JosephH Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 It would be interesting to pass that conclusion by Malcolm, John, and a few of the rocket scientists like RGold over in the RC thread. I suspect their conlusion is that it doesn't load the three anchor points in a 33/33/33, but rather a 25/50/25 distribution. Hard to imagine a conclusion that it isn't really equalizing at all or just a little... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayB Posted March 22, 2006 Author Share Posted March 22, 2006 Pretty interesting. Looks like I'll probably end up wading through the thread after all.... Â "Funny this should come along just now. I'm just finishing redoing the anchor books into one big anchor building omnibus. We're basically done --all that's left is a bit of editing, and incorporating a slew of drop tests we did with Sterling Ropes (conducted by America's leading drop/test dude, Jim Ewing, with statistical analysis by trad master Dr. Larry Hamilton and climber/fitness model/criminology professor, the esteemd "Crimpgirl," Dr. Callie Rennisson). Â The tests were to determine, once and for all, which system was better at load sharing when sustaining a dynamic fall (Factor 1 for our testing)--the Cordelette, or the Sliding X. Both rigging systems were tested when rigged to vertical and horizontally oriented anchor points. In the vertical configuration--as you find in a crack--the rigging systems have unequal sized legs; in the horizontal configured anchor (as found, for instance, with bolts placed side to side on top of a sport climb), the legs are as close to equal as they could be tied. Â Moreover, each set up was tested with several diameters of high tensile strength cord and webbing (Dyneema, Technora, Spectra, et al), as well as with old style nylon cord and webbing. Â It is still too early to release the results, but I can say right now that there is a significant difference in load sharing performance between the two systems, and much that has been written about the cordelette's equalizing capacities is strictly untrue. Â More later. I'm just eyeballing the graphs I got from Jim, Larry and Crimpy. At least now we finally know what's up with these systems, and that's a real good thing. Â JL " Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayB Posted March 22, 2006 Author Share Posted March 22, 2006 So Joseph - is this more or less the final configuration of the "equalette" that JL was talking about? To rig this thing you'd basically start with a standard cordalette, tie a couple of overhand knots near the middlen with a 1-3 foot gap between them for the sliding portion of the anchor, then take the remaining loop on each side of the knot and clove hitch the loop to one or two pieces? If I'm reading this right it doesn't seem like this would take any longer to rig up than a standard cordalette, and would have some significant advantages. I especially like the clove attachments to the anchor points as it seems like the slippage in the cloves could really help dissipate max loads. Â Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cobra_Commander Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 I suspect their conlusion is that it doesn't load the three anchor points in a 33/33/33, but rather a 25/50/25 distribution. Hard to imagine a conclusion that it isn't really equalizing at all or just a little... Â I believe "just a little" was their conclusion. It is nice to have such easy access to individuals like Long who have put so much time into this. But to be honest, I found his anchor book (admittedly an old version) to be overly complicated, perhaps causing new climbers to be overly focused on anchor building and less focused on equally important safety issues. Â It is nice to see such openness to change however, and he seems like a great guy with obviously a ton of practical experience. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ketch Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 Lest this thread turn into a copy of the RC.com link referenced. Â I for one am waiting on the day when harnesses come with airbags and heads up route displays. Belayers should also be equipped with autobelays so they don't need to actually touch the rope. Â As long as we just bolt all the rock sketchy placments are not a concern. While we are at it replace em all with 3/4 stainless and we won't even need to equalize. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayB Posted March 22, 2006 Author Share Posted March 22, 2006 I'm looking forward to the day when cc.com includes scripts that chime in with worthless shit so you never even have to touch your keyboard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foraker Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 I think you've pretty much filled up our quota for that today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayB Posted March 22, 2006 Author Share Posted March 22, 2006 Excellent. Thanks for that contribution. Â What I actually wanted was a forum for people to recycle weak-ass one-liners, and it's clear that the best way to do that is to at least appear to ask a real question. The "Should I retire this cam?"------> "Yes send all of your cams to me for immediate demolition, har, har" dynamic, while classic, was clearly showing its age. Sadly, this attempt at weak-ass one liner solicitation hasn't yielded much in the way of new material yet, but I have high hopes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cj001f Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 la plus ca change, la plus que c'est le meme chose Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-spotter Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 you know, an American Death Triangle loads all the pieces equally too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foraker Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 Don't worry, I'll let you know when your petulant ego-driven verbosity is worth more than a weak-ass one liner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raindawg Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 "Cordelettes are gay." - Jim Donini  TRUE DAT!  Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayB Posted March 22, 2006 Author Share Posted March 22, 2006 Don't worry, I'll let you know when your petulant ego-driven verbosity is worth more than a weak-ass one liner. Â Not bad. Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catbirdseat Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 (edited) This is one of those rare threads we really ought to keep spray out of completely, IMHO. Â Wait a minute! Why is this in Spray? Edited March 22, 2006 by catbirdseat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-spotter Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 Â Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catbirdseat Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 So Joseph - is this more or less the final configuration of the "equalette" that JL was talking about? To rig this thing you'd basically start with a standard cordalette, tie a couple of overhand knots near the middlen with a 1-3 foot gap between them for the sliding portion of the anchor, then take the remaining loop on each side of the knot and clove hitch the loop to one or two pieces? If I'm reading this right it doesn't seem like this would take any longer to rig up than a standard cordalette, and would have some significant advantages. I especially like the clove attachments to the anchor points as it seems like the slippage in the cloves could really help dissipate max loads. I just wanted to point out something, in case it isn't obvious to everyone. This method of using a cordellette has the advantage that since the legs are single, rather than double, you have more cord available to incorporate more than the usual three pieces into the anchor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny_Tuff Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 I'll stick to clipping draws to each bolt and lowering off. Â Â Hellz yeah! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayB Posted March 22, 2006 Author Share Posted March 22, 2006 So Joseph - is this more or less the final configuration of the "equalette" that JL was talking about? To rig this thing you'd basically start with a standard cordalette, tie a couple of overhand knots near the middlen with a 1-3 foot gap between them for the sliding portion of the anchor, then take the remaining loop on each side of the knot and clove hitch the loop to one or two pieces? If I'm reading this right it doesn't seem like this would take any longer to rig up than a standard cordalette, and would have some significant advantages. I especially like the clove attachments to the anchor points as it seems like the slippage in the cloves could really help dissipate max loads. I just wanted to point out something, in case it isn't obvious to everyone. This method of using a cordellette has the advantage that since the legs are single, rather than double, you have more cord available to incorporate more than the usual three pieces into the anchor.  Brian, Brian, Brian - let's keep the on-topic out of this thread, lest it discourage others from contributing any more of the hillarious and useful one-liners. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cobra_Commander Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 CBS has been waiting his entire life for just this thread, don't spoil it for him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny_Tuff Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 CBS has been waiting his entire life for just this thread, don't spoil it for him. Â "and in the darkened underpass I thought 'oh, God, my chance has come at last' but then a strange fear gripped me and I just couldn't ask" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kix Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 funny how none of these issues ever come up when I'm out bouldering. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archenemy Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 Weird. Maybe they just don't think you'll have anything to offer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-spotter Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 funny how none of these issues ever come up when I'm out bouldering. Â You can't deny that Climbing mag did once run a whole tech tip on how to spot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cobra_Commander Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 for immediate release!!! turns out the tallest spotter takes 90% of the load, no distribution at all! he may have been wearing cords too!!!! blistering berkshards! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary_Yngve Posted March 22, 2006 Share Posted March 22, 2006 You can't deny that Climbing mag did once run a whole tech tip on how to spot. Â What's so hard about it? Â Your distance the boulderer is directly proportional to how many beans they ate last night and inversely proportional to how hot they are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.