best example of what happens when you dont extend the pieces under a roof
|
youtube.com/watch?v=vqEbB6z…
note that - the lower cam, due to the lack of extension, rotates/walks quite a bit - the lack of extension increases the drag/bend in the rope and thus increases the fall forces on the top piece - the climber may be shifting the cams with his or the ropes movements we had to carry out a climber who had a similar situation where the top two pieces pulled, one of them a #2 camalot, on a small roof ... possibly to to not extending the pieces enough on the roof and theres been at least one MP accident report thats similar extend those pieces !!! |
|
Hardest item for me to teach and get through...so many gravitate from sport climbing to trad now days without any alpine training....kind of like teaching one to ski over their skis vs on their butt. Most feel safer clipping short. They feel safer with a single rope vs doubles. Directional seems to be down the list in terms of concerns when someone moves from sport. Biggest fall I ever took was because I did not have enough gear (slings) to make proper extension under a huge roof. I zippered 3 pieces. |
|
Other likely contributing factors could be the cams being too small for the crack and flairing cracks. It is hard to tell given the camera angle. |
|
Although I don't disagree that extended pieces is beneficial sometimes, mandatory some times and not necessary at all sometimes, it may have done nothing for this guy. For starters, with 40 or 50 feet of rope out and a fall only inches above his last piece that load would be so small relatively speaking that extension may have increased the load at this point by increasing the length of the fall. Seriously, that was a one foot fall on fifty feet of rope, a ff so small it's hardly even worth the math. 1/50. I put greater loads on my gear when I fart. The fact that two pieces blew under such small loads suggests poor placement. Sure the cam may have rotated a bit. But a decent cam placement usually has some degree of multidirection. I have to call bs on no extension leads to gear failure on this one. Maybe the belayer was holding on to the climber side rope while using a gri Gri. |
|
Greg D wrote:Although I don't disagree that extended pieces is beneficial sometimes, mandatory some times and not necessary at all sometimes, it may have done nothing for this guy. For starters, with 40 or 50 feet of rope out and a fall only inches above his last piece that load would be so small relatively speaking that extension may have increased the load at this point by increasing the length of the fall. Seriously, that was a one foot fall on fifty feet of rope, a ff so small it's hardly even worth the math. 1/50. I part greater loads on my gear when I fart. The fact that two pieces blew under such small loads suggests poor placement. Sure the cam may have rotated a bit. But a decent cam placement usually has some degree of multidirection. I have to call bs on no extension leads to gear failure on this one. Maybe the belayer was holding on to the climber side rope while using a gri Gri.I am going to agree with the above analysis. The rope is taunt, very little slack. The guy fell from about a foot above his piece. So the rope was basically stretching under his weight. If you view the video in slow motion the top piece does not seem to be moving much even though there is little slack. So for it and the lower piece to pull out I would say the bigger issue was poorly set gear. That said I would agree the gear could have been better placed not only in terms of extending it but location. I often get to the base of a roof place a piece and clip it short initially. Then I figure out the next best placement above. Once it is set I extend the lower piece. |
|
Placements any where should be evaluated for appropriate slinging relative to their contribution to the overall rope path. Slinging long under roofs should be common sense as once over the roof it's really going to suck if you don't. |
|
Greg D wrote:Although I don't disagree that extended pieces is beneficial sometimes, mandatory some times and not necessary at all sometimes, it may have done nothing for this guy. For starters, with 40 or 50 feet of rope out and a fall only inches above his last piece that load would be so small relatively speaking that extension may have increased the load at this point by increasing the length of the fall. Seriously, that was a one foot fall on fifty feet of rope, a ff so small it's hardly even worth the math. 1/50. I put greater loads on my gear when I fart. The fact that two pieces blew under such small loads suggests poor placement. Sure the cam may have rotated a bit. But a decent cam placement usually has some degree of multidirection. I have to call bs on no extension leads to gear failure on this one. Maybe the belayer was holding on to the climber side rope while using a gri Gri.actually the fact that the sharp bend was so close to the last piece increase the fall forces ... its called effective rope length Fall factor alone is not enough of a criterion on its own to characterize the severity of a fall because it considers only the rope itself. It is better to think about the impact force because this is the force directly received by the climber during a fall. - Petzl its a misconception that if i have alot of rope out this will always reduce the fall forces ... this is ONLY true if the rope can come into play with a fairly straight path ... any sharp bends, especially near the last piece, would substantially increase the fall forces in fact it might be "safer" to have te sharp bend lower near the belayer, or with less rope out providing it runs straight ... as theres more effective rope length as to the lower piece walking heres 3 photos in sequence ... you can clearly see the difference between the positions as it moves back and forth due to rope drag ... and the final position before it pulls a small cam (orange metolius) shifting back and forth is very suspect ... theres no reason not to extend it on a roof high up, youll fall maybe a foot more cam pointed mostly downwards cam pointed sharply outwards due to drag as climber weights the top piece cam pointed straight downwards after top piece pulls, right before it pulls regardless even with flared/poor placement opportunities its even more important then to sling yr pieces as even a slightest bit of walking in those cases can lead to failure |
|
...and the walking in this case was not at all "slight." |
|
|
|
Dow Williams wrote:Hardest item for me to teach and get through...so many gravitate from sport climbing to trad now days without any alpine training....kind of like teaching one to ski over their skis vs on their butt. Most feel safer clipping short. They feel safer with a single rope vs doubles. Directional seems to be down the list in terms of concerns when someone moves from sport. Biggest fall I ever took was because I did not have enough gear (slings) to make proper extension under a huge roof. I zippered 3 pieces.------------------------------- Dow, I was instructing a sport climber in gear placements yesterday. One of the things I do now, which I never used to do, is have the student set up a traverse situation of placements near the ground, clip through the pieces; then I tighten up the cord from both ends, move the pull points around, so the student can see graphically how the placements behave under load. I discuss "effective length" as well while demonstrating. I emphasize the first placement of a lead needs to be multi-directional. Years ago,I was a volunteer at a rescue on "Alice in Wonderjam" in Joshua Tree where the leader, at the height where the crack begins to open up, zippered all her wire placements and decked head first. That might have been prevented by a cam placement at the base to contain the outward pulling force exerted during the fall As far as the video goes, the contributors seem to have covered the bases. I might only add a big cam could have been placed in the horizontal crack and runnered, which might have kept the next piece quieter. Might have kept him off the ground as well. |
|
Thanks guys. I'll be learning trad first over bolt clipping very soon. At first I was hesitant due to trads complexity. I admit, the learning the easier way (bolt clipping) at first was tempting. After reading these comments I'm confident that (as always) learning difficult things (trad placement, etc.) first is the way to go. Makes life easier in the long run. :) the instructors life too I imagine. |
|
Heather, with regard to slinging, what you want to do is visualize a straight line from the belayer to your top piece. That is the path the rope "wants" to follow. To the extent that it doesn't follow that line, it will pull, left, right, or up on the pieces you've placed. Slings can straighten out the rope path and make it less likely it will pull gear out when loaded. With gentler bends comes less rope friction too, which can also be critical for progress. |
|
I agree, it's hard to say anything for sure, but if I were a betting man I would bet on placement quality, not slinging issues. Looking at the stills, the top cam was well inline with the direction of the fall as he was falling on it. the stills indicated that the red cam dident really move before or during the fall, which further implies placement quality. Even with the twisting and moving, if those placements were solid they still should have held, at least one of them. One of the advertised functions of a cam is that they can be pulled around a bit and still hold because they will just twist back into the direction of the pull (assuming parallel crack, bomber placement) I forgot who advertised that. I think it was Wild Country, but I know I have seen it. |
|
again to put it simply |
|
20 kN wrote:One of the advertised functions of a cam is that they can be pulled around a bit and still hold because they will just twist back into the direction of the pull (assuming parallel crack, bomber placement) I forgot who advertised that. I think it was Wild Country, but I know I have seen it."What anyone says about gear - including the manufacturer, the ghost of Warren Harding, or the best climber you've ever met - is utterly irrelevant once on lead. When you leave the ground, with whatever gear you take with you, it is you, and you alone, who are wholly responsible for: - knowing whether the gear is appropriate for the task at hand - knowing how to use the gear for what you are about to undertake No one is going to be on lead with you, but you, no one else is going to take the dive but you. Don't depend on what you've read and don't take anyone's word on anything - check it out for yourself until you understand it and have formed your own [confident] opinion. To be a good [trad] leader, and an old leader, you have got to be 100% self-reliant on your own opinions, knowledge and wisdom around placements (and there is a lot more to placing cams than shoving them in cracks). Others can inform your opinions, but when you leave the ground you shouldn't be relying on them; you should be relying on yourself. To quote the old Devils Lake adage: 'Place thy protection well lest the ground rise up and smite thee'. Also be aware, Darwin is always and constantly hard at work so you want to make sure you know what you know, know what you don't know, and know your limitations. |
|
Nope, not even vaguely, and they won't be taking the fall if you fuck up. You will. If your confidence comes from anything other than you figuring it out for yourself you should quit trad altogether. |
|
20 kN wrote:I agree, it's hard to say anything for sure, but if I were a betting man I would bet on placement quality, not slinging issues.It's both. Why do people get all hot and bothered trying to make it one or the other? 20kN wrote:Looking at the stills, the top cam was well inline with the direction of the fall as he was falling on it.Yup. No question the top cam was bad and slinging wouldn't have changed that. Slinging can't make a weak placement strong. 20kN wrote:...the stills indicated that the red cam didn't really move before or during the fall... The red cam rotates up 90 degrees and then back down 90 degrees. At least the sling does, and it is doing it under tension, so the cam almost certainly rotated as well. (If the cam was trapped in a pocket, the sling could rotate as seen without moving the cam.) 20kN wrote:...which further implies placement quality.It could have been a bad placement, but it also quite possible that the original placement was good and after two rotations it was no longer good. 20kN wrote:Even with the twisting and moving, if those placements were solid they still should have held, at least one of them.The first piece "should" have held. As for the second piece, you can't count on a placement in an irregular crack holding after it rotates up and down. We don't know if the crack was irregular or not, so there is no way to settle this part of the issue. 20kN wrote:One of the advertised functions of a cam is that they can be pulled around a bit and still hold because they will just twist back into the direction of the pull (assuming parallel crack, bomber placement).Unfortunately, if the crack isn't parallel-sided, this "advertised" expectation may not be realized, and people who are either used to parallel-sided cracks or who just read or hear about cams purported insensitivity to movement are setting themselves up for a possible nasty surprise. If the bottom cam was also no good to begin with, then slinging wouldn't have made any difference. If the bottom cam was ok but not after two 90 degree rotations in opposite senses, then slinging could have helped. Really, no one knows which of these possibilities was actually operative. The cracks in my local area are frequently irregular, so I tend to treat my cams like nuts. I know I would have slung the bottom cam, and I'd also like to think that (1) I would have used a directional piece to keep that cam down, especially in view of the fact that it was the "cam of last resort" before a ground impact; (2) I would have gotten in more gear so that a ground fall wouldn't have been a consequence of those failures. A big cam in the horizontal would have solved all the problems; (3) I would have backed down as I started losing it rather than cutting my feet loose and trying to pull up on poor jams. Of course, what I'd like to think and what actually happens in a given situation are sadly not always the same. |
|
Again, other people can inform your opinions. It's up to you, however, to verify all such information, figure out its application to your leading and placements, and form your own opinions. Anything else is inappropriate and misplaced faith. |
|
rgold wrote:The red cam rotates up 90 degrees and then back down 90 degrees. At least the sling does, and it is doing it under tension, so the cam almost certainly rotated as well. (If the cam was trapped in a pocket, the sling could rotate as seen without moving the cam.) It could have been a bad placement, but it also quite possible that the original placement was good and after two rotations it was no longer good.Rich your points on the lower cam walking are well taken. However, I would add that there is third factor involved, that is the leader's inexperience. Let's take the roof out of the equation for the moment. A piece that has the potential to walk and expand is never a good placement. One should reset it so that it can not walk or failing that one should place a draw/sling on it to reduce the chance of it walking. That is what one does with any marginal piece - make it as good as possible under the circumstances. If one looks carefully on the guy's harness he has not only a quick draw but also several full slings that are doubled up. So he had the gear not the knowledge. As such, I would place the cause as: 1. Inexperience. 2. Bad, poor, and/or lack of gear placements. 3. Failure to sling the gear at the roof. All are contributory to the incident. |
|
Thank god he was wearing a helmet. |
|
Dylan B. wrote: Ah, there you go. Before it was "irrelevant," but now it "informs your opinion." See the difference?It was 'informed' three posts back in the first post if you are reading along. |