RokStr Posted October 8, 2003 Posted October 8, 2003 Dear climbers! At the Center for Experimental Mechanincs (CEM) we are trying to improve the properties of climbing ropes. To do so we first have to determine which are the worst properties of existing ropes on the market. We have therefore prepared an online poll. We kindly ask that only people who climb and are acquainted with climbing techniques answer the following questions. You can find the poll at: http://www.ef.uni-lj.si/spik/anketaeng.asp Thank you for your cooperation! Quote
Terminal_Gravity Posted October 8, 2003 Posted October 8, 2003 I want a rope that doesn't weigh anything, costs nothing, will hold any fall any amount of times and never tangles. DUH I would also prefer that it was designed by some one that can spell. Quote
cj001f Posted October 8, 2003 Posted October 8, 2003 Dobrodosli! TG - be careful with Slovene climbers...... Quote
Terminal_Gravity Posted October 8, 2003 Posted October 8, 2003 cj001f said: Dobrodosli! TG - be careful with Slovene climbers...... I filled out the poll and was very polite. Do you think I will now be safe from roving bands of Slovene climbing thugs?? Quote
cj001f Posted October 8, 2003 Posted October 8, 2003 Terminal_Gravity said: Do you think I will now be safe from roving bands of Slovene climbing thugs?? As long as you don't get between them, their choss, and their Union Pivo you should be fine .... Quote
catbirdseat Posted October 9, 2003 Posted October 9, 2003 The last question was interesting. Which rope is better. The two were the same, except that the second had a lower impact force. Easy choice. Quote
vegetablebelay Posted October 9, 2003 Posted October 9, 2003 I particularly like the free-write question #15 - If there was a perfect climbing rope, what would it be like? TG answered it just fine right here. Quote
Cpt.Caveman Posted October 9, 2003 Posted October 9, 2003 catbirdseat said: The last question was interesting. Which rope is better. The two were the same, except that the second had a lower impact force. Easy choice. Yes they just want to know who the dumb climbers are I guess. Quote
Cpt.Caveman Posted October 9, 2003 Posted October 9, 2003 vegetablebelay said: I particularly like the free-write question #15 - If there was a perfect climbing rope, what would it be like? TG answered it just fine right here. I filled out the survey and quoted some of TG's remarks as well as commented on the whole "dry rope" deal. Quote
Ursa_Eagle Posted October 10, 2003 Posted October 10, 2003 100 out of 234 thought that the higher impact force was better?!?! Quote
chriss Posted October 11, 2003 Posted October 11, 2003 catbirdseat said: The last question was interesting. Which rope is better. The two were the same, except that the second had a lower impact force. Easy choice. I'm not trying to start anything, BUT... lower impact force does not always make the better rope. Both were listed as 10.5, 1 had a lower impact force than the other. You assumed all other factors were even. Don't buy ropes based on impact force alone. Everyone knows red ropes perform better. chris Quote
Terminal_Gravity Posted October 11, 2003 Posted October 11, 2003 All things being truly equal a lower impact force IS always better. But unfortunately other things are not equal. A lower impact force means more stretch for a given impact, which almost always means lower number of max falls and a longer body weight stretch: all three of which are bad so lower impact is a compromise. Quote
boatskiclimbsail Posted October 14, 2003 Posted October 14, 2003 If I recall correctly, the comparison stated they had the same elongation, so more stretch as a result of a lower impact force is not an issue. I think the intent was to see if climbers understood that a smaller number is better when talking about forces. There is an advertising phenomenon where consumers will buy something because there are higher numbers on the package, weather they mean anything or not. Quote
cj001f Posted October 15, 2003 Posted October 15, 2003 boatskiclimbsail said: If I recall correctly, the comparison stated they had the same elongation, so more stretch as a result of a lower impact force is not an issue. I think the intent was to see if climbers understood that a smaller number is better when talking about forces. There is an advertising phenomenon where consumers will buy something because there are higher numbers on the package, weather they mean anything or not. It's interesting you mention that - the root directory of the survey leads to the business school. I'd be interested to see if there was a regional analysis done. Quote
Nick Posted October 21, 2003 Posted October 21, 2003 Elongation is not the same thing as the rope stretch resulting from a fall. Elongation is a measure of the low-load stretch in the rope; it is a measure of how stretchy the rope is when you are jugging or rapelling. A rope with a lower impact force will stretch more durring the high impact of a fall than a rope with a high impact force. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.