Miguels raising money for steel

Access, Rehab Projects, Derbyfests and more...
User avatar
One-Fall
Posts: 843
Joined: Tue May 13, 2003 12:27 am

Re: Miguels raising money for steel

Post by One-Fall »

RRO wrote:either one but the blakster is top suck for sure.....
I agree. Blake probably sucks the most. Matt, you are a very close second for level of suckness.
Can't we all just get along?
Silk
Posts: 51
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2010 10:24 pm

Re: Miguels raising money for steel

Post by Silk »

dustonian wrote:a common fallacy in these stupid "Euro-slack" megawhips

(Regarding the particulars of the fall in question though, if he fell from above the last two bolts on Omaha there was probably about 100' of rope out, if not more.)

U sure it wasn't a "trust fall"? :P


3


2


1
chriss
Posts: 354
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2003 11:02 am

Re: Miguels raising money for steel

Post by chriss »

dustonian wrote:
pretty idiotic... ropes are only rated for a discrete number of factor 1 falls (or ONE factor 2), usually only 5 to 8 for typical sub-10mm sport climbing ropes.
Ropes are rated on a finite number of factor 2 falls. They test them at the extreme end of the spectrum. As a sport climber this makes me feel really good, as it is virtually impossible to get close to a factor 2 fall on a single pitch climb.
dustonian
Posts: 3089
Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2009 2:46 pm

Re: Miguels raising money for steel

Post by dustonian »

chriss wrote:
dustonian wrote:
pretty idiotic... ropes are only rated for a discrete number of factor 1 falls (or ONE factor 2), usually only 5 to 8 for typical sub-10mm sport climbing ropes.
Ropes are rated on a finite number of factor 2 falls. They test them at the extreme end of the spectrum. As a sport climber this makes me feel really good, as it is virtually impossible to get close to a factor 2 fall on a single pitch climb.
Not exactly. Single ropes are rated based on "UIAA falls," which consist of dropping an 80kg weight 15 feet onto 9' of rope until it breaks... in other words, a factor 1.67 fall. Granted, this is still fairly reassuring (if only it weren't for all those pesky knife-edged fixed draws everywhere!). Most manufacturers recommend counting any factor 1 fall as a UIAA fall and retiring any rope after a fall anywhere close to factor 2.

Lots of sources on this including:
http://www.climbing.com/print/equipment/slender/
http://www.theuiaa.org/safety_standards.php
toad857
Posts: 1691
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2007 4:31 pm

Re: Miguels raising money for steel

Post by toad857 »

retarded discussion about factor 1s, 2s, ratings, et cetera. go find something else to do.
dustonian
Posts: 3089
Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2009 2:46 pm

Re: Miguels raising money for steel

Post by dustonian »

You're right, it has no relevance to climbing.
chriss
Posts: 354
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2003 11:02 am

Re: Miguels raising money for steel

Post by chriss »

dustonian wrote:
chriss wrote:
dustonian wrote:
pretty idiotic... ropes are only rated for a discrete number of factor 1 falls (or ONE factor 2), usually only 5 to 8 for typical sub-10mm sport climbing ropes.
Ropes are rated on a finite number of factor 2 falls. They test them at the extreme end of the spectrum. As a sport climber this makes me feel really good, as it is virtually impossible to get close to a factor 2 fall on a single pitch climb.
Not exactly. Single ropes are rated based on "UIAA falls," which consist of dropping an 80kg weight 15 feet onto 9' of rope until it breaks... in other words, a factor 1.67 fall. Granted, this is still fairly reassuring (if only it weren't for all those pesky knife-edged fixed draws everywhere!). Most manufacturers recommend counting any factor 1 fall as a UIAA fall and retiring any rope after a fall anywhere close to factor 2.

Lots of sources on this including:
http://www.climbing.com/print/equipment/slender/
http://www.theuiaa.org/safety_standards.php
O.k., I guess I had a misconception of how they tested the ropes. I found a couple websites claiming a fall factor 2, and several others claiming the following:

"The UIAA test that determines a ropeís strength is called the drop test. The test uses a 176-pound (80-kilogram) weight for single ropes and 121 pounds (50 kilograms) for half ropes. In the test, the weight is tied onto the rope above an anchor. The weight is then dropped 16.4 feet on a 9.2-foot section of rope. This creates a fall factor of 1.8. The fall factor is determined by dividing the amount of rope out of the anchor by the vertical distance fallen. The most serious theoretical fall is one with a fall factor of 2."

So I guess I was trying to point out that the fall factors on the tests are much closer to 2 than 1. I wonder why they do not test with a fall factor 2. It seems as though they would want to test the worst case scenario?
dustonian
Posts: 3089
Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2009 2:46 pm

Re: Miguels raising money for steel

Post by dustonian »

Yeah, it's weird. I think it's because they want to test how the rope performs going up though a skinny carabiner in a big fall.
User avatar
pigsteak
Posts: 9684
Joined: Tue Jun 17, 2003 6:49 pm

Re: Miguels raising money for steel

Post by pigsteak »

why don't people adopt a route they want to put steel on, and go do the work too..maybe a bit of ownership will help....
Positive vibes brah...positive vibes.
User avatar
One-Fall
Posts: 843
Joined: Tue May 13, 2003 12:27 am

Re: Miguels raising money for steel

Post by One-Fall »

pigsteak wrote:why don't people adopt a route they want to put steel on, and go do the work too..maybe a bit of ownership will help....

That's exactly what i did :)
Can't we all just get along?
Post Reply