|
sterlingjim
Apr 21, 2006, 9:03 PM
Post #76 of 91
(12359 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 7, 2006
Posts: 251
|
It appears that 71% of the responders just don't get it. :wink:
|
|
|
|
|
tradklime
Apr 21, 2006, 11:43 PM
Post #77 of 91
(12359 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 2, 2002
Posts: 1235
|
In reply to: It appears that 71% of the responders just don't get it. :wink:
I think you mean 81%, and I agree with your sentiment.
|
|
|
|
|
roy_hinkley_jr
Apr 22, 2006, 12:15 AM
Post #78 of 91
(12359 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 8, 2005
Posts: 652
|
And 71% of that 81% started climbing after the cordedeath was introduced. They all think it's ancient history and well tested when actually it is neither.
|
|
|
|
|
jimdavis
Apr 22, 2006, 12:29 AM
Post #79 of 91
(12359 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 1, 2003
Posts: 1935
|
In reply to: You didn't answer my question. You are talking about an entirely new way of using the cordellette. It may be the way to go, but just for the sake of argument let's focus on the statically equalized design. Let's say we are not using Equallettes or Sliding X's. Okay?
Your joking right?
Your requesting that we fix a problem, without elimination the root of it.
Static equalization is the problem...There's nothing to argue about.
You asked how do we fix the problem of unequal load distribution... this is how to rig an anchor still using the same cord.
Dunno what else your expecting....
Jim
|
|
|
|
|
anchorhead
Apr 22, 2006, 3:35 AM
Post #80 of 91
(12359 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 18, 2006
Posts: 3
|
In reply to: Let us suppose that some of us would like to continue to use the cordellette in the tied-off mode, that is, with static equalization, the "traditional" configuration. Given what has been learned, what would you do differently in the way you set up the anchor? Let's call this an interim solution pending the release of John's new book. We know that unequal lengths are worse than equal lengths with regard to the individual legs. Vertical cracks by their very geometry tend to lead to unequal lengths. This is because we prefer to hang below our anchor point. There are more points above us than below us. The upper legs tend to be longer so the bottom tends to take most of the load. What can we do to reduce unequal lengths? 1) Minimize the angle between pieces. I would say that the 45 degree angle mentioned above would be the extreme case for me. I try to keep it smaller than that. 2) Build the anchor with the pieces arrayed horizontaly whenever possible. 3) If you can't do (1) or (2), then use dyneema runners to extend from the individual piece to reduce the unequalness. What else?
Here's an idea. I posted a picture to this site titled
"cordelette w better static equalization". Once approved I hope I
can add a link to it. In lieu of that, words will have to do.
Don't pre-tie your accessory cord. Tie
one end to the center anchor with your knot of choice, string the
outer anchors as you normally do with a cordelette, and tie your
power point. You'll end up with one strand going to the center
anchor, 2 strands to each of the outer anchors, and a loose tail
hanging out of the power point knot. The loose tail can be tied
to a second center anchor if you want to make a 4-anchor system.
This should
1) improve on the distribution of forces considerably.
2) let you use your 20 ft accessory cord for other purposes such as
rescue, hauling packs, or helping a neophyte over a scramble crux.
That double fisherman is a bear to untie.
BTW, like everything in climbing you have to make tradeoffs. The
advantage of 45 degree legs is that you can spread out your anchors
a bit more to improve the diversity on the rock, if that's what you
want to optimize. The well known disadvantage is the increase in
force on the outer anchors if the center anchor(s) fail. It all depends
on what you're trying to protect against.
|
|
|
|
|
jimdavis
Apr 22, 2006, 4:07 AM
Post #81 of 91
(12359 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 1, 2003
Posts: 1935
|
In reply to: Here's an idea. I posted a picture to this site titled "cordelette w better static equalization". Once approved I hope I can add a link to it. In lieu of that, words will have to do. Don't pre-tie your accessory cord. Tie one end to the center anchor with your knot of choice, string the outer anchors as you normally do with a cordelette, and tie your power point. You'll end up with one strand going to the center anchor, 2 strands to each of the outer anchors, and a loose tail hanging out of the power point knot. The loose tail can be tied to a second center anchor if you want to make a 4-anchor system. This should 1) improve on the distribution of forces considerably.
2) let you use your 20 ft accessory cord for other purposes such as
rescue, hauling packs, or helping a neophyte over a scramble crux.
That double fisherman is a bear to untie. BTW, like everything in climbing you have to make tradeoffs. The advantage of 45 degree legs is that you can spread out your anchors a bit more to improve the diversity on the rock, if that's what you want to optimize. The well known disadvantage is the increase in force on the outer anchors if the center anchor(s) fail. It all depends on what you're trying to protect against.
http://www.umit.maine.edu/..._small.JPG?WasRead=1
here ya go!
Jim
|
|
|
|
|
sterlingjim
Apr 23, 2006, 3:10 AM
Post #82 of 91
(12359 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 7, 2006
Posts: 251
|
In reply to: I think you mean 81%, and I agree with your sentiment.
I suppose you're right. I was just giving that middle 10% the benefit of the doubt.
I don't like the last two choices much though. How about 'one probably won't die using it but one should use something else.'?
I used a cordelette once and thought 'damn, this is a waist of time' and chucked it off the cliff. OK, I didn't actually chuck it off the cliff but I gave it away then and there.
|
|
|
|
|
clmbnski
Apr 23, 2006, 7:02 PM
Post #83 of 91
(12359 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 11, 2002
Posts: 85
|
Well after all the talk I am still unconvinced that the cordelette tied in its traditional configuration is as horrible as some people make it out to be.
I do use a slightly different system now though. If there are pieces in my anchor that are lower strength like smaller nuts,cams, ect. I connect them with the magic x and then incorporate that into the rest of the anchor making a sort of hybrid.
Sorry to those who want different poll options, but I am not going to change it because last time it messed the poll up for a week. Besides I think the current choices are pretty representative.
In reply to: I used a cordelette once and thought 'damn, this is a waist of time' and chucked it off the cliff. OK, I didn't actually chuck it off the cliff but I gave it away then and there. |
|
|
|
|
jimdavis
Apr 23, 2006, 7:26 PM
Post #84 of 91
(12359 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 1, 2003
Posts: 1935
|
In reply to: Well after all the talk I am still unconvinced that the cordelette tied in its traditional configuration is as horrible as some people make it out to be.
So why start this thread, then?
You've had John Long, and Jim Ewing step in and flat out tell you the cordelette sucks. There is no-one else closer to this research, and it's implications, than these 2 guys right here.
If your not going to take the word of the 2 guys that actually performed the research...what the hell are you going to believe?
Jim
|
|
|
|
|
clmbnski
Apr 23, 2006, 8:08 PM
Post #85 of 91
(12359 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 11, 2002
Posts: 85
|
In reply to: If your not going to take the word of the 2 guys that actually performed the research...what the hell are you going to believe?
John Long and Jim Ewing definitely have credibility, and are worth listening to but I am not going to come to the same conclusions until see more data, because that is just the way I am. So far I have seen about a three sentence summary of the testing data. What would convince me is somesort of technical writeup, as someone else also requested, detailing methods, raw data, discussion ect. If that has been posted already let me know.
Am I the only one who thinks being skeptical is a good thing? Isnt that what science is all about, not just taking something on faith but saying show me your evidence. When you are taking physics or chemistry or any other class the instructor doesnt just say "well this is the way it is" but rather why and how it came to be. The point is that just telling me is not going to convince me.
|
|
|
|
|
jimdavis
Apr 23, 2006, 8:45 PM
Post #86 of 91
(12359 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 1, 2003
Posts: 1935
|
In reply to: In reply to: If your not going to take the word of the 2 guys that actually performed the research...what the hell are you going to believe? John Long and Jim Ewing definitely have credibility, and are worth listening to but I am not going to come to the same conclusions until see more data, because that is just the way I am. So far I have seen about a three sentence summary of the testing data. What would convince me is somesort of technical writeup, as someone else also requested, detailing methods, raw data, discussion ect. If that has been posted already let me know. Am I the only one who thinks being skeptical is a good thing? Isnt that what science is all about, not just taking something on faith but saying show me your evidence.
Care to show the evidence you used to determine that the cordelette works well?
I mean, if your such a skeptic...and won't do anything until you see the hard data on it...what'd you base your descission to use a cordelette off of?
Johns evidence should be written up in his book...guess you'll have to wait till then to see the numbers...just like the rest of us. In the mean time, why would John and Jim stake their names on something they can't proove?
Jim
|
|
|
|
|
roy_hinkley_jr
Apr 23, 2006, 11:33 PM
Post #87 of 91
(12359 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 8, 2005
Posts: 652
|
In reply to: Am I the only one who thinks being skeptical is a good thing? Isnt that what science is all about, not just taking something on faith but saying show me your evidence. When you are taking physics or chemistry or any other class the instructor doesnt just say "well this is the way it is" but rather why and how it came to be. The point is that just telling me is not going to convince me.
Yet you blindly accepted the untested cordadeath :roll:
|
|
|
|
|
tradmanclimbs
Apr 24, 2006, 12:02 AM
Post #88 of 91
(12359 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 24, 2003
Posts: 2599
|
John allready did stake his name on something he did not prove. John was the one who convinced us all to use the cordelette in the first place 8^)
|
|
|
|
|
clmbnski
Apr 24, 2006, 1:15 AM
Post #89 of 91
(12359 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 11, 2002
Posts: 85
|
In reply to: Yet you blindly accepted the untested cordadeath Rolling Eyes
I have an open mind and will get the new anchor book when it comes out but the arguments I have seen against it on this website do not convince me that one should not use a cordelette.
Evidence that it works well: (And I am not saying it should be used all the time in every situation, but in general...)
-It is widely used and has been for some time
-It is very versatile and can be used in many different ways including self rescue
-It is quick and clean eliminating clusterfk
As far as SRENE goes I realize it has equilization problems but will conclude on the extent of the problem when I see the data.
If the new equalette or something similar can perform in a similar manner than I am all for it.
Chris
|
|
|
|
|
catbird_seat
Apr 24, 2006, 7:03 PM
Post #90 of 91
(12359 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 7, 2004
Posts: 425
|
In reply to: In reply to: Here's an idea. I posted a picture to this site titled "cordelette w better static equalization". Once approved I hope I can add a link to it. In lieu of that, words will have to do. Don't pre-tie your accessory cord. Tie one end to the center anchor with your knot of choice, string the outer anchors as you normally do with a cordelette, and tie your power point. You'll end up with one strand going to the center anchor, 2 strands to each of the outer anchors, and a loose tail hanging out of the power point knot. The loose tail can be tied to a second center anchor if you want to make a 4-anchor system. This should 1) improve on the distribution of forces considerably.
2) let you use your 20 ft accessory cord for other purposes such as
rescue, hauling packs, or helping a neophyte over a scramble crux.
That double fisherman is a bear to untie. BTW, like everything in climbing you have to make tradeoffs. The advantage of 45 degree legs is that you can spread out your anchors a bit more to improve the diversity on the rock, if that's what you want to optimize. The well known disadvantage is the increase in force on the outer anchors if the center anchor(s) fail. It all depends on what you're trying to protect against. here ya go! Jim
People are fond of saying now that the power point tie-off method was never tested, by which they mean it was never subjected to rigorous scientific study. In a sense though, it has been tested empirically by untold thousands of climbers in everyday use. The number of climbers who have died from anchor failure has been very small compared to other causes. If one could make some minor improvements to something that is arguably safe, why not?
|
|
|
|
|
jimdavis
Apr 25, 2006, 1:54 AM
Post #91 of 91
(12359 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 1, 2003
Posts: 1935
|
^^As someone else on this site put it: preventative medicine.
If you owned a car that had a potential issue with the airbag deploying...wouldn't you want it recalled? You still need to f* up (get in an accident in the first place) and you have a good ole seat belt, too...so it's no big deal, right? But you'd rather stack all the odds in your favor...wouldn't you?
Just my take on it...
Cheers,
Jim
|
|
|
|
|
|
