Unless you're planning to use one anchor for multiple routes or climb far off-route, a fixed focused multi-point anchor is safer than a sliding X.

The sliding X does not equalize well under shock loads. Just use a single piece of webbing or static line, or take the two pieces and tie an overhand on a bight as a master point.

Use the KISS principle and don't over complicate a simple top rope anchor.

It's a top-rope. There aren't shock loads.

Don't kid yourself. Unless you keep the belay tight to the climber at every moment, then any fall is a shock load.

Even a fall on a perfectly tight belay imparts double the climber's weight on the rope and about 1.67x that on the anchor.

Are you such an authority that you can just make up new meanings for well established terms now?

No. But I'm such an authority that I know that the term "shock load" is one of the least well-defined and most misunderstood terms in climbing.

In physics, a "shock load" is typically a ballistic impact. But in rope work, a shock load is any sudden deceleration and there is no standard for how sudden.

So, in essence, there are only two kinds of rope system loads: static and dynamic (or shock). If a climber falls on anything but a perfectly tight rope, there is a shock load as the downward acceleration is arrested.

In the same way, the load on your feet from standing is a static load. The load on your feet (and knees) from jogging, jumping or even walking downhill is a shock load (and your knees will tell you that).

I'm so sorry. Here, if you have a milkshake, and I have a milkshake, and I have a straw. There it is, that's a straw, you see? You watching?. And my straw reaches acroooooooss the room, and starts to drink your milkshake... I... drink... your... milkshake!

I have no idea what you're talking about. But damn, is it ever funny.

I have no idea what you're talking about. But damn, is it ever funny.

But please let deciding an appropriate way of connecting multiple anchors to a master point up to me... My question was asking if using two slings in an X instead of one would inhibit the function of the X, or cause any un wanted friction, wearing out the slings faster than normal.

Unless you're planning to use one anchor for multiple routes or climb far off-route, a fixed focused multi-point anchor is safer than a sliding X.

I am putting together my first TR kit. In the past I have always done my anchors by slinging two bomber trees with webbing long enough to almost meet. Then I connect the two pieces of webbing with biners to a sling acting as a sliding x.

Would it be fine to use two slings instead of one? I was just thinking that everything in the system is backed up except for the sling. Having two slings put together would make the system more redundant, but would it create any unnecessary friction possibly messing with the sliding x?

Thanks!
Dave

In physics, a "shock load" is typically a ballistic impact. But in rope work, a shock load is any sudden deceleration and there is no standard for how sudden. So, in essence, there are only two kinds of rope system loads: static and dynamic (or shock). If a climber falls on anything but a perfectly tight rope, there is a shock load as the downward acceleration is arrested.

... slinging two bomber trees with webbing long enough to almost meet. Then I connect the two pieces of webbing with biners to a sling acting as a sliding x.

Would it be fine to use two slings instead of one? I was just thinking that everything in the system is backed up except for the sling. Having two slings put together would make the system more redundant, but would it create any unnecessary friction possibly messing with the sliding x?

Why use the sling at all? Can't you have the webbing pieces tied just a little bit longer, so all you have is two pieces of webbing (one to each anchor tree) and then two locking 'biners that go through both pieces of webbing? It may take a few minutes longer to get the length of both webbing pieces adjusted, but you are setting up single-pitch TR, do couple minutes really matter?

I'm so sorry. Here, if you have a milkshake, and I have a milkshake, and I have a straw. There it is, that's a straw, you see? You watching?. And my straw reaches acroooooooss the room, and starts to drink your milkshake... I... drink... your... milkshake!

Don't kid yourself. Unless you keep the belay tight to the climber at every moment, then any fall is a shock load.

Can you point to some empirical evidence, such as accident rates due to failure of the sliding-X vs. a cordellette, that lends credence to your statement that a fixed multi-point anchor is safer than a sliding-X?

So you thought that it would be sensible to add to the confusion?

I've taken a lot of falls on top rope and on lead and the majority of them did not feel like "shock loading". Many were down right spring-y perhaps akin to bungy jumping. In common sense (a.k.a., using terms in the way they are commonly understood), saying all those falls shock loaded the anchor would be confusing.

So you say the "majority" of your falls didn't feel "shocky", which says that some did.

I am putting together my first TR kit. In the past I have always done my anchors by slinging two bomber trees with webbing long enough to almost meet. Then I connect the two pieces of webbing with biners to a sling acting as a sliding x.

Would it be fine to use two slings instead of one? I was just thinking that everything in the system is backed up except for the sling. Having two slings put together would make the system more redundant, but would it create any unnecessary friction possibly messing with the sliding x?

Thanks!
Dave