|
|
|
|
alex913
Jun 21, 2005, 8:05 PM
Post #1 of 8
(2269 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 30, 2005
Posts: 10
|
Ladies and Gentlemen:
I have graduated to leading my first sport route (5.6 at Williamson Rock, CA). Upon lowering me after my ascent, my wife--who weighs 40-45 lbs less than I do--had a hard time keeping her feet on the ground after locking me off on her ATC.
Here is our source of confusion:
In all of the climbing books we've read there is a lot of discussion regarding the friction of a belay device stopping a fall. There is only limited discussion regarding anchoring the belayer to prevent the belayer from lifting or slamming into the cliff face. However, having read a lot of posts in the "Belay Device" section of the "GEAR" page on this site, there are reports that praise the ability of a particular belay device to stop a fall by a heavy leader even by a light belayer. That's why we're confused.
Doesn't the force of a fall have to go somewhere (taking into account the stretch of the rope, etc.)? I mean, if the belay device produces a lot of friction, doesn't that put more force on the belayer's stance, i.e. lifting the belayer? And if the belay device does NOT produce a lot of friction, isn't that more forgiving on the belayer?
My wife and I are trying to solve the problem of her being lighter than me and having the ability to stop my lead fall without herself getting lifted or slammed. There is no way to set up a belay anchor where we climb.
Thanks in advance for all your suggestions.
Alex
|
|
|
|
|
jpdreamer
Jun 21, 2005, 8:14 PM
Post #2 of 8
(2269 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 14, 2000
Posts: 232
|
When lead climbing, if the leader is signifigantly heavier than the belayer, then the belayer would likely benefit from an anchor of some sort. A tree works well, you can also sling a rock or place a piece or two.
If nothing else, you could use a third person as an anchor.
|
|
|
|
|
off_center
Jun 21, 2005, 8:22 PM
Post #3 of 8
(2269 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 4, 2004
Posts: 100
|
Stopping Power seems to refer more to the ease with which the belayer prevents rope from running through the belay device, which has nothing to do with whether or not the belayer can stay on the ground.
Since you can't anchor her to the ground, you might try having her give you a 'softer' catch; have a little rope slide through the device during the catch, rather than completely locking-off. This will lessen the impulse on the belayer by spreading it out over longer period of time (obviously we're talking very short amounts of time), hopefully enough that she can stay on the ground. If not, fill her pockets up with rocks and sand.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Jun 21, 2005, 8:44 PM
Post #4 of 8
(2269 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: Ladies and Gentlemen: I have graduated to leading my first sport route (5.6 at Williamson Rock, CA). Upon lowering me after my ascent, my wife--who weighs 40-45 lbs less than I do--had a hard time keeping her feet on the ground after locking me off on her ATC. Here is our source of confusion: In all of the climbing books we've read there is a lot of discussion regarding the friction of a belay device stopping a fall. There is only limited discussion regarding anchoring the belayer to prevent the belayer from lifting or slamming into the cliff face. However, having read a lot of posts in the "Belay Device" section of the "GEAR" page on this site, there are reports that praise the ability of a particular belay device to stop a fall by a heavy leader even by a light belayer. That's why we're confused.
You may be less confused than whoever wrote the thing that confused you (that made a lot of sense). The belayer's weight relative to his partner's has no direct relation with the belayer's ability to hold a fall, though the belayer's hand strength does, if the fall is severe and he is using a non-autoocking belay device.
In reply to: Doesn't the force of a fall have to go somewhere (taking into account the stretch of the rope, etc.)?
The energy has to "go somewhere"; that is, energy is conserved.
In reply to: I mean, if the belay device produces a lot of friction, doesn't that put more force on the belayer's stance, i.e. lifting the belayer?
Yes.
In reply to: And if the belay device does NOT produce a lot of friction, isn't that more forgiving on the belayer?
"More forgiving" is a poor choice of words here. First off, let's get this out of the way: for the kind of routine lead falls we're talking about here, any properly used belay device will provide enough braking force so that no significant amount of rope will slip through the device. Thus, the effect on the belayer will be the same, regardless of the belay device used, autolocking or not. Where it will make a difference is on more severe falls, where the leader falls past the belayer, as can occur on a multi-pitch route. Such falls will produce forces that exceed the braking force of a non-autolocking belay device, and will cause some rope to run through the device before the fall is arrested. For a given fall, a belay device that allows rope to run through it will result in less force on the belayer than one that doesn't allow the rope to run. Whether this is really "less forgiving" on the belayer is questionable, though, since the belayer has to maintain control of the belay with the rope running through the device. If she's not wearing gloves, she might have trouble doing so.
In reply to: My wife and I are trying to solve the problem of her being lighter than me and having the ability to stop my lead fall without herself getting lifted or slammed.
If you can't anchor her, she's going to get lifted when you fall, so she needs to learn to respond correctly; there is no reason that she should ever be slammed into the wall. Where she stands when belaying you is critical. She should be as close to the wall as possible (most beginners belay too far back), so that she will be lifted straight up, not pulled into the wall, and she should be directly below the first bolt, unless that puts her directly below you, in which case, she should stand just far enough to the side that you won't fall directly onto her or hit her with a rock, should you break a hold (which, BTW, is a frequent occurance at Wmson). She also needs to learn to get her feet out in front of her when she is lifted, so that she can use her legs to absorb the impact into the wall.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
chanceboarder
Jun 21, 2005, 8:45 PM
Post #5 of 8
(2269 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 6, 2003
Posts: 1348
|
in situations where your belayer is much lighter then the climber and there is no anchor available you're belayer is going to have to get used to be pulled off the ground in the event of a fall. all belay devices that you can use will hold a fall and prevent the rope from slipping through no more then a couple of inches when properly used.
if you have an anchor available use it. if you don't then have your wife stand as close to the wall as possible and even put a foot against the wall if she can. this will prevent her from being pulled into and slamming against the wall in the event of a fall. the force will still pull her up but she wont go flying forward. don't let her belay from far back cuz when you fall she'll go skidding across the ground as you go flying towards it. the same thing goes for when she's lowing you, stay close to the wall and lean back in her harness to help her put a little more weight on there. if she's having problems just holding the rope when you fall and it slipping through the belay device too much you may want to think about investing in a gri gri.
i out weigh my partner by a good 80 pounds or so and she's never had a problem belaying me and catching my falls with an ATC. they've got plenty of holding power. having your belayer come off the ground a little in a fall makes for a nice soft catch as long as you're not in danger of decking on anything.
|
|
|
|
|
alex913
Jun 21, 2005, 8:59 PM
Post #6 of 8
(2269 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 30, 2005
Posts: 10
|
Wow!!! Thank you for the almost instantaneous and remarkably INFORMATIVE replies!!! I sent the link to this post and your replies to my wife's e-mail address already.
We have a regular ATC (not XP version with the teeth), a B-52 that I used once on military rope (so I don't know what its like on a regular rope, especially on belay) and a Wild Country Variable Controller that I found in the Sierras at the base of a crag. I know it is almost silly to ask which is best/easiest to lock off (assuming that's the intent) without having compared them in the field, would you provide any input?
What about the Reverso? Should it be used on sport routes?
Thanks again,
Alex
|
|
|
|
|
craftedpacket
Jun 21, 2005, 9:16 PM
Post #7 of 8
(2269 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 9, 2004
Posts: 187
|
There is nothing wrong with using an autolocking device for catching lead falls on sport. A gri-gri, cinch, or some other autolocking device is great. An autolocking device is good if you think your wife might not be able to stay locked off with an ATC type device while she is being pulled up because of the weight difference. I like the added level of comfort. The autolocking device is also good if the leader is working a hard problem and will be hanging alot. A reverso is really similar to an ATC as far as the stopping method, its only used in locking mode for belaying from the top of a route. Hope this helps.
|
|
|
|
|
davidji
Jun 21, 2005, 9:52 PM
Post #8 of 8
(2269 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 30, 2003
Posts: 1776
|
In reply to: We have a regular ATC (not XP version with the teeth), a B-52 that I used once on military rope (so I don't know what its like on a regular rope, especially on belay) and a Wild Country Variable Controller that I found in the Sierras at the base of a crag. I know it is almost silly to ask which is best/easiest to lock off (assuming that's the intent) without having compared them in the field, would you provide any input? |
|
|
|
|
|
