Forums: Climbing Information: Accident and Incident Analysis:
accident ... possibly belayer error
RSS FeedRSS Feeds for Accident and Incident Analysis

Premier Sponsor:

 
First page Previous page 1 2 3 Next page Last page  View All


bearbreeder


Jul 10, 2012, 6:56 PM
Post #26 of 53 (3845 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 1, 2009
Posts: 1960

Re: [bassfreak] accident ... possibly belayer error [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

bassfreak wrote:
The rope wasn't much smaller just smaller then what the belayer had previously used it was a 9.4, belayer had only one hand below the atc with no glove on, it was on a standard atc. And the reason I had trust with the guy was first I've known him for a while and there were other more experience climbers around who were supposed to be watching him for any mistakes so that this wouldn't happen. There were 3 other climbers there who had the experience to know how to properly use the device and educate the belayer they apparently got side tracked and were talking because they assumed everything was under control. We all became complacent because everything had worked fine the previous times and the newer belay seemed to have a firm grasp on what to do and was displaying proper technique minus the lack of gloves. I feel the main reason this accident happened was first a lack of experience/supervision and myself becoming complacent thinking that since I'm not leading or setting gear, that I'm on a top rope what goes wrong on a top rope. That mentality is what helped contribute to getting injured. I failed to recognize that its still a dangerous sport no matter how secure I felt. Everyone was just caught up in having a good time and led us to having a lapse in judgment.


again thanks for the reply

while it is absolutely true that you should never get dropped under any circumstances, thinner ropes can be slicker through a standard ATC, with ropes under 9.5 mm i insist one being belayed by something with more friction such as a guide/reverso/grigri

there is a casualness about lowering that i often see ... usually its someone sliding the rope through the device with one hand, sometimes keeping the other hand on the rope above the atc ... sounds like something similar happened ...

gloves should not be needed for TRing IMO, if the belayer is experienced and vigilant ...

again, best wishes ...


notapplicable


Jul 10, 2012, 9:18 PM
Post #27 of 53 (3819 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 31, 2006
Posts: 17766

Re: [patto] accident ... possibly belayer error [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

patto wrote:
Hand over hand (or hand to hand) is a very valid way of control over the rope. In fact it is superior as it does not rely on palm to rope friction.

MADNESS!

The fact that more than one person is in here promoting this notion is blowing my mind.

I understand that not everyone has, or even wants, callused hands but those people should use gloves. Going hand over hand while lowering your climber is the worst/most awkward/clumsy/convoluted possible solution to the problem.


patto


Jul 11, 2012, 1:28 AM
Post #28 of 53 (3793 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2005
Posts: 1451

Re: [notapplicable] accident ... possibly belayer error [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

jt512 wrote:
Actually, compared with letting the rope run through your hands, hand-over-hand lowering relies more on palm-to-rope friction, because you have to actually grip the rope. Letting the rope slide through your hands relies primarily on the braking force of the device. You can lower in full control with almost no grip at all by keeping the rope tightly bent over the edge of the belay device.

Quite untrue. Dynamic friction is lower than static friction.


notapplicable wrote:
MADNESS!

The fact that more than one person is in here promoting this notion is blowing my mind.

I understand that not everyone has, or even wants, callused hands but those people should use gloves. Going hand over hand while lowering your climber is the worst/most awkward/clumsy/convoluted possible solution to the problem.

Absolutely not. A static grip is fundamentally more controllable than relying on dynamic friction.

I'm not promoting this as the best option. If this is an issue then the device friction is lower than it should be. However if you do find yourself in the situation of a high load then hand over hand is comprehensibly superior and much more controllable than relying on dynamic friction with your hand or glove.


roninthorne


Jul 11, 2012, 7:31 AM
Post #29 of 53 (3760 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 27, 2002
Posts: 632

Re: [majid_sabet] accident ... possibly belayer error [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (4 ratings)  
Can't Post

majid_sabet wrote:
...using gloves should be an standard habit when belying any size rope .

Bullshit. After 30+ years on rock, climbing across the U.S. with hundreds of people, I've never seen anyone (who knew what they were doing) come close to dropping someone, losing a belay, or losing control of their rappel because they weren't wearing gloves. The rope starts warming your hand, you slow the rate of feed by lowering your brake and and increasing friction on the DEVICE. This was a bad belay. Period.


Partner robdotcalm


Jul 11, 2012, 8:18 AM
Post #30 of 53 (3745 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 31, 2002
Posts: 1023

Re: [jt512] accident ... possibly belayer error [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

jt512 wrote:
bassfreak wrote:
The rope wasn't much smaller just smaller then what the belayer had previously used it was a 9.4, belayer had only one hand below the atc with no glove on, it was on a standard atc.

One reason you got dropped is that your rope was way too thin for a standard ATC. You'd likely have been dropped if you fell as well.

Use 2 carabiners instead of one with the ATC and there'll be enough device friction to control the lowering even with a half rope.

rob.calm


jt512


Jul 11, 2012, 10:11 AM
Post #31 of 53 (3712 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 11, 2001
Posts: 21890

Re: [patto] accident ... possibly belayer error [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

patto wrote:
jt512 wrote:
Actually, compared with letting the rope run through your hands, hand-over-hand lowering relies more on palm-to-rope friction, because you have to actually grip the rope. Letting the rope slide through your hands relies primarily on the braking force of the device. You can lower in full control with almost no grip at all by keeping the rope tightly bent over the edge of the belay device.

Quite untrue. Dynamic friction is lower than static friction.

Right. And lowering hand over hand uses static friction, whereas letting the rope slide through your hands uses dynamic friction. Therefore, hand-to-rope friction is a greater percentage of the force used to control the rope while lowering using the hand-over-hand method vs letting rope slide through the device. That was my point, and you have supplied the reason why it is true.

Jay


patto


Jul 11, 2012, 10:33 AM
Post #32 of 53 (3705 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2005
Posts: 1451

Re: [jt512] accident ... possibly belayer error [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

jt512 wrote:
Right. And lowering hand over hand uses static friction, whereas letting the rope slide through your hands uses dynamic friction. Therefore, hand-to-rope friction is a greater percentage of the force used to control the rope while lowering using the hand-over-hand method vs letting rope slide through the device. That was my point, and you have supplied the reason why it is true.

Jay

Your logic does not compute Jay.

If the rope is sliding through your hand then you need to grip it harder to get the same braking force than if it isn't sliding through your hand. More to the point though, your aren't dissipating energy as heat in your hand so there is no possibility of rope burn.

Static lowering clearly gives better control.


(Not that I'm advocating that it is by any means necessary if you have sufficient friction in the device. Personally I normally just let rope slide through my hands.)


majid_sabet


Jul 11, 2012, 12:20 PM
Post #33 of 53 (3681 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 12, 2002
Posts: 8344

Re: [roninthorne] accident ... possibly belayer error [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

roninthorne wrote:
majid_sabet wrote:
...using gloves should be an standard habit when belying any size rope .

Bullshit. After 30+ years on rock, climbing across the U.S. with hundreds of people, I've never seen anyone (who knew what they were doing) come close to dropping someone, losing a belay, or losing control of their rappel because they weren't wearing gloves. The rope starts warming your hand, you slow the rate of feed by lowering your brake and and increasing friction on the DEVICE. This was a bad belay. Period.

in my 30 years climbing, mountaineering and rescue work all over the world, I seen plenty of people (both n00bs and pros) that somehow lost control of their belay ( sudden leader fall shock, rockfall on their head....etc) cause their brunt hand could not control the rope so all it take one unexpectedly fuc8up to end up servery hurt or dead.

gloves are an addition to safe climbing just like locking biner, helmet and so fort


flame is on


(This post was edited by majid_sabet on Jul 11, 2012, 12:23 PM)


Partner cracklover


Jul 11, 2012, 12:32 PM
Post #34 of 53 (3671 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 9973

Re: [patto] accident ... possibly belayer error [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

patto wrote:
jt512 wrote:
Right. And lowering hand over hand uses static friction, whereas letting the rope slide through your hands uses dynamic friction. Therefore, hand-to-rope friction is a greater percentage of the force used to control the rope while lowering using the hand-over-hand method vs letting rope slide through the device. That was my point, and you have supplied the reason why it is true.

Jay

Your logic does not compute Jay.

If the rope is sliding through your hand then you need to grip it harder to get the same braking force than if it isn't sliding through your hand. More to the point though, your aren't dissipating energy as heat in your hand so there is no possibility of rope burn.

Static lowering clearly gives better control.


(Not that I'm advocating that it is by any means necessary if you have sufficient friction in the device. Personally I normally just let rope slide through my hands.)

Is anyone else getting powerful flashbacks from recdot? Wow, this thread feels almost identical!

GO


jt512


Jul 11, 2012, 12:35 PM
Post #35 of 53 (3670 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 11, 2001
Posts: 21890

Re: [patto] accident ... possibly belayer error [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

patto wrote:
jt512 wrote:
Right. And lowering hand over hand uses static friction, whereas letting the rope slide through your hands uses dynamic friction. Therefore, hand-to-rope friction is a greater percentage of the force used to control the rope while lowering using the hand-over-hand method vs letting rope slide through the device. That was my point, and you have supplied the reason why it is true.

Jay

Your logic does not compute Jay.

If the rope is sliding through your hand then you need to grip it harder to get the same braking force than if it isn't sliding through your hand.

And the harder you grip the rope, the greater the friction between the rope and your hand. You keep proving my point, but failing to realize it.

In reply to:
Static lowering clearly gives better control.

Define "control." Over most of the range of speeds that you'd want to lower someone, letting the rope slip through your hands gives better control over speed than lowering hand over hand. Letting the rope slip through your hands also gives better control of the smoothness (constancy of speed) than lowering hand over hand does. So, I'm not sure what aspect of "control" you think is greater by lowering hand over hand.

In reply to:
(Not that I'm advocating that it is by any means necessary if you have sufficient friction in the device. Personally I normally just let rope slide through my hands.)

As you should, since you have more control over smoothness and speed.

Jay


(This post was edited by jt512 on Jul 11, 2012, 12:57 PM)


Partner drector


Jul 11, 2012, 1:17 PM
Post #36 of 53 (3654 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 1037

Re: [jt512] accident ... possibly belayer error [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

jt512 wrote:
patto wrote:
jt512 wrote:
Right. And lowering hand over hand uses static friction, whereas letting the rope slide through your hands uses dynamic friction. Therefore, hand-to-rope friction is a greater percentage of the force used to control the rope while lowering using the hand-over-hand method vs letting rope slide through the device. That was my point, and you have supplied the reason why it is true.

Jay

Your logic does not compute Jay.

If the rope is sliding through your hand then you need to grip it harder to get the same braking force than if it isn't sliding through your hand.

And the harder you grip the rope, the greater the friction between the rope and your hand. You keep proving my point, but failing to realize it.

In reply to:
Static lowering clearly gives better control.

Define "control." Over most of the range of speeds that you'd want to lower someone, letting the rope slip through your hands gives better control over speed than lowering hand over hand. Letting the rope slip through your hands also gives better control of the smoothness (constancy of speed) than lowering hand over hand does. So, I'm not sure what aspect of "control" you think is greater by lowering hand over hand.

In reply to:
(Not that I'm advocating that it is by any means necessary if you have sufficient friction in the device. Personally I normally just let rope slide through my hands.)

As you should, since you have more control over smoothness and speed.

Jay

With the rope in the same position for both types of grip and the same rate of lowering, the friction will need to be identical. We are not measuring friction like in a physics class, we are creating it.

The difference is that letting the rope slide through your hand will take more grip force of the hand to achieve the same friction as holding it in your hand statically because of the difference between static and kinetic friction. If the difference is significant, which I can't recall from physics class, then the amount of force needed for the sliding grip will be too much for him to handle as was the case. It may have also happened with any hand technique since the belayer was clearly trying to do something beyond his ability.

But sheesh, the friction for lowering is achieved through the rope on the device and it is always kinetic. The hand should just be controlling the rope, not holding the weight of the climber.

Dave


jt512


Jul 11, 2012, 2:14 PM
Post #37 of 53 (3634 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 11, 2001
Posts: 21890

Re: [drector] accident ... possibly belayer error [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

drector wrote:
jt512 wrote:
patto wrote:
jt512 wrote:
Right. And lowering hand over hand uses static friction, whereas letting the rope slide through your hands uses dynamic friction. Therefore, hand-to-rope friction is a greater percentage of the force used to control the rope while lowering using the hand-over-hand method vs letting rope slide through the device. That was my point, and you have supplied the reason why it is true.

Jay

Your logic does not compute Jay.

If the rope is sliding through your hand then you need to grip it harder to get the same braking force than if it isn't sliding through your hand.

And the harder you grip the rope, the greater the friction between the rope and your hand. You keep proving my point, but failing to realize it.

In reply to:
Static lowering clearly gives better control.

Define "control." Over most of the range of speeds that you'd want to lower someone, letting the rope slip through your hands gives better control over speed than lowering hand over hand. Letting the rope slip through your hands also gives better control of the smoothness (constancy of speed) than lowering hand over hand does. So, I'm not sure what aspect of "control" you think is greater by lowering hand over hand.

In reply to:
(Not that I'm advocating that it is by any means necessary if you have sufficient friction in the device. Personally I normally just let rope slide through my hands.)

As you should, since you have more control over smoothness and speed.

Jay

With the rope in the same position for both types of grip and the same rate of lowering, the friction will need to be identical. We are not measuring friction like in a physics class, we are creating it.

Friction is proportional to the normal force. We are creating the normal force with our grip. The harder we grip the rope, the greater the normal force, and hence the greater the friction.

In reply to:
The difference is that letting the rope slide through your hand will take more grip force of the hand to achieve the same friction as holding it in your hand statically because of the difference between static and kinetic friction.

I doubt that the difference between the kinetic and static coefficients of friction is large enough to make a practical difference. Say I have the rope locked off. If I keep the rope in the same position but want to let rope start sliding through the device, I loosen my grip, and hence reduce the friction. If I want to stop the rope from sliding, I tighten my grip, and hence increase the friction. If I want to lower hand over hand with the rope in this same position I am likely going to maintain about this same amount of grip (force) on the rope. Therefore, I am using more hand-to-rope friction by lowering hand over hand than by letting rope slip through the device.

In theory, lowering hand over hand I could maintain nearly the lightest possible grip on the rope that prevents the rope from sliding through the device, in which case my grip force would be less than when letting rope slide through the device; but (1) I doubt people grip the rope that loosely, and (2) my argument with Patto has not been about girp force, but about friction.

In reply to:
But sheesh, the friction for lowering is achieved through the rope on the device and it is always kinetic. The hand should just be controlling the rope, not holding the weight of the climber.

Yeah, basically that's true. The belayer dropped the climber because he was using a rope too thin for the belay device, and I suspect that he did not have the brake side of the rope sufficientlybent over the device for maximum braking.

Jay


Partner drector


Jul 11, 2012, 4:18 PM
Post #38 of 53 (3607 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 1037

Re: [drector] accident ... possibly belayer error [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

myself wrote:
jt512 wrote:
patto wrote:
jt512 wrote:
Right. And lowering hand over hand uses static friction, whereas letting the rope slide through your hands uses dynamic friction. Therefore, hand-to-rope friction is a greater percentage of the force used to control the rope while lowering using the hand-over-hand method vs letting rope slide through the device. That was my point, and you have supplied the reason why it is true.

Jay

Your logic does not compute Jay.

If the rope is sliding through your hand then you need to grip it harder to get the same braking force than if it isn't sliding through your hand.

And the harder you grip the rope, the greater the friction between the rope and your hand. You keep proving my point, but failing to realize it.

In reply to:
Static lowering clearly gives better control.

Define "control." Over most of the range of speeds that you'd want to lower someone, letting the rope slip through your hands gives better control over speed than lowering hand over hand. Letting the rope slip through your hands also gives better control of the smoothness (constancy of speed) than lowering hand over hand does. So, I'm not sure what aspect of "control" you think is greater by lowering hand over hand.

In reply to:
(Not that I'm advocating that it is by any means necessary if you have sufficient friction in the device. Personally I normally just let rope slide through my hands.)

As you should, since you have more control over smoothness and speed.

Jay

With the rope in the same position for both types of grip and the same rate of lowering, the friction will need to be identical. We are not measuring friction like in a physics class, we are creating it.

The difference is that letting the rope slide through your hand will take more grip force of the hand to achieve the same friction as holding it in your hand statically because of the difference between static and kinetic friction. If the difference is significant, which I can't recall from physics class, then the amount of force needed for the sliding grip will be too much for him to handle as was the case. It may have also happened with any hand technique since the belayer was clearly trying to do something beyond his ability.

But sheesh, the friction for lowering is achieved through the rope on the device and it is always kinetic. The hand should just be controlling the rope, not holding the weight of the climber.

Dave

Dang. I was all wrong once I gave it some thought. My pedestrian knowledge of physics is more of a hinderance than a help. Well, mostly wrong.

Dave


patto


Jul 12, 2012, 7:37 AM
Post #39 of 53 (3525 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2005
Posts: 1451

Re: [jt512] accident ... possibly belayer error [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

jt512 wrote:
my argument with Patto has not been about girp force, but about friction.
I'm sorry but what are you saying here?

Do I need to quote myself?

patto wrote:
If the rope is sliding through your hand then you need to grip it harder to get the same braking force than if it isn't sliding through your hand.

It seems that your misunderstanding about the difference between kinetic and static coefficients of friction seem to be the issue.

jt512 wrote:
I doubt that the difference between the kinetic and static coefficients of friction is large enough to make a practical difference.

That is precisely why you get more control with a static grip. Its the reason why ABS exists on cars! Furthermore if its start moving rapidly then your hand glazes and friction further decreases. This is the runaway condition that can cause such accidents.

Its no different if you are rapping with a thin line. If you don't have gloves then hand over hand is the safe way to stay in control.


jt512


Jul 12, 2012, 12:45 PM
Post #40 of 53 (3496 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 11, 2001
Posts: 21890

Re: [patto] accident ... possibly belayer error [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

patto wrote:
jt512 wrote:
my argument with Patto has not been about girp force, but about friction.
I'm sorry but what are you saying here?

No matter how hard you are gripping the rope, if the rope is not moving through your hand, then the friction is greater than if the rope is moving through your hand. You initially said that hand-over-hand lowering "does not rely on palm-to-rope friction," and that is wrong. The hand-to-rope friction must be greater if the rope is not sliding through your hands than if it is. This is true even if, due to the higher static coefficient of friction, you don't have to grip is hard.

In reply to:
It seems that your misunderstanding about the difference between kinetic and static coefficients of friction seem to be the issue.

I have no misunderstanding about the difference between kinetic and static coefficients of friction. You seem not to understand that if the rope isn't moving through your hands, then the hand-to-rope friction must be greater than if the rope is moving through your hands.

jt512 wrote:
I doubt that the difference between the kinetic and static coefficients of friction is large enough to make a practical difference.

I take back the statement above for the case where your belay device is not providing sufficient braking force. Then, yes, you should lower (or rappel) without letting rope slip through your hands, and for the reason you state: you want to take advantage of the higher static coefficient of friction.

Jay


(This post was edited by jt512 on Jul 12, 2012, 3:27 PM)


patto


Jul 12, 2012, 2:44 PM
Post #41 of 53 (3466 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2005
Posts: 1451

Re: [jt512] accident ... possibly belayer error [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

jt512 wrote:
I take back the statement above for the case where your belay device is not providing sufficient braking force. Then, yes, you should lower (or rappel) without letting rope slip through your hands, and for the reason you state: you want to take advantage of the higher static coefficient of friction.

Well that was the original point, that I stated quite clearly in my first post. Wink


The other stuff: You seem to be thinking that the total friction force exerted by hand+belayer on the rope is less when the rope is moving than if it is static. This is not the case. The total friction is the SAME. Since it is moving the grip force is higher.


jt512


Jul 12, 2012, 3:41 PM
Post #42 of 53 (3450 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 11, 2001
Posts: 21890

Re: [patto] accident ... possibly belayer error [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

patto wrote:
jt512 wrote:
I take back the statement above for the case where your belay device is not providing sufficient braking force. Then, yes, you should lower (or rappel) without letting rope slip through your hands, and for the reason you state: you want to take advantage of the higher static coefficient of friction.

Well that was the original point, that I stated quite clearly in my first post. Wink


The other stuff: You seem to be thinking that the total friction force exerted by hand+belayer on the rope is less when the rope is moving than if it is static. This is not the case. The total friction is the SAME. Since it is moving the grip force is higher.

Can you explain why if I'm letting rope slide through my hand, and I want to stop it, I have to increase my grip on the rope, and hence increase hand-to-rope friction; and then if I want to start letting rope slide again, I have to relax my grip, hence reducing the hand-to-rope friction?

Furthermore, if I've been letting rope slide through my hand, and I want to switch to hand-over-hand lowering, I have to first stop the rope from sliding through my hand, which, as noted above, requires me to increase my grip on the rope (and hence increase the hand-to-rope friction), and now to maintain that grip (or nearly so) in order to switch to hand-over-hand lowering.

Is it not clear that if I were to loosen my grip to what it was when letting rope slide through the device that the rope would again slide through the device? There would have to be a very large difference (unrealistically large, I think) between the static and kinetic coefficients of friction for this not to be the case.


patto


Jul 12, 2012, 5:53 PM
Post #43 of 53 (3425 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2005
Posts: 1451

Re: [jt512] accident ... possibly belayer error [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

This has now become an argument about physics not climbing. But I'll continue. Angelic

jt512 wrote:
Can you explain why if I'm letting rope slide through my hand, and I want to stop it, I have to increase my grip on the rope, and hence increase hand-to-rope friction
Deceleration. You need to increase the friction to slow the climber. But once the rope has stopped you can reduce your grip.

jt512 wrote:
and then if I want to start letting rope slide again, I have to relax my grip, hence reducing the hand-to-rope friction?
Acceleration. Obviously you need to reduce total friction temporarily to allow the rope to begin moving.

jt512 wrote:
Furthermore, if I've been letting rope slide through my hand, and I want to switch to hand-over-hand lowering, I have to first stop the rope from sliding through my hand, which, as noted above, requires me to increase my grip on the rope (and hence increase the hand-to-rope friction), and now to maintain that grip (or nearly so) in order to switch to hand-over-hand lowering.
No that isn't correct. Once the rope has stopped moving you can significantly loosen your grip before it starts again.

jt512 wrote:
Is it not clear that if I were to loosen my grip to what it was when letting rope slide through the device that the rope would again slide through the device?
That isn't clear and that isn't correct.

jt512 wrote:
There would have to be a very large difference (unrealistically large, I think) between the static and kinetic coefficients of friction for this not to be the case.
Static friction is sometimes twice that of kinetic friction. Sometimes it is only 20% more. I don't know the figure for hand on rope.


Gabel


Aug 7, 2012, 2:00 PM
Post #44 of 53 (3098 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 25, 2010
Posts: 47

Re: [bassfreak] accident ... possibly belayer error [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Hei bassfreak,

Glad to hear you are okay. I hope you have learned your lessons and will eventually come to terms with your individual mistakes in this scenario.

Cheers,

Gabel

PS: The way I understand "rock cushion" in the report is that you didn't land on a flat surface (thus having to absorb full impact force) but on a tilted surface causing you to slide down the face and absorbing less force over time. But you should be the one telling us about it. :)


DemolitionRed


Aug 31, 2012, 7:46 AM
Post #45 of 53 (2859 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 30, 2012
Posts: 77

Re: [Gabel] accident ... possibly belayer error [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

I like tubular belay devices but I'm always going to use hand over hand, especially as I never use rope thicker than 9.1mm. Allowing your brake hand to slide the rope heightens your risk of getting rope burn or even getting the flesh between your thumb and forefinger pulled into the tube....OUCH!!
Gloves are not something I ever use because during the climb I need to feel what my lead climber is doing. That's just a personal thing but I have never worn gloves and never had rope burns. (I have however, broken my leg belaying but that's a whole other story!!)

I'm sorry this happened to you and I'm sorry for your belayer too because he must feel like shit.
One of the reasons I solo climbed for as long as I did is, it was only me and the rock. Putting your trust back in another person (no matter how good you know he is) is going to take a little time.
BTW I highly recommend the Petzl Grigri 2. You can use rope as thin as 8.9 mm and although its an expensive bit of kit, it something that would of saved your fall.


rightarmbad


Sep 2, 2012, 6:12 AM
Post #46 of 53 (2773 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 21, 2005
Posts: 217

Re: [DemolitionRed] accident ... possibly belayer error [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

There is no way I can lower safely by letting the rope slide through my hand.

I go hand over hand and generally use two biners for more device friction as well.

There is a word for people that can lower by sliding the rope through their hands, it's called 'light'.


billl7


Sep 2, 2012, 7:35 AM
Post #47 of 53 (2762 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 13, 2005
Posts: 1888

Re: [DemolitionRed] accident ... possibly belayer error [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

Although several folks have said it, this thread's static versus dynamic thing overshadows what is likely the main lesson in my view: the rope was too skinny for the device for the circumstances.

Someone new to belaying is less likely to pick up on the above issue. I mean, one can't fall back to the basic specification of the range of rope diameters the device can "handle" which in this case is 7.7mm (yikes!) to 11mm.

DemolitionRed wrote:
Allowing your brake hand to slide the rope heightens your risk of getting rope burn or even getting the flesh between your thumb and forefinger pulled into the tube....OUCH!!

If burning while lowering is a risk with a tubular belay device then it's well past time to look at whether the device/rope/setup is the right one to use. Lots of risk to keep operating that way, ridiculously so if using the same config with intent to catch a lead fall.

Edit: It is illuminating to dwell on that fact that there is no such thing as catching a lead fall using the static method folks are promoting for lowering.

Bill L


(This post was edited by billl7 on Sep 2, 2012, 7:39 AM)


jt512


Sep 2, 2012, 10:49 AM
Post #48 of 53 (2738 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 11, 2001
Posts: 21890

Re: [rightarmbad] accident ... possibly belayer error [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

rightarmbad wrote:
There is no way I can lower safely by letting the rope slide through my hand.

If that's really true, then you probably won't be able to catch a hard fall, either. What kind of belay device are are you using, and with what diameter rope?

Jay


patto


Sep 2, 2012, 12:45 PM
Post #49 of 53 (2719 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2005
Posts: 1451

Re: [jt512] accident ... possibly belayer error [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

jt512 wrote:
rightarmbad wrote:
There is no way I can lower safely by letting the rope slide through my hand.

If that's really true, then you probably won't be able to catch a hard fall, either. What kind of belay device are are you using, and with what diameter rope?

Jay
I too am concerned by such a statement.


ObviousTroll


Sep 2, 2012, 3:27 PM
Post #50 of 53 (2701 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 29, 2012
Posts: 90

Re: [rightarmbad] accident ... possibly belayer error [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

rightarmbad wrote:
There is no way I can lower safely by letting the rope slide through my hand.

Do you wear gloves?

Have you ever rappelled?


(This post was edited by ObviousTroll on Sep 2, 2012, 3:28 PM)

First page Previous page 1 2 3 Next page Last page  View All

Forums : Climbing Information : Accident and Incident Analysis

 


Search for (options)

Log In:

Username:
Password: Remember me:

Go Register
Go Lost Password?
$8.55 (10% off)
$10.76 (10% off)
$16.16 (10% off)
$134.99 (10% off)



Follow us on Twiter Become a Fan on Facebook