|
yomomma
Sep 23, 2005, 2:23 PM
Post #1 of 46
(5846 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 26, 2003
Posts: 65
|
You're 5 ft. above your last piece. You fall. With rope stretch and a bit of slack in the system you end up 20 ft. below your piece. Have you taken a 5 ft. fall, a 10 ft. fall or a 25 ft. fall?
|
|
|
|
|
saxfiend
Sep 23, 2005, 2:42 PM
Post #2 of 46
(5846 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 31, 2004
Posts: 1208
|
In reply to: You're 5 ft. above your last piece. You fall. With rope stretch and a bit of slack in the system you end up 20 ft. below your piece. Have you taken a 5 ft. fall, a 10 ft. fall or a 25 ft. fall?
JL
|
|
|
|
|
clarki
Sep 23, 2005, 2:49 PM
Post #3 of 46
(5846 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 24, 2004
Posts: 192
|
Well, we need to go all the way back to the Civil War for this one. Considering the fact that many 'necks still fly the confederate flag in their front yards thereby interfering with the natural flow of air near the crux traverse of Zoo View, AND, if you take into account the current barometric pressure near the eye of Hurricane Rita, what you get is, as the fabled John Long put it "a Homeric Peeler", that is to say, a fall of epic proportions
By falling 5 feet above your last piece, taking into account rope stretch, slack and the above considerations, you would wind up falling, by my calculations, approximately 17426.3 feet, placing you well into the crust of the earth.
|
|
|
|
|
saxfiend
Sep 23, 2005, 2:58 PM
Post #4 of 46
(5846 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 31, 2004
Posts: 1208
|
In reply to: you would wind up falling, by my calculations, approximately 17426.3 feet, placing you well into the crust of the earth.
JL
|
|
|
|
|
clymber
Sep 23, 2005, 3:00 PM
Post #5 of 46
(5846 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 8, 2002
Posts: 1259
|
clarki you put in the same exact reply as i was going to...how could that person call themselves a climber and not know how to figure out such a easy math problem....probably one of those gym rats
|
|
|
|
|
yomomma
Sep 23, 2005, 3:21 PM
Post #6 of 46
(5846 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 26, 2003
Posts: 65
|
Sorry, my bad. I should have known better than to ask a question on rc.com. I'll just slink on back to the gym.
|
|
|
|
|
clarki
Sep 23, 2005, 3:25 PM
Post #7 of 46
(5846 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 24, 2004
Posts: 192
|
C'mon Dan, don't be so sensitive.....Get your ass to the Hanging Rock Adopt-A-Crag day tomorrow (9/24-Tory's Den @ 9am) and when the day is over I'll buy you a beer :lol:
John
|
|
|
|
|
clarki
Sep 23, 2005, 3:27 PM
Post #8 of 46
(5846 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 24, 2004
Posts: 192
|
CHECK ME OUT! I HAVE 100 POSTS!!!! I AM THE COOLEST EVER!!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
veganboyjosh
Sep 23, 2005, 3:28 PM
Post #9 of 46
(5846 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 22, 2003
Posts: 1421
|
if you put a dollar in the slot machine, and get three lemons, and get 25 bucks back, but then gamble all that away, did you lose 1 dollar, 24 dollars, 25 dollars, or 26 dollars?
|
|
|
|
|
clarki
Sep 23, 2005, 3:31 PM
Post #10 of 46
(5846 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 24, 2004
Posts: 192
|
Do you get to keep the lemons?
|
|
|
|
|
microbarn
Sep 23, 2005, 3:33 PM
Post #11 of 46
(5846 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 12, 2004
Posts: 5920
|
In reply to: Have you taken a 5 ft. fall, a 10 ft. fall or a 25 ft. fall?
Yes
|
|
|
|
|
freeskicolorado
Sep 23, 2005, 3:53 PM
Post #12 of 46
(5846 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 19, 2004
Posts: 174
|
In reply to: In reply to: you would wind up falling, by my calculations, approximately 17426.3 feet, placing you well into the crust of the earth. This figure doesn't take into account the type of pro used as the last piece (cam vs. passive pro), or whether or not the climber was wearing a helmet. But it's probably close enough. JL
Or the ham sandwhich factor. The number of ham sandwhichs consumed prior to falling must play an extremely important role in the distance fallen.
Perhaps this question should be posed to subtle. He would surely lend insight on the subject.
|
|
|
|
|
yomomma
Sep 23, 2005, 4:23 PM
Post #13 of 46
(5846 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 26, 2003
Posts: 65
|
ok, let's put it a different way. John took a 30 ft. whipper. How far was he above his last piece?
|
|
|
|
|
renohandjams
Sep 23, 2005, 4:28 PM
Post #14 of 46
(5846 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 24, 2005
Posts: 616
|
In reply to: ok, let's put it a different way. John took a 30 ft. whipper. How far was he above his last piece? |
|
|
|
|
trenchdigger
Sep 23, 2005, 4:30 PM
Post #15 of 46
(5846 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 9, 2003
Posts: 1447
|
In reply to: ok, let's put it a different way. John took a 30 ft. whipper. How far was he above his last piece?
How attentive was his belayer?
|
|
|
|
|
saxfiend
Sep 23, 2005, 4:46 PM
Post #16 of 46
(5846 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 31, 2004
Posts: 1208
|
In reply to: In reply to: ok, let's put it a different way. John took a 30 ft. whipper. How far was he above his last piece? It depends on a lot of factors. You can't just say, oh he was excatly 15 feet above his last piece. He was probably less than that.
JL
|
|
|
|
|
caughtinside
Sep 23, 2005, 4:48 PM
Post #17 of 46
(5846 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30603
|
Good work, boys! Great thread! :lol:
|
|
|
|
|
grk10vq
Sep 23, 2005, 4:55 PM
Post #18 of 46
(5846 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 7, 2004
Posts: 527
|
So did he fall 5 feet or 17426.3 feet.
|
|
|
|
|
yomomma
Sep 23, 2005, 5:51 PM
Post #19 of 46
(5846 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 26, 2003
Posts: 65
|
In reply to: Right. If he was 15 feet above his last piece, and there was absolutely no slack in the system (highly unlikely), and there was zero rope stretch (!), and the belayer didn't budge an inch, then the fall would be 30 feet. In the real world, of course, there is slack and rope stretch etc. to factor in, you get the idea.
And that was the point of my original post. If someone says they took a 30 footer onto a red tricam, what does that tell you? They could have been 5 ft. above the piece high on the route or they could have been 10 or 12 ft. above the piece low on the route.
|
|
|
|
|
microbarn
Sep 23, 2005, 5:57 PM
Post #20 of 46
(5846 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 12, 2004
Posts: 5920
|
In reply to: ok, let's put it a different way. John took a 30 ft. whipper. How far was he above his last piece?
ok, the others already took the accurate position. You can't really tell because how much slack is in the system, how much the rope stretches, weight difference of belayer and leader, or if he is at the top of a climb or bottom.
I think I would like to throw out a number though. I will say 8 feet above your last peice will be a 30 foot fall.
16 foot fall from being 8 feet above a piece
4 feet of slack in the system if you were up pretty high in a pitch
4 feet from your belayer being lifted
6 feet of rope stretch
These numbers are very rough, but may give you some idea of what you are looking for.
|
|
|
|
|
ontherocks
Sep 23, 2005, 6:08 PM
Post #21 of 46
(5846 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 3, 2001
Posts: 155
|
In reply to: ok, let's put it a different way. John took a 30 ft. whipper. How far was he above his last piece?
Did his last piece hold? Was it any slack on the rope? How much dynamic elongation the rope admits? Was he traversing? How much slippage was on the belay? Was the belayer lifted or jumped? Was his rope cut on the fall? Was he using a rope at all (I guess he was)? Did John hit something on his way down that broke his fall? I wonder what you want to find out with these cryptic questions.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Sep 23, 2005, 6:21 PM
Post #22 of 46
(5846 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: In reply to: you would wind up falling, by my calculations, approximately 17426.3 feet, placing you well into the crust of the earth. This figure doesn't take into account the type of pro used as the last piece (cam vs. passive pro), or whether or not the climber was wearing a helmet. But it's probably close enough. JL
For the sake of completeness, you also have to consider how tall the climber is. For instance, say a 6-foot-tall climber took a so-called 5-foot fall. Since the final postition of his head would still be 1 foot above the initial position of his feet, according to one renegade school of fall theory, he hasn't actually fallen yet. In fact, some radical fall theorists would even argue that his true fall length was -1 foot.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
saxfiend
Sep 23, 2005, 6:30 PM
Post #23 of 46
(5846 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 31, 2004
Posts: 1208
|
In reply to: In reply to: Right. If he was 15 feet above his last piece, and there was absolutely no slack in the system (highly unlikely), and there was zero rope stretch (!), and the belayer didn't budge an inch, then the fall would be 30 feet. In the real world, of course, there is slack and rope stretch etc. to factor in, you get the idea. And that was the point of my original post. If someone says they took a 30 footer onto a red tricam, what does that tell you? They could have been 5 ft. above the piece high on the route or they could have been 10 or 12 ft. above the piece low on the route.
In reply to: You're 5 ft. above your last piece. You fall. With rope stretch and a bit of slack in the system you end up 20 ft. below your piece. Have you taken a 5 ft. fall, a 10 ft. fall or a 25 ft. fall?
. . . if you start five feet above your last piece and end up 20 feet below it, it's very simple -- you've fallen 25 feet. No mystery there.
JL
|
|
|
|
|
ontherocks
Sep 23, 2005, 6:34 PM
Post #24 of 46
(5846 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 3, 2001
Posts: 155
|
Also, if you keep your harness loose, you can have 1 foot wedgie that can increase the length of your fall in... let's say 1 foot, that had to be discounted from your distance to the last piece (if you are not traversing).
The damage and skin exposure can be also increased by wearing loose harness and pants and falling upside down (don't try it on slab).
|
|
|
|
|
dunn
Sep 23, 2005, 6:55 PM
Post #25 of 46
(5846 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 19, 2005
Posts: 3
|
Well, if I can leave the cubicle by 4:30, I could pick up Anthony by 4:45 from band, take him to the doctor by 5:15, be done shopping by 6:20 in time to meet the group at the gym by 7:00. gAAAAAsp. I am working on a the new orange boulder problem. I really wonder if John and Mia are still together. Man, Jake and Josh really need to slow it down. Hah, this nOOb punk wants to ask a serious question... AHHHHH...HHH... "Well, if you want to know that youll have to create an Algarithim to find the coefficient of X/y" Well, of to sleep.
Man, you guys really suck.
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
