hops_scout 9 Posted September 20, 2003 Share Posted September 20, 2003 http://www.rockclimbing.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=39279&postdays=0&postorder=asc&topic_view=&start=15 Link to post Share on other sites
packsaddle 753 Posted September 21, 2003 Share Posted September 21, 2003 Nope, but it was interesting. We do nearly all of our climbing at the scout camp or with professional guides/outfitters. Can't afford the price of troop-owned equipment. Maybe we'll be limited to climbing walls in the future. Link to post Share on other sites
buffalo2 14 Posted September 22, 2003 Share Posted September 22, 2003 Hops, this is real and I'd encourage you to closely read some of the more thoughtful portions of that thread. Understand that there's a multitude of different backgrounds and skill levels contributing to those bulletin boards. Scouts and climbing mix pretty well, but we have to be pretty careful on how we do it (working to the lowest common denominator sadly) because the stakes are pretty high. That 5000# anchor requirement comes from the 2004 BSA Climbing Standards. The folks that I know that are involved with that are skilled and rational, and I won't argue with their decision. It's a little inconvenient, but just not that tough to comply and stay safe. If you and your Troop are getting into this look around for training; it's available but you'll probably have to dig for it. Be careful! Link to post Share on other sites
johnmbowen 10 Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 Buffalo2 Do you know if this rule applies to established set ups in Scout Camps, or to all Troops in the field. I am aware that alot of the very stringent rules set by BSA apply to the set routes in Scout Camps, such as the rules involving no use of personal gear, etc. However, in the past these have not applied to Troops that go out on Troop outings for climbs. Where are the rules published? Thanks JB Link to post Share on other sites
le Voyageur 72 Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 I've yet to get a current copy of the new standards for either Climbing, or COPE. However, a 5 000 lb anchor system is odd, if my math is right thats works out to about 20kn (kilo newtons - foot pounds of energy, 1 kn = 250 foot pounds of energy). Thus any fall that would produce this much energy would be a non surviable fall even if the rope didn't seperate, and the climber never made contact with the ground. No doubt about it, it's time to get a copy and see what the changes are. On a side note, I've developed a self adjusting anchor system that can bleed off anywhere between 3 and up to 8kn of energy (750 to 2,000 ft lbs of energy)to eliminate/reduce severe falls... (that reminds me, gotta give a follow up call to the company that I trying to get to make this thing....hopefully I'll have a bunch to sell, or just plain give away to a few camps before summer..) Link to post Share on other sites
buffalo2 14 Posted October 23, 2003 Share Posted October 23, 2003 jmb: I believe that this anchor standard applies to any Scout climbing/rappelling activity, regardless of the site. Makes you think a little harder on your anchoring setups, and build them that much better! Understand that it can get a bit subjective once you're off the Tower and on real rocks... Again you should look in the BSA Standard for Climbing/Rappelling and read for yourself, there is still plenty of room for your interpretation and I've heard several... The Standard should be available from Council or talk to folks on your local camp staff. Recently encountered some flat webbing used by Yates to make sewn slings and the like, don't know what the material is but was 1" wide and rated at 6000# Had sort of a corrugated surface and looked like it would knot well - better than the Spectra stuff. Does anybody know anything about this? Listed in their catalog but not in bulk. le voy: I believe that this 5000# number comes from derating and dynamic loads and absolute worst case; haven't seen the thinking behind the numbers but perhaps the mass-production environment at some of the camp facilities is behind it? Would be interested in seeing a sketch or whatever you'd be willing to share on your anchor system, use the PM feature? Be careful out there! Link to post Share on other sites
Fat Old Guy 11 Posted October 23, 2003 Share Posted October 23, 2003 le Voyageur, I don't know much about climbing but I do know that your units don't make sense. A kN, a kilonewton, is a unit of FORCE just like a lb. A Newton-meter or Joule, is the metric unit of energy as ft-lb is the unit in 'Merican. Link to post Share on other sites
Fat Old Guy 11 Posted October 23, 2003 Share Posted October 23, 2003 I read that thread. Boy were there a lot of unhappy ranters who aren't even impacted by the whole thing. The thing to do is to err on the side of safety. If memory serves, SCCA requires that safety harnesses have a breaking strength of 20,000 lbs. Now, if my frail human body is subjected to enough G's to break that belt, I've been turned into jelly. Parachute cord is rated for 550 lbs and they use many to tie a chute to a person. Why not use cords rated for 100 lbs? Safety. If you're only dealing with your own safety, feel free to cut the margins but when you're setting the standards for others, go with the max that you can get away with. Link to post Share on other sites
le Voyageur 72 Posted October 24, 2003 Share Posted October 24, 2003 FOG, you're right in that a kn is a unit of force, and is the standard used in the climbing industry. However, everypiece of climbing gear that I've seen has always expressed the kn in terms of foot pounds of energy. Thus for me, a 5 000 lb anchor system would equate to 20 kn, a tremendous amount of force that would shock load the system (climber, harnesses, rope, knots, carabiners, anchors, rock, belayer) at some point into failure. Maybe it's not good math, but it's enough to keep me aware of what could be generated in the system letting me take the precaution to keep everything below the limits of failure, and work within the manufacturers recommendations. However, I understand what is being attempted, which is a totally bombproof system. However, there are many weak links in these systems that will not allow for an effective anchor system rated at 20 kn's or higher. The first one being the very rock in which the anchors are placed. Thus, for some types of rocks, sandstone being one, anchors will have to be some type of fixed expansion bolt epoxyed in. With heavy use, and exposure to the environment these bolts will more than likely have to be replaced every year, thus degrading the rock even more. The next weak link are knots....thus I would suggest not tying in with a Figure 8, but instead with a Figure 9 to reduce the bend angle. To understand this, take a piece of kernmantle and just fold it over to form a bend. At the top of the bend the fibers in this area are under tension (a shearing force), while at the bottom of the bend, these fibers are under compression and are holding very little of the load. The sharper the bend means more fibers under compression with a greater strain on those few fibers under tension and holding the bulk of the load. Hence, any shock load to any knot with an excessive bend angle could result in rope failure reguardless of the amount of energy (or force) that the anchors can hold. Thus the reason for a Figure 9 knot over the 8.... It is because of this, that I've developed my own anchor system which is not only self equalizing, but capable of bleeding off, hopefully, enough energy (or force) to protect the system to prevent failure... Link to post Share on other sites
Fat Old Guy 11 Posted October 24, 2003 Share Posted October 24, 2003 oops!(This message has been edited by Fat Old Guy) Link to post Share on other sites
Fat Old Guy 11 Posted October 24, 2003 Share Posted October 24, 2003 "Maybe it's not good math," It's not bad math, it's bad physics. Akin to "Free gift". Good luck marketing your new system of anchors. Will you call them "Janeways" in honor of your internet handle? :-) Link to post Share on other sites
le Voyageur 72 Posted October 24, 2003 Share Posted October 24, 2003 Boy FOG, you nearly had me stumped, took awhile to figure out what a Janeway was?!??....guess I'm not a Trekie since I prefer the 18th century life of those canoe paddling voyageurs over this asphalt coated, and concrete covered world we live in... As for a name for the rig...never gave it much thought, figured it'll just name it's self... Link to post Share on other sites
kayakinmom 10 Posted October 26, 2003 Share Posted October 26, 2003 I don't personally climb and don't have much knowledge of the mathematical portions of this conversation but my hubby is a climber who has helped in rescue efforts. The majority of falls that I personally know of occur because of improperly placed gear. The last time he was at the Gunks they had to carry out a guy who fell off a cliff. When he lost his hold, the pieces that he had placed on the way up came out of the crack and he took a really bad spill. (I belive at the time that climber posted a thank you on rockclimbing.com) I also recall reading somewhere about a boy scout who broke his wrist because of double ropes or something. I was looking for that post again to show hubby. Anyone have any ideas where I might have seen it? I thought maybe it was here. Bottom line - No gear can protect you from yourself if you don't know what you're doing. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now