Post #44 of 65
(4636 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 27, 2001
Posts: 1235
|
jds100- you did the math correctly but you used the value of 20 for the length of the rope out. Remember that only 15 feet of rope is absorbing the fal since the belayer took in 5 feet. So it is 20 (distance above the last piece) + 15 (distance the climber will fall past the belay) = 35 (total length of fall)
35/15 (length of rope that is absorbing the fall) = 2.33
I realize this is a pretty contrived scenario but it could happen. Especially with sport climbers. Imagine the climber falls before clipping the second bolt and yells "TTTAAAAAKKKKKKKEEEEE"
The belayer wil draw in the slack while the climber comes down. Now this fall factor will not exceed 2 but the point is that by bringing in that extra few feet of slack you are unwittingly increasing the fall factor. But if it keeps you partner from hitting the ground than go for it. I only post this as food for thought for belayers.
|
|
|
|
|
jds100
Dec 3, 2001, 8:13 PM
Post #45 of 65
(4636 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 5, 2001
Posts: 1008
|
Thanks, Wiggle; I just went to the Petzl site, as directed by your link in the earlier part of this forum (duh!), and according to the formula there (which is the Gold standard), your scenario CAN create a Fall Factor greater than 2. Excellent point!
And, I apologize to everyone from Kansas; I hope you can understand my hope to send Schist-Head back to the other side of the rainbow.
|
|
|
|
|
atg200
Dec 3, 2001, 8:26 PM
Post #46 of 65
(4636 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 27, 2001
Posts: 4317
|
Hi,
Yup, fall factors can go pretty high. That is why via ferratas are so dangerous without load limiters of some kind on the lanyard.
newbie is an illustration of another good formula:
A = P/E
where P = arrogant posturing level
and E = actual trad experience
plugging in values of
A = 100/1
we see that newbieclimber has an A(asshole) factor of a perfect 100.
|
|
|
|
|
newbieclimber
Dec 3, 2001, 9:30 PM
Post #47 of 65
(4636 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 9, 2001
Posts: 129
|
"I realize this is a pretty contrived scenario but it could happen. Especially with sport climbers. Imagine the climber falls before clipping the second bolt and yells "TTTAAAAAKKKKKKKEEEEE"
The belayer wil draw in the slack while the climber comes down. Now this fall factor will not exceed 2 but the point is that by bringing in that extra few feet of slack you are unwittingly increasing the fall factor. But if it keeps you partner from hitting the ground than go for it." (wigglestick)
wrong. in that scenario the belayer will be reducing the fall factor by taking in rope.
with any falls less than factor 1 if a belayer is able to take in rope the fall factor is reduced. with fall factors over 1 taking in rope increases the fall factor.
next!
[ This Message was edited by: newbieclimber on 2001-12-03 23:55 ]
|
|
|
|
|
wigglestick
Dec 3, 2001, 9:50 PM
Post #48 of 65
(4636 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 27, 2001
Posts: 1235
|
Ok, I admit it. You are right this time. I wrote without thinking. But when I wrote it I was trying to contrive a situation where the fall factor would be greatest while sport climbing. And I guess I didn't think it through enough. But it didn't slip through did it? Newbie wins. Next.
"He does have a point"
"That's his head"
|
|
|
|
|
graniteboy
Dec 4, 2001, 5:59 AM
Post #49 of 65
(4636 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 1, 2001
Posts: 1092
|
Newbie: you seem pretty pissy and opinionated abt this whole thing. I suggest you do what I do; Freesolo. Then you don't have to worry abt all that stupid clanky gear, and (in your case) you won't be acting like a smart ass know it all (who is allegedly a neophyte as well) and making your partner want to kill you. Nothing makes me wanna chop my alpine partners up into itsy bitsy pieces with my sacred ice tools more than them being a know it all beginner.
So here's an even BETTER scenario than all the crap you wrote above: Newbie's been talking crap to his grouchy old trad partner about all this, and then he starts to lead. His partner decides to fix Newbie's wagon, and takes him off belay when NewB is 50 feet up, and solos up to newbie while Newbie's pissing his pants. Then the grouchy old trad passes Newbie just before Newbie peels. How much force did Newbie apply to the ground? 2000 lbs???
PS newB; it's possible to take a fall w/ higher than force factor 2. Just clip into one of those euro-cables directly with a biner sometime, and jump off from 30 feet above the last anchor point. You will snap your back and produce a force factor 3 or more, easily.
A lead rope kink getting snagged in something (like a crack) while you fall can produce the same effect: 50 ft fall on 1 foot of rope. Geez; Imagine...
[ This Message was edited by: graniteboy on 2001-12-03 22:03 ]
[ This Message was edited by: graniteboy on 2001-12-03 22:10 ]
|
|
|
|
|
darkside
Dec 4, 2001, 9:45 AM
Post #50 of 65
(4636 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 15, 2001
Posts: 1687
|
Newbie, newbie, newbie. What are we to do. I've been re-reading some of the other forums you've posted in and why is it that you seem so determined to cause strife. Maybe you are a newbie climber(???) but you are by no means new to upsetting people. I could find fault with your arguments but I tire of banging my head on this wall. I do not intend to post in this forum any more. How about we all leave newbie to his own......
Next
|
|
|
|
|
|
