belay off anchor or belayoff harness

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List

This thread has been locked

Messages 1 - 70 of total 70 in this topic

hunter4884

Trad climber

Topic Author's Original Post - Jun 9, 2013 - 03:57pm PT

always belay off the anchor.
1. can escape belay for doing a rescue
2. not gonna get ripped in half if a bad fall happens
3. multi directional

kennyt

climber

Woodfords,California

Jun 9, 2013 - 04:01pm PT

will you be using a grigri?

kennyt

climber

Woodfords,California

Jun 9, 2013 - 04:24pm PT

what color is it?

your grigri I mean

guyman

Social climber

Moorpark, CA.

Jun 10, 2013 - 11:17am PT

I have never needed to "escape a belay"...

wanted to but never needed to.

pud

climber

Sportbikeville & Yucca brevifolia

Jun 10, 2013 - 11:29am PT

Never heard of anybody getting "ripped in half" from catching a fall.
A dynamic belay has saved me from serious injury on more than one occasion.
Your anchor depends on your ability and situation.
Neither one is "correct" for every belay.

ionlyski

Trad climber

Kalispell, Montana

Jun 10, 2013 - 11:30am PT

I can't believe I fell for this clown's gri-gri troll.

FRUMY

Trad climber

SHERMAN OAKS,CA

Jun 10, 2013 - 11:35am PT

When you are 140 & catching 200 pounders you take a beating.

Magic Ed

Trad climber

Nuevo Leon, Mexico

Jun 10, 2013 - 11:50am PT

I always belay off my harness and I (almost) always use a gri-gri. I know how to escape if necessary but in 45 years of climbing it has never been necessary.

RyanD

climber

Squamish

Jun 10, 2013 - 12:46pm PT

Awesome thread, looking forward to checking in later.

Roots

Mountain climber

SoCal

Jun 10, 2013 - 12:51pm PT

I prefer to belay off harness for most situations.

MisterE

Social climber

Jun 10, 2013 - 01:06pm PT

Harness with re-direct through anchor if needed.

So, both.

hunter4884

Trad climber

Topic Author's Reply - Jun 10, 2013 - 01:14pm PT

my grigri is a blue grigri and yes i always use a grigri for belaying on multipitch routes

hunter4884

Trad climber

Topic Author's Reply - Jun 10, 2013 - 01:22pm PT

the ripped in half thing was a joke by the way

my cousin who was following my lead took a big fall and if he were to had fallen with the grigri hooked to my waist it could have seriously hurt my back. And also to all those who have never had to escape belay practice because you need it to be second nature when your under that much stress!

hunter4884

Trad climber

Topic Author's Reply - Jun 10, 2013 - 01:32pm PT

you know what i mean he was following and i was belaying him up on a multi pitch route.

(that was sh@ty wording on my part, i will admit)

The Guy

Trad climber

Portland, OR

Jun 10, 2013 - 01:36pm PT

slack in that belay...keep your second a little tighter.

hunter4884

Trad climber

Topic Author's Reply - Jun 10, 2013 - 01:41pm PT

rope caught on rock plus he said slack to try to snap it off the rock when the sandstone brokeand at first it was just tight and then it got uncaught and yanked really hard im luck i wasnt belaying from my harness

Big Mike

Trad climber

Jun 10, 2013 - 01:43pm PT

Maybe if you had him a bit tighter the impact wouldn't have been so great?

I always belay off an anchor now, even on single pitch.. But i have a broken spine.. Lol

hunter4884

Trad climber

Topic Author's Reply - Jun 10, 2013 - 01:44pm PT

your right big mike i should have him a little tighter (my dumb ass move)how did you brake your spine

Big Mike

Trad climber

Jun 10, 2013 - 01:49pm PT

I was snowboarding and Landed on my ass after sending a large roller going 90km/h.

Fuvked up my spinal cord too. I'm extremely fortunate to simply be walking at the moment..

Johannsolo

climber

Soul Cal

Jun 10, 2013 - 08:49pm PT

Are you 11 or 12 years old?

hunter4884

Trad climber

Topic Author's Reply - Jun 10, 2013 - 09:05pm PT

im 15

JimT

climber

Munich

Jun 11, 2013 - 08:01am PT

15, about the age I started climbing, 45 years on and I still don´t belay off the anchor. Guess I´m going to die.

John Butler

Social climber

SLC, Utah

Jun 11, 2013 - 10:12am PT

1. can escape belay for doing a rescue?
A: You're either a guide or climbing with the wrong people
2. not gonna get ripped in half if a bad fall happens?
A: They are on top rope... how are they going to rip you in half? OK... I had a guy THAT BIG follow me he yelled take. I don't climb with him anymore.
3. multi directional?
A: So is your belay loop

The real reason to belay off the anchor (with an auto-locking device) is because it makes rope management easier. For me, it actually makes it possible :-)

rgold

Trad climber

Poughkeepsie, NY

Jun 11, 2013 - 11:55am PT

15, about the age I started climbing, 45 years on and I still don´t belay off the anchor. Guess I´m going to die.

In my opinion, it is slightly more likely that the anchor-belayers will die, or at least have epics.

I started at 14, and it is now 56 years later. I belay off an anchor from time to time, initially to test out the process and the devices and subsequently because a particular configuration made it a relatively simple proposition.

There are two issues. One is what device or method you use to belay off the anchor, and the other is whether a harness-level belay is a better option. There are plenty of arguments about both, and I'd recommend you do a little searching and read up on some of the pros and cons.

But I also think the harness belay-anchor belay is a false dichotomy. Personally, I always belay off the anchor, in a sense, with the belay device at my harness. This means that my tie-in to the anchor is snug and my device is clipped to the rope tie-in loop, not the harness belay loop. (See for example http://www.ukclimbing.com/articles/page.php?id=1129, but I learned the method years before from the recommendations of BD engineer Chris Harmston on the old rec.climbing.)

With this method, you have the advantage of waist-level handling, which no matter what anyone says provides a better more attentive belay, and the load is transmitted directly to the anchor via the tie-in. No "ripping the belayer in half" if there is a big fall to hold.

The tie-in provides a dynamic connection to the anchor, which is better in case of a big load, since the anchor is protected by a energy absorbing intermediary to the device. Moreover, since the tie-in stretches a bit under load, the ability of the belayer to take some of the load by bracing is still present.

The net effect is a better belay for the second, at least in many cases, and protection for the anchor in case of a big load. Moreover, the method works for all anchor configurations, whereas belaying off the anchor is not always feasible if the anchor is not well-positioned.

As for self-rescue, you should know how to do it, even though the chances of using the techniques is miniscule, and the chances that some of the techniques, particularly some of the raising techniques, will work is also miniscule. It is true that a Grigri on the anchor makes it easier to initiate self-rescue procedures, but it is only slightly harder to set things up from other belay positions, whose advantages, day in and day out, outweigh preparing for events that many people will never experience in an entire career.

Seamstress

Trad climber

Yacolt, WA

Jun 11, 2013 - 04:16pm PT

Awesome question.

15 may be SMALLER than many partners - something I can fully relate to. I'm 125 lbs and my husband is over 200. When he falls - leading or belaying - I will be moved. I must be anchored even for toprope. Most of the time, I will belay off the anchor. YES - I have had occasions to tie off my partner and escape the belay. This is so much easier when you are belaying off the anchor. As I have been raising shildren, they sometimes require urgent attention while we are climbing. So we love the gri-gri and can readily save child/gear/dog/ourselves from any catastrophe. I doubt that my back could handle many falls when someone is nearly twice my size.

The idea of a dynamic belay has some merit in some circumstances. Keep in mind that the rope is an excellent shock absorber and you rarely need any more dynamcism than that - perhaps if you are one of those hardman on a gnarly aid climb. Belay devices slip - more energy absorption. You can make belaying off the anchor more dynamic by clipping your belay loop to the belay device attachment point. Stand alongside the anchor, a tad offset. The jolt will move you a little (absorbing some shock) and then load the entire anchor. Voila - some dynamicism (is that even a word?). My most pertinent case was my husband falling on a little loweball while my 6 month old was sliding downhill. Caught fall, tied off, and ran after child tumbling downslop. Adjusted my child protection system but continued to use the belay off anchor technique.

RyanD

climber

Squamish

Jun 11, 2013 - 05:34pm PT

With a bombproof anchor:

Put your new Grigri on anchor.

Put rope in Grigri

Pull rope

Partner climbs to anchor, secures themself

Take Grigri off anchor clip to belay loop

Clip rope in anchor

Partner leads off

Finish climb

Edit- get ridiculed on Internet

chalkfree

Trad climber

Claremont, CA

Jun 11, 2013 - 06:10pm PT

Agree with rgold:
-easier to manage rope (slack and tension) with belay from harness
-dynamic nature of belayer in the system helps

I tried to do a direct belay and lower off of the anchor this past weekend with two kids, and the positioning of anchor is critical and hard to achieve (whether belaying from above or below load). I had to abandon that attempt and go with belay/lower from my harness.

For taking and feeding of rope (and this is a biggy!), I get best control with belay at my waist. Also, I am from the hip-belay age group, so have no problem with doing a hip belay every now and then.

ladyscarlett

Trad climber

SF Bay Area, California

Jun 12, 2013 - 12:30am PT

oh MAN!

I have been seeing this argument for a while, and it really shows me that the community really is split on the issue, regardless what one side will say about the other.

So many times I've found myself on the receiving side of a lecture while I'm belaying someone up a pitch. Funny, because I never get lectured for my smoking or drinking habits, which tends to be just as controversial.

At a well insulated 140, I have belayed (and caught!) guys as heavy as 240, while belaying from my harness. There were even a few times where I tested out what it would feel like to catch the fall with my body rather than relying solely on my anchor. Well, in all honesty, with the right stance, I was amazed at what was possible, without a bruise or sore spot(silly me, I was 'training' for one of those fabled JTree topouts where it's just a hole at the summit to brace yourself with no piece in sight. Haven't seen one of those yet...).

But I know one thing for sure, my belay practices are part of what makes me a dangerous climber, so climb at your own risk! ;) Seriously folks...sometimes I want to face outward...because it's fun, and I like to enjoy the view, especially of my partner grumbling up my lead.

I was also recently reminded that autolocking devices like the gri gri are awfully nice for untangling knots on rappel and taking pictures ;P

Rgold, that's a neat trick, I'm going to try it! A climber could miss the distinction, especially if there are a lot of distracting rope piles, totem cams, great climbing, and beautiful views!

Cheers

LS

Cheers

LS

rgold

Trad climber

Poughkeepsie, NY

Jun 12, 2013 - 01:04pm PT

You have to be an absolute nut case to belay the leader off a direct belay....

Who here is suggesting this and who taught them?

It is commonplace in Europe, where bolted belay anchors are more common than in the U.S. But the U.S. is rapidly catching up (sadly, in my opinion).

Here's a diagram from Panorama [3] 2009 http://www.alpenverein.de/chameleon/outbox/public/10147/p_sic_15517.pdf . Trad anchor with upward pull directional. (Note that in a fall, the Munter biner would probably collide with the anchor biner on the red sling, open the gate, and end up clipped to it.)

Here is one of the CAI tests for catching a UIAA fall with a Munter hitch on an anchor.

[Click to View YouTube Video]

There have been tests by the DAV as well.

Here is an IFMGA technical report on the matter. Note that there is much attention paid to using trad anchors, not just bolted anchors.

http://www.outdoorlink.org/research-papers/part-5-belaying-lowres.pdf

[One of the most surprising results of tests in that paper is that factor 2 falls directly onto the belay generate no more than about 5 kN. This surely needs to be explained in terms of the UIAA rope ratings which are factor 1.78 falls and generate considerably higher rope tensions.]

the goat

climber

north central WA

Jun 12, 2013 - 01:25pm PT

Is that "whopper" or "whipper" stories?

rgold

Trad climber

Poughkeepsie, NY

Jun 12, 2013 - 02:04pm PT

...getting your hand drag into the system as if you watch the video the guy almost does.

The Munter provides more friction than ATC's. Your hand will be dragged into an ATC too under the same circumstances, and more violently at that.

What you saw there is a technique Americans don't even understand. The CAI calls it the "inertial phase" of the belay, when the resisting hand is drawn to the device. Once the hand hits the device, you get rope slippage through the hand, which of course is worse. The video shows extreme forces controlled entirely in the inertial phase with no rope slippage through the hand---it is actually a far superior result to what would happen to most American belayers, who belay with their hand inches from the device and so would get almost no inertial benefit and be forced to control a sliding rope.

If you don't like the Munter, you can also use ATC's on the anchor, as well as other devices. See the IFMGA report I linked.

By the way, I'm not personally advocating belaying the leader directly off the anchor as a general technique. I've already said above I'm not even a fan for it's use in belaying seconds. But American attitudes are governed by tradition unsupported by any kind of testing, which is to say they are based on superstition (ok, maybe supposition is a less inflammatory term) more than reason and knowledge. The DAV and CAI, with vast financial resources and dedicated testing facilities, are many years ahead of us. The reality is that there are probably at least some situations in which a direct belay off the anchor is a good idea.

ladyscarlett

Trad climber

SF Bay Area, California

Jun 12, 2013 - 02:39pm PT

I can't believe I haven't seen this phrase yet...

"It depends!!!"

Hahaha...

I hear that both the munter AND fiddly belay gadgets can make a perfectly supple rope into a kinky mess!

Guess it's just a matter of handling it as it comes to you...don't we love rope management?

Cheers

LS

Jason Kim

Trad climber

San Diego, CA

Jun 12, 2013 - 02:43pm PT

Thanks for posting that video and link, Rich. Lots of good info there.

I frequently see people belaying with a tube-style device, and holding their brake hand directly alongside (or sometimes, almost on top of) the device. This always makes me cringe, because it eliminates any hope of slowing the falling climber during the "inertial phase" and makes it very likely that the belayer's hand will get sucked into the device and pinched (or worse), which would seem to increase the risk of a total belay failure. I generally try and keep my hand as far away from the device as I can.

It's very common in gym climbers whose belay habits (and muscle memory) were developed on top-ropes, where the forces are lower.

J man

Trad climber

morgan hill

Jun 12, 2013 - 03:21pm PT

belay from trailer hitches is safe and secure.

Big Mike

Trad climber

Jun 12, 2013 - 03:32pm PT

Even with a ATC or similar there is still lots of opportunity to get driven at mach speed up into the anchor and have your barake hand driven into the belay device. I've seen it and I'm sure most of us have.

This is very true. I did it Nathan last year, when i took my huge screamer on the pillar. I pulled him right into those huge boat anchors...

Big Mike

Trad climber

Jun 12, 2013 - 04:13pm PT

I'm glad to hear you didn't pop the pillar off at the same time. It might have chopped the rope

Me too!! I still need to send that thing! :) lol. One near death experience per year is good enough.. ;)

rgold

Trad climber

Poughkeepsie, NY

Jun 12, 2013 - 08:51pm PT

There's an interesting video comparing identical falls held by a harness belay and a direct belay off the anchor. I can't seem to locate it by itself, but it is included in the following Mike Barter video, starting at 7:44 and lasting about a minute.

[Click to View YouTube Video]

RyanD

climber

Squamish

Jun 12, 2013 - 09:07pm PT

I knew this thread would be awesome.

John Butler

Social climber

SLC, Utah

Jun 12, 2013 - 10:55pm PT

So the belayer absorbs less force belaying a leader off anchor with a munter. The force absorbed by the leader increases? A munter doesn't absorb much, does it? Somebody ought to be able to do the math.

rgold

Trad climber

Poughkeepsie, NY

Jun 12, 2013 - 11:15pm PT

No, it is pretty complicated to even test. Most of the smacking the belayer takes has nothing to do with absorbing fall energy. And the CAI testing suggests that only a very small amount of belayer lifting has any effect in reducing peak loads.

Belays off the anchor do lead to higher loads, but I think not by much more than 10%. On the other hand, smashing the belayer around might lead to a complete loss of control of the belay, so that's the other side of the coin. For example, if you look at the belay scenes at the beginning of the video, you'll see one in which the belayer's helmet gets knocked out of position.

labrat

Trad climber

Auburn, CA

Jun 13, 2013 - 12:09am PT

rgold

http://vimeo.com/44869774

This link should work. ACMG fixed point belay.

paganmonkeyboy

climber

mars...it's near nevada...

Jun 13, 2013 - 12:18am PT

clove hitch the first 2 pieces, figure 8 the top one, throw the rope across the back and around the hips and off you go ! just don't fall there, you'll kill us both...

MisterE

Social climber

Jun 13, 2013 - 12:28am PT

Why am I still alive?

rgold

Trad climber

Poughkeepsie, NY

Jun 13, 2013 - 08:54am PT

Not everyone who started with us is.

justthemaid

climber

Jim Henson's Basement

Jun 13, 2013 - 10:25am PT

tomtom

Social climber

Seattle, Wa

Jun 13, 2013 - 01:32pm PT

Depends.

Offset

climber

seattle

Jun 13, 2013 - 03:29pm PT

those that are anti-belay off the anchor... are you also against roped soloing? am i missing something?

DanaB

climber

Jun 13, 2013 - 05:41pm PT

but is extremely outdated

Could you explain why you feel the munter-mule is outdated? In what situations? In youropinion, what is a better alternative?
Thanks.

Jason Kim

Trad climber

San Diego, CA

Jun 14, 2013 - 12:52am PT

Some interesting info in this thread. I am always interested in tests and results which challenges the conventional wisdom.

Coz, you would probably drum up more business for yourself by hashing out your opinions here, which seem to be pretty strong. I don't know if you get many referrals or clients off this forum, but I wouldn't hire you, based on your posts in this thread.

climbski2

Mountain climber

Anchorage AK, Reno NV

Jun 14, 2013 - 01:22am PT

I'm no fan of the munter except in cases of a dropped or forgotten device. Then in a pinch it works.

I use the Tuber not an ATC. I like the various amounts of friction/dynamism I can engineer easily with a Tuber.

I have in the past preferred to belay a leader with the belay connected directly to the the anchor with my weight on the anchor separately. Although I was never strict about it.

My thinking was that My mass provided a buffer for the anchor in an upward pull same as if I belayed off my waist. The Anchor provided a buffer for my belay and a bit more downward separation for braking,

However if i were to be bounced past the anchor point then braking could be somewhat momentarily compromised, This seemed less of an issue at that point as the whole reason one would be bounced above the anchor point would be due to the fact that the fall was nearly completely arrested at that time.

This stuff is not simple for sure.

Coz I am VERY interested in why you think this is a bad idea. If I am understanding your brief posts correctly.

rgold

Trad climber

Poughkeepsie, NY

Jun 14, 2013 - 02:07pm PT

I don't make my living from climbing, so I've made it a point to share whatever I think I know. I believe that techniques ought to come with supporting reasoning, ideally with well-run testing and, in the absence of that, at least an attempt at theoretical support. The reasoning, whatever form of it is available, ought to accompany the methods, so that other people can evaluate and make their own decisions.

As people manage to test various procedures, it is inevitable that flaws will be found in current practice and better ways will be identified. Entirely new ideas, such as the inertial phase of the belay sequence, ideas that the vast majority of climbers didn't even know about, can emerge. But since technology seems to advance faster that the evaluation of it, we are also destined to be continually bombarded with new gadgets and new techniques which haven't been genuinely evaluated yet.

It is also inevitable that people will say, "I've done it this way for years and it worked fine." Such reasoning is, of course, completely invalid, and personally, I'm not a traditionalist in this sense. If there is a demonstrably better way to do something, I'd rather be doing that, but of course the problem lies with "demonstrably."

One of the aspects of giving away information is that it gets no respect. Put the same thing in a book, or pay Coz $500 for it, and all of a sudden the idea everyone dumped on becomes authoritative.

In the wild and wooly days when I did some guiding to help make it through grad school, the necessary qualifications were the ability make one's way to a stationary store and have business cards printed. It always amazed me that most people asked for no more evidence of qualification than those silly cards---the perception of authority seems to undermine what would otherwise be a healthy scepticism.

So, in many cases, the "no respect" approach is better for the development of truly better practices, because the ideas gets fully thrashed without benefitting from a protective coating of expert opinion that may or may not have validity for the particular concept in question. Because of this, I think that internet discussions, with all their substantial flaws, can still play a productive role in the advancement of better practices.

rockgymnast

Trad climber

Virginia

Jun 14, 2013 - 02:33pm PT

Rgold - may I call you Richard?

I have been reading your posting here on Supertopo and other internet forums for years.

I just wanted to say thanks; I enjoy reading both your technical responses to various questions as well as your philosophical posts.

Thanks for your many contributions; I find myself nodding in agreement (almost) all the time.

Marty

labrat

Trad climber

Auburn, CA

Jun 14, 2013 - 02:52pm PT

Well said! x2 Thank you rgold!
Erik

perswig

climber

Jun 14, 2013 - 06:29pm PT

Mr. Kay,

As a frequent user of a Munter and a sliding scale of other belay options, I'd like to ask permission to borrow the term "mountaineery" now and again.

Promise to provide due credit.

Dale
(CV available on request, if you're particular to whom you lend it...)

Oh, and ditto Dave Kos on rgold and others' contributions present and past.

labrat

Trad climber

Auburn, CA

Jun 14, 2013 - 09:49pm PT

Thud!

That was the sound of an extra large belay glove hitting the rocky belay ledge........

RyanD

climber

Squamish

Jun 14, 2013 - 10:00pm PT

Thread of the week!

Rgold = wisdom

climbski2

Mountain climber

Anchorage AK, Reno NV

Jun 15, 2013 - 09:39am PT

Fair nuff. But I sure had fun writing that. Gone.

Mike Bolte

Trad climber

Planet Earth

Jun 15, 2013 - 12:48pm PT

if you use a ATC as a direct belay, then just get a hand gun and end it now.

I'm wondering what this statement from Coz means. I thought ATC's were belay devices, so "direct belay" must have a meaning I am not getting here. Do I have to wait for the book?

EDIT: thanks for the clarification below Coz

RyanD

climber

Squamish

Jun 15, 2013 - 03:44pm PT

Thanks Coz, that's what I was getting at with my post earlier. Not belaying the leader directly off the anchor with a Grigri but Grigri on the anchor when belaying the second. So easy to manage the rope, falls, etc.

At the belay change- With bolted anchors- i usually clip the rope thru a draw on one of the bolts when my buddy leads up & then unclip it once hes got solid gear. On a gear anchor I usually try & place a piece above the anchor if available to protect the belay. I do this because I always thought the outcome would be better for him to fall on the bolt or piece as opposed to directly on my harness. Id rather get sucked up than have my buddy hanging directly off my harness. Your point is interesting though & obviously situations & judgment come into play at every single belay situation which is the most important point of this whole conversation. Ive definitely learned a few things. Many ways to skin the cat it seems. Lots of good comments and some funny territorial pissing here.

bvb

Social climber

flagstaff arizona

Jun 15, 2013 - 06:07pm PT

Interesting question. I've always anchored in and then belayed directly off my harness, using a directional if wise (as Erik mentioned about 80 posts ago.) In 40 years of climbing with 100s of people in 100s of places, this seems to be the way to go. There are exceptions to the rule, but you need a lot of experience to recognize them. Like the time I body-belayed my partner with one hand, using the other hand on a bomber hold as the anchor. In that particular situation I think I could have caught her. I was well balanced and braced, with good feet.

Jon Beck

Trad climber

Oceanside

Jun 15, 2013 - 08:51pm PT

Ron - Fall Factor 1.375

Click Here for Fall Force Calculator

rgold

Trad climber

Poughkeepsie, NY

Jun 15, 2013 - 09:00pm PT

Argh, not that "calculator." It is completely bogus!

Ron, when you say "40 feet out with a 30 foot fall," this would normally mean the leader was 15 feet above the last piece, which was 40 feet from the belayer. If this is true, the fall factor was 30/55=0.55.

If you mean the leader was 30 feet above the last piece, (which would be a 60 foot fall), then the fall factor would be 60/70 =0.86.

In neither case is it anywhere near 1.375.

The only fall force calculator I know of at present that is "correct" in the sense that it corresponds to a valid mathematical model is Jay Tanzman's at http://jt512.dyndns.org/impactcalc.

In answer to your other question, the belay device doesn't change the fall factor. But the fall factor is only fully relevant when all the fall energy is absorbed by the rope stretching. To the extent that other mechanisms are involved (tightening of knots, rope slipping through belay device), the fall factor can only describe part of the energy-absorbtion process, and most of the "other mechanisms" depend solely on fall height and not on the ratio of fall height to amount of rope out.

aguacaliente

climber

Jun 16, 2013 - 02:23am PT

I took Ron to mean that the leader was 40 feet up and 15 feet above pro, thus a 30 foot fall on 40 feet of rope, or fall factor 30/40 = 0.75.

From that you can see it's hard to get a fall factor 1 without falling past the anchor.

Good lord that myoan.net calculator is useless, it can't get even the simplest cases right.

rgold

Trad climber

Poughkeepsie, NY

Jun 16, 2013 - 01:20pm PT

I took Ron to mean that the leader was 40 feet up and 15 feet above pro, thus a 30 foot fall on 40 feet of rope, or fall factor 30/40 = 0.75.

I just worked this out in the previous post! There are 55 feet of rope out, not 40 feet (you have to count the rope from the last pro to the leader's waist). So it is 30/55, not 30/40.

rgold

Trad climber

Poughkeepsie, NY

Jun 16, 2013 - 01:35pm PT

I couldnt get that second link to make any sense, or even complete the input.

What to enter in each entry box:

Fall factor: put in 0.75 as aquacaliente indicated above. (I didn't read your description correctly.) It may be less than that, since the fall factor is calculated before rope stretch, not after.

Climber's weight in pounds: Obvious meaning.

Impact force rating: This is the UIAA rating for your rope. Probably around 8 kN.

Friction factor: 0.33333... Leave as is. This represents the mechanical efficiency of the top carabiner as a pulley.

aguacaliente

climber

Jun 16, 2013 - 01:48pm PT

I just worked this out in the previous post! There are 55 feet of rope out, not 40 feet (you have to count the rope from the last pro to the leader's waist). So it is 30/55, not 30/40.

I understand, we just have different ideas about what he meant by 40 feet up - was the leader 40 feet up, or was the last piece 40 feet up? Either way I think we agree that the fall factor is moderately less than 1.

Edit: Ron, in the jt512 calculator, you have to put in the fall factor (like 0.7-0.8) not the fall distance (40).

rgold

Trad climber

Poughkeepsie, NY

Jun 16, 2013 - 02:09pm PT

5 kN peak load on the belayer is about 1124 lbf. Ouch!

gunsmoke

Mountain climber

Clackamas, Oregon

Jun 17, 2013 - 12:28am PT

I've taken two 20 footers onto the anchor with nothing in between. I wasn't hurt by either fall because I WASN'T belayed off the anchor. Wasn't nice on the belayer, but it prevented bailing.