Shout Box

Who's Online
0 registered (), 12 Guests and 1 Spider online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Page 4 of 17 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 16 17 >
Topic Options
#28498 - 04/23/07 04:31 PM Re: cordelette-attention RG [Re: mworking]
paulraphael Offline
enthusiast

Registered: 01/22/02
Posts: 321
Loc: New York, NY
the ledge is also useful for avoiding a big clusterf___ at the powerpoint. it's an easy place for the second(s) to clip into, or if your climbing alpine, to clip in your pack, etc..

but i'd prefer the powerpoint for the belayer's main tie-in.

if you need to shorten the thing in general, there are better ways to do it (tie a bigger knot, etc.)

Top
#28505 - 04/23/07 07:56 PM Re: cordelette-attention RG [Re: paulraphael]
nerdom Offline
Pooh-Bah *

Registered: 09/07/01
Posts: 2483
Loc: Davis Sq., MA
 Originally Posted By: paulraphael
 Originally Posted By: dalguard
I was being grumpy last night, sorry. Anyway, the material you should use for a cordalette is Bluewater Titan. This is based on testing http://www.xmission.com/~tmoyer/testing/High_Strength_Cord.pdf which I'm not going to pretend I understand.


What I took away from that (and other tests, including the ones J. Long did with Sterling Ropes) is that 7mm nylon is the best material.

It loses much less strength when knotted than any of the high tech cords, and is also essentially immune to fatigue--the constant weakening of the fibers from being flexed under load. All the high tech cords are depressingly vulnerable to fatigue.


And it is also fairly cumbersome. 5.5mm spectra is really light and compresses to a pretty small wrap. And the difference in strength is not enough to concern me. As for durability, the stuff is pretty cheap, about $15-$20 per cordalette. I'm guessing you can easily get a solid year's use of that. What's $20 a year? The real issue with it, as I recall, is weakening due to loading the strands over an edge. So don't load the strands over any edges!
_________________________
we're all living proof that nothing lasts

Top
#28507 - 04/23/07 10:20 PM Re: cordelette-attention RG [Re: nerdom]
rg@ofmc Offline
Pooh-Bah

Registered: 12/25/99
Posts: 2472
Loc: Poughkeepsie, NY
aren't the people decrying the cordelette now for being non-equalizing the same people who have decried the cordelette forever for being . . . whatever? The same people who clove-hitched because it didn't require a separate piece of gear and was just more "trad"?

Well, I can only speak for myself here, but I sense that I just might be one of the shifty paradigm shifters Dawn is complaining about. Personally, I've never been a fan of cordelettes and have generally found them to be superfluous. This has nothing to do with being against fads, being more rad or trad or having a tad bigger nads. I usually tie in with the rope, but my tie-in looks pretty much like a cordelette. I've posted pictures in response to questions about how to do this on rockclimbing.com. I almost never just clove hitch a bunch of stuff together, so I plead not guilty, your honor, to the charge of hypocrisy.

My rope-only anchors suffer from the same equalization issues as the cordelette, and I've never made any bones about it. I tried for a while to speak of fixed-arm anchors, all of which have the same equalization issues, but I gave up on that terminology after it became clear no one else was going to use it. Note that I recently posted a few basic suggestions for cordelette deployment that bridge the gap between paying no attention to equalization to having some simple strategies that could be part of a foundation of informed usage. I would hardly be doing this if I had concluded that fixed-arm anchors are dangerous in general.

RG, are you now using one of those more complicated rigs that requires more gear or are you still clove-hitching? And if you're clove-hitching, do you believe you're getting better equalization that way?

Mostly I'm still constructing rope anchors, which are, as I hope I just explained, equivalent to cordelettes in the (non) equalization departement. The complicated gear-intensive rigs from the sliding-X thread are a testimony to human ingeniousness, but I'll never use one of them. I was fortunate to be able to have Mal Daly make up a version of Trango's Alpine Equalizer for me that I named the Geekqualizer. Pictures of it have appeared on various sites including this one. Anyone hoping to detect trad feet of clay need look no further than this, a total sell-out to the dark side of gimmicry. I swore I would try to use it on every climb to see how practical it is to deploy in the field, but so far I haven't done very well. Early results suggest to me it involves more fussing than I want to indulge in.

I almost am getting the feeling at this point that people are being told option A is not good when there isn't a better option B.

I think you're right, when it comes to anchors with three or more pieces.

RG, this isn't aimed at you directly.

Not to worry, even if some it some of it is. You're entitled. And to recycle a quote from Hell's Angels chief Sonny Barger on alleged police brutality, "it's nothing---I've been hurt by experts."

But it seems to me that anyone who ever thought a cordelette yields 33/33/33 load distribution is woefully unaware of the basics of physics. I'm not talking PhD stuff, just things about angles that all leaders should appreciate.

YOur hypothetical non-Ph.D.'s are also laboring under the misapprehension that 3 X 33 = 100. Might this be the Heisenberg Uncertaintly Principle in a new guise? But seriously, there are basics and there are basics. The comments I made a few years ago, which seem to be one of the things that woke up the equalization monster, apply to the substantial failures of equalization that occur when the pieces are all in the same vertical crack and so all arm angles are zero.

The truly amazing thing about this whole discussion is the almost complete state of ignorance climbers enjoy. For every propeller-head like me spouting Hooke's Law and the equations of simple harmonic motion, there is a bunch of young and old fogies proclaiming the old methods have worked just fine and there's nothing to think about. They never tire of confusing the low probability that anyone's belay anchors will ever be seriously tested with the fact that the methods being used are adequate. Nonetheless, I sympathize with Dawn having to deal with know-nothing safety nazis telling her that her methods are unsafe. Considering the general state of ignorance we live with, anchoring technique looks as much like astrology as science, and we'd all be better off if the religious fanatics on both sides of the debate turned down the volume so the rest of us could hear ourselves think.

Top
#28515 - 04/24/07 12:58 PM Re: cordelette-attention RG [Re: rg@ofmc]
talus Offline
veteran

Registered: 08/23/04
Posts: 1259
Have the guys over at Sterling done any tests on 2 gear placements "equalized" -vs- 3? It seems that the load between 2 pieces would be more evenly distributed than 3 pieces using a cordelette.
_________________________
John Okner Photography

Top
#28518 - 04/24/07 01:24 PM Re: cordelette-attention RG [Re: rg@ofmc]
empicard Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 08/29/01
Posts: 2957
Loc: LI, NY
rg, is it safe to assume you mostly "swing leads?"
when leading in blocks or doing all the leading yourself, i find anchoring with the rope becomes a hinderance.
_________________________
tOOthless

Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.

Top
#28519 - 04/24/07 03:11 PM Re: cordelette-attention RG [Re: empicard]
Smike Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 05/01/01
Posts: 3143
Loc: in your backyard
And so it goes..

I think that in the ‘general’ sense this way or that way with anchors all fall into the “sufficient” category as long as they are not breaking any obvious rules. (i.e. using only one piece, lots of slack in the system, using 2mm cord etc….) The rest is beyond sufficient and is splitting hairs.

When something inherently danergous is throw out into the climbing community and used at large it usually surfaces (sometimes with unfortunate events) pretty quickly and becomes one of those things you don’t do, or avoid altogether. (no arguing over the American death triangle, or short tails on the Euro death knot)

Top
#28522 - 04/24/07 05:30 PM Re: cordelette-attention RG [Re: rg@ofmc]
dalguard Offline
veteran

Registered: 03/22/00
Posts: 1515
Loc: CT
 Quote:
They never tire of confusing the low probability that anyone's belay anchors will ever be seriously tested with the fact that the methods being used are adequate.

Let's not discount that completely. Climbing is an inherently risky sport and your chances of dying by total anchor failure are miniscule compared to your chance of dying by having a piece pull during a lead fall, for example. You're probably right that the risk is so low because FF2 falls don't happen often, but that's not a bad thing either. FF2 falls are to be avoided for many reasons. The failure points include the rope, the gear, the belayer, and the belayer's connection to anchor. They almost always result in injury to both the leader and the belayer, even when the anchor holds. But they're easily avoided and we all know better. Building an anchor that's guaranteed to hold a FF2 fall every time you build one might not really be the right answer, even if it were possible.

To me, this whole cordelette brohaha is similar to the belay loop failure brohaha. It just makes more sense to concentrate our attention on the ways we're really likely to get hurt and stop giving each other the evil eye over minor differences in style.

 Quote:
My rope-only anchors suffer from the same equalization issues as the cordelette, and I've never made any bones about it.
I suppose you get the benefit of a dynamic connection but it must make life difficult if you're not swinging leads. For myself, I recognize that in the event of a FF2 fall, the failure of the piece I'm redirecting through would likely cause either anchor failure or belayer failure. I'm careful about that redirection piece and I'm careful about not falling on the anchor, but that doesn't mean it's not ever going to happen. But the way I belay, the cordelette doesn't even come into play until the shit has already majorly hit the fan.


Edited by dalguard (04/24/07 05:31 PM)

Top
#28526 - 04/24/07 07:33 PM Re: cordelette-attention RG [Re: dalguard]
Dillbag Offline
old hand

Registered: 05/02/06
Posts: 1130
Loc: "The Town"
 Quote:
brohaha


Can't help it... Sorry... It's brouhaha...
_________________________
...anethum graveolens cucumis sativus!

Top
#28527 - 04/24/07 08:36 PM Re: cordelette-attention RG [Re: dalguard]
empicard Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Registered: 08/29/01
Posts: 2957
Loc: LI, NY
 Originally Posted By: dalguard
the cordelette doesn't even come into play until the shit has already majorly hit the fan.

how's that?
_________________________
tOOthless

Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana.

Top
#28528 - 04/24/07 08:41 PM Re: cordelette-attention RG [Re: empicard]
Dillbag Offline
old hand

Registered: 05/02/06
Posts: 1130
Loc: "The Town"
Ummm... Cause...

 Quote:
the way dalgaurd belay(s)


Duh!
_________________________
...anethum graveolens cucumis sativus!

Top
Page 4 of 17 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 16 17 >


Moderator:  daryl512 
Sponsored