|
airscape
May 11, 2010, 5:34 PM
Post #26 of 106
(13837 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 26, 2001
Posts: 4240
|
[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, 5:45 PM
Post #27 of 106
(13830 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 17, 2004
Posts: 369
|
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, 5:47 PM
Post #28 of 106
(13826 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 17, 2004
Posts: 369
|
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, 5:57 PM
Post #29 of 106
(13812 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 25, 2004
Posts: 26
|
how do you post a picture within a thread?
|
|
|
|
|
airscape
May 11, 2010, 6:08 PM
Post #30 of 106
(13801 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 26, 2001
Posts: 4240
|
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, 6:08 PM
Post #31 of 106
(13799 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 12, 2007
Posts: 3025
|
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, 6:09 PM
Post #32 of 106
(13799 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 25, 2004
Posts: 26
|
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, 6:23 PM)
|
|
Attachments:
|
AnticamV2.jpg
(30.4 KB)
|
|
|
|
|
acorneau
May 11, 2010, 6:14 PM
Post #33 of 106
(13786 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 6, 2008
Posts: 2889
|
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, 6:19 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
boadman
May 11, 2010, 6:19 PM
Post #34 of 106
(13778 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 7, 2003
Posts: 726
|
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, 6:22 PM
Post #35 of 106
(13773 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 12, 2007
Posts: 3025
|
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, 6:24 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
airscape
May 11, 2010, 6:22 PM
Post #36 of 106
(13773 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 26, 2001
Posts: 4240
|
I find this thread fascinating.
|
|
|
|
|
airscape
May 11, 2010, 6:25 PM
Post #37 of 106
(13766 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 26, 2001
Posts: 4240
|
You have just given me an idea for something.
I shall post a drawings post haste.
|
|
|
|
|
sidepull
May 11, 2010, 6:29 PM
Post #38 of 106
(13754 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 11, 2001
Posts: 2335
|
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?
|
|
|
|
|
mattmaddaloni
May 11, 2010, 6:47 PM
Post #40 of 106
(13726 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 25, 2004
Posts: 26
|
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, 6:56 PM
Post #41 of 106
(13717 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 11, 2010
Posts: 1
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
mattmaddaloni
May 11, 2010, 7:09 PM
Post #42 of 106
(13693 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 25, 2004
Posts: 26
|
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, 9:20 PM
Post #43 of 106
(13620 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 28, 2010
Posts: 20
|
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, 9:46 PM
Post #44 of 106
(13599 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 13, 2005
Posts: 3479
|
|
|
|
|
|
drews256
May 11, 2010, 9:50 PM
Post #45 of 106
(13593 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 28, 2010
Posts: 20
|
I like it
|
|
|
|
|
acorneau
May 11, 2010, 10:02 PM
Post #46 of 106
(13589 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 6, 2008
Posts: 2889
|
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, 10:04 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
camhead
May 11, 2010, 10:02 PM
Post #47 of 106
(13589 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 10, 2001
Posts: 20939
|
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???!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
gmggg
May 11, 2010, 10:25 PM
Post #48 of 106
(13568 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 25, 2009
Posts: 2099
|
Ha! That was exactly what I was thinking. Finally limestone is "safe" for trad.
|
|
|
|
|
edge
May 11, 2010, 10:35 PM
Post #49 of 106
(13557 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 14, 2003
Posts: 9120
|
gmggg wrote: Ha! That was exactly what I was thinking. Finally limestone is "safe" for trad.
Finally, an answer for the Mass tufa porblem!
|
|
|
|
|
camhead
May 11, 2010, 10:37 PM
Post #50 of 106
(13554 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 10, 2001
Posts: 20939
|
edge wrote: gmggg wrote: 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?
|
|
|
|
|
|
