BD Daisy Chain vs. Sterling Chain Reactor

I have both and want to get rid of one, what are your guys opinions?

Daisy chains are not necessary for free climbing. Use one of your runners for a rap sling. Build an anchor on the way up and clip in to the rope with a clove hitch. Get rid of both!

GET RID OF BOTH

Jim Amidon wrote:GET RID OF BOTH

+1

John Wilder wrote:depends. if you're using it as a personal anchor, then keep the Chain Reactor (despite what the two folks above me said, i really like mine if i know i'm going to be doing a ton of rappels or dealing with hanging belays on a multipitch route. if i'm just going to do a couple raps or whatever, then slings are fine)

Agreed. I dumped the daisy chain in favor of the Chain Reactor because of the independent loops as well as the fact that it's made of nylon, which gives you somewhat more dynamic quality than dyneema.

JL

IMO, Dump both and make a Purcell

An installed tether, used properly, makes multipitch free climbing and rappelling more efficient and so faster. It is also very helpful for the second when both hands have to be freed to clean gear, and can be a big help in various emergency situations. All these functions can be performed by slings, with a loss of efficiency in some cases. In other cases, the climber may not have the slings they need.

A daisy is an aid-climbing tool. It is typically longer than a tether like the chain reactor and, unlike chain-style tethers, has pockets that are easily clipped when the tether is loaded. The chain reactor is, however, a much stronger unit.

Purcell prussiks are nice but don't work well for many free-climbing applications. They can only be adjusted down to half their maximum length and are impssible to adjust once loaded.

It is impossible to shorten a Purcell when loaded. But that applies to every other possible system anyways. It is still easy to lengthen it.

I'm with rgold -- the daisy is a useful tool that improves efficiency in a lot of applicatons. Yeah, slings work. But the daisy is basically just the weight of a locker, and simplifies a lot of situations. I like that I always have something ready to clip if I need to get anchored in quickly.

It has become popular to show how rad you are by ragging on daisy chains, or people that use them. Whatever. They're useful.

As far as the daisy vs. chain reactor (PAS, etc.) argument, I'm a big fan of the BD daisy chain. Unlike almost all others, the loops in the BD daisies do a great job of load limiting if you screw up and fall hard onto it. Most other daisies, PAS, Chain Reactor, etc. are stitched up so hard, or designed in such a way that a hard load just causes complete failure of the system (slings are subject to the same issue). Unfortunately, the testing where I've seen this was part of something else, so I don't have any results to point you to. Basically, after what I've seen loading a lot of anchor connection systems to failure (and reading others testing of the same topic) is that the BD nylon daisy is a great tool.

However, those chain reactors (PAS, etc.) are designed to be full-strength anchor conenctions (i.e. clip into the anchor with it, and belay off your harness) -- I use the rope if I need that function, so the fact that the BD daisy chain wouldn't work for this is not a downside to me.

DannyUncanny wrote:It is impossible to shorten a Purcell when loaded. But that applies to every other possible system anyways.

Daisies and chain tethers can be shortened while you are hanging on them, at least if you are strong enough, as I imagine most climbers are, to lock off momentarily while gripping the tether so that the adjusting biner can be moved to a higher pocket. It is very hard in practice to do anything analogous with a Purcell prussik; at the very least it will be far more strenuous and involved.

Making this type of adjustment is a typical application when the second needs to free both hands in order to clean a stuck piece, and then, as mentioned earlier, even if you manage to shorten it the Purcell prussik many not shorten enough.

If you are going to go to the bother of climbing with an installed tether, the loss of versatility in the Purcell prussik gives more weight to the arguments against such extra encumbrances. It is good for canyoneering and rescue positioning, but it is not ideal for climbing.

There is one advantage: you have some spare cord for bailing and emergencies.

I don't think Rich Farnham's comments about the load limiting effect of blowing pockets make much sense. The amount of energy absorbtion you are likely to get by blowing a few bar tacks is minimal, and will probably be negated by the short free fall that occurs as you drop to the bottom of the blown pocket.

And, contrary to those comments, the Sterling Chain Reactor won't break on a factor-two fall. Sterling's tests, more severe than reality because done with with steel weights, indicate that the Chain Reactor can withstand three factor-2 falls.

If I had to choose one for free climbing, I'd probably get rid of the daisy. Not a big fan of the non-full strength loops.

I'm pretty firmly in the "personal anchor gear is an unnecessary pain in the ass most of the time" camp. Personal anchor gear is unitasker that gets in the way, while you usually have the tools to get the job done efficiently and safely already on you.

For multi-pitch, a clove hitch on your rope is a fast, safe, and more versatile option for anchors. When rapping off, slings work just fine, since you'll be standing on a ledge most of the time anyway.

For cleaning sport anchors, you already have quickdraws on you, at the chains, or you're picking them up as you clean. Just use 'em. 1 QD to each bolt, clipped to your belay loop. Done. Clip a few together (clipping to the dogbone, NOT 'biner to 'biner) if you need to get it longer.

Where personal anchors REALLY shine is doing gym / wall maintenance and setting, where the daisy chain is WAY better.

Rich Farnham wrote: I like that I always have something ready to clip if I need to get anchored in quickly.

That's what the rope is for.

Rich Farnham wrote: It has become popular to show how rad you are by ragging on daisy chains, or people that use them. Whatever. They're useful.

Daisy chains are only useful and designed for Aid climbing, and even then they are not very useful as there are better alternatives for die hard Wall climbers. Not for everyone, but hands down I prefer my Yates adjustable daisies to a BD or conventional daisy. Personal preference, just need to treat the Cam Buckles with respect.

vimeo.com/14679471

blackdiamondequipment.com/e…

Rich Farnham wrote: Unlike almost all others, the loops in the BD daisies do a great job of load limiting if you screw up and fall hard onto it.

Don't count on it.

Another vote for the Chain Reactor. Mine stays on my harness all the time. It stays out of the way and gets clipped to my haul loop until I need it. It doesn't weigh much of anything, especially with a small light locker like the BD Vaporlock or Nitron. It's just a very useful tool to have with you I think. Sure there are other ways to do it, and there are times when I clove in instead of using my anchor but it's useful none the less.

Another advantage is that it's become another routine for me. I'm not constantly girthing slings to my harness and taking them off or anything like that. Just like I always tie my 8 the same way I always clean routes the same way, rappel the same way, and usually anchor at the top of pitches the same way unless I'm on a huge ledge and want room to move around while I belay.

I use the yates Adjustable Daisy Strap setting all of the time. I have yet to use it out side as a single anchor, don't know how much i can trust the adjustable metal buckle.

Outside i have switched to the Metolius PAS, but thats getting a bit old and furry.

So the chain reactor get my vote as i will probably switch to to something nylon next.

Keep two small lockers on it.

Jim Amidon wrote:GET RID OF BOTH

End of thread.

Sam Stephens wrote:Another advantage is that it's become another routine for me. I'm not constantly girthing slings to my harness and taking them off or anything like that.

Good point. It's always strange to me that some people think these things are somehow "in the way."

JL

JPVallone wrote: That's what the rope is for.

There are many situations where I like having a quick and ready way to get anchored when I'm not actually tied into the rope. One example that has just come up on another thread is getting on and off tyrols (in particular, the ones where the take-off is dangerous, and it is valuable to be clipped in to the anchor while you arrange the connection you will use to cross the tyrol). Another is scrambling out to a rap anchor (think top of Vertigo rappels -- I'll clip in before making the final move down to directly below the first anchor). A lot of people use a sling girthed onto their belay loop for this. I'd argue this is a more dangerous situation than a BD Daisy. I'd be particularly interested in what a dyneema sling would do to a nylon belay loop.

(since you like the BD QC Lab, see here )

JPVallone wrote:Daisy chains are only useful and designed for Aid climbing...

Glad that's settled. So something can only ever be used for the thing it was originally designed for? I'd like to think climbers are more resourceful than that. Does the daisy have limitations as a personal tether -- sure it does. So do all tethers -- including using slings.

The video from BD is an excellent example of a limitation of the Daisy. But once you know how to avoid that, it is not difficult to use. I use a different method -- tying an overhand at the biner end of the daisy. Yes this reduces the overall strength of the sling. But the reduction is less than the effect of girth-hitching a sling. Again, a limitation, but not a deal-breaker.

rgold wrote:I don't think Rich Farnham's comments about the load limiting effect of blowing pockets make much sense. The amount of energy absorbtion you are likely to get by blowing a few bar tacks is minimal, and will probably be negated by the short free fall that occurs as you drop to the bottom of the blown pocket.

Blowing bartacks is exactly how most energy absorbers (screamers, etc.) worked for a long time until many started going to a continuous stitch pattern that creates a slightly smoother tear. Following your logic, screamers wouldn't work. I can tell you from testing I've seen, and others I've read, that energy is most certainly absorbed as the bartacks in a daisy blow.

Many daisy chains have 3 or 4 bartacks at each loop. What seems to happen is the strength of that connection is greater than the material, so the webbing blows at the pocket. The two-tack BD loops seem to tear well (the stitching rips), without casuing the sling itself to fail. To my knowledge, no direct investigation of this behavior (of the BD daisy) has been done, and I doubt BD would stand behind it as an approved use. I'm just passing on what I've seen in case others are interested.

rgold wrote:I don't think Rich Farnham's comments about the load limiting effect of blowing pockets make much sense. The amount of energy absorbtion you are likely to get by blowing a few bar tacks is minimal, and will probably be negated by the short free fall that occurs as you drop to the bottom of the blown pocket. And, contrary to those comments, the Sterling Chain Reactor won't break on a factor-two fall. Sterling's tests, more severe than reality because done with with steel weights, indicate that the Chain Reactor can withstand three factor-2 falls.

I forgot that we included some of this daisy chain data in this paper (presented at ITRS, 2009). Check out pages 9 and 10, as well as Gibbs' paper referenced in the footnote on page 10.

Re: Chain Reactors and FF2. I've never held a Chain Reactor in my hand. It looked like Sterling's version of the Metlious PAS, which I'm pretty sure was included in Gibbs' testing (don't have time to look it up right now). If Sterling is doing something different to make theirs better than the PAS, then my comparison may not be valid. I still prefer to have something with some shock absorption in it. Even though the CR may not break in a hard fall, I suspect that the forces it transfers to your body will be uncomfortably high.

JPVallone wrote,
Daisy Chains are only useful and designed for aid climbing

Rich Farnham replied,
Glad that's settled. So something can only ever be used for the thing it was originally designed for? I'd like to think climbers are more resourceful than that.

The BD QC lab on daisies ends with:

Daisy chains are for aid climbing NOT for use as part of your personal anchor system. Don’t know how to properly anchor yourself using the rope? Don't know how to thread sport anchors without clipping in with a daisy chain? Then go get some instruction from a professional guide IMMEDIATELY before you get yourself hurt.

It appears that resourcefulness has its limits.

I wrote,
I don't think Rich Farnham's comments about the load limiting effect of blowing pockets make much sense. The amount of energy absorbtion you are likely to get by blowing a few bar tacks is minimal, and will probably be negated by the short free fall that occurs as you drop to the bottom of the blown pocket.


Rich Farnham replied,
Blowing bartacks is exactly how most energy absorbers (screamers, etc.) worked for a long time until many started going to a continuous stitch pattern that creates a slightly smoother tear. Following your logic, screamers wouldn't work. I can tell you from testing I've seen, and others I've read, that energy is most certainly absorbed as the bartacks in a daisy blow.


Rich, the question isn't whether or not blowing bar tacks absorbs energy. It is whether the combination of energy absorbed by blowing bar tacks and fall energy gained by falling further as the pockets rip results in any net energy absorbtion, and, as I said, this seems very unlikely.

Let's say the pocket is held by three bar tacks 1/4" apart testing at 3 kN or approximately 675 lbf. Ripping those stiches absorbs 0.5 in X 675 lbf or approximately 338 inch-pounds of energy. Now your falling---lets say 180 lb---climber drops 2 inches to the bottom of the next pocket, adding 180 X 2 = 360 inch pounds to the amount of fall energy to be absorbed. The result is essentially no net absorbtion of fall energy; the extra distance fallen as the pockets rip more or less balances any energy absorbed by ripping the bar tacks.

Rich Farnham wrote:I've never held a Chain Reactor in my hand. It looked like Sterling's version of the Metlious PAS, which I'm pretty sure was included in Gibbs' testing (don't have time to look it up right now). If Sterling is doing something different to make theirs better than the PAS, then my comparison may not be valid.

The main difference I'm aware of between the PAS and the Chain Reactor is that the CR is made from nylon and the PAS is made from dyneema. RG can probably tell you if there are other differences.

JL

rgold wrote:The BD QC lab on daisies ends with: Daisy chains are for aid climbing NOT for use as part of your personal anchor system. Don’t know how to properly anchor yourself using the rope? Don't know how to thread sport anchors without clipping in with a daisy chain? Then go get some instruction from a professional guide IMMEDIATELY before you get yourself hurt. It appears that resourcefulness has its limits.

Yeah, I'm not surprised that given our liability system, that they are throwing out all sorts of dire warnings. (The tags on all of our gear are full of them.) There are people out there who try to use a daisy as a PAS for multi-pitch climbing so they can belay off their harness. I can't think of any logical reason to do this, and strong language should be used to encourage people to so something different (like use the rope to connect to the anchor, or buy a Chain Reactor).

Maybe I'm the idiot, but I don't see how people clipping quickdraws into their belay loop (or longer slings girthed to the belay loop) at the top of a sport pitch is any safer than using a daisy while you thread the chains. It's not that I find using the quickdraws to be particularly dangerous, and have done it plenty of times. I just don't buy the rhetoric that daisies are extremely dangerous and should never be used for this situation. Many times, I find the daisy to actually be safer, because I can adjust my anchor connection to the right length. With slings or draws, it is not always convenient to hang in the position required to keep tension on them. Without some tension, I would argue that the slings or quickdraws are relatively less safe than a daisy.

As another example, I'll throw out the Vertigo rappels question again. To get to the first anchor, you traverse easily out an exposed foot ramp which ends just above the anchors. The final step down to the good position below the anchors, where you'd want to rig the rappel from, is more difficult. You can reach the bolts (down and to the side a bit) before doing this final move. I clip into the anchor before doing the final move. This is not a factor 2 situation, but likely barely exceeds factor 1. I clip in with no slack. I don't recall the exact details of the move to get below the anchor, but I know that a fall will not be a true FF=1.x because the fall occurs on a slab, and has a swinging component which limits the peak load.

How would you manage this situation? Would you tie into the end of the rope so that you can use the shock absorbing properties of your rope in case you fall? Would you clip in with your Chain Reactor which could handle the fall without breaking? Something else?

I'm saying that I understand the behavior and limitations of a BD daisy, and I will continue to use it in that situation. The "use slings" crowd can not make that move as safely as I can with my daisy. Maybe they are tying into the rope for this little move, but I highly doubt it (most of us won't take the time to do this). I think most of them just feel that the sling is a perfectly safe solution to the problem. And it probably is safe enough. But I still maintain that it is not safer (or more convenient) than my BD daisy which is already girthed on my harness, ready to be used.

Still thinking about the bartack/energy question. I'll get to that in a bit...