|
|
|
|
gmitch
May 11, 2007, 2:24 PM
Post #1 of 8
(1942 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 8, 2007
Posts: 5
|
I was looking through an old (70's) mountain rescue book the other day and came across this technique for a cordelette. You'll have to forgive me for the picture attached I don't draw I climb, Anyway.
The idea is that you set up the cordelette through the anchors but instead of tying them all together in a figure eight, only the outside loop is tied into a figure eight with the tail creating another loop. Into this loop you attach two carabiners and the cord in between the anchors.
I wasn't familiar with this and have played with it in the backyard it seems to work fairly well when the load shifts from one side to the other. Only major problem I see with it is the potential to shock load the system if one anchor fails and the extra two carabiners you have to use.
Has anyone tried this/uses this and what are your opinions on it? Is there a similar set-up that is better? I'm going to play with it a little this weekend and see how I like it in the real world. Thanks
|
|
Attachments:
|
equalizingcordellette.JPG
(16.6 KB)
|
|
|
|
|
reg
May 11, 2007, 2:33 PM
Post #2 of 8
(1929 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 1560
|
gmitch wrote: I was looking through an old (70's) mountain rescue book the other day and came across this technique for a cordelette. You'll have to forgive me for the picture attached I don't draw I climb, Anyway. The idea is that you set up the cordelette through the anchors but instead of tying them all together in a figure eight, only the outside loop is tied into a figure eight with the tail creating another loop. Into this loop you attach two carabiners and the cord in between the anchors. I wasn't familiar with this and have played with it in the backyard it seems to work fairly well when the load shifts from one side to the other. Only major problem I see with it is the potential to shock load the system if one anchor fails and the extra two carabiners you have to use. Has anyone tried this/uses this and what are your opinions on it? Is there a similar set-up that is better? I'm going to play with it a little this weekend and see how I like it in the real world. Thanks
i see what your saying - many points of failure. i'd have to try it to see the equalization properties BUT i don't see any reason to use it now that we have the equallette. IMHO
(This post was edited by reg on May 11, 2007, 2:34 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
trenchdigger
May 11, 2007, 3:45 PM
Post #3 of 8
(1868 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 9, 2003
Posts: 1447
|
This system works well, but no redundancy exists in the cord.
The Trango Alpine Equalizer is identical to this, but with solid rings in place of the two carabiners connected to the loop above the figure 8. Adding a clove hitch to the middle anchor arm adds redundancy, but loses some degree of equalization, placing all the load on two pieces and dividing it unevenly between them.
IMHO, redundancy is usually going to be far more important in an anchor than true equalization. For that reason, I still prefer the simplistic redundancy of a tied cordelette for most anchors. The equalette has its place in my toolkit as well.
|
|
|
|
|
gmitch
May 11, 2007, 4:16 PM
Post #4 of 8
(1843 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 8, 2007
Posts: 5
|
I'm definitely a fan of your standard tied cordellete. I have yet to use the alpine equalizer and am glad you mentioned that. I guess I will have to pick one up and try it. Does an Alpine equalizer have the same potential to shock load the anchor points as this anchor does?
|
|
|
|
|
trenchdigger
May 11, 2007, 4:20 PM
Post #5 of 8
(1836 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 9, 2003
Posts: 1447
|
Yup... it works identically to this anchor system.
|
|
|
|
|
westbend
May 12, 2007, 5:08 PM
Post #6 of 8
(1733 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 6, 2006
Posts: 22
|
If the loop holding the two biners just above the power point breaks, do you get (pretty close to) a death triangle?
|
|
|
|
|
fulton
May 12, 2007, 5:35 PM
Post #7 of 8
(1726 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 26, 2004
Posts: 210
|
Equalizing cordelette? Can't be done.
Equalization is a myth.
But cordelettes continue to 'work' the best.
Once you think about the situation enough, you will become as comfortable and as apathetic about the illusion of equalization as I am.
I would advise you, generally, to get concerned with redundancy (especially concerning cord) - and stop questing after this mythical 'equalization.'
(if your cordelettes are made of spectra, you will never equalize anything, but if can rig the cordelette using perlon then you might be able to 'stretch' the shortest arm enough to engage the longest arm - but you are still working within the web of the illusion.)
|
|
|
|
|
paulraphael
May 15, 2007, 1:38 AM
Post #8 of 8
(1565 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 6, 2004
Posts: 670
|
In principle this setup can work. there are ways to tie it short so that extension is greatly limited. The cord can also be backed up by tying a figure 8 from the rope coming off your tie-in knot to the strongest piece of protection (loosely, so it doesn't interfere with the main rigging). It's worth asking, how much redundancy does the cord really need? I don't think I've ever heard of a severed cord leading to anchor failure; it's always the pro pulling for one reason or another. But backing up the rope on a strong piece covers every non-redundant part of the chain besides the rope iteslf: the cord, the tie-in knot, the locking biner.
All this being said, there is a much simpler and more elegant way to accomplish the same thing ... faster to setup than either a cordelette or equalette, and much better equalization than either. I'm going to post some pictures to the Lab, with a field report and some calls for testing in a few days.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
