Mountain Project Logo

Fixe Anchor Failure

Jim Titt · · Germany · Joined Nov 2009 · Points: 490
S. Neoh wrote:In the vertically oriented ("French style") anchor system, do the primary and backup have to be solid rings or links? Can each be a "ram horn" or quickie? I am asking because all the photos (so far) show the French style anchor system requiring the last person of the party to untie and thread the rope through at least one ring/link. A somewhat time consuming task which is also more error prone for the less experienced or well-travelled climber.
Never seen a clip-in French style anchor, once you add a karabiner into the bottom bolt and say a rams horn in the top one the virtue of cheapness is gone and it´s better to just go to an inline style. I only use them on multi-pitch where they are for abseiling, sport climbs it´s always a ramshorn.
Jim Titt · · Germany · Joined Nov 2009 · Points: 490
20 kN wrote: How is someone supposed to create redundancy with a one bolt anchor while cleaning the route after the last climber? Use a prussik or put the GriGri on backwards so if they fall they whip onto a lower bolt? Yea, technically you can do that, but heck man we are talking about sport climbing, I bet 90% of sport climbers dont even know that trick. Even if they did, why take the risk of whipping like that just to save a single bolt at the anchor? Why risk taking a 30 footer (and likely breaking your legs if you're close to the deck) if the anchor pulls and you whip into the lower bolt? The second bolt is not about strength, it's about redundancy. The same theory as to why you dont rap off a single cam. Bolts pull all the time, UIAA certified and all. I dont know what places you are visiting that all have single bolt anchors, but if you tried that in the USA at a major crag your lines would get chopped or retrobolted overnight, and for good reason.
Hmm, the list of places unsuitable for you to climb at is extremely long if you don´t want to use a single point anchor. Start with the German speaking parts of Europe, most sea cliffs in the UK, the Dolomites, the Alps and Mt Everest.
I´ve used 2 two-bolts anchors this year in France, as they were both Fixe chain sets they were probably really only single bolts anyway:-)
slim · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Dec 2004 · Points: 1,103
kennoyce wrote: The accident wouldn't have happened because the lower bolt would have been in the rock below the loose block, so when the loose block came off the climber would have fallen the 1 foot or so until the lower redundant bolt took the weight of the climber. You would however then have a block that is attached to the rope possibly flying towards either the climber or the belayer depending on how the rope was set up through the anchor.
you're calling a block coming off, dumping onto the climber (while both are attached to the rope) not an accident? i don't think that would go too well...

i'm pretty surprised you would say that. i usually find your comments/thoughts on these types of things dead on target.
Jim Titt · · Germany · Joined Nov 2009 · Points: 490

Or the block would have been left dangling on the chain joining the two bolts in the normal inline anchor we use.....

Ken Noyce · · Layton, UT · Joined Aug 2010 · Points: 2,648
slim wrote: you're calling a block coming off, dumping onto the climber (while both are attached to the rope) not an accident? i don't think that would go too well... i'm pretty surprised you would say that. i usually find your comments/thoughts on these types of things dead on target.
Sorry Slim, I meant that to be a bit sarcastic in tone (which I unsuccessfully tried to show with my final sentance;) There is the slight possibility that depending on the location of the block in relation to the climber/pro/belayer, an accident may have been avoided, but there is a much higher probability that an accident would have still occurred.

I have no idea when the block came off, but let's say the climber was being lowered with the rope still going through some of the lower draws on the route since this seems like it would be a probable time for the block to cut loose. In this case, if we assume that there had been a vertical anchor and the climber had clipped into the upper bolt with the belayer side of the rope and the lower bolt with the climber side of the rope. When the block came off in this situation there is a possibility that it would have only fallen to the last clipped draw where it would have been stopped. This is about the only way an accident could have been avoided, and it still relies on additional assumptions like the climber not being in the path of the zip-lining block (which is highly unlikely for most routes) and that the block remains in tact and doesn't hit anything which would shatter it sending smaller blocks down onto both the climber and belayer.
Ken Noyce · · Layton, UT · Joined Aug 2010 · Points: 2,648
Jim Titt wrote:Or the block would have been left dangling on the chain joining the two bolts in the normal inline anchor we use.....
Yes, this would be the case for an inline anchor, but unfortunately, not the case for a French style anchor.
Jim Titt · · Germany · Joined Nov 2009 · Points: 490
kennoyce wrote: Sorry Slim, I meant that to be a bit sarcastic in tone (which I unsuccessfully tried to show with my final sentance;) There is the slight possibility that depending on the location of the block in relation to the climber/pro/belayer, an accident may have been avoided, but there is a much higher probability that an accident would have still occurred. I have no idea when the block came off, but let's say the climber was being lowered with the rope still going through some of the lower draws on the route since this seems like it would be a probable time for the block to cut loose. In this case, if we assume that there had been a vertical anchor and the climber had clipped into the upper bolt with the belayer side of the rope and the lower bolt with the climber side of the rope. When the block came off in this situation there is a possibility that it would have only fallen to the last clipped draw where it would have been stopped. This is about the only way an accident could have been avoided, and it still relies on additional assumptions like the climber not being in the path of the zip-lining block (which is highly unlikely for most routes) and that the block remains in tact and doesn't hit anything which would shatter it sending smaller blocks down onto both the climber and belayer.
In fact the block came off when the climber weighted it and both were caught by the next draw, the belayer was unable to control the fall for whatever reason and both hit the ground.
Ken Noyce · · Layton, UT · Joined Aug 2010 · Points: 2,648
Jim Titt wrote: In fact the block came off when the climber weighted it and both were caught by the next draw, the belayer was unable to control the fall for whatever reason and both hit the ground.
Interesting, I had figured that the block must have come loose when the climber had lowered far enough that he wouldn't have been caught by a lower bolt before hitting the ground. I guess this is yet another pro-gri-gri data point.
slim · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Dec 2004 · Points: 1,103

man, i think hitting the ground would almost be the least of his worries... uggh. having climbed quite a few chossy routes, sometimes i clip into a bolt on semi-detached rock and really wonder if i would be better off not clipping it. think how much that would suck - pop off a route, and all of a sudden have a microwave sized block careening down the rope at you. ooof!

you totally caught me off guard with the sarcasm - i thought you were on drugs, or even worse elanor might have hacked your accunt.

Ken Noyce · · Layton, UT · Joined Aug 2010 · Points: 2,648
slim wrote:man, i think hitting the ground would almost be the least of his worries... uggh. having climbed quite a few chossy routes, sometimes i clip into a bolt on semi-detached rock and really wonder if i would be better off not clipping it. think how much that would suck - pop off a route, and all of a sudden have a microwave sized block careening down the rope at you. ooof! you totally caught me off guard with the sarcasm - i thought you were on drugs, or even worse elanor might have hacked your accunt.
Seriously, that would be about the worst case scenario. And again, sorry about the sarcasm, I'll try to remember to refrain from it in the future since it's so easy to get lost in the translation to written text.
Rich Farnham · · Nederland, CO · Joined Aug 2002 · Points: 297
J. Albers wrote:...simply having a ring that hangs perpendicular when it is not loaded is not a good indication of whether it will twist the rope. The important information is knowing what orientation the rings end up in when the rope loads both anchors in tandem... In the case of the single ring Fixe anchor, the two rings initially hang perpendicular (or largely so), but when they are loaded together, the two rings induce an inward force on each other -- via the rope -- that twists the orientation of each ring sharply. This sharp orientation shift causes the rope to have the the force of its load exerted asymmetrically across the surface of each ring...
My experience matches what J. Albers describes. The only time I see the single ring Fixe anchors work well is on steep rock where the rings hang free and don't touch the wall. This allows them to remain perpendicular to the wall. I don't recall ever having twisting issues with the double ring Fixe anchors, or a similar setup with a quicklink and a ring.

As for the French setup, I could probably get used to it. But it is nice to just throw two quickdraws on the anchor and lower without having to find the right combo of quickdraws and single biners that gets both rope-end biners at the same height.
eli poss · · Durango, CO · Joined May 2014 · Points: 525
Rich Farnham wrote:But it is nice to just throw two quickdraws on the anchor and lower without having to find the right combo of quickdraws and single biners that gets both rope-end biners at the same height.
They don't really care about the biners being at the same height and theoretically distributing the load. While this makes sense logically, considering the low loads encountered in TRing, I would rather potentially spend more money creating a V set up because of familiarity.

Humans don't like change, even if it is often beneficial.
20 kN · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Feb 2009 · Points: 1,346

On a side note, the single ring Fixe anchors dont seem to absolutely guarantee the rope will twist either. Today my partner lowered off five routes equipped with the Fixe single ring hangers, placed horizontally about a foot apart, and none of the anchors twisted the rope the slightest.

slim · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Dec 2004 · Points: 1,103
20 kN wrote:On a side note, the single ring Fixe anchors dont seem to absolutely guarantee the rope will twist either. Today my partner lowered off five routes equipped with the Fixe single ring hangers, placed horizontally about a foot apart, and none of the anchors twisted the rope the slightest.
yeah, they're pretty much just like a pair of coldshuts if they are installed just right.
Guideline #1: Don't be a jerk.

Fixed Hardware: Bolts & Anchors
Post a Reply to "Fixe Anchor Failure"

Log In to Reply

Join the Community

Create your FREE account today!
Already have an account? Login to close this notice.

Get Started.