|
|
Forums:
Climbing Information:
The Lab:
Re: [billl7] Yet another Improved(?) Equalette idea...:
Edit Log
|
|
majid_sabet
May 11, 2007, 7:47 PM
Views: 60174
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 8390
|
billl7 wrote: Majid, Assuming by shock load you mean the initial impact from the fall, trenchdigger's modification has two strands taking the load just as would the unmodified equalette. So the stiffness and equalization is the same. Now, if the 3rd strand is much shorter than the other two then there could be some unecessary loading of that strand, the limiter knots, as well as the two arms of the rig. So make all 3 strands the same length (might already be the plan).
Bill
A foot of cord stretch differently than 18 inches of same cord therefore we do not need to go thru those arguments. The whole purpose of building any type of equalized anchor is to make sure that we are safe in event of a shock load. That is the whole goal and nothing else therefore, that will leave us with few questions such as;
What type of anchor are we building here (simple, complex).
What is it going to used for?
In event of sh8t hit the fan, what is the worse possibility?
Which one of these anchors point is going to die on us first?
Are we safe in event of 1-2 point fail?
Now we can go out there and build all kind of CF anchor and confuse the fu8k out of ourselves thinking it is bomb proof but then we could find out the hard way or we could just built do the job in simplest way.
Simple = safe = easy to inspect= least fuc8up
Complex = may be safer= harder to inspect= more to miss = more fuc8up
(This post was edited by majid_sabet on May 11, 2007, 11:37 PM)
|
|
|
Edit Log:
|
|
Post edited by majid_sabet
() on May 11, 2007, 7:48 PM
|
|
Post edited by majid_sabet
() on May 11, 2007, 7:50 PM
|
|
Post edited by majid_sabet
() on May 11, 2007, 8:04 PM
|
|
Post edited by majid_sabet
() on May 11, 2007, 11:37 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
