|
|
|
|
gush
Aug 28, 2007, 5:43 AM
Post #1 of 48
(3721 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 22, 2004
Posts: 9
|
Alright so I already know what you guys are thinking and that is a Big NO !!! :) However I think as taboo as that sounds it is important to keep an opened mind.
I just finished reading an article that was written by a very renowned rope expert (Kirk Mauthner). This article describes a huge fall and how potentially the belay technique used, saved the belayer from injury.
In this article the description of the belay technique used was very vague. What was mentioned is that Kirk had read an article from a guy named Chris Semmel from the German alpine club. This article apparently discussed a comparison between where to attach the belay device and the advantages of belaying a lead climber directly of a point in the anchor system. He says that the German alpine club tested this method to factors no greater then 0.4 fall factor. He then goes on to describe how these tests showed a marginal difference in the peak force seen at the top piece of protection but that the force exerted on the belayer was quite pleasant and non existent, in comparison to the traditional technique of belaying directly off the harness. He also goes on the say how he has now tested this method to much greater fall factors and is pleased with the results.
Now to be honest the moment I heard of this new technique, I was completely uncomfortable with it, and still remain so. I find it difficult to understand why and how it is better then the traditional way of belaying of the harness. I have caught and taken many falls throughout my climbing life and as a belayer I have never felt the violent affects that Kirk describes in this article. However I am willing to take a closer look before I make up my mind. My question is simply this. Have any of you heard of, or used this new lead belay technique? Does anyone have any information, links or diagrams that they could share on this particular matter?
I appreciate your opened mindedness and look forward to reading your replies..
Kevin
|
|
|
|
|
johngenx
Aug 28, 2007, 5:49 AM
Post #2 of 48
(3711 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 18, 2005
Posts: 45
|
I've never seen that. Unless you're top roping without using a belay anchor, won't the anchor and your harness ultimately keep you from bashing into something? Of course, it means getting your anchor to hold in the right direction...
Interesting.
|
|
|
|
|
N_Oo_B
Aug 28, 2007, 5:57 AM
Post #3 of 48
(3706 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 21, 2007
Posts: 463
|
does the article have a link or was it in a mag/irl book ect?
a time or two when being lazy I've belayed off an anchor while out sport climbing, but had it secured to my belay loop with a piece of spectra in case the single bolt pulled.. dunno how safe that is, but me and my partner were ok with it.
|
|
|
|
|
domu888
Aug 28, 2007, 6:03 AM
Post #4 of 48
(3696 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 19, 2007
Posts: 111
|
This isn't exactly a new technique: it's nearly always mentioned as being recommended if there is a substantial weight difference between climber and belayer, assuming that the belay anchor is multi-directional.
Often, when the belayer is anchored to a multi-directional belay anchor, with the anchor attached directly to the belay loop, it is in effect the same set-up if there is very little slack in the system: the belay loop merely acts as a sling attaching the belay device and the directional anchor, the position of the belayer in the system is really immaterial.
Anyway, this choice boils down to person choice. If you belay off your harness and there is slack in the system you will shock load the anchor to some extent, but this is offset by the potential energy-absorbing violence of the belayer being pulled off his/her stance due to the slack in the system. Either way energy is neither created nor destroyed.
Personally, I would consider belaying directly off the anchor when the anchor was completely bomber and there was a danger of injury to the belayer should they be pulled off stance. Usually I prefer to be belayed directly off the harness because then I know they aren't going anywhere!
|
|
|
|
|
majid_sabet
Aug 28, 2007, 6:40 AM
Post #5 of 48
(3675 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 8390
|
I belay off anchor all the time and it is safe. Kirk is also among the few top experts in rope/system in north America .
|
|
|
|
|
majid_sabet
Aug 28, 2007, 6:44 AM
Post #7 of 48
(3666 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 8390
|
domu888 wrote: majid_sabet wrote: I belay off anchor all the time and it is safe. Kirk is also among the few top experts in rope/system in north America . Well, that's the kiss of death for this technique: the endorsement of majid! 
Ohh really ?
says who?
|
|
|
|
|
domu888
Aug 28, 2007, 6:47 AM
Post #8 of 48
(3656 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 19, 2007
Posts: 111
|
majid_sabet wrote: domu888 wrote: majid_sabet wrote: I belay off anchor all the time and it is safe. Kirk is also among the few top experts in rope/system in north America . Well, that's the kiss of death for this technique: the endorsement of majid! Ohh really ? says who?
Just yanking your chain, but see http://www.rockclimbing.com/...tring=majid;#1629077 in reference.
|
|
|
|
|
majid_sabet
Aug 28, 2007, 6:52 AM
Post #9 of 48
(3652 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 8390
|
are you having fun ?
(This post was edited by majid_sabet on Aug 28, 2007, 7:10 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
domu888
Aug 28, 2007, 6:58 AM
Post #10 of 48
(3642 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 19, 2007
Posts: 111
|
Aren't we both?
|
|
|
|
|
norushnomore
Aug 28, 2007, 9:15 AM
Post #11 of 48
(3613 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 4, 2002
Posts: 414
|
majid_sabet wrote: I belay off anchor all the time and it is safe. Kirk is also among the few top experts in rope/system in north America .
Are you saying that "Kirk is also among the few top experts" besides you?
I believe that you belay all the time and it is safe.
Since you don't climb that's the only thing left to do.
Just one question how do you get to that anchor to belay off?
|
|
|
|
|
paintrain
Aug 28, 2007, 5:35 PM
Post #12 of 48
(3511 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 17, 2004
Posts: 184
|
I am always suspect of german inspired climbing recommendations.
They still haven't given up the full body harness or the munter.
Hope you have a stretchy rope.
PT
|
|
|
|
|
binrat
Aug 28, 2007, 5:56 PM
Post #13 of 48
(3484 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 27, 2006
Posts: 1155
|
Majid:
Kirk Who???
Binrat
|
|
|
|
|
livinonasandbar
Aug 28, 2007, 6:29 PM
Post #14 of 48
(3453 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 3, 2003
Posts: 356
|
Have you two finished your pissing match?
I believe the answer to the original inquiry is "it depends". For a number of reasons and in a number of situations, belaying the second directly from the anchor can be very useful and convenient (especially with a munter hitch). Obviously, however, you must be confident that your anchor is bomb-proof. So long as the second does not allow slack to accumulate in the rope, the forces generated by a fall will be minimal.
Belaying a leader from the anchor, in my mind at least, is a very different situation. The potential force generated by a leader fall is much more significant. And the direction of that force will be upward (generally), rather than downward. Including the belayer in the anchor system adds significantly to the dynamic nature of the system. The belayer will absorb much of the force that would, otherwise, be placed directly on the gear. Having said that, the belayer should clearly understand the nature and direction of force that might be applied to him/her in the event of a fall. Proper stance (both in terms of stability and position relative to the direction of force and distance from the wall), and the use of directionals within the anchor system will help ensure an effective catch and minimize any potential for belayer injury.
In a lead situation, I think the physical role the belayer plays in the anchor system is vital and should not be removed. But, once again, the belayer had better know what he or she is in for in the event of a whipper...
We may now return to taking cheap shots at poor ol' Majid...
|
|
|
|
|
majid_sabet
Aug 28, 2007, 7:08 PM
Post #15 of 48
(3407 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 8390
|
norushnomore wrote: majid_sabet wrote: I belay off anchor all the time and it is safe. Kirk is also among the few top experts in rope/system in north America . Are you saying that "Kirk is also among the few top experts" besides you? I believe that you belay all the time and it is safe. Since you don't climb that's the only thing left to do. Just one question how do you get to that anchor to belay off?
I am a beginner who wants to learn about climbing like any one else and I have never claim to be any kind of expert on any thing so do not attach that label to me.
|
|
|
|
|
james481
Aug 28, 2007, 7:14 PM
Post #16 of 48
(3390 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 10, 2007
Posts: 201
|
livinonasandbar wrote: Belaying a leader from the anchor, in my mind at least, is a very different situation. The potential force generated by a leader fall is much more significant. And the direction of that force will be upward (generally), rather than downward. Including the belayer in the anchor system adds significantly to the dynamic nature of the system. The belayer will absorb much of the force that would, otherwise, be placed directly on the gear.
I'm a total noob, so take what I say with a big grain of salt, but I think that this is essentially incorrect. If the belayer is yanked around violently, they may be dissipating some of the energy of a leader fall, but of course that leads to it's own problems (including potential loss of control of the belay) When you look at the energy levels involved in a leader fall, to expect that the body weight of the belayer is going to absorb very much of the energy is unrealistic. If the belayer is tied in tight to the belay anchor (as it should be), the force of a big leader fall is going to go essentially straight into the anchor. After all, we're talking about thousands of pounds of force here (for a big leader fall). To expect that your 200 pounds of dead weight is going to absorb enough energy to save the anchor from high forces is just not going to happen. If that 200 pounds of force absorbed is the difference between holding a fall and ripping out the belay anchor, I'd be looking for a new (or reinforced) anchor...
|
|
|
|
|
majid_sabet
Aug 28, 2007, 7:18 PM
Post #17 of 48
(3380 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 8390
|
james481 wrote: livinonasandbar wrote: Belaying a leader from the anchor, in my mind at least, is a very different situation. The potential force generated by a leader fall is much more significant. And the direction of that force will be upward (generally), rather than downward. Including the belayer in the anchor system adds significantly to the dynamic nature of the system. The belayer will absorb much of the force that would, otherwise, be placed directly on the gear. I'm a total noob, so take what I say with a big grain of salt, but I think that this is essentially incorrect. If the belayer is yanked around violently, they may be dissipating some of the energy of a leader fall, but of course that leads to it's own problems (including potential loss of control of the belay) When you look at the energy levels involved in a leader fall, to expect that the body weight of the belayer is going to absorb very much of the energy is unrealistic. If the belayer is tied in tight to the belay anchor (as it should be), the force of a big leader fall is going to go essentially straight into the anchor. After all, we're talking about thousands of pounds of force here (for a big leader fall). To expect that your 200 pounds of dead weight is going to absorb enough energy to save the anchor from high forces is just not going to happen. If that 200 pounds of force absorbed is the difference between holding a fall and ripping out the belay anchor, I'd be looking for a new (or reinforced) anchor...
For a noob , I think you do fine and what you said is pretty correct. If your anchor can not handel min 20 KN of force then do not count on it.
|
|
|
|
|
epoch
Moderator
Aug 28, 2007, 7:23 PM
Post #18 of 48
(3372 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 28, 2005
Posts: 32163
|
majid_sabet wrote: norushnomore wrote: majid_sabet wrote: I belay off anchor all the time and it is safe. Kirk is also among the few top experts in rope/system in north America . Are you saying that "Kirk is also among the few top experts" besides you? I believe that you belay all the time and it is safe. Since you don't climb that's the only thing left to do. Just one question how do you get to that anchor to belay off? I am a beginner who wants to learn about climbing like any one else and I have never claim to be any kind of expert on any thing so do not attach that label to me.
IRT the OP. Seeing as belaying directly off of the anchor will be situational. Depending on the situations that you may or may not place yourself in you may or may not be in the position to always belay off of the anchor.
I usually climb with partners who weigh a bit less than myself. Usually they are anchored for an upward pull, regardless if I am toproping or leading. This alleviates unnecessary violence in the belay when I have pitched off.
|
|
|
|
|
livinonasandbar
Aug 28, 2007, 7:59 PM
Post #19 of 48
(3314 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 3, 2003
Posts: 356
|
Each dynamic element within an anchor system serves to reduce the amount of force that, ultimately, ends up loading the gear placements. And this is good, for while a "bomb proof" anchor should always be one's goal, it's simply not always possible to achieve.
Re. the belayer, I previously mentioned the importance of not getting knocked about...
|
|
|
|
|
jeff_m
Aug 28, 2007, 8:07 PM
Post #20 of 48
(3307 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 17, 2006
Posts: 155
|
majid_sabet wrote: norushnomore wrote: majid_sabet wrote: I belay off anchor all the time and it is safe. Kirk is also among the few top experts in rope/system in north America . Are you saying that "Kirk is also among the few top experts" besides you? I believe that you belay all the time and it is safe. Since you don't climb that's the only thing left to do. Just one question how do you get to that anchor to belay off? I am a beginner who wants to learn about climbing like any one else and I have never claim to be any kind of expert on any thing so do not attach that label to me.
Hey Majid,
There's a guy who I guess is kinda well-known in North America also that wrote a book or two about anchors. Here's something he emphasized, (though, since it contradicts your "real world" expertise of using the anchor to lead belay, he's probably wrong):
"Make certain, so far is humanly possible, that the top piece of pro, AND NOT THE BELAY ANCHOR [my emphasis], arrests any and all leader falls...
"The main task of the belay is to limit loading on the topmost protection...
"The MOST CRITICAL TIME is when a leader is first leaving the belay and has yet to place the first piece of protection (the Jesus nut)...
"The belay anchor is not completed, and the roped safety system is not truly online, till a secure Jesus Nut is placed."
(Again, to empasize, we're talking about LEADING and NOT SECONDING OR TOP-ROPING.)
Oh, it's a book by this Long guy (Jim? Jack? John? Can't remember offhand).
There's another book (something about Freedom and Hills and some such stuff) which emphasizes the benefits of belaying from the anchor, (and which is spookily similar---downright eerie in fact!---to James481's quote) but again, it's to belay THE FOLLOWER, not the leader.
To the OP: Think about what instance you'd be in where you'd choose to LEAD belay directly from the anchor and how it would help time/energy/safety. Let me know what you come up with, 'cause I can't think of any. (Though, I direct (anchor) belay often for followers.)
Ah, but what hell do I---or those I quoted---know?  .
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Aug 28, 2007, 8:08 PM
Post #21 of 48
(3304 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
james481 wrote: livinonasandbar wrote: Belaying a leader from the anchor, in my mind at least, is a very different situation. The potential force generated by a leader fall is much more significant. And the direction of that force will be upward (generally), rather than downward. Including the belayer in the anchor system adds significantly to the dynamic nature of the system. The belayer will absorb much of the force that would, otherwise, be placed directly on the gear. I'm a total noob, so take what I say with a big grain of salt, but I think that this is essentially incorrect. If the belayer is yanked around violently, they may be dissipating some of the energy of a leader fall, but of course that leads to it's own problems (including potential loss of control of the belay) When you look at the energy levels involved in a leader fall, to expect that the body weight of the belayer is going to absorb very much of the energy is unrealistic. If the belayer is tied in tight to the belay anchor (as it should be), the force of a big leader fall is going to go essentially straight into the anchor. After all, we're talking about thousands of pounds of force here (for a big leader fall). To expect that your 200 pounds of dead weight is going to absorb enough energy to save the anchor from high forces is just not going to happen. If that 200 pounds of force absorbed is the difference between holding a fall and ripping out the belay anchor, I'd be looking for a new (or reinforced) anchor...
Nope. I suspect you missed the main point: the direction of force. You will note that a completely unanchored climber can catch a very hard leader fall. In fact, this happens constantly with single pitch sport climbing, in which a significant amount of energy is often put into lifting the belayer off the ground.
Back to the point of the OP. No, this is something I would not do, for simply practical reasons, in most situations. When I'm lead climbing, I typically have an anchor that consists of several pieces that are equalized for a downward pull. I rarely have anything in the anchor designed for an upward pull. This (typical) setup simply does not lend itself to belaying a leader off the anchor, because any lead fall would pull directly the power point *up*. That point would, of course, simply fly up twice the distance to the nearest piece of gear, before weighting, in sequence (unequalized) each piece of gear in the anchor. A terrible outcome. Meanwhile, poor me, trying to hold onto the brake strand of the rope, would have the entire force of the fall pulling the rope through my hands, which would be guaranteed to get badly burned. And even if I had a single piece of gear designed for an upward pull in the anchor - I'd now be relying on that one piece to prevent a catastrophic failure. No good!
In effect, the only way to make this viable is with an anchor like the one you use when solo-belaying - bomber for upward and downward pull. What's the payoff for requiring such an investment in time and energy? I sure don't see one.
The only exception I can think of would be two closely spaced horizontally-oriented bolts, in which you could put a short crossed sling between them, and belay off the power-point there.
GO
|
|
|
|
|
serac
Aug 28, 2007, 9:04 PM
Post #22 of 48
(3241 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 13, 2006
Posts: 13
|
I think the anchor belay is valid in some circumstances. I climbed quite a bit with a french-canadian girl who was literally half my body weight. If she was not tethered to something I would dirt and she would have to rap back to the ground.
Sometimes if my lead was above ledges we would attach the belay to the anchours so that she could give me a hard catch and keep me from hitting a ledge. Years of practice climbing with people bigger meant she could also give a soft catch despite there not being any give in the anchor system itself.
|
|
|
|
|
paintrain
Aug 28, 2007, 9:15 PM
Post #23 of 48
(3235 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 17, 2004
Posts: 184
|
livinonasandbar wrote: Have you two finished your pissing match? I believe the answer to the original inquiry is "it depends". For a number of reasons and in a number of situations, belaying the second directly from the anchor can be very useful and convenient (especially with a munter hitch). Obviously, however, you must be confident that your anchor is bomb-proof. So long as the second does not allow slack to accumulate in the rope, the forces generated by a fall will be minimal. ............. We may now return to taking cheap shots at poor ol' Majid...
Not sure what pissing match you are talking about.
My joke about German systems is only half a joke. Climb some in Europe and you will see people basing their climbing gear/technique on some really badly performed experiments 30 years ago (dropping a mannequin with a back pack on in a waist harness vs a sit harness and such) .
But from my reading based on the title. "belaying a lead climber directly off the anchor", I would say it doesn't "depend" on anything - I wouldn't do it period. For all the reasons stated by everyone and yourself. Its force dissipation. Relying on the rope being your sole energy absorber isn't the soundest practice. It is easy to mitigate by applying the belayer into the system. Seems we agree, but the topic wasn't bringing up a second. That is pretty accepted practice.
If you are worried about your belayer's skill level or getting knocked off their stance you can do a number of things. 1. get another belayer. 2. get them experience on less dramatic terrain. 3. build a better suited anchor. 4. give them a gri gri.
Munters work fine for both lead and TR. The germans choose them over belay devices constantly. It gives them hours of pleasure untwisting their double ropes. All the while they decide if they should duck their heads or start climbing since "Rock" and "on belay" in German is hard to differentiate when the wind is blowing.
I will now end my cheap shots at Germans (though sometimes it is so easy). Though I am so tempted to bring up the vintage print they use for pants materials........but that is another post.
|
|
|
|
|
shimanilami
Aug 28, 2007, 9:18 PM
Post #24 of 48
(3229 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 24, 2006
Posts: 2043
|
A friend of mine just got back from Austria. He was amazed at how they bolt everything out there: sport, trad, alpine ... everything. He was also blown away by the the huge bolts they use for anchors. He said he'd never seen bolts so big in his life.
Given this, it's understandable why they would belay directly off the anchor. The situation is a little different in the States, where you're often building your anchor with gear.
|
|
|
|
|
livinonasandbar
Aug 28, 2007, 9:30 PM
Post #25 of 48
(3213 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 3, 2003
Posts: 356
|
Paintrain, I was referring to Majid and domu888's pissing match... nothing to do with you or others.
You're right about "it depends"... it doesn't. I missed the qualifying reference to belaying the leader, rather than the second. So, we are in agreement. (Feels good, doesn't it? Such a thing so rarely occurs on this site!)
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
