|
kachoong
Jun 7, 2005, 5:13 AM
Post #26 of 33
(2472 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 23, 2004
Posts: 15304
|
In reply to: Extra credit question: What is the limit of the fall factor as the amount of slack added increases? -Jay |
|
|
|
|
climbsomething
Jun 7, 2005, 5:28 AM
Post #27 of 33
(2472 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 30, 2002
Posts: 8588
|
Boardline says here:
In reply to: My parents, I'm 15, arn't as worried of my getting hurt but me spending my money on equipment. They think it's a fad lmao
and here:
In reply to: I started rock climbing (gym) a little bit ago and I love every moment of it.
Conclusion: Inexperienced children should not be rope soloing.
|
|
|
|
|
kachoong
Jun 7, 2005, 5:40 AM
Post #28 of 33
(2472 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 23, 2004
Posts: 15304
|
In reply to: In reply to: Question for those who have used a gri-gri for SB: Is there a chance it may not lock if you load it slowly? if you sit on it slow enough, it slides a bit, but in a gym, the ropes are generally pretty fat so this usually isnt much of a problem. the main problem is having to suck up slack every move or two. this is difficult and really should not be done unless you're actually setting the route- because there's a good chance you'll pop at some point and ground fall is a real issue in the gym.
If the fall is long enough and the Grigri has shifted on the carabiner there is potential for the biner to be crossloaded. This could be a problem! A mallion would be better to attach the Grigri to on your harness. Stronger and less likely to crossload.
But "Boardline", as stated above.... you really shouldn't be rope soloing in a gym under those circumstances.... learn more about it AND find someone to climb with!
|
|
|
|
|
ringlock
Jun 7, 2005, 6:22 AM
Post #29 of 33
(2472 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 29, 2005
Posts: 5
|
penalty slack!!
|
|
|
|
|
viciado
Jun 7, 2005, 11:33 AM
Post #31 of 33
(2472 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 9, 2003
Posts: 429
|
In response to the OP, IMHO you seem to need more experience. Ask a competente person face to face to help you rather than getting virtual internet advice.
|
|
|
|
|
bigjonnyc
Jun 7, 2005, 12:03 PM
Post #32 of 33
(2472 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 17, 2004
Posts: 369
|
Jay, I believe you are wrong in this case. There is no way possible that there can be a fall factor of greater than 1 in this solo TR case. As many of us know, a fall factor is the ratio of the fall length to the length of rope out in the system. If you were solo TRing from a line that was tied off at the anchors at the top of the climb, and at some point the ascender/belay device stopped taking slack, then the total length of rope out would be the would be equal to the greatest fall length, i.e. the climber reaches the top and falls, and thus the fall factor would be 1. if the climber were tied in, the rope fed through the anchors, and back to the ascender/belay device, then it would be the same as the previous case, except that there would be twice as much rope in the system, so the fall factor in this case would be 1/2.
|
|
|
|
|
oldsalt
Jun 7, 2005, 1:39 PM
Post #33 of 33
(2472 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 19, 2004
Posts: 919
|
In reply to: There is no way possible that there can be a fall factor of greater than 1 in this solo TR case. As many of us know, a fall factor is the ratio of the fall length to the length of rope out in the system. If you were solo TRing from a line that was tied off at the anchors at the top of the climb, and at some point the ascender/belay device stopped taking slack, then the total length of rope out would be the would be equal to the greatest fall length, i.e. the climber reaches the top and falls, and thus the fall factor would be 1. if the climber were tied in, the rope fed through the anchors, and back to the ascender/belay device, then it would be the same as the previous case, except that there would be twice as much rope in the system, so the fall factor in this case would be 1/2.
He is correct on the fall factor. For static rope, the danger is not the fall factor, but the full impact of the fall on the body. Without rope stretch, the middle of the falling body stops and the upper and lower portions of the body keep going to the detriment of the spine.
The Petzl BASIC is approved for TR self-belaying in their documentation, however, the teeth can easily damage the sheath of the rope. The Ti-Block has still longer teeth and can involve the core on a fall.
I use the Rescuecender, because it is a cam without teeth. It can slip, which is not necessarily a bad thing. However, high impact testing has shown that cam devices can cut a rope.
The Rescuecender (and the Ti-Block and BASIC for that matter) will pass a weighted rope easily and catch a fall reliably. Still, it is better not to fall.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
