Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Steve Grossman
Trad climber
Seattle, WA
|
|
|
Nov 21, 2009 - 05:01pm PT
|
Hand drilling 1/2" holes in granite is no big deal really, I do it all the time. But then again, I stance drilled 3/8" holes for decades so what do I know?
My point is that those 3/8" bolts aren't as strong as you folks seem to believe that they are.
I am only sharing my knowledge and experience with you and will happily stop doing so if your minds are already made up on the subject. Surely slabs are not the only hard stone routes that the ASCA retrofits? Right?
Clint- You can be a bit snotty and presumptuous yourself.
|
|
Clint Cummins
Trad climber
SF Bay area, CA
|
|
|
Nov 21, 2009 - 05:17pm PT
|
OK, how long does it take you to drill a 1/2" in good granite? (I know it's a bit of a vague target, as the quartz content varies). I am thinking of some granite mix harder than the quartz monzonite at JTree.
I noticed your 3/8" on "G-Man" at Pat + Jack Pinnacle - I was impressed.
What's your height/weight? Remember, some of us are pencil necks (I'm 6', 135 lbs). So our tendon attachment areas are not so big and we may not be able to drill all day without injury.
Sharing the info is good. What is the mean and variance of the bolt strength for the standard you have researched for the indoor wall example?
You are right, it is not entirely slabs in Yosemite (although slabs seem to be where most of the 1/4" protection bolts are). I suppose a good example to check would be the Killer Pillar - steep, fairly hard and accessible; maybe those bolts get some repeated falls. They may have been placed in the power drill days and may already be 1/2". If not, then maybe a good place to check to see how they are holding up.
|
|
Steve Grossman
Trad climber
Seattle, WA
|
|
|
Nov 21, 2009 - 05:25pm PT
|
I have been swinging a 32 oz framing hammer most of my adult life and am very aware of my drilling skills. Taking the extra time and effort to drill bigger holes seems worth it to me.
To be absolutely clear, these retro-fitting projects that you guys take on are a huge amount of work and I salute and support your efforts. Why not maximize the quality and service life of that investment? That is my ongoing point. Has the ASCA even tried to gain an exception to the power drill ban above 500 feet?
The climbing wall engineering specification is in the hands of the Climbing Wall Assiciation (CWA) which I walked away from long ago for a variety of reasons. Believe me, the engineering rigor that leads to a formal specification is pretty stringent and I don't have the details or access to them any more. I carry away the results of our discussions as I was the one writing the draft while it was being formulated under the umbrella of an ASTM standard.
|
|
Clint Cummins
Trad climber
SF Bay area, CA
|
|
|
Nov 21, 2009 - 05:28pm PT
|
I don't know if ASCA has tried to get an exception to the power drill ban - hopefully Greg or Chris can answer this. Others have suggested this. Maybe we could use some help? If someone has investigated this, hopefully they will explain what opposition they ran into.
|
|
Steve Grossman
Trad climber
Seattle, WA
|
|
|
Nov 21, 2009 - 05:37pm PT
|
I don't think that the Wilderness Act would preclude any such exception even though it has been interpreted and used for all kinds of screwball things like an out right ban on any fixed anchors including a sling around a block or horn!
As long as you have an agreement to not enforce the ban from the rangers (with Jesse as your representative) that should be all that is required.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Nov 21, 2009 - 05:39pm PT
|
I've suggested this many times in the past that ASCA receive exempt status for bolting repairs using power drills thru supervision from the Climbing rangers.
An official sign could be hung displayed at the base of said route with description of repairs and official authorization. Camp 4 bulletin board would also have notification of said authorization and location of said route.
It would be Yosemite CalTrans (heh heh)
I don't even believe the ASCA have brought up this idea officially to the powers that be yet with a good coherent argument for their case?
Roger Brown said even if he's authorized for use of power drill for repair in Yosemite he would not use one because he loves to swing the hammer.
Anyways just my thoughts .....
|
|
Clint Cummins
Trad climber
SF Bay area, CA
|
|
|
Nov 21, 2009 - 05:47pm PT
|
Yeah, a little unofficial tolerance on enforcement would do it. I'll see what Jesse thinks.
I've been a little discouraged in the past. For example at Hetch Hetchy we had to sign in at the entrance booth and say what we were doing in there. About the only thing they asked when we said we were climbing was "You are not using power drills, are you?" (We weren't; there are these things called cracks....)
|
|
Clint Cummins
Trad climber
SF Bay area, CA
|
|
|
Nov 21, 2009 - 05:49pm PT
|
Anders,
> belay bolts placed too close together
What standard do you prefer for this? I recall seeing in the info from the manufacturer that the minimum bolt spacing should be 2 times the depth.
(I suppose this is for the hardest concrete they considered).
My climbing buddy Bob knows the code letters stamped on the outer tip of the wedge bolts, so he can tell the depth of such bolts in place.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Nov 21, 2009 - 05:51pm PT
|
You'll have to go above Jesse I would think.
Maybe even have to go as far Washington, DC ????
|
|
Mighty Hiker
climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Nov 21, 2009 - 06:19pm PT
|
What standard do you prefer for this? A quite conservative one, given that the bolts are likely to be in place and relied on for decades, without being checked. I believe that manufacturer's minimum recommendations (insofar as they are any - Petzl is reasonably good) assume uniform solid rock, without visible or hidden fractures. A lot of rock is fractured or soft or both, and also subject to natural and human weathering.
In this photo from upthread, it appears that the bolts were placed in a single block, with visible fractures on at least three sides. Maybe not, of course - but the bolts are also a bit too close together.
In the other photo posted, of two bolts and belay gear in what appears to be conglomerate, the bolts appear to be much too close together, given the nature of such rock.
In both cases, catastrophic failure seems possible. These setups seem more common in 'sport' climbing areas.
Pictures can be deceiving, and who knows what's under the surface, and what considerations the drillers had in mind? Maybe these are giant long bolts, placed after all the junk rock was crowbarred away - itself a not so subtle hint from nature. But why not be just a bit conservative - several times I've seen intact belay bolts setups lying in the scree below cliffs, attached to rocks which are no longer attached to anything.
|
|
Steve Grossman
Trad climber
Seattle, WA
|
|
|
Nov 21, 2009 - 07:39pm PT
|
Werner- I don't think the formal committment to banning power drills is even an issue past local precedent and enforcement. Who is really going to file a complaint about unequal treatment under the circumstances?
Has the NPS ever exercised authority to use a power drill in any rescue situation above 500 feet, in your extensive experience?
The climbing rangers simply have agree not to enforce during a sanctioned retro-fit. Simple as that, I would think as long as it is performed under the aegis of the ASCA or some other recognized organization and that formal permission is applied for and granted. The NPS is the government after all, so there is always a way or mechanism to act in the public interest.
|
|
Mighty Hiker
climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Nov 21, 2009 - 07:42pm PT
|
Perhaps the Ken and the YCA, the Access Fund, or Jesse might advise about anchor replacement possibilities in Yosemite. YOSAR might also have useful thoughts.
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Nov 21, 2009 - 08:26pm PT
|
In the other photo posted, of two bolts and belay gear in what appears to be conglomerate, the bolts appear to be much too close together, given the nature of such rock.
Anders, as someone who works in basalt I would say you are being paranoid for climbing purposes. The only criticism I'd have of the anchor above is that it may be too close to the fracture line above it - I'd have no problem whatsoever with the distance between the bolts. I don't know the loading or material specifics behind the construction bolting standards (which I've read), but I do know you could sink two bolts three inches apart in a chunk of our solid basalt and they'd be completely bomb for the life of the bolts. We don't do that, but you could. In that sh#t you folks have down in the Valley? Short of being on or near an edge or a significant fracture that stuff is so ridiculously bomb compared to our basalt it seems a pretty silly proposition.
|
|
Mighty Hiker
climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Nov 21, 2009 - 08:40pm PT
|
The only downside to placing belay bolts a bit farther apart appears to be that, if they're used for rappelling/lowering, a bit more hardware (chain) will probably be needed. The upside is likely greater security.
Many belay bolts are placed very close together, closer than any of those shown. There are lots of risks inherent in climbing, but bad or poorly placed bolts are no longer generally acceptable. Why place belay bolts that are too close together, or in suspect/fractured rock, when you can just as easily place them properly?
A job worth doing is worth doing well. It's a bit like those discussions about belay anchors and equalization and so on. Losing sight of the main issue, which is that the goal is to have belay anchors that are as strong as possible in the environment and circumstances, and to be tied to them. A fancy equalized belay made up of poorly placed gear is still crap; a poor belay made up of well-placed gear is probably OK. Likewise, for bolted climbs particularly, what's the point of bolted - that is, supposedly bomproof - belays that are marginally placed? Poor rock, too close together, fractures, etc?
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Nov 21, 2009 - 08:59pm PT
|
Fractured or suspect rock is one thing, but the notion and characterization of bolting even three inches apart in good rock is somehow 'bad' or 'risky' for climbing purposes is what I'm having a hard time with.
|
|
Mighty Hiker
climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Nov 21, 2009 - 09:11pm PT
|
Physics and geology. Rock has weaknesses, some not visible or observable, and changes over time. Even apparently solid rock. Anyone who's climbed for a while, especially aid climbing or doing new routes, has probably had times where rock unexpectedly broke. Geologists, too. With inverse square law, bolts placed twice as far apart are, all other things being equal, 1/4 as likely to be in the same unnoticed weak area. With observation and a bit of tapping with a hammer, and then drilling, perhaps even less so. So placing bolts say 10 cm apart instead of the minimum - something like 5 cm - reduces the odds of having both in an unobserved weak area, for trivial effort. (10 cm is still probably too little.)
I mentioned "vanishing belays" upthread; it might be interesting to build some belays in real rock, using various techniques, and pull them to destruction and see where the failure is, and how strong they are. I suspect the rock would fail more often than we'd like.
Repeated stress on anchors, and so on any weakness in the rock, can add to this, while placing belay bolts near visible fractures seems foolhardy.
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Nov 21, 2009 - 09:19pm PT
|
Sorry, but if we're talking good rock, then I don't buy any of it.
|
|
Mighty Hiker
climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Nov 21, 2009 - 09:26pm PT
|
I wonder what recommendations the climbing equipment/bolt manufacturers, e.g. Petzl and Fixe, make regarding this, and what evidence they base it on? I looked at their websites, but couldn't find anything that was very obvious - maybe itself a message. Has the UIAA done any testing? Rock quality outdoors may be hard to measure and can be inconsistent - pretty much what we're discussing - but perhaps there's some objective information available.
|
|
Clint Cummins
Trad climber
SF Bay area, CA
|
|
|
Nov 21, 2009 - 11:26pm PT
|
Locker,
Thanks for pointing that out.
I found:
http://www.nps.gov/jotr/planyourvisit/climbing.htm
"Fixed Anchors in Wilderness Areas Fixed anchors may be replaced, anchor for anchor, in wilderness. A permit is required to place new fixed anchors in wilderness. Contact the special-use office at 760-367-5545 to request a permit application.
Over 75 percent of the park is Congressionally-designated wilderness. Climbers are responsible for knowing where wilderness boundaries are located. A list of climbs and whether they are inside or outside of designated wilderness is available online. If you are unsure about a particular location, contact a park ranger.
Fixed Anchor-Free Zones Fixed anchors may not be placed or replaced in fixed anchor-free zones. Additionally, the Barker Dam area, a popular destination for many park visitors, has been designated a fixed anchor-free zone to maintain its aesthetic value for visitors. Fixed anchors may not be placed between the parking lot and the dam. If you wish to place fixed anchors in the surrounding area, make sure to identify the boundaries first.
Power drills Power drills may not be used without a permit. You may contact the special-use office at 760-367-5545 to learn more about the permitting process."
So it sounds like it depends on each Park's Wilderness Management Plan.
In Yosemite, a permit is not currently required so place fixed anchors in the wilderness.
I suppose there might be some risk of losing this freedom if the Plan was revised?
Or maybe we could add powerbolting for replacement by permit without affecting manual bolting?
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
"critical" spacing between 2 bolts is 2 imbedment depths for full strength (for anchors loaded in tension and shear)
Let us know!