Forums: Climbing Information: Gear Heads:
Wave Bolts?
RSS FeedRSS Feeds for Gear Heads

Premier Sponsor:

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


weekendbolter


Oct 24, 2011, 7:27 AM
Post #1 of 36 (9505 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 24, 2011
Posts: 3

Wave Bolts?
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

I've lurked around this site for a few years, but I finally have a question for a first post:

Anyone hear of or use these new glue in bolts called Wave Bolts? Their website says they are the best bolt available. After a long weekend and frustrating weekend of using Fixe ones I have been looking around the internet this morning (productive work day!) and came across their site. Looks new. The site is http://www.wavebolt.com . The videos show the bolt not sliding out of an overhanging route, which would be great for me. And the testing numbers are really high.
Anyone use them?

Thanks, Robert


dagibbs


Oct 24, 2011, 3:39 PM
Post #2 of 36 (9381 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 30, 2007
Posts: 880

Re: [weekendbolter] Wave Bolts? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
Can't Post

weekendbolter wrote:
I've lurked around this site for a few years, but I finally have a question for a first post:

Anyone hear of or use these new glue in bolts called Wave Bolts? Their website says they are the best bolt available. After a long weekend and frustrating weekend of using Fixe ones I have been looking around the internet this morning (productive work day!) and came across their site. Looks new. The site is http://www.wavebolt.com . The videos show the bolt not sliding out of an overhanging route, which would be great for me. And the testing numbers are really high.
Anyone use them?

Thanks, Robert

Registered: Oct 24, 2011, 7:13 AM


billcoe_


Oct 24, 2011, 4:05 PM
Post #3 of 36 (9365 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 30, 2002
Posts: 4668

Re: [weekendbolter] Wave Bolts? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Looks sweet! Much like someone mfg and improved version of the Buehler style glue in bolts that Jim Titt and the eurotrash (I joke make, calm down) developed for limestone. They are doing it in 6mm stainless, scary small, but very effective and strong.

Good on ya for jumping on the market niche. I dislike glueins as they are so much work, but for soft rock, they are the schizz.

For reference, here's a link to 8 real good links on the subject from 2007. http://cascadeclimbers.com/...arch=true#Post746006

Titt's page:
http://www.bolt-products.com/Glue-inBoltDesign.htm


yodadave


Oct 24, 2011, 4:18 PM
Post #4 of 36 (9358 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 10, 2008
Posts: 510

Re: [weekendbolter] Wave Bolts? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

They look pretty clever although hammering them in looked a wee bit more difficult than the guy made it sound.


marc801


Oct 24, 2011, 4:26 PM
Post #5 of 36 (9350 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 1, 2005
Posts: 2731

Re: [dagibbs] Wave Bolts? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

dagibbs wrote:
weekendbolter wrote:
I've lurked around this site for a few years, but I finally have a question for a first post:

Anyone hear of or use these new glue in bolts called Wave Bolts? Their website says they are the best bolt available. After a long weekend and frustrating weekend of using Fixe ones I have been looking around the internet this morning (productive work day!) and came across their site. Looks new. The site is http://www.wavebolt.com . The videos show the bolt not sliding out of an overhanging route, which would be great for me. And the testing numbers are really high.
Anyone use them?

Thanks, Robert

Registered: Oct 24, 2011, 7:13 AM
Your point? You can lurk and read for a decade before registering.


dagibbs


Oct 24, 2011, 5:21 PM
Post #6 of 36 (9329 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 30, 2007
Posts: 880

Re: [marc801] Wave Bolts? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

marc801 wrote:
dagibbs wrote:
weekendbolter wrote:
I've lurked around this site for a few years, but I finally have a question for a first post:

Anyone hear of or use these new glue in bolts called Wave Bolts? Their website says they are the best bolt available. After a long weekend and frustrating weekend of using Fixe ones I have been looking around the internet this morning (productive work day!) and came across their site. Looks new. The site is http://www.wavebolt.com . The videos show the bolt not sliding out of an overhanging route, which would be great for me. And the testing numbers are really high.
Anyone use them?

Thanks, Robert

Registered: Oct 24, 2011, 7:13 AM
Your point? You can lurk and read for a decade before registering.

You can. But when the first post is a link to a product site... it looks more suspicious.


ACJ


Oct 24, 2011, 5:51 PM
Post #7 of 36 (9307 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 25, 2008
Posts: 161

Re: [weekendbolter] Wave Bolts? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

I've seen and climbed on plenty of these already. Honestly, I think they look like crap at the crag. I've never seen one that didn't have that trashy homemade looking red/pink glue oozed out of it.

It's good to know they are credible, cause I've felt a bit sketched out clipping them!

I'm not the one out bolting, but I definitely feel as though aesthetics are high on my list. I prefer the look of a traditional bolt or the other glue ins, these just don't do it for me.


tolman_paul


Oct 24, 2011, 6:21 PM
Post #8 of 36 (9298 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 22, 2005
Posts: 385

Re: [weekendbolter] Wave Bolts? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Looks interesting, I'd never heard of them. It certainly solves one of the issues of glue ins, which is keeping them in place while the glue dries. Then again, if you're using a fast set adhesive and you take too long to pound it in, you could compromise the adhesive.

I look at glue ins as more of a special purpose than general purpose bolt, but they have their place.


Wavebolt


Oct 24, 2011, 6:21 PM
Post #9 of 36 (9297 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 4, 2011
Posts: 10

Re: [billcoe_] Wave Bolts? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

billcoe_ wrote:

Good on ya for jumping on the market niche. I dislike glueins as they are so much work, but for soft rock, they are the schizz.

Yes, in general glue-ins are more work than mechanicals, however my Wave Bolts significantly reduce the burdens of other designs. Really, the only additional work necessary with a Wave Bolt is squirting the glue in. This is far outweighed by the immense strength, longevity, and cost effectiveness of the Wave Bolt.


Wavebolt


Oct 24, 2011, 6:24 PM
Post #10 of 36 (9295 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 4, 2011
Posts: 10

Re: [yodadave] Wave Bolts? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

yodadave wrote:
They look pretty clever although hammering them in looked a wee bit more difficult than the guy made it sound.

How hard hammering them in is depends on how tightly you drilled your hole and the rock quality. In the video, the rock is limestone; they require much less hammering in softer sandstone. Plus, the hammer used in the video is very light. With a nice wall hammer they go right in.


Wavebolt


Oct 24, 2011, 6:29 PM
Post #11 of 36 (9290 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 4, 2011
Posts: 10

Re: [ACJ] Wave Bolts? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

ACJ wrote:
I've seen and climbed on plenty of these already. Honestly, I think they look like crap at the crag. I've never seen one that didn't have that trashy homemade looking red/pink glue oozed out of it.

It's good to know they are credible, cause I've felt a bit sketched out clipping them!

I'm not the one out bolting, but I definitely feel as though aesthetics are high on my list. I prefer the look of a traditional bolt or the other glue ins, these just don't do it for me.

Regarding the strength, in our testing the Wave Bolts are easily over twice as strong (i.e. resistance to failure) as a 1/2 X 4 3/4 inch Powers/Rawl bolt, for both shear and tension.

Regarding the aesthetics, what you mention has more to do with the route developer and not the bolt. The "trashy, homemade" glue is probably Hilti RE500, one of the strongest adhesives made by man. I do agree though that the developer shouldn't leave adhesive dripping down, they should be careful and clean it up.


shockabuku


Oct 24, 2011, 7:25 PM
Post #12 of 36 (9262 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 20, 2006
Posts: 4857

Re: [marc801] Wave Bolts? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Doh!


(This post was edited by shockabuku on Oct 24, 2011, 7:38 PM)


weekendbolter


Oct 25, 2011, 7:12 AM
Post #13 of 36 (9184 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 24, 2011
Posts: 3

Re: [dagibbs] Wave Bolts? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

Sorry if this was suspicious. Not my intent. I have indeed lurked annonymously for a while.
Anyway, thanks all for the info. The design makes sense. No one has used them though? I will keep following this to see if anyone updates.


JAB


Oct 28, 2011, 4:05 AM
Post #14 of 36 (8980 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 26, 2007
Posts: 373

Re: [tolman_paul] Wave Bolts? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

tolman_paul wrote:
I look at glue ins as more of a special purpose than general purpose bolt, but they have their place.

Why would you do that? Glue ins are far better in every way, except for the fact that you can't weight it right away. This is a problem in only a minority of sport routes, so in fact it should actually be the other way around.


USnavy


Oct 28, 2011, 5:27 AM
Post #15 of 36 (8964 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 5, 2007
Posts: 2660

Re: [weekendbolter] Wave Bolts? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

weekendbolter wrote:
Sorry if this was suspicious. Not my intent. I have indeed lurked annonymously for a while.
Anyway, thanks all for the info. The design makes sense. No one has used them though? I will keep following this to see if anyone updates.
Well the fact that they are made of grade 316SS and only run $5 each is attractive. Normally a 1/2" 316SS bolt and hanger combo runs around $16. But the big question is how does your 316SS compare to quality grade 316, such as the 316 stock that is used to makes Fixe's $20 quicklinks? I have seen 304 quicklinks that cost $5 at home Depot rust to shit in a month, where as quality 304 quicklinks that run over $10 each from Fixe lasts a few years in a marine environment.


(This post was edited by USnavy on Oct 28, 2011, 5:30 AM)


mattm


Oct 28, 2011, 5:48 PM
Post #16 of 36 (8872 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 20, 2003
Posts: 640

Re: [weekendbolter] Wave Bolts? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
Can't Post

I've used (and use) both Jim Titt's bolts and the Wave Bolt. They're damn close in performance, ease of use etc etc. I'm working on on a thorough write up of lots of fixed gear anchors but that's not done yet.

Here's the gist:

Glue: The Hilti is that awful red color. I use Epcon A7 and it's a nice grey color when cured. The key is to wipe the hole with a rag after inserting the bolt. Dripping messes are just poor form on the bolter's part. Some glues do drip more than others...

BOTH:
Are the best out there in terms of Glue Ins. Practically the same to be honest. Nothing else is close.

Bolt Product (Titt): Currently, they are formed for a 12mm hole (standard in Europe). They STAY in a 12mm hole (friction fit) just like a Wave Bolt but require Much less effort to pound in since just the last 3/4 create the friction fit. In a 1/2in hole (US standard) they don't have the friction fit and will slide out of steep holes. The US distributor is re-working the tooling here to accommodate the 1/2in hole size though so this issue will be moot soon. Only available in 304SS in the USA AFAIK. Lots of metal options if you order from Jim in Germany. Also available in larger sizes and lengths. http://www.appalachianclimbingschool.com/Bolt_Products.htm

Wave Bolt: 316SS which is nice. They're a much tighter fit in a 1/2in hole and require pounding after maybe 1 1/2in of insertion in limestone. As stated above, it is not an issue with your normal wall hammer. You can wiggle the drill for a looser fit but I don't really do that. Probably easier to do in sandstone. Available in 1/2 and 5/8in but only one length right now I think.

Glue Use: I've found that the Titt bolts require less glue than the Wave per 1/2in hole which I attribute to the larger metal volume of the Titt design in the hole. I have no idea if this effects strength at all (note that BOTH designs are stronger than anything else out there by a long shot so again, probably a moot point). BOTH designs have profiles where the glue fully locks the bolt in the hole.

Right now, I use the Titt bolts for vertical rock placements so I don't have to hammer and the Wave's for steep stuff. Once the Titt is tweaked for a 1/2in hole it really will be 6 of one and 1/2 dozen of the other with a few minor differences influencing your choice. If I were to pick only one, I'd probably lean to a Titt Bolt. I think the fit and finish is slightly superior to the Wave and if the US distributor makes the 1/2in fit change they'll be even better.

Both are great improvements on the old-school glue ins and are catching on in many soft(er) rock areas.


L to R: Hilti HSL, Powers 5 Piece 1/2in x 3.75, Hilti KB3 3/8x3.75in, Hilti KB3 1/2x5.5in, Wave Bolt 1/2 x 4in, Titt Bolt 12x100mm, Titt 12x150mm, Titt 16x150mm


(This post was edited by mattm on Jul 19, 2012, 8:01 AM)


USnavy


Oct 28, 2011, 6:41 PM
Post #17 of 36 (8863 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 5, 2007
Posts: 2660

Re: [mattm] Wave Bolts? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

mattm wrote:

Glue: The Hilti is that awful red color. I use Epcon A7 and it's a nice grey color when cured. The key is to wipe the hole with a rag after inserting the bolt. Dripping messes are just poor form on the bolter's part. Some glues do drip more than others...

\
One way to help reduce the visual aspect of epoxy is to throw dirt on the exposed epoxy. I take some dirt from the base of the cliff that is the same color as the rock and toss it on the exposed epoxy after I glue the bolt in. Of course, never mix the dirt with the epoxy, only apply it to exposed portions of the glue. But if you do it right, it will help the epoxy blend in with the rock.


Wavebolt


Oct 29, 2011, 7:24 AM
Post #18 of 36 (8802 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 4, 2011
Posts: 10

Re: [mattm] Wave Bolts? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

mattm wrote:
Wave Bolt: 316SS which is nice. They're a much tighter fit in a 1/2in hole and require pounding after maybe 1 1/2in of insertion in limestone. As stated above, it is not an issue with your normal wall hammer. You can wiggle the drill for a looser fit but I don't really do that. Probably easier to do in sandstone. Available in 1/2 and 5/8in but only one length right now I think.

Thanks for the write up mattm. I agree that Jim's bolt is good too, and definitely better than the other "standard" offerings. The Wave Bolt was designed to have maximum holding ability in overhangs before the adhesive sets so that it doesn't slide out of the hole. We've tested it to hold just over 1000lbs in a straight out pull without glue, so you can definitely clip right back into to "stay in" to the wall. It will be interesting to see how Jim's re-worked bolts will do in this, since only the last bit of the bolt shaft has the friction fit.

As you point out, if you aren't worried about the bolt sliding out (e.g. on a vertical wall) you can wiggle the drill around a bit in the hole to bore it out and then easily slide the Wave Bolt in without any hammering. Or you can wiggle the drill only a small amount if you want some, but not all of the holding power before the adhesive sets.

Finally, here is the link to our site: http://www.wavebolt.com


Partner j_ung


Oct 29, 2011, 8:35 AM
Post #19 of 36 (8786 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18687

Re: [ACJ] Wave Bolts? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

ACJ wrote:
I've seen and climbed on plenty of these already. Honestly, I think they look like crap at the crag. I've never seen one that didn't have that trashy homemade looking red/pink glue oozed out of it.

It's good to know they are credible, cause I've felt a bit sketched out clipping them!

I'm not the one out bolting, but I definitely feel as though aesthetics are high on my list. I prefer the look of a traditional bolt or the other glue ins, these just don't do it for me.

When placed correctly and putty is applied over the red glue, these and Bolt Products bolts are lower profile than any other bolt.


Rmsyll2


Oct 29, 2011, 4:49 PM
Post #20 of 36 (8710 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 6, 2010
Posts: 266

Re: [j_ung] Wave Bolts? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (7 ratings)  
Can't Post

I suspect that the "low profile" could be a problem with wanting to climb a route with them. If you are accustomed to seeing a hanger plate or a hunky chain and a big bolt head, seeing a simple wire loop does not inspire confidence. The thickness of the wire may be equal to the hanger, but there seems to be too little there. We would be learning again to have faith in testing rather than intuition.

A real problem with the dinky wire things is the radius it makes for a rope. WaveBolts has said:
"The "eye" of a Wave Bolt is large enough to easily clip two carabiners (even big, beefy ones), or one half-inch quicklink and a carabiner into it.
At an anchor station or crux bolt of a route, we highly recommend the developer attaching quicklinks and chain (or something similar) to the bolts so that climbers do not thread their ropes directly through the bolts. More information on this in the FAQ section of the site http://www.wavebolt.com/faq/."

I also wonder how much harder it will be to find anchors or to follow a route with the very "low profile" loops as all you can see, if the glue has been hidden as suggested here.

I think it funny that an alternative to bolts is named Bolts.

.


redlude97


Oct 29, 2011, 5:01 PM
Post #21 of 36 (8704 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 27, 2008
Posts: 988

Re: [Rmsyll2] Wave Bolts? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Rmsyll2 wrote:
I suspect that the "low profile" could be a problem with wanting to climb a route with them. If you are accustomed to seeing a hanger plate or a hunky chain and a big bolt head, seeing a simple wire loop does not inspire confidence. The thickness of the wire may be equal to the hanger, but there seems to be too little there. We would be learning again to have faith in testing rather than intuition.

A real problem with the dinky wire things is the radius it makes for a rope. WaveBolts has said:
"The "eye" of a Wave Bolt is large enough to easily clip two carabiners (even big, beefy ones), or one half-inch quicklink and a carabiner into it.
At an anchor station or crux bolt of a route, we highly recommend the developer attaching quicklinks and chain (or something similar) to the bolts so that climbers do not thread their ropes directly through the bolts. More information on this in the FAQ section of the site http://www.wavebolt.com/faq/."

I also wonder how much harder it will be to find anchors or to follow a route with the very "low profile" loops as all you can see, if the glue has been hidden as suggested here.

I think it funny that an alternative to bolts is named Bolts.

.
They don't look that much different from other glue ins I've encountered. The thickness of a hanger isn't really any thicker than those anyways. Your argument about use in anchors is a moot point anyways. You shouldn't be threading through the anchors, they should be equipped with chains or quicklinks, just like you wouldn't thread through normal hangers.


qwert


Oct 30, 2011, 2:19 AM
Post #22 of 36 (8641 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 24, 2004
Posts: 2392

Re: [Rmsyll2] Wave Bolts? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Rmsyll2 wrote:
A real problem with the dinky wire things is the radius it makes for a rope. WaveBolts has said:
"The "eye" of a Wave Bolt is large enough to easily clip two carabiners (even big, beefy ones), or one half-inch quicklink and a carabiner into it.
At an anchor station or crux bolt of a route, we highly recommend the developer attaching quicklinks and chain (or something similar) to the bolts so that climbers do not thread their ropes directly through the bolts.
I dont think that they are talking about the radius, but rather the fact that lowering through the bolt puts some wear on them, which - on well travelled routes - might become a problem. I can definitely see that for the top anchor, that sees continuous lowering, but for intermediate bolts?Ö

In reply to:
I also wonder how much harder it will be to find anchors or to follow a route with the very "low profile" loops as all you can see, if the glue has been hidden as suggested here.
What?
You do know that there are many disciplines where you dont have any "markers" in the rock that tell you where you have to go? Yes, its convenient when you just have to follow the shiny things, and especially on overbolted and overdeveloped sport crags its often the only thing that somehow defines a route, but generally you should be able to find a route without those bolts. Ever heard of trad climbing?

In reply to:
I think it funny that an alternative to bolts is named Bolts.
What?

qwert


USnavy


Oct 30, 2011, 5:45 AM
Post #23 of 36 (8627 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 5, 2007
Posts: 2660

Re: [Wavebolt] Wave Bolts? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Wavebolt wrote:
ACJ wrote:
I've seen and climbed on plenty of these already. Honestly, I think they look like crap at the crag. I've never seen one that didn't have that trashy homemade looking red/pink glue oozed out of it.

It's good to know they are credible, cause I've felt a bit sketched out clipping them!

I'm not the one out bolting, but I definitely feel as though aesthetics are high on my list. I prefer the look of a traditional bolt or the other glue ins, these just don't do it for me.

Regarding the strength, in our testing the Wave Bolts are easily over twice as strong (i.e. resistance to failure) as a 1/2 X 4 3/4 inch Powers/Rawl bolt, for both shear and tension.
The rated mechanical breaking strength of a 1/2" Power-Bolt is 55 kN in shear and 49 kN in tension and I have verified the accuracy of those ratings in pull tests in hard colbalt basalt. On your website you said you were able to apply 9100 lbs. in tension to your test bolt. So its rated for 40 kN, which not only is nowhere near twice as strong as a 1/2" Power-Bolt, itís not even as strong as a 1/2" Power-Bolt. I understand the bolt did not fail at 40 kN. However you stopped the test and you can only claim what you truly know and have tested, so that's 40 kN.

Now I watched your video and saw that the two 1/2" Power-Bolts were deforming under the pull test. However that is nowhere near an appropriate comparative test regarding the ultimate failure strength between of bolts versus the Power-Bolt. You are testing those bolts in soft RRG sandstone that likely has a compressive strength below what Powers says the Power-Bolt is appropriate to be used in. Additionally, you are comparing the pull out strength of the bolts in sandstone after the bolt has deformed, not the actual breaking strength. Bolts in the climbing realm are normally rated to their mechanical breaking strength as tested in a material strong enough to allow the bolt to fail before the testing material deforms. Commercial and industrial expansion bolt manufacturers do test the pull out strength of their bolts in softer concrete, but they denote this and they also normally publish their ultimate mechanical breaking strength.

In order to properly create a comparative test for your bolts and the Power-Bolt, you would need to test them in a substance that is strong enough to allow the bolt to fail under its mechanical limitations, not by pulling out of the rock as the rock severely deforms.

So making a blanket statement that your bolts are more than "twice as strong as the 1/2" Power-Bolt" is completely erroneous. You are implying that the mechanical failure strength of your bolts is twice that of the Power-Bolt which is not even remotely true.

Also you state on your website your bolts tested to twice that of the UIAA requirement for rock anchors. That statement is completely false according to your website. UIAA 123, the UIAA specification for rock anchors, says that bolts need to hold 20 kN in tension and 25 kN in shear. On your website you claim your samples tested at 35 kN in tension and 40 kN in shear. Neither of those values are twice that of the UIAA 123 specifications. It may be that the bolts are stronger than what they tested to before you stopped the test, but once again you can only claim what you know and what you have tested.

Making erroneous claims regarding your products and othersí products is unprofessional. I have no doubt your bolts are strong enough to be used for climbing, and if tested in accordance with UIAA 123, they would likely pass. I will likely buy a handful of your bolts myself. But making untested and erroneous blanket claims that your bolts are more than twice as strong as the Power-Bolt and twice as strong as the UIAA 123 requirement does not work in your favor.


(This post was edited by USnavy on Oct 30, 2011, 5:58 AM)


Wavebolt


Oct 30, 2011, 6:57 AM
Post #24 of 36 (8597 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 4, 2011
Posts: 10

Re: [USnavy] Wave Bolts? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

USNavy, you make excellent points. I take responsibility for errors and will make the appropriate changes in future statements and/or publications.

My intent was not to make erroneous or deceitful claims. I asked my distributor of Powers bolts what the tension and shear ratings were for the bolt. I was told 4500lbs. Since this fits with other manufacturers' (e.g. ITW) ratings, I took it as accurate. I see now, however, that according to http://www.powers.com/...mechanical/06914.pdf Powers rates their bolts at approx. 41kn for tension and 44 for shear (1/2 inch bolt, 4000psi concrete). You are correct that our test results are not twice this amount.

Regarding the UIAA standards, in http://www.theuiaa.org/...3_rock_anch_2009.pdf section 2.2.3 states an axial load of 20kn. I took this to mean a minimum requirement, so a test result (albeit shear) of over 9100lbs led me to say 'over twice as strong as the UIAA requirement.'

I see how easy it is to make errors and/or be perceived as misleading, which ultimately undermines the perceived quality of our product. This is not my intent, and I hope my responses will work to correct this.


billcoe_


Oct 30, 2011, 2:19 PM
Post #25 of 36 (8535 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 30, 2002
Posts: 4668

Re: [Wavebolt] Wave Bolts? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Wavebolt wrote:
USNavy, you make excellent points. I take responsibility for errors and will make the appropriate changes in future statements and/or publications.

My intent was not to make erroneous or deceitful claims. I asked my distributor of Powers bolts what the tension and shear ratings were for the bolt. I was told 4500lbs. Since this fits with other manufacturers' (e.g. ITW) ratings, I took it as accurate. I see now, however, that according to http://www.powers.com/...mechanical/06914.pdf Powers rates their bolts at approx. 41kn for tension and 44 for shear (1/2 inch bolt, 4000psi concrete). You are correct that our test results are not twice this amount.

Regarding the UIAA standards, in http://www.theuiaa.org/...3_rock_anch_2009.pdf section 2.2.3 states an axial load of 20kn. I took this to mean a minimum requirement, so a test result (albeit shear) of over 9100lbs led me to say 'over twice as strong as the UIAA requirement.'

I see how easy it is to make errors and/or be perceived as misleading, which ultimately undermines the perceived quality of our product. This is not my intent, and I hope my responses will work to correct this.

It works for me. In fact, 9100 lbs is so much stronger than the old 1/4" bolts we use to use, in any material any time of the day wet or dry.

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

Forums : Climbing Information : Gear Heads

 


Search for (options)

Log In:

Username:
Password: Remember me:

Go Register
Go Lost Password?



Follow us on Twiter Become a Fan on Facebook