|
chizelz
Apr 5, 2004, 2:06 AM
Post #1 of 30
(5141 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 3, 2004
Posts: 262
|
still working on my home wall, and I am now trying to plan out some lead anchor locations. I have figured out a solid anchor detail, but my dilemma now is how far apart to space them as well as how far off the ground to place the first one.... this may sound like a noob question..... well it is. I havn't lead before, and thought what better way to learn than from the comfort of my home gym. The wall itself will be 26' high. Any advice you could provide would be greatly appreciated. My first thought was to have the first anchor at 8' off the ground and then ever 4' thereafter.... your thoughts??
|
|
|
|
|
illimaniman
Apr 5, 2004, 2:22 AM
Post #2 of 30
(5141 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 21, 2002
Posts: 128
|
My personal thought would be 10', 16', 22', and some rappel anchors at the top. In my opinion, 4' is too close together.
|
|
|
|
|
itakealot
Apr 5, 2004, 2:37 AM
Post #3 of 30
(5141 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 8, 2003
Posts: 382
|
Place a practice anchor where you will be just a few inches off the ground so you can get a good stance to practice clipping with both hands and with the gate facing you and away from you.
Then switch out the clipping holds or place a variety of clipping holds around the bolt, from jugs to crimps..
For the climb place the bolt high enough where you won't crater and don't place the 2nd bolt too high where you would crater as well.
The more you can practice a solid clip, the more energy you will have to run the crux. I see many climber sketch on the clip since they do not know how to settle into a positive stance and then they start to get mindfLIcked then comes the yell to take.
|
|
|
|
|
mheyman
Apr 5, 2004, 3:04 AM
Post #4 of 30
(5141 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 25, 2002
Posts: 607
|
In reply to: "My personal thought would be 10', 16', 22', and some rappel anchors at the top. In my opinion, 4' is too close together."
4ft sounds close but this is a short wall.
IMHO 10 & 16 are to far that low - as a mater of fact I'd rather have 12 and 16 cause I won't be in danger of ground fall when making the second clip. With 10 and 16 when you clip that second bolt you will have slack- say 1 foot. So, you have seven feet of rope out to fall from a 10 foot bolt. Throw in rope stretch, some belayer movement, and your gonna touch - if you are lucky not hard and not the wrong way, but why set it up like this in the first place.
Bolt at 22 and anchor at 24? Guess I'd go with 12, 16, 20 and 24. This allows hard moves and poor clipping stances in a short wall. Short falls will keep the fall factor down and lengthen rope life too.
|
|
|
|
|
chizelz
Apr 5, 2004, 4:42 PM
Post #5 of 30
(5141 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 3, 2004
Posts: 262
|
Thanks for your input, having never lead I appreciate your advice... just a thought, but would anchors @ 4' o.c. vertically not give the option of missing a clip, or mixing it up a bit more??? again please excuse my ignorance, just thinking out loud.
|
|
|
|
|
jkarns
Apr 5, 2004, 4:54 PM
Post #6 of 30
(5141 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 13, 2003
Posts: 542
|
Another note:
You have not mentioned the angle of the wall. Leading on a vertical indoor wall is not so much fun. All the holds sitck out and whack you as you fall. I would note recommend setting your wall up for leading unless it is overhanging (which it should be anyway to maximize your workout).
|
|
|
|
|
chizelz
Apr 5, 2004, 5:09 PM
Post #7 of 30
(5141 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 3, 2004
Posts: 262
|
right you are I didn't mention the overhang... unfortunatly where the wall is located in my house, only allows me to go vertical. Believe me I would have loved to have added an overhang to the whole thing, but it wouldn't work with the design of the space.
|
|
|
|
|
bustloose
Apr 7, 2004, 10:04 PM
Post #8 of 30
(5141 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 10, 2003
Posts: 489
|
you have room IN your house for a 26' foot climbing wall?? yeah, right.
|
|
|
|
|
chizelz
Apr 8, 2004, 12:53 PM
Post #9 of 30
(5141 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 3, 2004
Posts: 262
|
bustloose, is that doubt I sense??? The pics will come once its up..... but yea 26'. The house is a 30' high "cube" with a curved element that disects the house in half, the curve itself varies from 20+' at the low end to 40+' feet at the other. My climbing wall is located with the curve, and therefore can only get max 26' of height. Hard to believe... um.. if you imagine a typical residential home yes, but this is far from typical. This wasn't meant to be a discussion about my house... but understand why it happened, and understand your doubt. Any advice on the origional post??
|
|
|
|
|
jimdavis
Apr 10, 2004, 11:00 PM
Post #10 of 30
(5141 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 1, 2003
Posts: 1935
|
How are you anchoring the bolts? Tell me your going through some kind of welded steel frame. Anything less and you might be taking out a piece of the wall and having it chase you on the way down. I'd place at 10', 14', 18', 22' and at the top.
Because 10' will be your first clip, it's ok to have high; i doesn't matter that your clipping above your head cause there is nothing to keep you in until you clip. That way you'll eliminate a little bit of rope drag by having that 1st point up a little higher.
|
|
|
|
|
dredsovrn
Apr 11, 2004, 12:47 AM
Post #11 of 30
(5141 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 24, 2003
Posts: 1226
|
4' is a little close. Just make sure you won't deck if you fall while making the next clip.
|
|
|
|
|
chizelz
Apr 12, 2004, 12:52 PM
Post #12 of 30
(5141 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 3, 2004
Posts: 262
|
Thank you to all who contributed advice. The blocking has now been installed, and I tried to take a happy medium of all that was suggested. My first bolt was at 7'-6" above the floor. That height, worked out best for fitting in-between joints of my sheets which are running horizontally. From the first clip I continued them up @ 5'-0" o.c. Most people thought that the 4'-0" centers were a little close, but at the same time I didn't want to run them out too far, I figure the more clipping practice the better. As I mentioned my sheets are running horizontally, making an 8'-0" wide wall. I installed anchors in two rows vertically, spaced roughly @ 1/3rds of the sheet. Probably a little overkill, but the bolts and anchors were pretty cheap, and I figured it would give me a lot more opportunity for different routes.
jimdavis,
In response to your question, I am anchoring both the lead bolts and top rope anchors the same way. Because this is an exterior wall of a residential house, there were quite a few things to consider for this detail, namely insulation, and vapor barrier. The wall itself is built of pre-engineered wood studs, (because of their span 26+ feet) spaces filled with r20 batt insulation, and 6mil poly v.b.. 2x6 blocking was installed between the studs on the flat, with a 3/8" dia bolt sticking through. The bolt was glued as well as embedded into the back of the 2X6 on the flat. (so I didn't loose it in the wall cavity while installing the plywood) The bolt then continues through 3/4" plywood to the hanger. (the 3/4" plywood has a strength similar to an 1-1/2" thick piece of spruce, so I have provided 3" of solid wood for the bolt to go through)
|
|
|
|
|
chizelz
Apr 15, 2004, 9:18 PM
Post #13 of 30
(5141 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 3, 2004
Posts: 262
|
finally got around to getting a pic of the wall up, or at least where the wall will be.....
Future home of my indoor wall
|
|
|
|
|
bustloose
Apr 16, 2004, 2:25 PM
Post #14 of 30
(5141 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 10, 2003
Posts: 489
|
holy shit. nice house. apologies for the doubt, but there are just so many posers on here that want to look cool.
that will be an impressive home wall.
phil.
|
|
|
|
|
chizelz
Apr 16, 2004, 2:33 PM
Post #15 of 30
(5141 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 3, 2004
Posts: 262
|
Thanks Phil, and no need to apologize, I would have doubted me too, it is far from typical.
|
|
|
|
|
tattooed_climber
Apr 22, 2004, 4:03 PM
Post #16 of 30
(5141 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2003
Posts: 4838
|
quick little sub-catagory question, is there anything wrong with bolting a hanger into a T-nut?...this will prob be only for taking body weight and not falls...(i'm still builting my bouldering cave)
|
|
|
|
|
chizelz
Apr 22, 2004, 4:57 PM
Post #17 of 30
(5141 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 3, 2004
Posts: 262
|
In reply to: quick little sub-catagory question, is there anything wrong with bolting a hanger into a T-nut?...this will prob be only for taking body weight and not falls...(i'm still builting my bouldering cave)
My first reaction would be yes there would be something wrong with bolting a hanger into a T-Nut.... now only you will be able to "police" your anchor but "probably only for taking body weight" to me means that someday it will be used to take a fall..... but only you will know that. The shoulder on a tnut isn't very wide, and even though it would take a fair amount of force to pull "anything" through a 3/4" piece of plywood, (again equivilent to ~1-1/2" thick solid wood blocking) I still wouldn't chance it. The t-nut doesn't distribute the force over a very large area. Would it work to hold your weight carefully loaded.... I am pretty sure it would. Would I use it for an anchor... nope. Throw a couple of layers of 3/4" scraps where your anchor will be, with a big heavy washer and a good 3/8" bolt, and I think it would be a whole lot safer.
|
|
|
|
|
imnotclever
Apr 22, 2004, 5:17 PM
Post #18 of 30
(5141 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 8, 2003
Posts: 10000
|
In reply to: 2x6 blocking was installed between the studs on the flat, with a 3/8" dia bolt sticking through. The bolt was glued as well as embedded into the back of the 2X6 on the flat. (so I didn't loose it in the wall cavity while installing the plywood) The bolt then continues through 3/4" plywood to the hanger. (the 3/4" plywood has a strength similar to an 1-1/2" thick piece of spruce, so I have provided 3" of solid wood for the bolt to go through)
It may be too late, but here you didn't mention the connection from the 2x6 to the studs. If you can, give this connection some consideration and make it as stout as you can.
p.s. The lead anchor points for climbing gyms are designed for 4400 pounds. If you lay 2 - 2x6 together with the 5.5" sides touching and run a 16 penny nail into them, that nail should be good to resist about 150 pounds of shear.
|
|
|
|
|
chizelz
Apr 22, 2004, 5:31 PM
Post #19 of 30
(5141 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 3, 2004
Posts: 262
|
In reply to: It may be too late, but here you didn't mention the connection from the 2x6 to the studs. If you can, give this connection some consideration and make it as stout as you can.
In reply to: p.s. The lead anchor points for climbing gyms are designed for 4400 pounds. If you lay 2 - 2x6 together with the 5.5" sides touching and run a 16 penny nail into them, that nail should be good to resist about 150 pounds of shear.
How do "climbing gyms" achieve lead anchor points designed for 4400 pounds? I am not sure what you are trying to say with the 16 penny nail example??? Are you comparing this to a lead anchor?? Can you please elaborate....
|
|
|
|
|
imnotclever
Apr 22, 2004, 6:39 PM
Post #20 of 30
(5141 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 8, 2003
Posts: 10000
|
Climbing gyms usually have the lead anchor points attached directly to structural steel. The top rope anchors are connected directly to the steel structure as well. All of these points are designed for the 4400 pounds.
My point about the nail example is that with wood connections are very weak. You probally have less than 300 pounds capacity per side of that 2x6, or a total of 600 pounds. This is the weak part of your system.
It is backed up by the sheet of plywood that is attached to your studs, however.
IF your system fails it will likely be the connection at the 2x6 to the stud failing first which will then cause the force to be transferred to the back side of the plywood in bearing. The plywood will either punch loose locally or enough of the screws holding the plywood on will pull out. Hopefully the screws will keep the plywood on.
So, be mindful of this connection and make it strong.
|
|
|
|
|
chizelz
Apr 22, 2004, 6:55 PM
Post #21 of 30
(5141 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 3, 2004
Posts: 262
|
In reply to: My point about the nail example is that with wood connections are very weak. You probally have less than 300 pounds capacity per side of that 2x6, or a total of 600 pounds. This is the weak part of your system. It is backed up by the sheet of plywood that is attached to your studs, however. IF your system fails it will likely be the connection at the 2x6 to the stud failing first which will then cause the force to be transferred to the back side of the plywood in bearing. The plywood will either punch loose locally or enough of the screws holding the plywood on will pull out. Hopefully the screws will keep the plywood on. So, be mindful of this connection and make it strong.
Thanks for your explanation, and for your contribution. There is some good food for thought there. Given anchors spaced at 5'-0" o.c. (overkill I know) there would be no long runouts and no high forces generated. Given the anchor spacing, the connection details, the materials used, as well as all the load sharing by materials, do you, in your opinion see this system failing under normal climbing conditions???
|
|
|
|
|
imnotclever
Apr 22, 2004, 8:22 PM
Post #22 of 30
(5141 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 8, 2003
Posts: 10000
|
In reply to: Given the anchor spacing, the connection details, the materials used, as well as all the load sharing by materials, do you, in your opinion see this system failing under normal climbing conditions???
A good question. Here is the bad answer. I don't know. I don't think the connection is very good. The 2x6 connected to the plywood might reinforce the plywood enough so that local failure doesn't happen, which may cause the plywood to engage enough srews to stay on. (This is what happens when you pull on any hold anyway.)
It also alludes to the difference between design loads and actual loads. You will never see the 4400 lbs at that connection. But who knows what you will acutally see. The strenght of the nail that I list is an allowable strength and not an ultimate one. The difference is that ultimate is failure and allowable is some multiple of the failure i.e. 0.5, 0.66, whatever.
This is one of those cases where "bigger is better" and "when in doubt make it stout". Sorry I can't help any more than that.
|
|
|
|
|
chizelz
Apr 23, 2004, 12:28 PM
Post #23 of 30
(5141 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 3, 2004
Posts: 262
|
In reply to: A good question. Here is the bad answer. I don't know. I don't think the connection is very good. The 2x6 connected to the plywood might reinforce the plywood enough so that local failure doesn't happen, which may cause the plywood to engage enough srews to stay on. (This is what happens when you pull on any hold anyway.)
In reply to: It also alludes to the difference between design loads and actual loads. You will never see the 4400 lbs at that connection. But who knows what you will acutally see. The strenght of the nail that I list is an allowable strength and not an ultimate one. The difference is that ultimate is failure and allowable is some multiple of the failure i.e. 0.5, 0.66, whatever.
In reply to: This is one of those cases where "bigger is better" and "when in doubt make it stout". Sorry I can't help any more than that. |
|
|
|
|
mheyman
Apr 23, 2004, 1:49 PM
Post #24 of 30
(5141 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 25, 2002
Posts: 607
|
In reply to: Given anchors spaced at 5'-0" o.c. (overkill I know) there would be no long runouts and no high forces generated.
Important! Fall forces are not solely determined by how far you fall, but are determined by fall factor. Fall factor is the length of rope that catches the fall, divided by the length of the fall. Fall wise, strongest anchors need to be near the bottom of the wall because you can never have a high fall factor falling onto an upper anchor with the belayer on the ground. The top anchors though will see many many cycles of load unload over time.
My real point is that having a short wall does not lessen the forces you need to design for in any way. Further you cannot be sure that some will not skip a clip – either intentionally or accidentally, or that the rope won’t ever unclip possibly because of a back-clip.
Great opportunity for a wall though. Wish I had one!
|
|
|
|
|
chizelz
Apr 23, 2004, 1:57 PM
Post #25 of 30
(5141 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 3, 2004
Posts: 262
|
In reply to: Important! Fall forces are not solely determined by how far you fall, but are determined by fall factor. Fall factor is the length of rope that catches the fall, divided by the length of the fall. Fall wise, strongest anchors need to be near the bottom of the wall because you can never have a high fall factor falling onto an upper anchor with the belayer on the ground. The top anchors though will see many many cycles of load unload over time.
In reply to: ......Further you cannot be sure that some will not skip a clip – either intentionally or accidentally, or that the rope won’t ever unclip possibly because of a back-clip
In reply to: Great opportunity for a wall though. Wish I had one! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
