Forums: Climbing Information: The Lab:
$40 bet - two non-locking biner anchor failure.
RSS FeedRSS Feeds for The Lab

Premier Sponsor:

 
First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 Next page Last page  View All


dead_horse_flats


Jan 31, 2012, 8:27 PM
Post #1 of 92 (11573 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 14, 2006
Posts: 64

$40 bet - two non-locking biner anchor failure.
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
Can't Post

This is a $40 offer to anyone who can demonstrate a scenario of the failure of a top rope anchor using two non-locking opposed biners at the power point.

Disclaimers.
1. Opposed means opposed.
2. No manually holding the biners to force the rope thru them.
3. No wrapping the rope around the biners unless you can create a situation where this could happen un-intentionally.
4. Failure means the rope escaped from BOTH biners. Both means both.
5. No theories, microfractures, CE marks, or alien abductions.

Prove it and I will mail you $40.


sittingduck


Jan 31, 2012, 9:56 PM
Post #2 of 92 (11527 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 19, 2003
Posts: 338

Re: [dead_horse_flats] $40 bet - two non-locking biner anchor failure. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

It takes more than 40$ to tell you how on this troll infested site Crazy


jae8908


Jan 31, 2012, 9:59 PM
Post #3 of 92 (11524 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 15, 2011
Posts: 270

Re: [dead_horse_flats] $40 bet - two non-locking biner anchor failure. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

I almost want to double that amount to the person who proves you wrong. lol. Unfortunately I am now broke from the purchase of a crash pad.


jt512


Jan 31, 2012, 10:20 PM
Post #4 of 92 (11509 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 11, 2001
Posts: 21887

Re: [dead_horse_flats] $40 bet - two non-locking biner anchor failure. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

dead_horse_flats wrote:

Prove it and I will mail you $40.

Not much profit left over after having to break two biners.

Jay


jt512


Jan 31, 2012, 10:23 PM
Post #5 of 92 (11508 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 11, 2001
Posts: 21887

Re: [dead_horse_flats] $40 bet - two non-locking biner anchor failure. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

dead_horse_flats wrote:

4. Failure means the rope escaped from BOTH biners. Both means both.

Prove it and I will mail you $40.

Why would the rope have to escape? Shouldn't failure also include both biners breaking, or one biner breaking and the rope escaping from the other?

Jay


(This post was edited by jt512 on Feb 1, 2012, 1:35 AM)


JimTitt


Jan 31, 2012, 11:49 PM
Post #6 of 92 (11486 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 7, 2008
Posts: 954

Re: [dead_horse_flats] $40 bet - two non-locking biner anchor failure. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

It has happened more often than you think, one cause is failure to tie in correctly.


climb-high


Feb 1, 2012, 12:19 AM
Post #7 of 92 (11477 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 20, 2008
Posts: 14

Re: [dead_horse_flats] $40 bet - two non-locking biner anchor failure. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

bolts break, doesnt matter what is on there. you fall and die! slings break, you fall and die. your retard sport head friend doesnt correctly load his Gri-Gri, you fall and die! not to mention all of the other random shit that happens for no good reason, no matter how safe you thing you are being. you fall, you die!

I WIN!!!


Urban_Cowboy


Feb 1, 2012, 3:01 AM
Post #8 of 92 (11453 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 2, 2009
Posts: 217

Re: [JimTitt] $40 bet - two non-locking biner anchor failure. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

JimTitt wrote:
It has happened more often than you think, one cause is failure to tie in correctly.
That wouldn't be a "two non-locking biner anchor fail", that would be a tie in fail.


USnavy


Feb 1, 2012, 4:29 AM
Post #9 of 92 (11427 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 5, 2007
Posts: 2648

Post deleted by USnavy [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  

 


USnavy


Feb 1, 2012, 4:32 AM
Post #10 of 92 (11423 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 5, 2007
Posts: 2648

Re: [jt512] $40 bet - two non-locking biner anchor failure. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

jt512 wrote:
dead_horse_flats wrote:

Prove it and I will mail you $40.

Not much profit left over after having to break two biners.

Jay
There is if you climb in Yosemite. There are biners all over the place there. In one month alone I found over 20.


guangzhou


Feb 1, 2012, 4:46 AM
Post #11 of 92 (11415 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 26, 2004
Posts: 3388

Re: [USnavy] $40 bet - two non-locking biner anchor failure. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

USnavy wrote:
dead_horse_flats wrote:
This is a $40 offer to anyone who can demonstrate a scenario of the failure of a top rope anchor using two non-locking opposed biners at the power point.

Disclaimers.
1. Opposed means opposed.
2. No manually holding the biners to force the rope thru them.
3. No wrapping the rope around the biners unless you can create a situation where this could happen un-intentionally.
4. Failure means the rope escaped from BOTH biners. Both means both.
5. No theories, microfractures, CE marks, or alien abductions.

Prove it and I will mail you $40.
Open your wallet because your bet is already lost. Here is how I do it: First I set up the anchor with a double strand of 2" webbing and any selection of two O&O biners. Next I thread the rope through the master point biners. I am going to pretend to be a super paranoid Majid and use 5/8" static rope to TR on. Next I anchor one end of the static line to the ground because being Majid I cant find any partners to give me a catch, so I am going to TR solo. Last but not least, I connect the climber end of the rope to my friend's F-450, drop the b**ch in 4x4 low and smoke all four tires on the cement. Biner failure. I win $40. Wink

Other than that, its not going to happen, I think you will end up keeping your $40.

I an willing to bet the binner outlast the rope or webbing on this.


dead_horse_flats


Feb 1, 2012, 7:00 AM
Post #12 of 92 (11354 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 14, 2006
Posts: 64

Re: [dead_horse_flats] $40 bet - two non-locking biner anchor failure. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

Thanks to several responses for the lack of perception. Here is a clarification:

1. The theory is that the two non-locking biners at the power point provide a source of failure.

2. This discussion is "NOT" about:
a. failures of the belayer or leader.
b. equipment failure other than the two biners.

3. I will accept broken biners as part of the bet as long as you can demonstrate it in a realistic situation without using an F450.


(This post was edited by dead_horse_flats on Feb 1, 2012, 7:18 AM)


dead_horse_flats


Feb 1, 2012, 7:07 AM
Post #13 of 92 (11344 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 14, 2006
Posts: 64

Re: [jt512] $40 bet - two non-locking biner anchor failure. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

jt512 wrote:
dead_horse_flats wrote:

4. Failure means the rope escaped from BOTH biners. Both means both.

Prove it and I will mail you $40.

Why would the rope have to escape? Shouldn't failure also include both biners breaking, or one biner breaking and the rope escaping from the other?

Jay

I will accept broken biners. Prove that it can happen. No theories.


dead_horse_flats


Feb 1, 2012, 7:10 AM
Post #14 of 92 (11342 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 14, 2006
Posts: 64

Re: [jt512] $40 bet - two non-locking biner anchor failure. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

jt512 wrote:
dead_horse_flats wrote:

Prove it and I will mail you $40.

Not much profit left over after having to break two biners.

Jay

OK, $40 plus the cost of the biners.


dead_horse_flats


Feb 1, 2012, 7:15 AM
Post #15 of 92 (11335 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 14, 2006
Posts: 64

Re: [USnavy] $40 bet - two non-locking biner anchor failure. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

USnavy wrote:
dead_horse_flats wrote:
This is a $40 offer to anyone who can demonstrate a scenario of the failure of a top rope anchor using two non-locking opposed biners at the power point.

....ail you $40.
Open your wallet because your bet is already lost. Here is how I do it: First I set up the anchor with a double strand of 2" webbing and any selection of two O&O biners. Next I thread the rope through the master point biners. I am going to pretend to be a super paranoid Majid and use 5/8" static rope to TR on. Next I anchor one end of the static line to the ground because being Majid I cant find any partners to give me a catch, so I am going to TR solo. Last but not least, I connect the climber end of the rope to my friend's F-450, drop the b**ch in 4x4 low and smoke all four tires on the cement. Biner failure. I win $40. Wink

Other than that, its not going to happen, I think you will end up keeping your $40.


Your mistake was using a ford. Irrefutable and copious statistical evidence has shown that chevys dont have that problem.


(This post was edited by dead_horse_flats on Feb 1, 2012, 7:16 AM)


jt512


Feb 1, 2012, 3:02 PM
Post #16 of 92 (11203 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 11, 2001
Posts: 21887

Re: [dead_horse_flats] $40 bet - two non-locking biner anchor failure. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

dead_horse_flats wrote:
jt512 wrote:
dead_horse_flats wrote:

4. Failure means the rope escaped from BOTH biners. Both means both.

Prove it and I will mail you $40.

Why would the rope have to escape? Shouldn't failure also include both biners breaking, or one biner breaking and the rope escaping from the other?

Jay

I will accept broken biners. Prove that it can happen. No theories.

"Prove that it can happen" and "No theories" seem to contradict each other. Do you mean that the only proof you'll accept is the demonstration of an actual failure, say, by using a drop tower? And that an argument based on logic and physics, if someone could construct one, would not be acceptable as proof?

Jay


Player


Feb 1, 2012, 11:18 PM
Post #17 of 92 (11094 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 29, 2011
Posts: 55

Re: [dead_horse_flats] $40 bet - two non-locking biner anchor failure. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
Can't Post

Use 2 of these biners and fall as normal.


Please just donate the $$$ to the access fund.


dead_horse_flats


Feb 2, 2012, 7:50 AM
Post #18 of 92 (11049 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 14, 2006
Posts: 64

Re: [jt512] $40 bet - two non-locking biner anchor failure. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

jt512 wrote:
dead_horse_flats wrote:
jt512 wrote:
dead_horse_flats wrote:

4. Failure means the rope escaped from BOTH biners. Both means both.

Prove it and I will mail you $40.

Why would the rope have to escape? Shouldn't failure also include both biners breaking, or one biner breaking and the rope escaping from the other?

Jay

I will accept broken biners. Prove that it can happen. No theories.

"Prove that it can happen" and "No theories" seem to contradict each other. Do you mean that the only proof you'll accept is the demonstration of an actual failure, say, by using a drop tower? And that an argument based on logic and physics, if someone could construct one, would not be acceptable as proof?

Jay


Yes. Exactly.

Being an engineer myself who has actually created and used many such simulators, I understand there is a difference between theory and actual application. The calculations you did in physics101 usually had an intro that contained " assume zero friction".

On the other hand I am talking about serviceable, non deformed biners. If you build an anchor with a compromised* set of biners then thats just simple darwinism.

*bent, grooved, etc.


(This post was edited by dead_horse_flats on Feb 2, 2012, 7:55 AM)


mattm


Feb 2, 2012, 8:16 AM
Post #19 of 92 (11038 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 20, 2003
Posts: 640

Re: [dead_horse_flats] $40 bet - two non-locking biner anchor failure. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

IS there a point to this? You're saying that setup is fine? People are saying otherwise? What's the motivation here?

dead_horse_flats wrote:
This is a $40 offer to anyone who can demonstrate a scenario of the failure of a top rope anchor using two non-locking opposed biners at the power point.

Disclaimers.
1. Opposed means opposed.
2. No manually holding the biners to force the rope thru them.
3. No wrapping the rope around the biners unless you can create a situation where this could happen un-intentionally.
4. Failure means the rope escaped from BOTH biners. Both means both.
5. No theories, microfractures, CE marks, or alien abductions.

Prove it and I will mail you $40.


dead_horse_flats


Feb 2, 2012, 9:03 AM
Post #20 of 92 (11015 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 14, 2006
Posts: 64

Re: [mattm] $40 bet - two non-locking biner anchor failure. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

mattm wrote:
IS there a point to this? You're saying that setup is fine? People are saying otherwise? What's the motivation here?

Good question.

OK here's my last post on this and then I'm done and gone.

I believe that the failure as described of two non-locking biners has never occurred and will not occur. Since I do trust my life to this, if I am wrong, I would like someone to prove it. The proof to me is easily worth $40 plus cost.


(This post was edited by dead_horse_flats on Feb 2, 2012, 9:18 AM)


blondgecko
Moderator

Feb 2, 2012, 3:18 PM
Post #21 of 92 (10927 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 2, 2004
Posts: 7666

Re: [dead_horse_flats] $40 bet - two non-locking biner anchor failure. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (5 ratings)  
Can't Post

dead_horse_flats wrote:
mattm wrote:
IS there a point to this? You're saying that setup is fine? People are saying otherwise? What's the motivation here?

Good question.

OK here's my last post on this and then I'm done and gone.

I believe that the failure as described of two non-locking biners has never occurred and will not occur. Since I do trust my life to this, if I am wrong, I would like someone to prove it. The proof to me is easily worth $40 plus cost.

By doing so, you seem to be taking a flamethrower to a strawman, since nobody has said such failure has occurred or will occur. A situation was identified in which everyday usage pushes certain wiregate biners outside of their normal working configuration, and the general consensus was that OK, it's probably a good idea to avoid using wiregates in that situation. Nobody's getting hysterical. Nobody's running around screaming that if you use them that way you're going to die. But, why tempt fate by using gear in a way it's explicitly not designed to be used?


Partner cracklover


Feb 2, 2012, 4:04 PM
Post #22 of 92 (10907 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 9935

Re: [dead_horse_flats] $40 bet - two non-locking biner anchor failure. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

dead_horse_flats wrote:
This is a $40 offer to anyone who can demonstrate a scenario of the failure of a top rope anchor using two non-locking opposed biners at the power point.

Disclaimers.
1. Opposed means opposed.
2. No manually holding the biners to force the rope thru them.
3. No wrapping the rope around the biners unless you can create a situation where this could happen un-intentionally.
4. Failure means the rope escaped from BOTH biners. Both means both.
5. No theories, microfractures, CE marks, or alien abductions.

Prove it and I will mail you $40.

I just did it. Am I the first? Do I win? What proof do I need to submit in order to claim my $40?

Unfortunately, I need a second pair of hands to get video of the scenario, but I could easily give you still shots and a description.

GO


dead_horse_flats


Feb 2, 2012, 7:28 PM
Post #23 of 92 (10846 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 14, 2006
Posts: 64

Re: [cracklover] $40 bet - two non-locking biner anchor failure. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

cracklover wrote:
dead_horse_flats wrote:
This is a $40 offer to anyone who can demonstrate a scenario of the failure of a top rope anchor using two non-locking opposed biners at the power point.

Disclaimers.
1. Opposed means opposed.
2. No manually holding the biners to force the rope thru them.
3. No wrapping the rope around the biners unless you can create a situation where this could happen un-intentionally.
4. Failure means the rope escaped from BOTH biners. Both means both.
5. No theories, microfractures, CE marks, or alien abductions.

Prove it and I will mail you $40.

I just did it. Am I the first? Do I win? What proof do I need to submit in order to claim my $40?

Unfortunately, I need a second pair of hands to get video of the scenario, but I could easily give you still shots and a description.

GO

I would be thrilled to see what ever evidence you can provide in photos or video. Can you post it here for others to see also?

This is fabulous if you actually did it. I thought for sure the whole deal was a no-go. However, let me remind you of the rules, especially 2 and 3, so you dont waste your time.


Partner cracklover


Feb 3, 2012, 8:35 AM
Post #24 of 92 (10784 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 9935

Re: [dead_horse_flats] $40 bet - two non-locking biner anchor failure. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

dead_horse_flats wrote:
cracklover wrote:
dead_horse_flats wrote:
This is a $40 offer to anyone who can demonstrate a scenario of the failure of a top rope anchor using two non-locking opposed biners at the power point.

Disclaimers.
1. Opposed means opposed.
2. No manually holding the biners to force the rope thru them.
3. No wrapping the rope around the biners unless you can create a situation where this could happen un-intentionally.
4. Failure means the rope escaped from BOTH biners. Both means both.
5. No theories, microfractures, CE marks, or alien abductions.

Prove it and I will mail you $40.

I just did it. Am I the first? Do I win? What proof do I need to submit in order to claim my $40?

Unfortunately, I need a second pair of hands to get video of the scenario, but I could easily give you still shots and a description.

GO

I would be thrilled to see what ever evidence you can provide in photos or video. Can you post it here for others to see also?

This is fabulous if you actually did it. I thought for sure the whole deal was a no-go. However, let me remind you of the rules, especially 2 and 3, so you dont waste your time.

Okay, but we got a foot of snow last night, and it's going to keep dumping all day today, so it will be some time before all this melts and I can take real photos outdoors. Would you prefer to wait, or shall I simulate it as well as I can indoors?

At some point, I will try to recruit someone to shoot video, because actually watching the rope wiggling out from the first biner is much different than just seeing still pics of the progress. The escape from the second biner is more straightforward.

Just the same, I'm confident that between text and photos, you should understand it well enough to be able to recreate it yourself.

Anyway, please spell out your terms - what do you need from me? Real situation outdoors, or simulated indoors? Photos and instructions enough, or do you need video? Because if you need real video from outdoors, it could be a long time. (As I said, I'll try to do the video at some point even if you accept still shots now. Maybe my wife will agree to help if I split the $40 with her).

GO


ablanchard17


Feb 3, 2012, 1:47 PM
Post #25 of 92 (10704 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 22, 2011
Posts: 41

Re: [dead_horse_flats] $40 bet - two non-locking biner anchor failure. [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Watch as someone with a pull rig applies 20+ kn and has the rope fail.

a failing rope would count as the rope escaping both biners by your testing parameters.

First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 Next page Last page  View All

Forums : Climbing Information : The Lab

 


Search for (options)

Log In:

Username:
Password: Remember me:

Go Register
Go Lost Password?
$8.96 (10% off)
$24.26 (10% off)
$141.75 (10% off)
$49.46 (10% off)



Follow us on Twiter Become a Fan on Facebook