|
sillywilly98
Dec 11, 2012, 12:01 AM
Post #1 of 20
(8479 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 10, 2012
Posts: 11
|
I am 165 lb with 9.8 mm rope with wirenuts sizes 4-13. How high can i climb obove them when lead climbing?
|
|
|
|
|
surfstar
Dec 11, 2012, 12:10 AM
Post #2 of 20
(8462 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 31, 2011
Posts: 206
|
sillywilly98 wrote: I am 165 lb with 9.8 mm rope with wirenuts sizes 4-13. How high can i climb obove them when lead climbing?
1.7 ft x the size of the wirenut
|
|
|
|
|
sillywilly98
Dec 11, 2012, 12:21 AM
Post #3 of 20
(8444 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 10, 2012
Posts: 11
|
does it matter what kind of rock? These things are quite freeking small
|
|
|
|
|
guangzhou
Dec 11, 2012, 3:09 AM
Post #4 of 20
(8293 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 27, 2004
Posts: 3389
|
sillywilly98 wrote: I am 165 lb with 9.8 mm rope with wirenuts sizes 4-13. How high can i climb obove them when lead climbing?
Really depend on your lead head. Chances are your head will give out on going higher before the nuts reach their breaking strength from the potential fall.
(This post was edited by guangzhou on Dec 11, 2012, 3:11 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
notapplicable
Dec 11, 2012, 3:35 AM
Post #5 of 20
(8271 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 31, 2006
Posts: 17771
|
sillywilly98 wrote: I am 165 lb with 9.8 mm rope with wirenuts sizes 4-13. How high can i climb obove them when lead climbing?
The length of fall is not the major concern here, the Fall Factor what you need to look at.
#4 & 5 have a 6KN breaking strength and can hold up to a 1.10 Fall Factor.
#6-13 are rated to 10KN and can hold up to a 1.87 Fall Factor.
Both of these would be fairly punishing falls and should be avoided for many reasons other than the possibility of breaking you wire nuts.
|
|
|
|
|
maldaly
Dec 11, 2012, 3:36 AM
Post #6 of 20
(8270 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 31, 2002
Posts: 1208
|
sillywillie98,
The simple answer is that it depends. The #13 might fail when subjected to a 3 foot fall and the #4 might hold a 50-footer.
The real answer is that there are so many facets to this question that I won't be able to come close to answering it. You need to learn a lot more about protecting trad climbs and all of the dynamic forces that are in play.
You'll be close to the answer when you realize the question in almost meaningless. Seriously.
Climb safe,
Mal
|
|
|
|
|
shimanilami
Dec 11, 2012, 5:01 AM
Post #7 of 20
(8227 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 24, 2006
Posts: 2043
|
maldaly wrote: You'll be close to the answer when you realize the question in almost meaningless.
Words to live by.
Henceforth, you shall be known as the Guru of RC.com.
|
|
|
|
|
Gmburns2000
Dec 11, 2012, 12:54 PM
Post #9 of 20
(8136 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 6, 2007
Posts: 15266
|
I can't believe people have responded.
|
|
|
|
|
olderic
Dec 11, 2012, 1:52 PM
Post #10 of 20
(8119 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 17, 2003
Posts: 1539
|
sbaclimber wrote: sillywilly98 wrote: I am 165 lb with 9.8 mm rope with wirenuts sizes 4-13. How high can i climb obove them when lead climbing? Easy... the length of your rope minus the distance between your belayer and the nut any higher than that, you are no longer lead climbing 
What if he unties the rope and solos? then how far above the nut can he climb?
|
|
|
|
|
sbaclimber
Dec 11, 2012, 2:08 PM
Post #11 of 20
(8107 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 22, 2004
Posts: 3118
|
olderic wrote: sbaclimber wrote: sillywilly98 wrote: I am 165 lb with 9.8 mm rope with wirenuts sizes 4-13. How high can i climb obove them when lead climbing? Easy... the length of your rope minus the distance between your belayer and the nut any higher than that, you are no longer lead climbing What if he unties the rope and solos?
|
|
|
|
|
olderic
Dec 11, 2012, 2:27 PM
Post #12 of 20
(8092 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 17, 2003
Posts: 1539
|
sbaclimber wrote: olderic wrote: sbaclimber wrote: Easy... the length of your rope minus the distance between your belayer and the nut any higher than that, you are no longer lead climbing What if he unties the rope and solos? As I already stated, he would no longer be "lead" climbing. ergo, moot...
Ok - how about if he stays tied in but they start simul climbing. Can get the same distances. Is that "leading"? How about simul soloing - there is a "leader" then. Edge cases for sure. The real question is why are we feeding the troll?
|
|
|
|
|
sbaclimber
Dec 11, 2012, 2:34 PM
Post #13 of 20
(8086 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 22, 2004
Posts: 3118
|
olderic wrote: sbaclimber wrote: olderic wrote: sbaclimber wrote: Easy... the length of your rope minus the distance between your belayer and the nut any higher than that, you are no longer lead climbing What if he unties the rope and solos? As I already stated, he would no longer be "lead" climbing. ergo, moot... Ok - how about if he stays tied in but they start simul climbing. Can get the same distances. Is that "leading"?
|
|
|
|
|
olderic
Dec 11, 2012, 2:42 PM
Post #14 of 20
(8072 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 17, 2003
Posts: 1539
|
sbaclimber wrote: olderic wrote: sbaclimber wrote: olderic wrote: sbaclimber wrote: Easy... the length of your rope minus the distance between your belayer and the nut any higher than that, you are no longer lead climbing What if he unties the rope and solos? As I already stated, he would no longer be "lead" climbing. ergo, moot... Ok - how about if he stays tied in but they start simul climbing. Can get the same distances. Is that "leading"? Yes, that is still leading, and the formula I gave for calculating the distance will still give the correct answer.
It's NOT supposed to be a serious question And the troll has us hook, line any sinker. But just for the sake of accuracy (why do I do this?) in the case of simul climbing the "minus" in your original statement becomes a "plus".
|
|
|
|
|
sbaclimber
Dec 11, 2012, 2:50 PM
Post #15 of 20
(8065 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 22, 2004
Posts: 3118
|
olderic wrote: sbaclimber wrote: olderic wrote: sbaclimber wrote: olderic wrote: sbaclimber wrote: Easy... the length of your rope minus the distance between your belayer and the nut any higher than that, you are no longer lead climbing What if he unties the rope and solos? As I already stated, he would no longer be "lead" climbing. ergo, moot... Ok - how about if he stays tied in but they start simul climbing. Can get the same distances. Is that "leading"? Yes, that is still leading, and the formula I gave for calculating the distance will still give the correct answer. And the troll has us hook, line any sinker. But just for the sake of accuracy (why do I do this?) in the case of simul climbing the "minus" in your original statement becomes a "plus".
PS, you seem to think I am being serious and feeding the troll. Trust me, my intent is neither!
|
|
|
|
|
rocknice2
Dec 11, 2012, 2:51 PM
Post #16 of 20
(8064 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 13, 2006
Posts: 1221
|
No I think it's still 'minus'. The 2nd still has to climb up to give rope and at that point they're closer to the nut.
or it that 3 nuts?
rats beaten to the punch.
(This post was edited by rocknice2 on Dec 11, 2012, 2:51 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
olderic
Dec 11, 2012, 2:57 PM
Post #17 of 20
(8053 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 17, 2003
Posts: 1539
|
rocknice2 wrote: No I think it's still 'minus'. The 2nd still has to climb up to give rope and at that point they're closer to the nut. or it that 3 nuts? rats beaten to the punch.
Well I was assuming that the simul 2nd just climbed past the nut and didn't remove it. Leading to the distance approaching infinity. But that is an unlikely scenario. More likely is that the 2nd does clean it and the leader's distance above stays ~ 1 rope length. +1 foot if the 2nd racks on his harness. -1 foot if the 2nd racks over his shoulder. But what if the 2nd drops it while cleaning?
|
|
|
|
|
TradEddie
Dec 11, 2012, 5:31 PM
Post #18 of 20
(7970 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 29, 2007
Posts: 164
|
As high as your other nuts will let you!
|
|
|
|
|
dr_feelgood
Dec 13, 2012, 2:43 AM
Post #19 of 20
(7742 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 6, 2004
Posts: 26060
|
It may have been mentioned before, but the proper question should have been "how high above my wire nut can I fall?"
|
|
|
|
|
surfstar
Dec 13, 2012, 6:06 PM
Post #20 of 20
(7638 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 31, 2011
Posts: 206
|
dr_feelgood wrote: It may have been mentioned before, but the proper question should have been "how high above my wire nut can I fall?"
As high as you can climb. Duh.
|
|
|
|
|
|
