Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Tobe
Trad climber
Ames, IA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Original Post - Feb 21, 2013 - 08:30pm PT
|
So today I was climbing and I started talking to a guy at the gym about multi pitch anchors and now I'm confused. Basically he told me my way of building an anchor is unsafe and "yer gonna die!!!!!!"
I learned to build an anchor in this manner:
-Plug 2-3 pieces of gear or clip existing bolts
-Run a cordelette through the pieces or bolts, and tie them off with a figure 8. (like how you would tie an overhand knot)
-Clip in to the master point directly or with a sling depending on the situation
-Belay second from the master point, or from a secondary belay anchor. (i usually go off master point for simplicity sake)
I have also used three slings to make an anchor as well.
He said my anchor was bad because the master point will not equalize as my body moves, but I cant think of a time where my body moved a significant amount while anchored.
His way was like this:
plug gear or clip bolts
clove hitch the pieces/bolts with the rope
clove hitch locking biner to harness and belay second from the body.
That doesnt make any sense to me, it doesnt seem any more dynamic than a "standard" anchor and i feel like belaying a second from your belay loop would be awkward.
Was this guy an idiot or am i gonna die?
thanks
-ST
|
|
j-tree
Big Wall climber
Classroom to crag to summer camp
|
|
|
Feb 21, 2013 - 08:40pm PT
|
You're fine.
Climbing is about managing risk, not eliminating risk. Climbing theorists like to get their panties in a bunch.
No reason to belay off a secondary anchor, waste of resources.
|
|
FRUMY
Trad climber
SHERMAN OAKS,CA
|
|
|
Feb 21, 2013 - 08:46pm PT
|
Tobe - go to the stoney point thread- around 1340 -1360 watch Pyro's videos,look at the knots he's using setting up a top rope.
|
|
mhay
climber
Reno, NV
|
|
|
Feb 21, 2013 - 08:51pm PT
|
When I first started climbing self-equalizing was the hip thing to do. Then at some point it became pre-equalized, which is what you currently do. Apparently, the hip new thing has gone full circle back to self-equalizing. However, that is not what guy-in-gym is talking about. Cloving a bunch of pieces together does not self-equalize, so tell him to piss-off. But the part about you dieing is correct. So go climbing while you're still here.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Feb 21, 2013 - 09:04pm PT
|
No reason to belay off a secondary anchor, waste of resources.
Not true.
I've done it numerous times according to time and circumstance.
There are times when it's preferred and or necessary.
I'll be at the cookie again tomorrow, show up, and I'll make a million different anchor variations for ya.
Only one million though and no more .....
|
|
Bill Mc Kirgan
Trad climber
Cedar Rapids, Iowa
|
|
|
Feb 21, 2013 - 09:10pm PT
|
You're way is fine Tobe, and not much different than what your critic recommends. Instead of using cordalette your critic does a static equalization with the rope using clove hitches.
Your way uses more gear, but is for all intents and purposes the same. If any part of the anchor rips then there will be some extension and shock loading to the remaining anchor points.
Self-equalizing anchors are just a myth, or an unattainable ideal. There will always be some extension involved.
Just remember... "Place thy protection well lest the ground rise up and smite thee".
|
|
the Fet
climber
Tu-Tok-A-Nu-La
|
|
|
Feb 21, 2013 - 10:47pm PT
|
When I was starting out a guy told me NOT to belay off my harness I should always redirect off the anchor lol.
Unless you are dealing with sketchy placements most anchor methods are usually fine. Cordellette, Clove hitch the rope, sliding X, etc. I prefer not tying in with the rope because its a pain when you swing leads and it makes self rescue more difficult.
Belaying the second off your harness might mean less force on the anchor in a fall but to me that's usually outweighed by the ability with a redirect to easily hold a fallen second, easier to belay, and easier to self rescue.
Unfortunalty these know it all types make it harder to speak up or be listened to when people actually doing something wrong.
|
|
jstan
climber
|
|
|
Feb 21, 2013 - 10:50pm PT
|
Finally!
A thread on anchors.
|
|
johntp
Trad climber
socal
|
|
|
Feb 21, 2013 - 10:52pm PT
|
I'll be at the cookie again tomorrow, show up, and I'll make a million different anchor variations for ya.
Call in sick, get in your car and be there in the morning. This is a very one time chance.
Edit: good opportunity.
|
|
briham89
Big Wall climber
san jose, ca
|
|
|
Feb 21, 2013 - 11:27pm PT
|
So today I was climbing and I started talking to a guy at the gym
Well there's your problem!!!!
You're fine don't listen to this guy.
I think the main thing as others have said is to learn the basics of what makes a "safe" anchor and know how to apply it to any situation you face.
|
|
ionlyski
Trad climber
Kalispell, Montana
|
|
|
Feb 21, 2013 - 11:30pm PT
|
Tobe,
Run, don't walk to the Cookie. You got the old man now to show you the ways. You just short cut about 30 years off the learning curve.
Arne
edit-and it sounds like you mostly got it figured out anyway.
|
|
Ksolem
Trad climber
Monrovia, California
|
|
|
Feb 22, 2013 - 12:49am PT
|
Solid
Redundant
Equalized
and have No Extension if one of the redundant components fail
If you don't have ALL of these 100% PERFECT (especially the last two), yer gonna die.
Are you nuts?? I'll take solid and redundant, thanks. Have you actually climbed anything serious in your life?
Oh, the first two fwiw.
|
|
apogee
climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
|
|
|
Feb 22, 2013 - 12:49am PT
|
Ames, IA?
Man, the trolls run wild here these days.
|
|
ruppell
climber
|
|
|
Feb 22, 2013 - 01:00am PT
|
Are you nuts?? I'll take solid and redundant, thanks.
Yep. That whole shock load idea has been dis-proven for a while now. Sliding X is simple and bomber.
|
|
Ward Trotter
Trad climber
|
|
|
Feb 22, 2013 - 01:14am PT
|
Freeze it in place.Bomber.
|
|
10b4me
Boulder climber
Somewhere on 395
|
|
|
Feb 22, 2013 - 01:32am PT
|
Troll or not, I don't really care.
On multipitch, I would plug in a piece for an upward pull.i.e., when the second gets to the anchor, clip him in to your anchor, and the anchor used placed for the upward. That way he won't get pulled up if you take a leader fall
|
|
surfstar
climber
Santa Barbara, CA
|
|
|
Feb 22, 2013 - 01:47am PT
|
A single blue camalot is and always will be equalized.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Feb 22, 2013 - 02:02am PT
|
QITNL
You got my vote .....
|
|
rgold
Trad climber
Poughkeepsie, NY
|
|
|
Feb 22, 2013 - 08:02am PT
|
Tobe, both the cordelette and the rope-only methods are fine. After being the standard in the U.S. for a quite a few years, I sense more and more people ditching their cordelettes and just anchoring with the rope. There are advantages and drawbacks to each method, and if you do some searching you can find heated arguments about which is best.
The one thing I'd say for sure is that anyone who tells you "yer gonna die" as a result of choosing one of these methods over the other doesn't know what they are talking about. The mark of experience is being able to use either method, or both combined, when they are appropriate. Most of the time both will work.
Here is a fast and effective method for using just the rope:
I am somewhat surprised, at this late date, to see the concept of equalization still promoted. It has become increasingly clear, both for theoretical reasons and as the result of a growing body of tests, that equalization is not practically achievable in the field. A rough rule of thumb for three-point anchors seems to be that one of the anchor points is likely to get half the load or more.
The appropriate concept is load distribution, not equalization. Of course, you do your best to direct the load equally to your anchor points, but understand that it ain't gonna happen. This makes it more important to have all anchor pieces solid, since one of them is very likely to get a majority of the load. The idea that you can put in a bunch of questionable pieces and "equalize" the whole mess so that it achieves suitable strength is a fantasy, which is not to say that sometimes, hopefully rarely, we are obligated to depend on something like that.
What is most important is to protect the belay from the effects of a leader fall directly onto it. Here again their are various strategies and arguments you can peruse on the web. I don't think there is any disagreement about the fact that a really strong protection point, close to but independent of the belay anchor, is the ideal situation. As with other ideal practices, this isn't always achievable.
It is extremely rare to hear of the failure of a belay anchor, but it does happen. Almost all belay anchors are good enough, but understand that almost none are tested by severe events, and most experienced climbers have never had their anchor-building techniques and strategies subjected to a major impact.
|
|
jopay
climber
so.il
|
|
|
Feb 22, 2013 - 10:06am PT
|
This whole anchor building thing rears its head on practically every climbing related site and is debated ad nauseum, and what I find amusing is that starting in 1983 as I did, one could scarcely find any pertinent info concerning anchor building let alone equalization, and now we debate it and argue whats best, whats worse, here's my diagram etc. I purchased Freedom of The Hills volume 4 when I started and there was no anchor building that I recall or equalization. I remember quite well when a climbing mag ran an article describing the magic X, and later I learned to tie a double bowline that could be equalized, I don't know exactly when the cordellette thing gained such widespread use, maybe in the last 10 years or so.But somehow we survived without such knowledge and I did a fair bit of ground up trad, and managed to get up Colorado multi pitch.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!