Forums: Climbing Information: The Lab:
The Anticam
RSS FeedRSS Feeds for The Lab

Premier Sponsor:

 


mattmaddaloni


May 10, 2010, 5:41 PM
Post #1 of 106 (27138 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 25, 2004
Posts: 26

The Anticam
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

My name is Matt Maddaloni and I am currently immersed in the adventure of the Anticam. I would like you to join me as I share its design, function, development and future.



If you don't know what the Anticam is please visit
http://theseasontv.com
There are 5 free web TV episodes showing the beginning of the Anticam. A climbing device that pinches rock instead of expanding between it. Watch episodes 1, 6, 9, 15, 21 and 22

Before I begin I'd like to explain why I am not patenting it. I work as a mechanical engineer and have patented several devices and systems under Ziptrek Ecotours. All have been rigging related and some are far more complicated than the Anticam. It is very expensive to patent something and climbing is already a difficult business to be in so the chances of making enough money to warrant the time and expense necessary to patent a Anticam is just not worth it.

So my goal is:

Make the Anticam open source and develop it here on this forum so that one day we all can have and use them.

so it begins...

photo shows version 1 of the Anticam
mm


(This post was edited by mattmaddaloni on May 11, 2010, 11:31 AM)
Attachments: Anticam.jpg (100 KB)


Rudmin


May 10, 2010, 6:19 PM
Post #2 of 106 (27084 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 29, 2009
Posts: 606

Re: [mattmaddaloni] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (4 ratings)  
Can't Post

Now we just need to find an anticrack


Partner angry


May 10, 2010, 6:28 PM
Post #3 of 106 (27075 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 21, 2003
Posts: 8405

Re: [mattmaddaloni] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
Can't Post

This is just another one of a million ideas I had years ago.

Not practical. The occasional aid on a flake and that's it. Not really worth carrying.


acorneau


May 10, 2010, 6:29 PM
Post #4 of 106 (27071 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 6, 2008
Posts: 2889

Re: [mattmaddaloni] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

mattmaddaloni wrote:
My name is Matt Maddaloni and I am currently immersed in the adventure of the Anticam. I would like you to join me as I share its design, function, development and future.

If you don't know what the Anticam is please visit
http://www.theseasontv.com
There are 5 free web TV episodes showing the beginning adventures of the Anticam. A climbing device that pinches rock instead of expanding between it. Watch episodes 1, 6, 9, 15, 21 and 22

Before I begin I'd like to explain why I am not patenting it. I work as a mechanical engineer and have patented several devices and systems under Ziptrek Ecotours. All have been rigging related and some are far more complicated than the Anticam. It is very expensive to patent something and to get a return for those dollars you need to have far more than a patent. High grade components, assembly, safety testing, manufacturing, distribution and retail are all expenses not included in the $20,000 it takes to patent in Canada. Every country beyond that would require another $20,000. How many Anticams would I need to sell to pay off the first bill...

Climbing is already a difficult business to be in so the chances of making enough money to warrant the time and expense necessary to patent a Anticam is just not worth it.

For the Anticam to have the best chance of success it should be an open source project. If solutions to its various problems are found here on this forum then maybe a company one day will make them available to the public.

So that's my goal:

Make the Anticam open source and develop it here so that one day we all can have and use them.

so it begins...

photo shows version 1 of the Anticam
mm


Ha ha ha... Laugh

Ok, seriously, ever think about how often a nice "pinch" would come around in any given climb? Not that often.

Secondly, why would someone want to carry around something about as heavy as a Valley Giant just to protect said perfect pinch?

Good luck with your invention, though.


mattmaddaloni


May 10, 2010, 7:28 PM
Post #5 of 106 (27016 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 25, 2004
Posts: 26

Re: [mattmaddaloni] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
Can't Post

Where would one have to use an Anticam?



1) In the first http://theseasontv.com episode I discover a huge flake on the Chief in Squamish, BC. This flake begins about 1 inch in thickness and as it sweeps from left to right it gains mass until it is about 20 inches thick. This 80 foot pitch of rock has never been climbed, either on aid or free. A number 2 camalot placed behind it would expand the flake until the cam popped out (with less than body weight) or the flake itself breaks off. Using Anticams allows a climber to safely traverse the pitch free. Such a classic line deserves to be done without bolts and the climbing is incredible and different from other routes.

2) Two pitches climbed here in Squamish that were bolted flakes but were done without using the Anticam.

3) I have found a huge roof crack. Several huge flakes stick out of the crack, they are so big that it would be brutal to squeeze up into the recesses and place cams, instead a first ascentionist would bolt the outside of the 5.12+ layback flakes. Instead I want to climb it first minimizing bolts and using the Anticam. This is an exciting opportunity and it is amazing that two great projects have presented themselves in only a month of having a first working prototype.

It takes imagination to find opportunities to do new things. I also think having great stoke and energy in life is a hard thing to find with so many stresses in our lives. Please do not wreck the stoke and post negative remarks on this thread. Thank you.


(This post was edited by mattmaddaloni on May 11, 2010, 11:32 AM)
Attachments: The-Flake.jpg (78.5 KB)


mattmaddaloni


May 10, 2010, 7:40 PM
Post #6 of 106 (26992 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 25, 2004
Posts: 26

Re: [mattmaddaloni] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

If you would like to see the Guillotine Flake getting an ascent (this week) with the Anticam check out
http://arcteryx.com
it will not be on The Seasons web site for another week.
mm


bradley3297


May 10, 2010, 7:45 PM
Post #7 of 106 (26981 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 4, 2008
Posts: 83

Re: [mattmaddaloni] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Freeing up from the skies would be an amazing achievement. I think bolting lines like these would just turn them into generic lines. million sport climbs already. I also think that a prototype anti-cam and a anti-cam that was patented and then perfected before it was put on the market would be very different in size and weight. the amount of sketchy unprotectable natural lines that would open up would be amazing. Maybe even take the a4 out of some aid climbs around here lol.


kennoyce


May 10, 2010, 8:32 PM
Post #8 of 106 (26932 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 6, 2001
Posts: 1338

Re: [angry] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

angry wrote:
This is just another one of a million ideas I had years ago.

Not practical. The occasional aid on a flake and that's it. Not really worth carrying.

Yep, my thoughts exactly. I am also a mechanical engineer, I have also thought of the "anticam" idea on several occasions when I am brainstorming new climbing gear, but inevitably it always comes down to the same thing. It just isn't worth creating a piece of gear so specialized that you could only use it on one climb out of a thousand.


m-allenbach


May 10, 2010, 9:47 PM
Post #9 of 106 (26875 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 25, 2008
Posts: 10

Re: [kennoyce] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Practical or not it is still a fairly cool idea. Even cooler though is the fact that he actually built and used it.


mattmaddaloni


May 10, 2010, 10:45 PM
Post #10 of 106 (26850 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 25, 2004
Posts: 26

Re: [mattmaddaloni] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

The 'idea' of the Anticam isn't new, many have thought about a pinching device. Cool. What stumped me for a very long time was two major issues.

1) How can you make it fit varying sized features
2) How can you place it with one hand

of course other problems like weight and strength also apply



Several years ago I wanted to climb the Guillotine Flake and it was obvious the Anticam was the way to go. Unfortunately I couldn't figure out the above issues.

Then about one year ago I thought about using a V shape with a bottom axle and a spreader bar. The Anticam could spread apart from one central axle. Then a bar could be popped into place and lock off the V from spreading farther. The cams on the end would take up any small adjustments from there. Voila! I had one of the problems solved.

Here is the 3D drawings of that first prototype. This was made in Autodesk Inventor


(This post was edited by mattmaddaloni on May 11, 2010, 11:33 AM)
Attachments: anticam-v1-assembly-open.jpg (75.6 KB)


mattmaddaloni


May 10, 2010, 11:35 PM
Post #11 of 106 (26825 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 25, 2004
Posts: 26

Re: [mattmaddaloni] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Here is the first technical drawing of the Anticam. This is version 1. I will add photos and drawings of the newest prototype at a later time.
mm




(This post was edited by mattmaddaloni on May 11, 2010, 11:53 AM)
Attachments: Anticam-V1-tech-drawing.jpg (75.4 KB)


iknowfear


May 11, 2010, 2:05 AM
Post #12 of 106 (26781 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 8, 2004
Posts: 669

Re: [mattmaddaloni] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

I cannot judge the usefulness, but it looks waaaay cool!


adatesman


May 11, 2010, 5:30 AM
Post #13 of 106 (26716 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 13, 2005
Posts: 3479

Post deleted by adatesman [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (5 ratings)  

 


airscape


May 11, 2010, 5:54 AM
Post #14 of 106 (26686 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 26, 2001
Posts: 4240

Re: [mattmaddaloni] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

 
You know you could possibly just climb with a modified vise grip.

One handed operation.
Lots of different jaw types.
Adjustable.

Your idea looks interesting though.
How will it stay attached though if it's not loaded?


(This post was edited by airscape on May 11, 2010, 5:56 AM)


Rudmin


May 11, 2010, 6:04 AM
Post #15 of 106 (26671 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 29, 2009
Posts: 606

Re: [mattmaddaloni] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

mattmaddaloni wrote:
The 'idea' of the Anticam isn't new, many have thought about a pinching device. Cool. What stumped me for a very long time was two major issues.

1) How can you make it fit varying sized features
2) How can you place it with one hand

of course other problems like weight and strength also apply

Several years ago I wanted to climb the Guillotine Flake and it was obvious the Anticam was the way to go. Unfortunately I couldn't figure out the above issues.

Then about one year ago I thought about using a V shape with a bottom axle and a spreader bar. The Anticam could spread apart from one central axle. Then a bar could be popped into place and lock off the V from spreading farther. The cams on the end would take up any small adjustments from there. Voila! I had one of the problems solved.

Here is the 3D drawings of that first prototype. This was made in Autodesk Inventor

I think it would be more useful if you flipped the cams around and had a regular cam with a spreader bar.


kachoong


May 11, 2010, 6:48 AM
Post #16 of 106 (26628 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 22, 2004
Posts: 15304

Re: [mattmaddaloni] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

I think it's a neat idea... unfortunately the consequences of falling on that contraption in some circumstances are a little dire... especially with the spreader bar sticking out.

Have you thought about making different sizes, where in the smaller range the bar isn't so long and won't stick out as much?


bigjonnyc


May 11, 2010, 7:22 AM
Post #17 of 106 (26592 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 17, 2004
Posts: 369

Re: [mattmaddaloni] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
Can't Post

mattmaddaloni wrote:
It takes imagination to find opportunities to do new things. I also think having great stoke and energy in life is a hard thing to find with so many stresses in our lives. Please do not wreck the stoke and post negative remarks on this thread. Thank you.

"Stoke" is not a noun. Also, people here have every right to post negative feedback on your ideas or designs. You just need to learn to take the good with the bad, and not let other peoples negativity "wreck your stoke."


maldaly


May 11, 2010, 7:25 AM
Post #18 of 106 (26591 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 31, 2002
Posts: 1208

Re: [Rudmin] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Rudmin wrote:
mattmaddaloni wrote:
The 'idea' of the Anticam isn't new, many have thought about a pinching device. Cool. What stumped me for a very long time was two major issues.

1) How can you make it fit varying sized features
2) How can you place it with one hand

of course other problems like weight and strength also apply

Several years ago I wanted to climb the Guillotine Flake and it was obvious the Anticam was the way to go. Unfortunately I couldn't figure out the above issues.

Then about one year ago I thought about using a V shape with a bottom axle and a spreader bar. The Anticam could spread apart from one central axle. Then a bar could be popped into place and lock off the V from spreading farther. The cams on the end would take up any small adjustments from there. Voila! I had one of the problems solved.

Here is the 3D drawings of that first prototype. This was made in Autodesk Inventor

I think it would be more useful if you flipped the cams around and had a regular cam with a spreader bar.

That was called the Sizemo and made by Dave Wagoner (RIP) of CCH. It didn't work.
Mal


adatesman


May 11, 2010, 7:59 AM
Post #19 of 106 (26537 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 13, 2005
Posts: 3479

Post deleted by adatesman [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  

 


hafilax


May 11, 2010, 8:43 AM
Post #20 of 106 (26495 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 11, 2007
Posts: 3025

Re: [adatesman] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

You make it sound like those are free climb ready. I'd like to see you place one of those with one hand. Crazy

The clamp isn't the difficult part, it's the activation.

My thoughts are that the lobes have to be much wider apart for stability (comparable to a C4) and for one handed operation it either needs a spring loaded release with lock screw like a big bro or a ratchet mechanism like those auto-adjust vice grips.


adatesman


May 11, 2010, 9:04 AM
Post #21 of 106 (26479 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 13, 2005
Posts: 3479

Re: [hafilax] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

 


(This post was edited by adatesman on Aug 12, 2010, 9:54 AM)


hafilax


May 11, 2010, 9:17 AM
Post #22 of 106 (26461 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 11, 2007
Posts: 3025

Re: [adatesman] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

And what I'm getting at is that none of them will work as is for climbing.

I'm surprised you're not more enthusiastic about this given the homebrew cam competitions. How many of those have outdone what is already commercially available?


adatesman


May 11, 2010, 9:43 AM
Post #23 of 106 (26433 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 13, 2005
Posts: 3479

Post deleted by adatesman [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  

 


ryanb


May 11, 2010, 10:07 AM
Post #24 of 106 (26402 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 4, 2004
Posts: 832

Re: [mattmaddaloni] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

I think this thing is awesome, largely because he is actually climbing hardish trad with it.

Sure its a specialty piece you wouldn't always carry but so are big cams, screamers, ball nuts etc... I like the idea of building a piece of gear that lets you climb R/X routes relatively safely without damaging the rock, I'm going to keep my eye open for routes around here where these things could be used to bring the risk factor down to my level and if I find them I'll build a couple.

Possibly ones that can be flipped around for wide cracks too and have a larger section of the spiral on the lobes (like the super cams)...


mattmaddaloni


May 11, 2010, 10:18 AM
Post #25 of 106 (26385 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 25, 2004
Posts: 26

Re: [adatesman] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
Can't Post

I don't care if anyone else thinks the Anticam is useless, a waste of time or whatever... I'm highly motivated to see it develop. If your interested too then let's put our heads together. Otherwise I'm sure there are lots of forums and threads about stuff that might interest you more and if your writing here than your wasting your time right?

For those with constructive criticism thanks for your input, it's really fun sharing this adventure with you.

now back to business... I have googled and probed every possible previous invention and material handling device out there. I even used several types as a steel fabricator in my younger years. The point is there just wasn't any device that had the expansion range, one hand operation or was light weight enough to actually carry on a climb and if a easy modification existed I would of jumped on it right away. Why? Because the goal was to climb that pitch free.

As an inventor of rigging equipment I've come to realize that the best ideas are the most simple. When a simple idea is shown it seems completely obvious and people are always amazed that it had not been thought of before. But that's the crazy part, simple, well designed systems are the most difficult to invent and this whole process can be really frustrating.

Version 2 solved some significant problems and allowed me to climb a difficult pitch without too much effort spent on placing the gear. Considering this is it's first year of development and it's not a paid gig I'd say progress is being made...

In my next message I am going to show the tech drawings for version 2. What would be great is if anyone had insight into how to get around the need for the bar.

cheers
mm


airscape


May 11, 2010, 10:34 AM
Post #26 of 106 (8640 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 26, 2001
Posts: 4240

Re: [adatesman] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

 
[COmplete and utter trad n00b] Might I ask with the given flake picture: What is the problem with using a normal cam between the flake and the wall?

It's not million miles apart. It looks pretty solid.

Does it Flex somehow rendering a standard cam vulnerable to out poppage?

[/Noob endness]


bigjonnyc


May 11, 2010, 10:45 AM
Post #27 of 106 (8633 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 17, 2004
Posts: 369

Re: [mattmaddaloni] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Why don't you use a fairly wide fixed axle distance and just use much larger camming lobes? This could give you an expanded camming range without the need the adjust the spread of the lobe axles. This will probably increase the weight significantly, though it could alleviate the need for two handed operation.


bigjonnyc


May 11, 2010, 10:47 AM
Post #28 of 106 (8629 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 17, 2004
Posts: 369

Re: [airscape] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

airscape wrote:
[COmplete and utter trad n00b] Might I ask with the given flake picture: What is the problem with using a normal cam between the flake and the wall?

It's not million miles apart. It looks pretty solid.

Does it Flex somehow rendering a standard cam vulnerable to out poppage?

[/Noob endness]

I think somewhere he mentioned that it does in fact flex too much for the use of normal cams.


mattmaddaloni


May 11, 2010, 10:57 AM
Post #29 of 106 (8615 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 25, 2004
Posts: 26

Re: [bigjonnyc] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

how do you post a picture within a thread?


airscape


May 11, 2010, 11:08 AM
Post #30 of 106 (8604 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 26, 2001
Posts: 4240

Re: [bigjonnyc] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

bigjonnyc wrote:
airscape wrote:
[COmplete and utter trad n00b] Might I ask with the given flake picture: What is the problem with using a normal cam between the flake and the wall?

It's not million miles apart. It looks pretty solid.

Does it Flex somehow rendering a standard cam vulnerable to out poppage?

[/Noob endness]

I think somewhere he mentioned that it does in fact flex too much for the use of normal cams.

Oh sorry I missed that, he said the cam would push out the flake, and even maybe break it.

If it has the chance to break though, I wouldn't feel safe being attached to it. It might weight a hell of a lot if it breaks.

Bolts seem to me the better option.


hafilax


May 11, 2010, 11:08 AM
Post #31 of 106 (8602 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 11, 2007
Posts: 3025

Re: [mattmaddaloni] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post



If the image is hosted somewhere else you use the following with the *s removed
[image*]URL[/image*]

If you upload it to RC.com you can use [inline attachment_filename.gif] replacing attachment_filename with the name given when uploading.


mattmaddaloni


May 11, 2010, 11:09 AM
Post #32 of 106 (8602 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 25, 2004
Posts: 26

Re: [mattmaddaloni] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Here is a rendered image of version 2 of the Anticam



The parts were cut by Brenco in Vancouver with a laser cutter. Cost about $300 for enough parts to make three complete Anticams.

Then I bought 1 inch round stock aluminum for the 'barrels' that the bolt slides through. I drilled those using a drill press.

The unit does not need a trigger system since I installed springs that roll the lobes in reverse to a normal cam. This is great for one handed operation but unless the rock is even sided a lobe cam miss contact from time to time and compromise the strength.

Amazingly this seems to not be a huge problem since you can crank it tight and the device will flex enough to allow all cams to touch in most situations.


(This post was edited by mattmaddaloni on May 11, 2010, 11:23 AM)
Attachments: AnticamV2.jpg (30.4 KB)


acorneau


May 11, 2010, 11:14 AM
Post #33 of 106 (8589 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 6, 2008
Posts: 2889

Re: [bigjonnyc] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

bigjonnyc wrote:
airscape wrote:
[COmplete and utter trad n00b] Might I ask with the given flake picture: What is the problem with using a normal cam between the flake and the wall?

It's not million miles apart. It looks pretty solid.

Does it Flex somehow rendering a standard cam vulnerable to out poppage?

[/Noob endness]

I think somewhere he mentioned that it does in fact flex too much for the use of normal cams.


Perfect time for Tri-cams. The #7 covers up to 5.5".


(This post was edited by acorneau on May 11, 2010, 11:19 AM)


boadman


May 11, 2010, 11:19 AM
Post #34 of 106 (8581 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 6, 2003
Posts: 726

Re: [mattmaddaloni] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

mattmaddaloni wrote:
I don't care if anyone else thinks the Anticam is useless, a waste of time or whatever... I'm highly motivated to see it develop. If your interested too then let's put our heads together. Otherwise I'm sure there are lots of forums and threads about stuff that might interest you more and if your writing here than your wasting your time right?

For those with constructive criticism thanks for your input, it's really fun sharing this adventure with you.

now back to business... I have googled and probed every possible previous invention and material handling device out there. I even used several types as a steel fabricator in my younger years. The point is there just wasn't any device that had the expansion range, one hand operation or was light weight enough to actually carry on a climb and if a easy modification existed I would of jumped on it right away. Why? Because the goal was to climb that pitch free.

As an inventor of rigging equipment I've come to realize that the best ideas are the most simple. When a simple idea is shown it seems completely obvious and people are always amazed that it had not been thought of before. But that's the crazy part, simple, well designed systems are the most difficult to invent and this whole process can be really frustrating.

Version 2 solved some significant problems and allowed me to climb a difficult pitch without too much effort spent on placing the gear. Considering this is it's first year of development and it's not a paid gig I'd say progress is being made...

In my next message I am going to show the tech drawings for version 2. What would be great is if anyone had insight into how to get around the need for the bar.

cheers
mm

A spring loaded cam could be used as a more adjustable locking mechanism on the bar, rather than the grooves w/ slots.


hafilax


May 11, 2010, 11:22 AM
Post #35 of 106 (8576 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 11, 2007
Posts: 3025

Re: [mattmaddaloni] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

It seems to me that it might be better to try an odd-leg calliper design with one straight arm that goes behind the flake and one bent arm that allows for some range. The symmetric design you just posted looks like it could leverage out on the flake if set wrong especially if the gap behind the flake is relatively small.

Odd-leg calliper:



(This post was edited by hafilax on May 11, 2010, 11:24 AM)


airscape


May 11, 2010, 11:22 AM
Post #36 of 106 (8576 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 26, 2001
Posts: 4240

Re: [mattmaddaloni] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

 
I find this thread fascinating.


airscape


May 11, 2010, 11:25 AM
Post #37 of 106 (8569 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 26, 2001
Posts: 4240

Re: [hafilax] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

 
You have just given me an idea for something.

I shall post a drawings post haste.


sidepull


May 11, 2010, 11:29 AM
Post #38 of 106 (8557 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 11, 2001
Posts: 2335

Re: [airscape] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (4 ratings)  
Can't Post

If the flake does sheer off - say, later in the climb you weight it or body cam - doesn't the anti-cam ensure you and your belayer are dead?


edge


May 11, 2010, 11:34 AM
Post #39 of 106 (8550 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 14, 2003
Posts: 9120

Re: [hafilax] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

hafilax wrote:

Odd-leg calliper:

I use the one on top to get the last olive out of the jar.


mattmaddaloni


May 11, 2010, 11:47 AM
Post #40 of 106 (8529 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 25, 2004
Posts: 26

Re: [hafilax] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

hafilax wrote:
It seems to me that it might be better to try an odd-leg calliper design with one straight arm that goes behind the flake and one bent arm that allows for some range. The symmetric design you just posted looks like it could leverage out on the flake if set wrong especially if the gap behind the flake is relatively small.

Odd-leg calliper:
[image]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/83/OddlegCalipers.jpg/800px-OddlegCalipers.jpg[/image]

You are right, if the space is small a straight leg would reduce leverage... awesome. I'll have to draw it up and do some calculations. As it was the leverage was manageable...

but to be clear a cam, Tri Cam or any other device used solely behind the flake would come out and or cause the flake to flex enough it may break and cause serious harm or death.

What is wild is that just underclinging the flake moves it so little that you don't notice it free climbing, mind you the belayer can see it move!!!


nathankookie


May 11, 2010, 11:56 AM
Post #41 of 106 (8520 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 11, 2010
Posts: 1

Re: [mattmaddaloni] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
Can't Post

The Anti-Cam is the essence of climbing. There is a problem and you have to solve it. The objective is to climb the Guilotiene Flake (protected) without damaging the rock through bolting. For me climbing is about challenging myself physically, mentally and exploring the vertical world.

What I admire most about the Anti-Cam project is how self sufficient this adventure is. Rather than just focusing on the moves of climbing, protected by commercially available gear, the Anti-Cam project is about the process of solving a problem. There is no debate, the Anti-Cam is not going to become a standard piece of equipment you carry for every route. It is a specific piece of protection for a certain type of route.

Commercially it would be very hard to justify the development of the Anti-Cam so I doubt there will be any climbing manufacturers that invest the time and money required to develop this piece of protection. Again, to me, that is what makes the Anti-Cam project so great. Necessity is the mother of all innovation and this route requires a new approach!

When I started climbing I was 14. I did not own any equipment because it was very expensive. This did not stop me, in fact it was a catalyst for me. I developed an interest in both climbing and design simultaneously. The first routes I climbed were on kernmantel rope wearing a swami belt, under the instruction of others and borrowing gear. As I learnt the principals of climbing and rope work, I applied the knowledge I had and practised the skills with what equipment I could get my hands on.

My school mate and I would abseil from the tree in the garden using hemp rope and home made harnesses. We were conservative in our approach, methodical and reasoned. We did not want to get hurt. Our experiments were always done in a way that we could learn the potential risk with out being exposed.

I learnt so much more than just the skills of climbing. I learnt to problem solve, design, manufacture and eventually turned these skills into a business.

Over the past 15 years I have been a passionate climber and equipment designer. I have worked for a few companies and been a part of the design, development and manufacturing process for climbing and outdoor equipment. It is super fun. I could not think of a better job.

When the "Stove Legs" were first climbed I have no doubt better equipment would have been helpful, safer and easier to use. That said, the stove legs were the best piece of gear they had and it enabled an ascent. No one at that time would have imagined a cam. They had a real adventure though. These adventures are seldom had in the current times. There are very few routes in the world that people are trying that require new innovative equipment. The reality is that very good gear exists for use in 99% of the situations you will ever encounter. Can gear be improved? I believe so, however the gains now are not the difference between success and failure in such a black and white case as the Guilotine Flake. The improvements in gear are really just improvements, not total inventions.

I'm inspired by the ANti-Cam project. I don't want to build an Anti-Cam, but I do want my own Anti-Cam project. I want to climb a route that I have built all the equipment for. I want to climb a route that tests my skills as not just a climber that can "pull down" and make the moves, plug gear and climb through the crux, but to climb a route using gear I have made my self in my garage at home. It is a process and it is fun!

Thanks for your Anti-Cam inspiration, the Seasons has me pumped, I'm off to start working out how to extrude my own yarn, to make rope. My Anti-Cam project will be about an adventure that I have using 100% home-made gear. That begs the question "how home-made"? Do you extrude the yarn and weave the rope, or buy the yarn and weave the rope? I think the further back you can take the process the more interesting it is. It's like brewing beer... Its a process.
In reply to:


mattmaddaloni


May 11, 2010, 12:09 PM
Post #42 of 106 (8496 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 25, 2004
Posts: 26

Re: [mattmaddaloni] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Here is the tech drawing for version 2 of the Anticam and a picture of them hanging from my garage door.




Attachments: AnticamV2tech.jpg (75.6 KB)
  4-anticams.jpg (77.3 KB)


drews256


May 11, 2010, 2:20 PM
Post #43 of 106 (8423 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 27, 2010
Posts: 20

Re: [mattmaddaloni] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

So although I have no posts I was thinking about this...I think you should have it so that when you pull on the carabiner it pinches harder. I also think that you should make the cam lobes reversible and then you can spread them apart like a regular cam. But I don't know how you would do this.


adatesman


May 11, 2010, 2:46 PM
Post #44 of 106 (8402 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 13, 2005
Posts: 3479

Post deleted by adatesman [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  

 


drews256


May 11, 2010, 2:50 PM
Post #45 of 106 (8396 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 27, 2010
Posts: 20

Re: [adatesman] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

I like it


acorneau


May 11, 2010, 3:02 PM
Post #46 of 106 (8392 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 6, 2008
Posts: 2889

Re: [mattmaddaloni] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Do a google search for "lifting tongs" and you'll find all kinds of results like this...





Edit to add: you just need to add a spring that will keep it closed around the "pinch" to keep it in place.


(This post was edited by acorneau on May 11, 2010, 3:04 PM)


Partner camhead


May 11, 2010, 3:02 PM
Post #47 of 106 (8392 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 9, 2001
Posts: 20939

Re: [drews256] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

I can't wait until this idea goes mainstream, so I can be the first to say:



WHAT ARE BOLTS DOING NEXT TO THAT PERFECTLY SOLID TUFA???!!!!MadMadMadMadMadMad


gmggg


May 11, 2010, 3:25 PM
Post #48 of 106 (8371 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 25, 2009
Posts: 2099

Re: [camhead] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

camhead wrote:

WHAT ARE BOLTS DOING NEXT TO THAT PERFECTLY SOLID TUFA???!!!!MadMadMadMadMadMad

Ha! That was exactly what I was thinking. Finally limestone is "safe" for trad.


edge


May 11, 2010, 3:35 PM
Post #49 of 106 (8360 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 14, 2003
Posts: 9120

Re: [gmggg] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

gmggg wrote:
camhead wrote:

WHAT ARE BOLTS DOING NEXT TO THAT PERFECTLY SOLID TUFA???!!!!MadMadMadMadMadMad

Ha! That was exactly what I was thinking. Finally limestone is "safe" for trad.

Finally, an answer for the Mass tufa porblem!


Partner camhead


May 11, 2010, 3:37 PM
Post #50 of 106 (8357 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 9, 2001
Posts: 20939

Re: [edge] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

edge wrote:
gmggg wrote:
camhead wrote:

WHAT ARE BOLTS DOING NEXT TO THAT PERFECTLY SOLID TUFA???!!!!MadMadMadMadMadMad

Ha! That was exactly what I was thinking. Finally limestone is "safe" for trad.

Finally, an answer for the Mass tufa porblem!

So when they get mass produced do you think I'll get a tufa the price of one discount?


gmggg


May 11, 2010, 4:13 PM
Post #51 of 106 (9935 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 25, 2009
Posts: 2099

Re: [camhead] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

camhead wrote:
edge wrote:
gmggg wrote:
camhead wrote:

WHAT ARE BOLTS DOING NEXT TO THAT PERFECTLY SOLID TUFA???!!!!MadMadMadMadMadMad

Ha! That was exactly what I was thinking. Finally limestone is "safe" for trad.

Finally, an answer for the Mass tufa porblem!

So when they get mass produced do you think I'll get a tufa the price of one discount?

Sure. Every other one would probably break off anyway.

Also, it seems that instead of bolting the flake one could just hand drill through and thread a sling. There would be no bolts; perfectly conforms to modern trad ethic.


bradley3297


May 11, 2010, 5:10 PM
Post #52 of 106 (9917 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 4, 2008
Posts: 83

Re: [sidepull] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

lol if you were anywhere on that wall and that flake ever broke off the anti-cam would be the last of your worries. that is a huge flake. youd be dead with or without an anticam hanging from it.


whipper


May 11, 2010, 5:39 PM
Post #53 of 106 (9907 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 21, 2002
Posts: 241

Re: [mattmaddaloni] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

How about 2 shorter bars that either slide past each other or one inside the other....or some sort of a spiral adjustment located in the middle of the piece.


Partner robdotcalm


May 11, 2010, 7:58 PM
Post #54 of 106 (9870 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 31, 2002
Posts: 1027

Re: [whipper] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
Can't Post

Matt,

Thanks for posting this. Itís been a fun thread. If I were you, Iíd ignore the silly criticism that basically says you didnít invent the mechanical clamp (duh!). Thatís hardly the point. Iím sure lots of people have had the idea about setting a clamp on a flake for protection. But ideas are cheap; the real deal is putting the idea into practice, and thatís what youíre doing. Itís the myriad of details that youíre attending to in order to have the device be useful that separates you from the rest of us dreamers.

The criticism that the device is special purpose is not relevant. I own a couple of Valley Giants. Maybe I use them on 5% of the climbs I do in a season, but when I need them I want them. Iíve never climbed at Squamish, but it appears that youíll be able to make good use of them there in establishing new, clean ascents.

Also youíre willing to really test the idea in the field http://arcteryx.com (itís episode 15). That takes some daring. I didnít really get the connection of the end of the video that shows you with a broken ankle. Did that occur while you were doing the testing?

Takes me back many years ago when the late Craig Luebben was developing the Big Bro as his senior thesis in mechanical engineering at Colorado State Univesity. I was a faculty member on his committee and the only climber. He came into my office one day and asked if I would test the device by falling. I said, ďYou just flunked.Ē. We settled for his using a 75 lb. bag of sand.

Cheers,
Rob.calm


kachoong


May 12, 2010, 5:57 AM
Post #55 of 106 (9823 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 22, 2004
Posts: 15304

Re: [mattmaddaloni] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

You could make an anticam for ice. Just put something like these on instead of the cams:



To help protect ice pillars and daggers


Attachments: raptor.jpg (10.4 KB)


sidepull


May 12, 2010, 7:14 AM
Post #56 of 106 (9796 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 11, 2001
Posts: 2335

Re: [bradley3297] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

bradley3297 wrote:
lol if you were anywhere on that wall and that flake ever broke off the anti-cam would be the last of your worries. that is a huge flake. youd be dead with or without an anticam hanging from it.

But isn't that the danger of this product? As the OP states, it's used to protect features that flex, that are inherently unstable. So it seems dangerous to invent "protection" that attaches you to the unstable feature.

Don't get me wrong, I applaud the OP - both for his climbing vision and his engineering prowess - and I enjoyed The Season. But given the vast number of lines I'd love to climb in my life, I can't see why I need to add this to my bag of tricks.


Partner camhead


May 12, 2010, 7:31 AM
Post #57 of 106 (9778 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 9, 2001
Posts: 20939

Re: [sidepull] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

sidepull wrote:
bradley3297 wrote:
lol if you were anywhere on that wall and that flake ever broke off the anti-cam would be the last of your worries. that is a huge flake. youd be dead with or without an anticam hanging from it.

But isn't that the danger of this product? As the OP states, it's used to protect features that flex, that are inherently unstable. So it seems dangerous to invent "protection" that attaches you to the unstable feature.

Don't get me wrong, I applaud the OP - both for his climbing vision and his engineering prowess - and I enjoyed The Season. But given the vast number of lines I'd love to climb in my life, I can't see why I need to add this to my bag of tricks.

There are plenty of features out there, especially in granite, which flex enough to make cams useless, but that are nowhere near detaching.


milesenoell


May 12, 2010, 9:02 AM
Post #58 of 106 (9734 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 19, 2006
Posts: 1156

Re: [kachoong] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

kachoong wrote:
You could make an anticam for ice. Just put something like these on instead of the cams:



To help protect ice pillars and daggers

[image]http://www.climbing.com/news/hotflashes/Norway-41--143klein.jpg[/image]

Plus, ice climbers generally aren't as hung up on safety margins.


milesenoell


May 12, 2010, 9:12 AM
Post #59 of 106 (9725 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 19, 2006
Posts: 1156

Re: [mattmaddaloni] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Ankle reconstruction sucks a lot, and it sucks for way longer than seems reasonable, but recovery can be close to complete so just hang in there. Do your ROM exercises and never forget that you are just waiting to get back on the rock.

As for the anti-cam: How much do those suckers weigh?


bradley3297


May 12, 2010, 5:02 PM
Post #60 of 106 (9655 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 4, 2008
Posts: 83

Re: [sidepull] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Ya what camhead said. a part of the flake i believe was bolted for aiding on the first ascent of the grand wall. i dont think the flake would be affected by human weight but it flexes.


adatesman


May 12, 2010, 8:25 PM
Post #61 of 106 (9617 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 13, 2005
Posts: 3479

Post deleted by adatesman [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  

 


jeremy11


May 12, 2010, 9:27 PM
Post #62 of 106 (9600 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 28, 2004
Posts: 597

Re: [adatesman] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

If you put an Anticam and a Cam on your rack at the same time, do they both get annihilated in a cloud of high energy photons?ShockedShocked

Nice project! I can tell there's a lot of time into making this right. Innovation is fun, even for highly specialized pieces. Open source is a nice touch too, since probably no company will make them.


alexfromithaca


May 12, 2010, 10:22 PM
Post #63 of 106 (9584 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 24, 2007
Posts: 2

Re: The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Hi Matt,
Great job on the anticam! My friend just pointed me to your post. I actually applied for a US patent on a device that would pinch rock two years ago. Mine is different in that its width cannot be adjusted. I was thinking that the device would need to be operatable with one hand, and I couldn't come up with any adjustable structure that would make that possible. I never patented anything before so I just wanted to see how the process works with this neat idea that I felt was patentable. (And it's not terribly expensive to at least apply for a US patent, as long as you prepare the application yourself Smile)
You are totally right about not making much money off this invention though Smile. I tried to pitch it to all the US gear makers in 2008 and they all had the same reply: "Interesting idea, but would not be of much use to warrant mass production". There were also concerns about whether a piece of rock would be able to withstand the massive squeezing forces that would result in the event of a climber's fall on this piece.
Check out the pictures of the model I made. I sacrificed a 0.75 Camelot to make it Smile Also if you are at all curious, you can check out my patent application here http://www.freepatentsonline.com/y2009/0230268.html.
I want to say that it was awesome for me to go from an idea to an actual working model. I am not an engineer like you, so for me it was truly a rare and satisfying experience. Keep working on your anticam and I am sure it will turn out great. Best of luck!
Attachments: Pic1.jpg (122 KB)
  Pic2.JPG (54.9 KB)
  Pic3.JPG (81.8 KB)


mattmaddaloni


May 12, 2010, 11:13 PM
Post #64 of 106 (9571 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 25, 2004
Posts: 26

Re: [alexfromithaca] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (4 ratings)  
Can't Post

Today I redpointed the Guillotine Flake!!!

I had to climb 15 feet out horizontally from the last Anticam to where the flake became thick enough to hold a regular cam. Pumped out with new route wall grit under my feet, it was terrifying to get that cam in. There isn't a single foot hold until near the very end. Fifteen feet out from those Anticams put everything into perspective. I wasn't scared of that flake anymore, I finally had confidence in the anitcams, everything came together. I clipped that cam and knew I had it in the bag... 30 feet of underclinging later I just made it to the no hands rest and it was over. One year of dreaming, designing, training, preparation and stress. And it's done. WHAT AN ADVENTURE!!!!



and ya, you can actually watch the video tomorrow at http://www.arcteryx.com Bryan Smith with http://reelwaterproduction.com is busting out the editing tonight!


(This post was edited by mattmaddaloni on May 12, 2010, 11:33 PM)
Attachments: matt-on-flake.jpg (86.9 KB)


mattmaddaloni


May 12, 2010, 11:19 PM
Post #65 of 106 (9568 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 25, 2004
Posts: 26

Re: [mattmaddaloni] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Hello Alexfromithica, way to go on designing and building your device. It looks really cool. The range problem was definitely the biggest challenge for me and I needed it to expand quite a lot. The current device I have ranges from 0" to 8.5" which really made the difference in finding placements.

Also super cool to hear from Robdotcalm, thanks for showing support and great to hear a perspective from someone who was part of the Big Bro development, and of course a pioneer like Craig Luebben.

A couple of points to make note for those thinking about this...

1) a scissor does not have a large range. It can only create a large leverage force when the scissor arms are all the way open, the force significantly drops even at 3/4 open.

2) major issue is the size of arm and cam used behind the flake. If you make a bar with a wide T-beam flange it will either lever out the flake or just not fit. The stress analysis calculators in Autodesk Inventor allowed me to take material away from the flange until it was the smallest it could be and still withstand the force applied in a fall. A larger cam and or leveraged cam would also take up too much room and would not fit behind the flake.

3) if you make the outside cams big then the device loads unevenly and tests show that it will eventually rotate until it pops off or if stopped by the inside arm against the back wall will lever out the flake.

4) And finally, if the arms are not strong enough to stop flexing when loaded then you will need a hammer to take the device off... just like when you tighten a locking biner when hanging on it and can't undo it when your not.

So the constants are; small same size cams that load evenly, thin and non flexing t-bar flange and long arms to reach around feature.

In later posts I will explain the spring and barrel components so that anyone who wants to build version 2 can do so.

mm


(This post was edited by mattmaddaloni on May 13, 2010, 12:02 AM)


airscape


May 13, 2010, 12:37 AM
Post #66 of 106 (9547 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 26, 2001
Posts: 4240

Re: [mattmaddaloni] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

mattmaddaloni wrote:
Today I redpointed the Guillotine Flake!!!

I had to climb 15 feet out horizontally from the last Anticam to where the flake became thick enough to hold a regular cam. Pumped out with new route wall grit under my feet, it was terrifying to get that cam in. There isn't a single foot hold until near the very end. Fifteen feet out from those Anticams put everything into perspective. I wasn't scared of that flake anymore, I finally had confidence in the anitcams, everything came together. I clipped that cam and knew I had it in the bag... 30 feet of underclinging later I just made it to the no hands rest and it was over. One year of dreaming, designing, training, preparation and stress. And it's done. WHAT AN ADVENTURE!!!!



and ya, you can actually watch the video tomorrow at http://www.arcteryx.com Bryan Smith with http://reelwaterproduction.com is busting out the editing tonight!

That's awesome!

It's nice to make your own stuff and use it!

well done!.

I had a bit of a thought for a different anti cam:

I have an idea of an anti cam where you have a fork with two parallel prongs with a cam sliding in a slot on one of the prongs, the slot is at an angle to the prong (Farther at the bottom of the fork closer to the front). the other prong has a cam that is fixed in place (or maybe a parallel slot) but can rotate.

If you push the fork over the lip of the flake and pull down the cams grab the flake. the harder you pull the higher the cam goes up the slot and the harder it pinches the flake.

Make sense?
I'll draw a quick sketch if I have time.


mattmaddaloni


May 13, 2010, 6:29 PM
Post #67 of 106 (9449 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 25, 2004
Posts: 26

Re: [airscape] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

email I received from a friend today, thanks Andrew

----

Oh, and congrats on your redpoint! I just read about your success on rockclimbing.com.

Iím sure youíve shot down a lot of ideas, maybe even this one tooÖ :-)

Ok, Iíll try to describe this thing:

Basically the same structure as you have for the arms and pivot points.
Arms held open by a straight wire spring, anchored around the master point at the bottom, and hooked into each arm.
A rope-holder cam similar to a grigri installed against the bottom pivot. This device should have a thumb-tab to be openable.
Webbing is bar-tacked around one axle at the midpoint of one arm (where your spreader bar is anchored)
Webbing passes over/around an axle at the midpoint of the other arm.
Webbing returns around another axle on the first arm, to form a Z-pulley
Webbing passes over the bottom master point and through the holding cam.
Tie-in point is on the end of this webbing.
A slider device with a finger loop can be installed on the sling between the Z-pulley and the holding cam, for tightening one-handed placements. (Simple mechanism, similar to a tibloc or type of sliding belt buckle.)

The idea is: a fall on the sling would pull the arms together with mechanical advantage. It should be designed so the downward force on the sling produces an equal inward force on the arms as the cams do against the rock. But, thatís the part I donít know: whatís the outward force of the cams against the rock, would 3:1 be enough to balance it, with the help of the grigri cam to prevent it slipping back?

Maybe a sketch over beer would be easierÖ Let me know what you think.

Cheers,
Andrew


mattmaddaloni


May 13, 2010, 6:36 PM
Post #68 of 106 (9443 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 25, 2004
Posts: 26

Re: [mattmaddaloni] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Thanks for the email Andrew.

I like the 3 to 1 pulley system idea. It might work better for range than the seriously limited scissor.

If webbing or rope is used there will be some small amount of stretch which will cause the cams on the rock to rotate until the stretch comes out. Not good! A wire cable could work better but it will be more difficult to bite into it with a cam.

and if a large impact fall force occurs you will never be able to create enough force on the cam to undo it.

keep the ideas coming! cheers
mm


(This post was edited by mattmaddaloni on May 13, 2010, 6:37 PM)


sidepull


May 13, 2010, 7:26 PM
Post #69 of 106 (9415 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 11, 2001
Posts: 2335

Re: [camhead] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

camhead wrote:
sidepull wrote:
bradley3297 wrote:
lol if you were anywhere on that wall and that flake ever broke off the anti-cam would be the last of your worries. that is a huge flake. youd be dead with or without an anticam hanging from it.

But isn't that the danger of this product? As the OP states, it's used to protect features that flex, that are inherently unstable. So it seems dangerous to invent "protection" that attaches you to the unstable feature.

Don't get me wrong, I applaud the OP - both for his climbing vision and his engineering prowess - and I enjoyed The Season. But given the vast number of lines I'd love to climb in my life, I can't see why I need to add this to my bag of tricks.

There are plenty of features out there, especially in granite, which flex enough to make cams useless, but that are nowhere near detaching.

I'm asking out of sheer ignorance of the physics so if you say I'm wrong I'll buy it, but if a flake would become dangerous if you placed a regular cam behind it, wouldn't it still be dangerous if you fell on it while being protected by an anti-cam? It seems like the first is passive and the second is dynamic and therefore generating more force or is it simply a matter of leverage (insert Johnny Depp joke here).?


Bolter


May 13, 2010, 8:49 PM
Post #70 of 106 (9388 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 21, 2009
Posts: 50

Re: [mattmaddaloni] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

So, after following this thread, I am impressed. Really.

I like the modified camalot.

I dig this idea and would even carry a few if the route had the opportunity.

So what is the cost of this rig so far??

One or two totally need to make it to the "Nut Museum".

I can follow that you need small cams and low profile to get behind the flake.

On the load put on 100 ton flake, I bet the climber and fall would be minimal to the totality of the situation.


(This post was edited by Bolter on May 13, 2010, 8:51 PM)


hafilax


May 13, 2010, 9:25 PM
Post #71 of 106 (9373 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 11, 2007
Posts: 3025

Re: [sidepull] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

sidepull wrote:
camhead wrote:
sidepull wrote:
bradley3297 wrote:
lol if you were anywhere on that wall and that flake ever broke off the anti-cam would be the last of your worries. that is a huge flake. youd be dead with or without an anticam hanging from it.

But isn't that the danger of this product? As the OP states, it's used to protect features that flex, that are inherently unstable. So it seems dangerous to invent "protection" that attaches you to the unstable feature.

Don't get me wrong, I applaud the OP - both for his climbing vision and his engineering prowess - and I enjoyed The Season. But given the vast number of lines I'd love to climb in my life, I can't see why I need to add this to my bag of tricks.

There are plenty of features out there, especially in granite, which flex enough to make cams useless, but that are nowhere near detaching.

I'm asking out of sheer ignorance of the physics so if you say I'm wrong I'll buy it, but if a flake would become dangerous if you placed a regular cam behind it, wouldn't it still be dangerous if you fell on it while being protected by an anti-cam? It seems like the first is passive and the second is dynamic and therefore generating more force or is it simply a matter of leverage (insert Johnny Depp joke here).?
When they were hammering bongs into the Split Pillar on the Grand Wall the pins at the bottom started falling out so they popped in a bolt. That flake could flex enough that the full range of the cam could tip out and just pull right out. The rock is also much stronger under tension, like pulling with the anticam, than under sheer, such as pushing out on it with a cam. I agree that being anchored to the flake with an anticam should it go would be deadly but I think that is incredibly unlikely.


Partner philbox
Moderator

May 14, 2010, 1:25 AM
Post #72 of 106 (9335 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 26, 2002
Posts: 13105

Re: [hafilax] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

hafilax wrote:
sidepull wrote:
camhead wrote:
sidepull wrote:
bradley3297 wrote:
lol if you were anywhere on that wall and that flake ever broke off the anti-cam would be the last of your worries. that is a huge flake. youd be dead with or without an anticam hanging from it.

But isn't that the danger of this product? As the OP states, it's used to protect features that flex, that are inherently unstable. So it seems dangerous to invent "protection" that attaches you to the unstable feature.

Don't get me wrong, I applaud the OP - both for his climbing vision and his engineering prowess - and I enjoyed The Season. But given the vast number of lines I'd love to climb in my life, I can't see why I need to add this to my bag of tricks.

There are plenty of features out there, especially in granite, which flex enough to make cams useless, but that are nowhere near detaching.

I'm asking out of sheer ignorance of the physics so if you say I'm wrong I'll buy it, but if a flake would become dangerous if you placed a regular cam behind it, wouldn't it still be dangerous if you fell on it while being protected by an anti-cam? It seems like the first is passive and the second is dynamic and therefore generating more force or is it simply a matter of leverage (insert Johnny Depp joke here).?
When they were hammering bongs into the Split Pillar on the Grand Wall the pins at the bottom started falling out so they popped in a bolt. That flake could flex enough that the full range of the cam could tip out and just pull right out. The rock is also much stronger under tension, like pulling with the anticam, than under sheer, such as pushing out on it with a cam. I agree that being anchored to the flake with an anticam should it go would be deadly but I think that is incredibly unlikely.

Firstly, huge congrats mate, well done on both the development of the anticam and the redpoint.

Would it be more correct to say, " The rock is also much stronger under clamping tension, like pulling with the anticam, than under leverage,". In other words, you may have to develop a new way of talking about these unique pieces because the old paradigm of language associated with cam technology does not really apply to what you have here.


sidepull


May 14, 2010, 4:29 AM
Post #73 of 106 (9309 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 11, 2001
Posts: 2335

Re: [philbox] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Fair enough. Thanks!


evanwish


May 14, 2010, 9:21 AM
Post #74 of 106 (9243 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 22, 2007
Posts: 1040

Re: [mattmaddaloni] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Just wondering, why do you use such small lobes with such small range?
I considered this design before, and realized, if you use really large lobes, and use the the full logrithmic spiral then you could get much much more range.


evanwish


May 14, 2010, 9:25 AM
Post #75 of 106 (9239 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 22, 2007
Posts: 1040

Re: [mattmaddaloni] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

I considered this once before and even cut some wooden lobes out and made a wooden cam just to satisfy my curiosity of the subject (not that it was made to actually hold any weight though).

I'll post a picture of the concept when i get home in 3 days.


squishy654


May 14, 2010, 9:26 AM
Post #76 of 106 (7647 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 18, 2008
Posts: 137

Re: [mattmaddaloni] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Link us to the video once it comes out, or is it already out?


hafilax


May 14, 2010, 9:28 AM
Post #77 of 106 (7646 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 11, 2007
Posts: 3025

Re: [evanwish] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

evanwish wrote:
Just wondering, why do you use such small lobes with such small range?
I considered this design before, and realized, if you use really large lobes, and use the the full logrithmic spiral then you could get much much more range.
If the gap behind the flake is small then you need small lobes. With lobes of different size it tends to rotate out of place and doesn't work as well.

All of the adjustment comes from the threaded rod. Rock isn't very compressible so you don't need that much range from the cam lobes. Just enough to make up for flexing in the fixture and the shape of the rock.


mattmaddaloni


May 14, 2010, 10:05 AM
Post #78 of 106 (7630 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 25, 2004
Posts: 26

Re: [hafilax] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

The final episode is out, the Season over. What a ride, another adventure survived. Check it out at http://www.arcteryx.com

In one week see it in High Definition at http://www.theseasontv.com



Thanks everyone who helped and especially Bryan Smith and Fitz Cahal who believed in me and my vision. We ALL have a story to tell and I thank you for helping me tell mine, cheers.
mm
Attachments: Anticams-on-flake.jpg (51.8 KB)


mattmaddaloni


May 14, 2010, 10:12 AM
Post #79 of 106 (7622 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 25, 2004
Posts: 26

Re: [mattmaddaloni] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Here is a drawing by Andrew showing his 3:1 pulley idea. Thanks bro
mm


Attachments: anticam-with-3-1-pulley.jpg (52.3 KB)


mattmaddaloni


May 14, 2010, 10:43 AM
Post #80 of 106 (7599 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 25, 2004
Posts: 26

Re: [mattmaddaloni] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

These pics show close ups of version 2.

You can see that the main spring that holds the cam initially to the flake is attached to the end barrel by bending through a drilled hole just above the spreader bolt hole.



The cam springs are shown here, notice where the spring attachment points are.



This shows the other side, notice the nut that allows the spring tension to be adjusted. In this photo the nut has been adjusted all the way to one side... I found some springs only needed 3/4 that distance.

Also note the spring wire that was used to stop the arms from sliding off the barrels and that the barrels need to rotate freely to help keep the bar aligned no matter what position the Anticam is in.




(This post was edited by mattmaddaloni on May 14, 2010, 10:46 AM)
Attachments: main-spring.jpg (59.5 KB)
  cam-springs.jpg (49.5 KB)
  bolt-through-barrels.jpg (56.8 KB)


Partner cracklover


May 14, 2010, 12:10 PM
Post #81 of 106 (7554 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10161

Re: [mattmaddaloni] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

mattmaddaloni wrote:
Today I redpointed the Guillotine Flake!!!

I had to climb 15 feet out horizontally from the last Anticam to where the flake became thick enough to hold a regular cam. Pumped out with new route wall grit under my feet, it was terrifying to get that cam in. There isn't a single foot hold until near the very end. Fifteen feet out from those Anticams put everything into perspective. I wasn't scared of that flake anymore, I finally had confidence in the anitcams, everything came together. I clipped that cam and knew I had it in the bag... 30 feet of underclinging later I just made it to the no hands rest and it was over. One year of dreaming, designing, training, preparation and stress. And it's done. WHAT AN ADVENTURE!!!!



and ya, you can actually watch the video tomorrow at http://www.arcteryx.com Bryan Smith with http://reelwaterproduction.com is busting out the editing tonight!

Congrats! That's a fantastic achievement!

GO


squish


May 14, 2010, 12:50 PM
Post #82 of 106 (7533 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 1, 2003
Posts: 470

Re: [mattmaddaloni] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Hey Matt, this is Andrew, I'll reply to your email here. (I haven't been on this forum in a few years!)

Well, actually it's a 2:1 pulley, isn't it... Oops.

In reply to:
If webbing or rope is used there will be some small amount of stretch which will cause the cams on the rock to rotate until the stretch comes out. Not good! A wire cable could work better but it will be more difficult to bite into it with a cam.

Maybe a flat-woven cable would be the trick?

Yes, I thought about the stretch too and I saw you mentioned it on the forum. The sling or cable would have to be tightened down quite well, since any initial impact with slack in the system would more easily rotate the cams than tighten the sling. Needs testing, obviously... Maybe a better system for ratcheting it tight, too.

In reply to:
and if a large impact fall force occurs you will never be able to create enough force on the cam to undo it. This is like hanging on a carabiner and tightening its lock screw and then unweighting it and trying to unscrew the lock... jammed!

If you mean the cams will get jammed against the rock by the re-compressed stretch in the sling, I think this design should make it easier to release the tension in the sling than a locking screw against the frame.

Still, the tensioning/brake cam would have to be designed so it grabs but doesnít bind itself permanently shut either! Iíve never seen a stuck grigri, so Iím sure something could be designed with a rocker-style cam if necessary.

In reply to:
but that said I still think it is worth trying your idea, maybe I can get around some of the points I talked about. I added your drawing to the forum, hope you don't mind. If you do I can take it off.

I'm not an engineer, and this will obviously need some testing before you trust your life to it. I like the idea of putting it in the open; I think the more people take shots at it, the better it can be.


mattmaddaloni


May 14, 2010, 3:37 PM
Post #83 of 106 (7467 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 25, 2004
Posts: 26

Re: [squish] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

I might be wrong about this but I think the re-compressed force will be less with the bolt since there is less stretch in the system and the only stretch available is in the flexing of the arms.

Jeremy Frimer did his thesis on a Anticam like device not too long ago. His device had one large cam and a tooth. The tooth slipped between the flake and the wall. Three major issues were realized but over all his thesis was a success mind you not climbing ready. The one large cam caused the device to rotate until it popped off at about 800 lbs. The expansion range was very small and once loaded required a hammer to remove it. Even with a strong t-bar flange the device still flexed enough to 'bite' the rock in recompression.

Here is a photo of his device.



(This post was edited by mattmaddaloni on May 14, 2010, 3:40 PM)
Attachments: jeremy-device.jpg (96.3 KB)


caughtinside


May 14, 2010, 3:54 PM
Post #84 of 106 (7454 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30603

Re: [mattmaddaloni] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

mattmaddaloni wrote:
If you would like to see the Guillotine Flake getting an ascent (this week) with the Anticam check out
http://arcteryx.com
it will not be on The Seasons web site for another week.
mm

That was sweet! Thanks for posting.


squish


May 14, 2010, 4:06 PM
Post #85 of 106 (7441 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 1, 2003
Posts: 470

Re: [mattmaddaloni] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Just one question: it's gorgeous outside, why aren't you climbing!? Tongue

Looking at your design again, I see you have a spring pulling the arms together. That actually seems to make more sense for placement than what I thought with the slider ratchet thing. Keeping the spring like you have it, you could then just tighten my design by pulling the sling through the bottom while pushing against the frame with a thumb. Hopefully a one-handed operation.

Not sure about the stretch re-compression, but it still seems my design should allow you to release it by letting in slack by opening the tensioner cam, which is not under sling tension.


majid_sabet


May 14, 2010, 4:23 PM
Post #86 of 106 (7430 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 12, 2002
Posts: 8390

Re: [mattmaddaloni] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
Can't Post

mattmaddaloni wrote:
Here is a drawing by Andrew showing his 3:1 pulley idea. Thanks bro
mm

I had this design made a year go but the cable part on yours comes with bigger problem which i do not think you have figured out.


dingus


May 14, 2010, 4:43 PM
Post #87 of 106 (7418 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398

Re: [hafilax] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

hafilax wrote:
And what I'm getting at is that none of them will work as is for climbing.

I'm surprised you're not more enthusiastic about this given the homebrew cam competitions. How many of those have outdone what is already commercially available?

You know the deal... that device is NIH and therefore no good. Software development folks (dontchya dare call em engineers) have this malady BAD.

DMT


squish


May 14, 2010, 4:48 PM
Post #88 of 106 (7413 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 1, 2003
Posts: 470

Re: [majid_sabet] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

majid_sabet wrote:
I had this design made a year go but the cable part on yours comes with bigger problem which i do not think you have figured out.

Right, not enough red arrows. Thanks, I'll get right on fixing that. Tongue


majid_sabet


May 14, 2010, 4:57 PM
Post #89 of 106 (7404 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 12, 2002
Posts: 8390

Re: [squish] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

squish wrote:
majid_sabet wrote:
I had this design made a year go but the cable part on yours comes with bigger problem which i do not think you have figured out.

Right, not enough red arrows. Thanks, I'll get right on fixing that. Tongue

do not underestimate my mechanical knowledge my man


dingus


May 14, 2010, 5:15 PM
Post #90 of 106 (7391 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398

Re: [mattmaddaloni] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Mattmaddaloni that is so cool! Thanks for taking me through that journey. Interesting to me as well, coming to this thread for the first time just minutes ago, how the naysayers and 'it'll never fly know-it-alls' were silenced, utterly silenced, by your success.

I trust there are lessons for us all, therein.

Now I think kachoong's suggestion of adapting this to ice is brilliant.

Thanks again
DMT


mojomonkey


May 14, 2010, 9:02 PM
Post #91 of 106 (7346 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 13, 2006
Posts: 869

Re: [dingus] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

I watched the last one but want to see it in action - do any of the videos show falls on one?


squish


May 14, 2010, 9:56 PM
Post #92 of 106 (7331 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 1, 2003
Posts: 470

Re: [mojomonkey] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

mojomonkey wrote:
I watched the last one but want to see it in action - do any of the videos show falls on one?
The Season Episode 15 shows Matt taking test falls on the first version.


bradley3297


May 16, 2010, 4:11 PM
Post #93 of 106 (7237 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 4, 2008
Posts: 83

Re: [mattmaddaloni] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

How hard is the flake. do you have a grade in mind.


Gmburns2000


May 16, 2010, 4:42 PM
Post #94 of 106 (7230 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 6, 2007
Posts: 15250

Re: [mattmaddaloni] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

I can't add anything to the technical discussion, but I wanted to throw out congrats on not only bagging the route, but also doing so while having faith in your ideas. Well done.


tradrenn


May 16, 2010, 5:10 PM
Post #95 of 106 (7219 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 15, 2005
Posts: 2990

Re: [hafilax] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

hafilax wrote:
It seems to me that it might be better to try an odd-leg calliper design with one straight arm that goes behind the flake and one bent arm that allows for some range. The symmetric design you just posted looks like it could leverage out on the flake if set wrong especially if the gap behind the flake is relatively small.

Odd-leg calliper:

So the end product would become Antitricam ?

Cool.


mattmaddaloni


May 16, 2010, 11:35 PM
Post #96 of 106 (7177 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 25, 2004
Posts: 26

Re: [bradley3297] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Thanks everyone for the good energy, cheers.

I think the Guillotine Flake would be rated about 5.11+ if you could place cams but with the added time and energy it takes to place version 2 of the Anticam I'd say its harder. There are no foot holds of any kind on the vertical wall behind the flake. It is one huge burly undercling pitch for 60 feet. I had sent three 5.12+ cracks that week as I was training for it, so I know about where my power and endurance were at.

I was super pumped by the end of the pitch and I've never breathed so hard in my life. To place an Anticam I would hang on with one arm unclip an Anticam with the other and just get it on the flake before I'd have to grab on again with both to stop from falling off. Then I would switch hands and try to de-pump before reaching for the screw lock and tightening the Anticam up. Then quickly grab back on, switch hands, de-pump and then finally clip the rope in before I could continue. You can get a hand jam every now and then but it is such a weird angle with your palms up and you elbows down and it wouldn't help a whole lot...

I'd give it about 5.12a


(This post was edited by mattmaddaloni on May 16, 2010, 11:43 PM)


fresh


May 17, 2010, 11:04 AM
Post #97 of 106 (7101 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 6, 2007
Posts: 1199

Re: [mattmaddaloni] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

awesome job dude! way inspiring, both the climb and the design/implementation. I also saw your huge safety net a few years ago, it's great to see you didn't stop there Wink


mattmaddaloni


May 17, 2010, 6:47 PM
Post #98 of 106 (7029 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 25, 2004
Posts: 26

Re: [fresh] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

ďWhenever you design something, it starts with a need,Ē says Bill Belcourt, BDís Climbing Hardgoods Category Director.

read this from an article on BD making carabiners...
I like it, so true.


TarHeelEMT


May 17, 2010, 11:14 PM
Post #99 of 106 (6986 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 20, 2009
Posts: 724

Re: [mattmaddaloni] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

mattmaddaloni wrote:
I don't care if anyone else thinks the Anticam is useless, a waste of time or whatever... I'm highly motivated to see it develop. If your interested too then let's put our heads together. Otherwise I'm sure there are lots of forums and threads about stuff that might interest you more and if your writing here than your wasting your time right?

For those with constructive criticism thanks for your input, it's really fun sharing this adventure with you.

now back to business... I have googled and probed every possible previous invention and material handling device out there. I even used several types as a steel fabricator in my younger years. The point is there just wasn't any device that had the expansion range, one hand operation or was light weight enough to actually carry on a climb and if a easy modification existed I would of jumped on it right away. Why? Because the goal was to climb that pitch free.

As an inventor of rigging equipment I've come to realize that the best ideas are the most simple. When a simple idea is shown it seems completely obvious and people are always amazed that it had not been thought of before. But that's the crazy part, simple, well designed systems are the most difficult to invent and this whole process can be really frustrating.

Version 2 solved some significant problems and allowed me to climb a difficult pitch without too much effort spent on placing the gear. Considering this is it's first year of development and it's not a paid gig I'd say progress is being made...

In my next message I am going to show the tech drawings for version 2. What would be great is if anyone had insight into how to get around the need for the bar.

cheers
mm

I don't have much to say other than "that's pretty cool."


dolphja


May 21, 2010, 11:26 AM
Post #100 of 106 (6877 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 18, 2001
Posts: 298

Re: [mattmaddaloni] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

necessity is the mother of invention Cool


bigo


May 21, 2010, 11:43 AM
Post #101 of 106 (3351 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 11, 2002
Posts: 237

Re: [adatesman] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

In reply to:
Seriously? Pointing out that what he's working on is commercially available gets 1 star?

You've organized a entire comp to making home-made cams many of them re-creations of exisiting designs. I don't think Matt has claimed a revolutionary design. It appears to me he is just enjoying the process of designing, fabricating and using his own gear - have you watched the video? Pretty cool.

In reply to:
The easiest thing to do would probably be buying a couple sets of Kant Twist clamps and throw a loop of cord around the center axles. They're lighter than vertical lift clamps and have more range, so probably a better choice. Heck, you could even drill out the pins on the end of the jaws and replace the copper pads with log spiral cam lobes fairly easily.

Pretty sure it would be easier to buy a commercially made cams instead of making your own...I am surprised at the tone of your posts - kinda weird IMO.


bjaminbjamin


May 30, 2010, 9:06 PM
Post #102 of 106 (3193 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 9, 2002
Posts: 6

Re: [mattmaddaloni] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

true enough! I 've looked under that flake many times, and thought no way would it support a cam. The anticam however....hhhmmm... Hey Matt, can you leave five lever pieces of your anitcam so we can sport our way across? brutal for the 2nd that would clean such a route....
In reply to:


mattmaddaloni


Jun 1, 2010, 12:00 PM
Post #103 of 106 (3112 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 25, 2004
Posts: 26

Re: [bjaminbjamin] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Anyone can borrow them anytime, wether for the guillotine flake or any other project. just let me know.

oh and for those interested check out my cable cam and remote controlled helicopter website at www.seatoskycam.com



My robot cable cam trolly now can climb vertically and I'm very excited to begin filming more climbing with it.

Also I just found out that the National Geographic TV show 'Amazing' that I worked on with the cable cam last summer and winter with Reel Water Productions will start to air July 9th on the Nat Geo Channel (93 for those in BC, on fridays and saturdays) and the first episode will show a professionally filmed version of my net climbing story.

Also filmed by us and showing in 'Amazing' is mountain biking in Washington, base jumping off the chief and fly by of the chief from jumping out of a helicopter with a wing suit, ice climbing on Icy BC near Cache Creek, slack lining across the north gully of the Chief with Robin Avery, kayaking the Box canyon of the Ashlu and sea kayaking the Butze rapid in Prince Rupert. Some of the video can be seen on our demo reel at http://www.seatoskycam.com

enjoy


(This post was edited by mattmaddaloni on Jun 1, 2010, 12:16 PM)
Attachments: Matt-climbing-with-seatosky.jpg (31.5 KB)


desertwanderer81


Jun 4, 2010, 11:26 AM
Post #104 of 106 (2989 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 5, 2007
Posts: 2272

Re: [mattmaddaloni] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Hey matt, rather than having a bolted bar or some sort of pulley system to make your cam bigger/smaller, why not do a notched bar that can slide in and out with a locking mechanism on it? Somewhat similar to how a ski boot works. You would be able to adjust it to the exact size of your pinch in seconds.


mattmaddaloni


Jun 13, 2010, 7:34 PM
Post #105 of 106 (2836 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 25, 2004
Posts: 26

Re: [desertwanderer81] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

I was going to go that route just after I finished the first version of the Anticam and then came up with the threaded bar idea. The threaded bar gives more incremental adjustment than a notched bar and can be undone after a fall. The notched bar would jam to the point you would need a hammer to get it off. But it would be faster to attach. It is funny how solving one problem can create a few more.

Thanks for the input
mm


MonkeyInTraining


Jun 13, 2010, 10:36 PM
Post #106 of 106 (2802 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 18, 2007
Posts: 139

Re: [mattmaddaloni] The Anticam [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

That is impressive design and implementation. Kudos for staying with the concept and seeing it through.


Forums : Climbing Information : The Lab

 


Search for (options)

Log In:

Username:
Password: Remember me:

Go Register
Go Lost Password?



Follow us on Twiter Become a Fan on Facebook