|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Welcome, Register :: Log In | Welcome to our newest member, newclimber. | |
| Users active in this forum: | ||
| Users active in this thread: Guest | ||
|
3 people online in the last 15 minutes - 0 members, 0 anon and 3 guests. (Most ever was 74 at 04:51:16 Sun Oct 28 2012) |
| Pages: [ 1 ] |
| [ Notify ] | [ Print ] | [ Send To Friend ] | [ Watch ] | [ < ] [ > ] |
|
shawkshaw 04:20:05 Thu May 6 2004 Offline 1343 posts Administrator  Reply |
what are peoples favorite anchor configuration. in this present age wear and tear are an increasing issue especially if the route becomes popular. do people like
1) two U's/rings 2) two U's/rings with twist shackles 3) two U's/rings with mallion and captive wire gates 4) two horizontal U's with shackles 5) chains attached to rings/U's 6) Fixe style chain anchors with clip gates 7) fixe style "amerika" lower offs that you flick the rope over and they have an auto close feature. i like 3 or 4. |
|
WingYing 07:17:08 Thu May 6 2004 Offline 100 posts Lead Climber Reply |
Steve. I think this all depends on the area the route is in. All Lower-offs need permanent redundancy built into them. Therefore shackles, biners etc of some sort should be fitted to them. Living in an area of HIGH THEFT I have stopped putting biners on lower-offs and therefore favour '10mm twisties'.
I think its much more important that the placement of the lower-off ensures that the climber has to do the last move regardless of whether the draws are on or not - no clipping low at the anchors! And that they are in sound rock. The only problem I have with 'rebolting' - which I do a hell of a lot of - is that we are creating a generation of 'faggots'!!! Not trying to be politically correct! Wing Ying's coach, again! |
|
vwills 07:33:39 Thu May 6 2004 Offline 355 posts Soloer Reply |
2 Us with a sign saying rap off this route! Probably Us with shackles these days but I don't know if people use them as intended.
|
|
Steve_M 01:26:46 Fri May 7 2004 Offline 421 posts Onsight Soloer  Reply |
In thailand no-one steals biners at the top of routes. There are normal screw gates just sitting at the top for you to clip. It's oh so convenient but it also makes replacement very easy. People will just leave another biner up there if the old ones are wearing through.
It's a shame that anything left on our cliffs that's not welded closed is stolen. |
|
Chris_Y 01:38:56 Fri May 7 2004 Offline 102 posts Flash Specialist Reply |
Have to say some sort of double ring / U with twisted shackles and enough room for rope & few biners (not a tight squeeze requiring the skinniest biners and latest 9.2mm rope).
I think some of criteria that need to be met (where possible) are: 1/ minimise wear on main anchor (shackle / biner for built in redundancy) 2/ maximise clearance in the system for multiple components, (rope and room of up to 2 biners) 3/ minimise twisting / kinking of ropes 4/ minimise wear / sheath damage on ropes - avoiding rock edges etc. 5/ anchor at an obvious / reasonable clipping stance (no cruxes being clipping the anchors!) 6/ reduced visual impact where possible. 7/ enable relatively easy cleaning of route (not always possible where route traverses) 8/ ** reduce possible human error. (a contentious one this). A systems where there is no untying / retying of knots is perhaps the "gold" standard for anchors (Fixe amerika etc.) but does bring up the issues of cost and visual impact!! Many more I'm sure... The anchor I liked best was one used in Spain some years ago. It consisted of a big open hook attached to a beefy plate that was bolted (at 4 corners) to the wall. Simply climb, finish the route and hook the rope over the hook - lower and clean away - super easy, super effieicent... probably goes against the theme of some of my above criteria though! |
|
trentsadventures 05:54:07 Mon May 10 2004 Offline 97 posts Lead Climber Reply |
Two UBs placed side by side horizontally with captive eye 316 wire gate biners on each. Very easy to clip and lower-off, saves having to rethread which is therefore safer. stops wear on the UBs and once the biners wear through they get chopped and replaced with staight shackles or maillons or twisties with more wire gate biners. for existing, high traffic anchors twisties are the solution before the wear gets too bad. would anybody like to chip in for some to donate to the Rebolting Fund? I have 4 already. i figure that to pay $25 for all the climbing ive done lately in the mts is a small price to pay. who will join me?
Trent |
|
shawkshaw 05:59:04 Mon May 10 2004 Offline 1343 posts Administrator Reply |
ill give you some dosh trent.
|
|
Steve_M 06:13:54 Mon May 10 2004 Offline 421 posts Onsight Soloer Reply |
How do we give cash to the rebolting fund ? (not someones beer fund)
|
|
trentsadventures 22:36:27 Mon May 10 2004 Offline 97 posts Lead Climber Reply |
give them the hardware. not the cash. i thing any donation is best off in the form of 10mm twisted 316 shackles that can be placed on existing rings/UB that are getting worn out quickly. i have a limited supply that i can get 4 for $25. im a poor uni student and if i can afford to donate im sure plenty of others can, look at classics like Jack High at Shipley. the twisties on that are even wearing quickly. these will go to a good cause. to pool the cash direct deposit is proably easiest seeings though we are all computer literate. Stevie H can act as bounty hunter if i skip town with the loot.
Trent |
|
Duane_M 00:29:56 Tue May 11 2004 Offline 75 posts Lead Climber Reply |
From an physics/engineering perspective the best style of anchors are ones used in the early days, but not so often installed now (that I have seen anyway).
That is a chain with 2-3 bolts place along the length of the chain, ensuring that the chain is tight between bolts and is installed vertically. Other configurations such as two ring bolts placed side by side have additonal forces acting on them. Not only is there a vertical force due to gravity but a horizontal one due to the axial force acting in the rope. Hence the total bending force on either bolt can be as much as 1.4 times as much as the total force experienced if there is only a vertical component acting on the bolt (could even be greater in certain situations). Not to mention a torque being present along the shaft of the bolt. But to put this in perspective, the total load a human can place on anchors by lowering off them is neglible in comparison to the load the bolts (that are well placed!)are capable of withstanding. Sorry for the jargon just thought I'd add my two bobs worth! |
|
Chris_Y 04:02:59 Tue May 11 2004 Offline 102 posts Flash Specialist Reply |
Engineers... "make it happen"... but seriously can we talk about sports now... my heads hurting!
|
|
Steve_M 04:37:57 Tue May 11 2004 Offline 421 posts Onsight Soloer Reply |
At the end of some of those old chains though you end up depending on a series of single links of chain as opposed to the two rings. Every link in the chain between the last bolt and you is then critical (no backup).
When the chain is in a V to the bolts, no single link is critical. Do people think this is an issue ? |
|
shawkshaw 04:44:33 Tue May 11 2004 Offline 1343 posts Administrator Reply |
yes. there needs to be some for of redundancy. although it would be very unlickely for a chain link to break id prefer to have a fail safe in case it did.
|
|
Steve_M 05:31:18 Tue May 11 2004 Offline 421 posts Onsight Soloer Reply |
The problem is that unlikely things eventually occur. Over a big enough sample space
 It seems like we have a fair few engineers on the forum Duane, Steve H, Myself. Any other lurking engineers out there ? |
|
vwills 05:45:47 Tue May 11 2004 Offline 355 posts Soloer Reply |
Thats a matter of contention.
|
|
shawkshaw 05:56:45 Tue May 11 2004 Offline 1343 posts Administrator Reply |
desired outcome achieved
|
|
Josh_C 20:11:22 Tue May 11 2004 Offline 1492 posts Net addict - someone take me climbing Reply |
i did physics in grade 11...does that count?
|
|
bundybear 21:31:10 Tue May 11 2004 Unavailable 1322 posts Net addict - someone take me climbing  Reply |
I never understood why people did engineering at uni, it took 30+ hours per week. Commerce was nearly too much at 13 hours per week. But now I can see the light, if it wasn't foe engineers there would be no climbing anchors..
|
|
Duane_M 01:58:09 Wed May 12 2004 Offline 75 posts Lead Climber Reply |
Take your point Steve M about redundancy, but I think we must look at the system globally. Sure there is one point of failure in a link of a chain, but there is also only one rope. Its impractical to have complete redundancy. Examing the highest likely point of failure is the way to go, hence focussing on bolt placement is (I believe) the critical point.
To avoid Chris Y having a brain explosion, I'll leave it there! |
|
shawkshaw 02:25:08 Wed May 12 2004 Offline 1343 posts Administrator Reply |
chain links are a pain to thread and they rust. you can use stainless and pay a bomb. i don't like them as lower offfs personally.
|
|
Steve_M 02:35:57 Wed May 12 2004 Offline 421 posts Onsight Soloer Reply |
Your rope is also YOUR rope. Same with your biners and draws and whatever else. You know the history you replace it when needs. Bolts, chains etc are not yours nor do you know the history necessarily. I am happy to trust my life to my rope but not that happy to trust a link of chain that is an unknown.
That said, I use them, I just don't think it's the best configuration. |
| Pages: [ 1 ] |
| [ Notify ] | [ Print ] | [ Send To Friend ] | [ Watch ] | [ < ] [ > ] |
|
Total Members: 2051, Newest Member: newclimber. | Register :: Log In :: In Power The time is now 04:45:45 Thu Jun 20 2013 |
