Forums: Climbing Information: The Lab:
Sequelette?
RSS FeedRSS Feeds for The Lab

Premier Sponsor:

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


jensen


Sep 16, 2012, 11:16 PM
Post #1 of 47 (8665 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 4, 2005
Posts: 12

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

This is just an idea that I have. It is yet another variation to the Equalette. I've only set it up in my living room, clipping to random things in my home. I haven't tried it out in the field yet.

1. Tie an inline figure 8 near your double-fisherman's knot in your cordelette. The two loops in the inline-8 portion should be about 8 to 10 inches long. As a result of tying the inline-8, you will have a short single loop and a long single loop. The short single loop created (shown on the right side of the attached SAM_1284.jpg image) should be about 1 to 1.5 feet long. This part should probably be pre-tied and shouldn't get untied probably ever.
2. Clip the short single loop to your pro. Clip a biner through the two inline-8 loops and through 1 strand of the long single loop(see SAM_1286.jpg)
3. Push a loop from the long single loop through the the two loops of the inline-8 portion splitting your long single loop into two new loops (shown in SAM_1090.jpg). (Side note: If you wanted a 4-point anchor you could actually create three new loops if you push an additional loop out between the two inline-8 loops).
4. Clip in the two new loops (shown in SAM_1293.jpg) to your pro.
5. Pull down to make a V at the end of the two inline-8 loops(shown in SAM_1295.jpg) manually equalizing your two new loops as though the V was going to be your power point. This is done because you'll lose cord real estate once you tie the overhand knot described in step 7.
6. Unclip the two new loops so you can tie your overhand knot described below. (see SAM_1296.jpg)
7. Tie an overhand knot on top of the ends of the inline-8 loops (see SAM_1297.jpg). Reclip your loops to your biners. Tying the overhand knot is a little tricky because you have to tie it so the inline-8 loop ends are on the side of the overhand knot that is away from the center of the system (shown in these close-up images from different perspectives SAM_1298.JPG and SAM_1299.jpg).
8. If you are using this as a TR anchor, you can clip another opposed and reversed locker through the same 3 loops that the first biner was clipped through in step 2 (shown in SAM_1302.jpg).

As I see it, here are the pros and cons, of this system:

Pros:

* You can clip your biners to the same strands in the middle so they sit well against each other.
* You have a single power point.
* You have loops at each piece of pro. (I prefer this to making 2 arms of the system from a single loop)
* If the loops are too long you can use clove hitch them to tighten them up.
* You have two beefy knots, that is, an in-line 8 and a multi-stranded overhand.
* No loose single strands floating in space which is what the Triplette looks like it has and although, according to what I've read, that's fine, it still makes me uncomfortable.

Cons:

* If you tie the overhand knot incorrectly (that is, so the inline-8 loops ends are on the side of the overhand knot that is closer to the center of the system), I'm not sure what would happen.
* Eats up more of your cord
* It's harder to tie the overhand because it's beefier

Please let me know what you all think.

Thanks,

Kelly
Attachments: SAM_1284.JPG (84.2 KB)
  SAM_1286.JPG (78.0 KB)
  SAM_1290.JPG (86.8 KB)
  SAM_1293.JPG (83.8 KB)
  SAM_1295.JPG (77.6 KB)
  SAM_1296.JPG (80.4 KB)
  SAM_1297.JPG (85.5 KB)
  SAM_1298.JPG (88.5 KB)
  SAM_1299.JPG (91.4 KB)
  SAM_1302.JPG (87.4 KB)


JimTitt


Sep 16, 2012, 11:26 PM
Post #2 of 47 (8657 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 7, 2008
Posts: 972

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

jensen wrote:

Please let me know what you all think.

Thanks,

Kelly

Thatīs the worst, most complicated and pointless way of joining three pieces together Iīve ever seen.


jensen


Sep 17, 2012, 12:12 AM
Post #3 of 47 (8645 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 4, 2005
Posts: 12

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

Wow! Don't hold back or anything.

If anyone else feels the same or has any other comments , just let me know.

Kelly


climbingaggie03


Sep 17, 2012, 12:32 AM
Post #4 of 47 (8635 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 18, 2004
Posts: 1172

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

Why on earth wouldn't you just equalize them and tie a figure 8 like a normal cordalette? looks pretty pointless to me.


patto


Sep 17, 2012, 3:37 AM
Post #5 of 47 (8606 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2005
Posts: 1451

Re: [climbingaggie03] Sequelette? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Its like the Kama Sutra of anchor building.

Sure there is a perfectly normal and sensible way of getting the job done. But why stop at that when you can twist it around an have more fun! Crazy


JimTitt


Sep 17, 2012, 3:42 AM
Post #6 of 47 (8604 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 7, 2008
Posts: 972

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

Youīve been trawling the bondage sites again havenīt you?


kennoyce


Sep 17, 2012, 7:16 AM
Post #7 of 47 (8550 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 6, 2001
Posts: 1300

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

JimTitt wrote:
jensen wrote:

Please let me know what you all think.

Thanks,

Kelly

Thatīs the worst, most complicated and pointless way of joining three pieces together Iīve ever seen.

+100


edge


Sep 17, 2012, 9:04 AM
Post #8 of 47 (8507 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 14, 2003
Posts: 9091

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

Aside from the over complication and reinventing the wheel issues, you have nylon on nylon in a position to slide in the event of a shift in direction under tension. You may think that's not a problem, but have a friend hold a piece of monofilament fishing line, and see how easily it breaks by pinching a piece of tissue over it and giving it a stroke or two (insert tasteless and predictable joke here...)

Personally I rarely use a cordelette, and would guess 98% of my anchors are built by using the rope. There are many good threads on this site explaining just how fast and efficient that can be.


LostinMaine


Sep 17, 2012, 9:23 AM
Post #9 of 47 (8493 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 8, 2007
Posts: 539

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

That is one intense spider's web of an anchor.


potreroed


Sep 17, 2012, 10:28 AM
Post #10 of 47 (8471 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 30, 2001
Posts: 1448

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

Waaay toooo complicated and unnecessary. KISS.


shimanilami


Sep 17, 2012, 12:21 PM
Post #11 of 47 (8431 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 24, 2006
Posts: 2043

Re: [jensen] Sequelette? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (5 ratings)  
Can't Post

Notes to self -

1. Don't climb with Jensen.

2. Get high with Jensen ('cuz clearly he smokes some strong shit.)

3. After getting high with Jensen, don't climb with Jensen.


sittingduck


Sep 17, 2012, 1:49 PM
Post #12 of 47 (8394 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 19, 2003
Posts: 338

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



Think you might get the same functionality out of this less complicated rig.


jensen


Sep 17, 2012, 7:44 PM
Post #13 of 47 (8304 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 4, 2005
Posts: 12

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

In reply to:
Aside from the over complication and reinventing the wheel issues, you have nylon on nylon in a position to slide in the event of a shift in direction under tension.

Thanks for the constructive input!

I understand the issues with nylon on nylon. And I see now that eventually equalizing the long loop through the the two inline-8 loops will eventually wear those loops down especially if I leave them pre-tied.

But I'm not sure where you see stuff shifting under tension. From my living room experiments, both the inline-8 knot and the overhand knot (assuming you position it correctly) tighten like an overhand knot would in a standard cordelette setup. Can you clarify?

And I'm sure a rope setup is super fast but I like the idea of my anchor being a separate system from my rope so it's easier to handle a self-rescue situation should I ever encounter one.


jensen


Sep 17, 2012, 7:49 PM
Post #14 of 47 (8301 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 4, 2005
Posts: 12

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

In reply to:
Think you might get the same functionality out of this less complicated rig.

Ah, the Quad. I actually love the Quad. Unfortunately, it doesn't work for a 3-point anchor system...


edge


Sep 17, 2012, 8:04 PM
Post #15 of 47 (8297 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 14, 2003
Posts: 9091

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

jensen wrote:
In reply to:
Aside from the over complication and reinventing the wheel issues, you have nylon on nylon in a position to slide in the event of a shift in direction under tension.

Thanks for the constructive input!

I understand the issues with nylon on nylon. And I see now that eventually equalizing the long loop through the the two inline-8 loops will eventually wear those loops down especially if I leave them pre-tied.

But I'm not sure where you see stuff shifting under tension. From my living room experiments, both the inline-8 knot and the overhand knot (assuming you position it correctly) tighten like an overhand knot would in a standard cordelette setup. Can you clarify?



Let's label the legs on this pic A, B, and C, left to right. Any movement by the belayer side to side, even just readjusting your stance or yarding in rope, could cause the fixed loop from C to saw against A and B. A sudden sideways pull, say from a traverse just before the belay, would exacerbate this. Also, any failure of A or B would create extension which would shock load C.

Edit: OK, I see now this is only a midway step in your set-up, so no hot nylon on nylon scissor action. Still all that extra fiddling just makes it even more complicated, time consuming, and undesirable.

In reply to:
And I'm sure a rope setup is super fast but I like the idea of my anchor being a separate system from my rope so it's easier to handle a self-rescue situation should I ever encounter one.

There's an old saying that "if you bring bivy gear, you will bivy.". It's a generalization, but holds true all too often. If you go about your climbing anticipating a self-rescue, well, you get the point. There are tried and true time tested methods to escape a belay from a rope anchor, and you would do well to learn them. You will ultimately climb faster, lighter, and safer.


(This post was edited by edge on Sep 17, 2012, 8:25 PM)


edge


Sep 17, 2012, 8:09 PM
Post #16 of 47 (8292 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 14, 2003
Posts: 9091

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

jensen wrote:
In reply to:
Think you might get the same functionality out of this less complicated rig.

Ah, the Quad. I actually love the Quad. Unfortunately, it doesn't work for a 3-point anchor system...

It does if you know how to rig it as such. Still not my preferred anchor though, but it addresses many of the shortcomings of your set up.


marc801


Sep 17, 2012, 10:12 PM
Post #17 of 47 (8259 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 1, 2005
Posts: 2726

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

jensen wrote:
This is just an idea that I have. It is yet another variation to the Equalette. I've only set it up in my living room, clipping to random things in my home. I haven't tried it out in the field yet.

1. Tie an inline figure 8 near your double-fisherman's knot in your cordelette. The two loops in the inline-8 portion should be about 8 to 10 inches long. As a result of tying the inline-8, you will have a short single loop and a long single loop. The short single loop created (shown on the right side of the attached SAM_1284.jpg image) should be about 1 to 1.5 feet long. This part should probably be pre-tied and shouldn't get untied probably ever.
2. Clip the short single loop to your pro. Clip a biner through the two inline-8 loops and through 1 strand of the long single loop(see SAM_1286.jpg)
3. Push a loop from the long single loop through the the two loops of the inline-8 portion splitting your long single loop into two new loops (shown in SAM_1090.jpg). (Side note: If you wanted a 4-point anchor you could actually create three new loops if you push an additional loop out between the two inline-8 loops).
4. Clip in the two new loops (shown in SAM_1293.jpg) to your pro.
5. Pull down to make a V at the end of the two inline-8 loops(shown in SAM_1295.jpg) manually equalizing your two new loops as though the V was going to be your power point. This is done because you'll lose cord real estate once you tie the overhand knot described in step 7.
6. Unclip the two new loops so you can tie your overhand knot described below. (see SAM_1296.jpg)
7. Tie an overhand knot on top of the ends of the inline-8 loops (see SAM_1297.jpg). Reclip your loops to your biners. Tying the overhand knot is a little tricky because you have to tie it so the inline-8 loop ends are on the side of the overhand knot that is away from the center of the system (shown in these close-up images from different perspectives SAM_1298.JPG and SAM_1299.jpg).
8. If you are using this as a TR anchor, you can clip another opposed and reversed locker through the same 3 loops that the first biner was clipped through in step 2 (shown in SAM_1302.jpg).

As I see it, here are the pros and cons, of this system:

Pros:

* You can clip your biners to the same strands in the middle so they sit well against each other.
* You have a single power point.
* You have loops at each piece of pro. (I prefer this to making 2 arms of the system from a single loop)
* If the loops are too long you can use clove hitch them to tighten them up.
* You have two beefy knots, that is, an in-line 8 and a multi-stranded overhand.
* No loose single strands floating in space which is what the Triplette looks like it has and although, according to what I've read, that's fine, it still makes me uncomfortable.

Cons:

* If you tie the overhand knot incorrectly (that is, so the inline-8 loops ends are on the side of the overhand knot that is closer to the center of the system), I'm not sure what would happen.
* Eats up more of your cord
* It's harder to tie the overhand because it's beefier

Please let me know what you all think.

Thanks,

Kelly
Ill be a bit less restrained than the other posters and go straight for the ad hominem attack: holy fuck you're a moron. I think you could over complicate a wet dream.

Seriously, in climbing, the less complicated, the better.


chris


Sep 18, 2012, 7:30 AM
Post #18 of 47 (8199 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 4, 2003
Posts: 94

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

I'm with the overwhelming majority on this - your idea, while entertaining, is over-thought and over-kill.

Since the evidence shows that complete equalization is not possible to reach, I've made a priority to limit extension on all my pieces over perfecting equalization.

Keep it simple - it saves gear, it saves time, and it keeps you safer.


jensen


Sep 18, 2012, 11:12 PM
Post #19 of 47 (8113 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 4, 2005
Posts: 12

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

Ok. I'm starting to sense that people think my proposed anchor system is too complicated... :)

So, I definitely agree that it's more complicated than the usual lot for 3-point anchor systems (that is, rope anchor, standard cordelette, equalette, triplette, ...). Even though I currently still use the standard cordelette system, I'm not happy with it or any of the others for various reasons.

Assuming my proposed method is a viable solution, I do like it over the others. You can take a lot of the complexity out by pre-doing things and that would also make the anchor setup quick.

Since I went overboard in my initial explanation, I've re-written it the way I think a normal person would have explained it. See images below.

If anyone who currently is not satisfied with the 3-point anchoring solutions out there would care to comment, please do. Thanks.



Attachments: Pretied.JPG (70.9 KB)
  Equalize.JPG (70.2 KB)
  Finish.JPG (69.7 KB)


jensen


Sep 18, 2012, 11:23 PM
Post #20 of 47 (8110 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 4, 2005
Posts: 12

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

In reply to:
It does if you know how to rig it as such. Still not my preferred anchor though, but it addresses many of the shortcomings of your set up.

I assuming the rigging you're referring to results in an anchor system that doesn't have 3 independent arms. I like the idea of having 3 independent arms for trad gear anchors. If my assumption is wrong, please let me know. Thanks.


JimTitt


Sep 18, 2012, 11:55 PM
Post #21 of 47 (8106 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 7, 2008
Posts: 972

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

Your anchor has two independent arms, not three. One is to the right of the karabiners the other to the left. the left one is split again but isnīt independent if you are considering the karabiners as the focal point.
If you think dynamic equalisation will occur then you are loading the pieces unequally.
Since dynamic equalisation wonīt occur anyway you are better off just clipping the lot and tying an overhand, at least youīve removed the extension and got three redundant arms. And made it simple enough your climbing partner can check it and trust it.
Better still is to use a simple, faster, versatile system which doesnīt need retying when the pieces are all over the place and doesnīt clutter your harness, this is called the rope.


sittingduck


Sep 19, 2012, 12:12 AM
Post #22 of 47 (8101 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 19, 2003
Posts: 338

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

jensen wrote:
In reply to:
It does if you know how to rig it as such. Still not my preferred anchor though, but it addresses many of the shortcomings of your set up.

I assuming the rigging you're referring to results in an anchor system that doesn't have 3 independent arms. I like the idea of having 3 independent arms for trad gear anchors. If my assumption is wrong, please let me know. Thanks.

I think edge mean something like this:



billl7


Sep 19, 2012, 6:16 AM
Post #23 of 47 (8052 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 13, 2005
Posts: 1888

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

jensen wrote:
If anyone who currently is not satisfied with the 3-point anchoring solutions out there would care to comment, please do. Thanks.
The above includes me. And the suggested rig also falls into all those other ones that are not satisfying.

Still ...

"No, you can't always get what you want
No, you can't always get what you want
No, you can't always get what you want
But if you try sometime, you just might find
You get what you need"

Rolling Stones

Bomber individual pieces. No Extension. Some load sharing is a bonus but not usually paramount for me. Sufficiently strong and redundant rigging. KISS.

It's fun to discuss getting more than that but it's more than is needed.

Save a climber.

Bill L


(This post was edited by billl7 on Sep 19, 2012, 6:41 AM)


kobaz


Sep 19, 2012, 8:39 AM
Post #24 of 47 (8010 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 19, 2004
Posts: 717

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

jensen wrote:
This is just an idea that I have. It is yet another variation to the Equalette. I've only set it up in my living room, clipping to random things in my home. I haven't tried it out in the field yet.

+1 for working on being clever, but holy crap that looks like a pain to set up.

Definitely do some field testing.

Any attempt at improving the cordalette/equalette should focus on being simple and bringing to the table something that lacks in the aforementioned setups.


marc801


Sep 19, 2012, 6:12 PM
Post #25 of 47 (7946 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 1, 2005
Posts: 2726

Re: [jensen] Sequelette? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (4 ratings)  
Can't Post

jensen wrote:
Ok. I'm starting to sense that people think my proposed anchor system is too complicated... :)

So, I definitely agree that it's more complicated than the usual lot for 3-point anchor systems (that is, rope anchor, standard cordelette, equalette, triplette, ...). Even though I currently still use the standard cordelette system, I'm not happy with it or any of the others for various reasons.

Assuming my proposed method is a viable solution, I do like it over the others. You can take a lot of the complexity out by pre-doing things and that would also make the anchor setup quick.

Since I went overboard in my initial explanation, I've re-written it the way I think a normal person would have explained it. See images below.

If anyone who currently is not satisfied with the 3-point anchoring solutions out there would care to comment, please do. Thanks.
So what you're saying is that although numerous replies explain why your system is too complicated for actual use and doesn't do what you think it does, you persist in saying that you prefer it and think it's better. This is classic rc.noob aggressive ignorance.

First page Previous page 1 2 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?



Follow us on Twiter Become a Fan on Facebook