Route Guide - iPhone / Android - Partners - Forum - Photos - Deals - What's New - School of Rock
Login with Facebook
 ADVANCED
would this work?
View Latest Posts in This Forum or All Forums
   Page 1 of 1.  
Follow replies to this topic? Notify me at the top of web site.
1

Email me.
 
 
By Mickey Sensenbach
From San luis obispo CA
Feb 16, 2013
me at the top of higher spire!

this is what youtube and lots of research is telling me to use for heavy loads:


hauling
hauling


hauling
hauling


have any of you used this method or know if it would work?


FLAG
By Tyrel Fuller
From Denver, CO
Feb 16, 2013
Big Bend

No, you are going to die.


FLAG
By csproul
From Rancho Cordova, CA
Feb 16, 2013
Summit of Wolf's Head with Pingora in the background

look two posts down
mountainproject.com/v/21-haul-setup---rate-my-rigging/107577>>> mountainproject.com/v/21-haul-setup---rate-my-rigging/107577>>>
Check out Mark Hudon's website. To me, that setup looks much less than optimal for 2:1 and probably not worth it for a truly heavy load. But I have not tried it, so I'll reserve judgement. I do know that Mark and PTPP's setup works well and is well tested.


FLAG
By Robert Cort
Feb 16, 2013

It'll work, you have a 3:1 theoretical mechanical advantage, but you have you least efficient pulley where you need your most efficient pulley. Your input force is reduced by at least 30% going over your carabiner, a quick analysis shows you're slightly less than a 2:1 (1.897 assuming 70% efficiency for the biner, and 90% for the pulley and traxion). If you put a 90% efficiency pulley in place of your biner, you'd have almost 2.5:1 (2.439). Just switching the location of your biner and pulley gets you from the 1.897 to 2.097:1 actual mechanical advantage (assuming the same efficiencies as stated above)


FLAG
By Rob Gordon
From Hollywood, CA
Feb 16, 2013
Tough Mantle Problem.  Haven't sent yet...

^^^ someone paid attention in physics class.


FLAG
By Mickey Sensenbach
From San luis obispo CA
Feb 16, 2013
me at the top of higher spire!

thanks for the segestion for the pullys and I just didnt have them for the picture but was going to switch out biners for pullys.


FLAG
By Andrew Rivera
Feb 16, 2013
climbing on an old dam

Robert Cort wrote:
It'll work, you have a 3:1 theoretical mechanical advantage, but you have you least efficient pulley where you need your most efficient pulley. Your input force is reduced by at least 30% going over your carabiner, a quick analysis shows you're slightly less than a 2:1 (1.897 assuming 70% efficiency for the biner, and 90% for the pulley and traxion). If you put a 90% efficiency pulley in place of your biner, you'd have almost 2.5:1 (2.439). Just switching the location of your biner and pulley gets you from the 1.897 to 2.097:1 actual mechanical advantage (assuming the same efficiencies as stated above)


mhmmm mhmm hmmm.. Yeah I know some of those words.


FLAG
By Mark Hudon
Feb 16, 2013
On the North America Wall in 1977.

I would certainly work but it would certainly be slow. You do have 3:1 but with every pull to raise the bag one foot you have to pump off three feet, in the very next stroke, to lower you pulley one foot, you have to feed out three feet. To raise the bag 150 feet you have to deal with 450 feet of rope.

BTW, that lower rope grab (what the hell are those things called, I own one and can't recall its name?) is going to shred your rope. I had one on Iron Hawk and it slipped three times and shredded six to eight inches of sheath each time.


FLAG
 
By Austin Baird
From SLC, Utah
Feb 17, 2013
Me scaring years off my mom's life

Mark Hudon wrote:
I would certainly work but it would certainly be slow. You do have 3:1 but with every pull to raise the bag one foot you have to pump off three feet, in the very next stroke, to lower you pulley one foot, you have to feed out three feet. To raise the bag 150 feet you have to deal with 450 feet of rope. BTW, that lower rope grab (what the hell are those things called, I own one and can't recall its name?) is going to shred your rope. I had one on Iron Hawk and it slipped three times and shredded six to eight inches of sheath each time.


Agreed. I'd switch the Tibloc out for a Ropeman 3.


FLAG
By Kirk B.
From Boise, ID
Feb 17, 2013
belay slaving on some route I forgot the name of way right of Bloody Fingers.

It is really Key to have good efficient pulleys.
My physics bro upstream is correct. Maximize your efficiency.
Good luck!


FLAG
By Keenan Waeschle
From Bozeman, MT
Feb 17, 2013
on top of the RNWF <br />June 2012

using a 5:1 is the worst advice I've ever heard. to haul a 200 foot pitch you'd have to move OVER 1000 FEET, FUCK THAT!


FLAG
By frankstoneline
Feb 17, 2013

Of note when dealing with heavy loads: don't over-fill that hot tub or you'll end up with water all over the place.


FLAG
By 20 kN
From Hawaii
Feb 17, 2013

Keenan Waeschle wrote:
using a 5:1 is the worst advice I've ever heard. to haul a 200 foot pitch you'd have to move OVER 1000 FEET, FUCK THAT!

No way, 5:1 is great idea. In fact, I think he should upgrade to a 182:1 to ensure he has the easiest-possible time hauling the pig. Just like this:


FLAG
By Mark Hudon
Feb 19, 2013
On the North America Wall in 1977.

Someone suggested 5:1?


FLAG
By John D
Feb 19, 2013

I've used 3:1 or Z drag for boating and it does work. My favorite thing to do is set up a tug of war and watch 3 people and 1 person have a reasonably fair battle.

I've never needed or used one for hauling, I think there are better ways out there, like counter weight hauling and 2:1


FLAG
By randy88fj62
Feb 19, 2013
Thunderbolt Peak in the Palisades

I would suggest this 2:1 mech advantage setup. I've used it twice now and it worked well.
mountainproject.com/v/21-haul-setup---rate-my-rigging/107577>>>


A tibloc is meant for emergency use only and has sharp teeth. I would not want to be using that for a hauling system. It also will not automatically grab. Usually you have to set them each time.

I would also not use a ropeman. I tried that and resetting the system is a pain. I found that using a petzl basic was best.

Your mini traxion is around 70% efficient. There are many other rope grab pulley combos out there that are moreefficient such as the kong block and roll.

The nylon bushing pulley you have in the picture has a horrible efficiency rating. If you can't find efficiency numbers for the pulley then it's not worth using.

All the efficiencies add up to you having to work harder to haul your pig up.


FLAG
 
By csproul
From Rancho Cordova, CA
Feb 19, 2013
Summit of Wolf's Head with Pingora in the background

randy88fj62 wrote:
I would suggest this 2:1 mech advantage setup. I've used it twice now and it worked well. mountainproject.com/v/21-haul-setup---rate-my-rigging/107577>>> A tibloc is meant for emergency use only and has sharp teeth. I would not want to be using that for a hauling system. It also will not automatically grab. Usually you have to set them each time. I would also not use a ropeman. I tried that and resetting the system is a pain. I found that using a petzl basic was best. Your mini traxion is around 70% efficient. There are many other rope grab pulley combos out there that are moreefficient such as the kong block and roll. The nylon bushing pulley you have in the picture has a horrible efficiency rating. If you can't find efficiency numbers for the pulley then it's not worth using. All the efficiencies add up to you having to work harder to haul your pig up.

Is the efficiency of the capturing device (the mini-trax in this case) relevant? Seems to me that the load is not on this pulley since the weight is being pulled by the Tibloc through the other two pulleys. I seem to remember Mark and PTPP saying that the efficiency of the pulley on the rope capture device was not important, but maybe I misunderstood. Or was this only the case if using a separate Z-chord to do the pulling and not the rope as is the case here? Definitely the other pulleys, especially the upper one, would be major factors in the efficiency.


FLAG


Follow replies to this topic? Notify me at the top of web site.
1

Email me.
Page 1 of 1.