This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Recently I was climbing on two 9 mm (or they may have been 8.5) ropes. As my route went straight up the crag i clipped both ropes into the gear, figuring that there was no problem with drag and it was better ro have 2 ropes to catch me than 1. My friend on the next route over persuaded me to clip only one rope at a time (alternating them from one placement to the next). According to her karabiners are not designed to take 2 ropes at once and it is more dangerous as it lowers the strain they can take.
On this ocassion I bowed to her superior knolwledge but have since been told she might have been wrong. I've been climbing for a few years and never heard this before. Anyone know which is safer?
On this ocassion I bowed to her superior knolwledge but have since been told she might have been wrong. I've been climbing for a few years and never heard this before. Anyone know which is safer?
In reply to Leeds Ben: iv been told that apart from the 1st clip in to only clip with a single rope, dont understand why i should clip with both at the bottom though
In reply to Leeds Ben: If in any way, you manage to break a krab, or a rope for that matter (both in reasonable nick) by just falling on it with double ropes or otherwise, I would be interested to hear about it. I really can't see what difference two ropes is going to make on a krab that was designed to take between 2 and 3 tonnes, especially as most "big" falls are less than 6m!
In reply to Leeds Ben:
Strictly speaking, two ropes in a modern light weight Krab is not ideal as only one of the ropes can sit correctly next to the spine of the krab. In practice, though, its a trade off of relative risks (one rope clipped versus two, different impact forces etc., speed of clipping.
What you shouldn't do is mix and match with some krabs double clipped and some not as this cause the ropes to stretch differently and to rub against each other.
Strictly speaking, two ropes in a modern light weight Krab is not ideal as only one of the ropes can sit correctly next to the spine of the krab. In practice, though, its a trade off of relative risks (one rope clipped versus two, different impact forces etc., speed of clipping.
What you shouldn't do is mix and match with some krabs double clipped and some not as this cause the ropes to stretch differently and to rub against each other.
In reply to Leeds Ben:
I was told this as well by some guy at wirksworth wall, he said it was because it placed the load away from the spine of the carabiner thus creating more leverage. he also said he worked for a carabiner importer.
I was told this as well by some guy at wirksworth wall, he said it was because it placed the load away from the spine of the carabiner thus creating more leverage. he also said he worked for a carabiner importer.
In reply to Leeds Ben: Others have offered their opinions about the risk of krab breaking. I would just amplify a point that GrahamD touched on: clipping both double ropes in to each piece of gear increases the impact force on the gear (and indeed, the climber) in the event of a fall. This is because two double ropes loaded together don't stretch so much (approximately 30% less than a single rope with the same load) and so the fall is arrested quicker, meaning that the impact force will be higher. I cannot say whether this would enough to break a krab in which the load is being applied in a less than optimal way, but it might make a difference as to whether or not the gear held.
In reply to Leeds Ben: aren't TWIN ropes meant to be clipped in together (as opposed to half ropes that is)? And with this in mind does it therefore make any difference whether you're using a pair of twin ropes OR half ropes (same thickness surely)...
In reply to Leeds Ben: It's funny just how few people realise the danger of using double ropes inapropriately i.e. - once 2 ropes have been put through one biner, they cannot be separated later in the pitch because if you were to fall primarily on one rope, massive friction is created between the 2 ropes inside the biner. A couple of friends of mine have seen badly burnt ropes from these kind of mistakes!
As far as putting two ropes through all quickdraws goes, this is standard practice on multipitch climbing in Europe, where 2 ropes are needed for abseiling or the occasional traverse pitch etc.
As far as putting two ropes through all quickdraws goes, this is standard practice on multipitch climbing in Europe, where 2 ropes are needed for abseiling or the occasional traverse pitch etc.
In reply to Leeds Ben: Do you have to have special krabs for a twin rope system?
Though I do tend to clip alternate ropes myself. As has been said the idea of ropes and Karabiners breaking is generally just that; a theoretical possibility, rather than an actual occurence.
Though I do tend to clip alternate ropes myself. As has been said the idea of ropes and Karabiners breaking is generally just that; a theoretical possibility, rather than an actual occurence.
In reply to daf:
Twin ropes have, in the past, been significantly thinner and more elastic than doubles.
Twin ropes have, in the past, been significantly thinner and more elastic than doubles.
In reply to iain abernethy:
don't know who told you this but it's wrong, see other replies for why. if you clip both ropes through the first clip you should clip them both through every clip
> iv been told that apart from the 1st clip in to only clip with a single rope
don't know who told you this but it's wrong, see other replies for why. if you clip both ropes through the first clip you should clip them both through every clip
In reply to GrahamD:
You've got me worried now. I've got a pair of 8.5mm Mammut Genesis - are they half or twin ropes, because I may have been using them inappropriately......
You've got me worried now. I've got a pair of 8.5mm Mammut Genesis - are they half or twin ropes, because I may have been using them inappropriately......
In reply to Max Gough:
Look at the labels on the end tapes, if they're still legible. If they say 1/2, they're halves!
Look at the labels on the end tapes, if they're still legible. If they say 1/2, they're halves!
In reply to Monkeymagic:
Presumably the opposite also applies, for the same reason - once they have been used separately (only one rope through a crab), they should not be clipped together later?
If so, whatever you do on the first crab should be repeated for the whole pitch.
Is this correct?
> 2 ropes have been put through one biner, they cannot be separated later in the pitch because if you were to fall primarily on one rope, massive friction is created between the 2 ropes inside the biner.
Presumably the opposite also applies, for the same reason - once they have been used separately (only one rope through a crab), they should not be clipped together later?
If so, whatever you do on the first crab should be repeated for the whole pitch.
Is this correct?
In reply to GrahamD:
yeah, but consider that at some point in the recent past (say mid 90s) most twin ropes were actually thicker than a lot of the double ropes available today, they weren't unsafe then, adn we're still using the same size crabs in general as we were 10 years ago.
yeah, but consider that at some point in the recent past (say mid 90s) most twin ropes were actually thicker than a lot of the double ropes available today, they weren't unsafe then, adn we're still using the same size crabs in general as we were 10 years ago.
In reply to:Presumably the opposite also applies, for the same reason - once they have been used separately (only one rope through a crab), they should not be clipped together later?
If so, whatever you do on the first crab should be repeated for the whole pitch.
Is this correct?
Yes, though putting both ropes through the last clip, i.e. you're scared off your chops and the last piece of gear was a long way behind and 2 ropes in your eventual piece of gear would make you fill your pants slightly less, shouldn't be a problem as they both move through the biner at the same rate, as long as no earlier biners were doubled up in.
Also, as far as an above response goes, worrying about the state of ropes given above treatment, the burns I mentioned were visibe big burn marks! Checking ropes regularly, as normal, applies.
If so, whatever you do on the first crab should be repeated for the whole pitch.
Is this correct?
Yes, though putting both ropes through the last clip, i.e. you're scared off your chops and the last piece of gear was a long way behind and 2 ropes in your eventual piece of gear would make you fill your pants slightly less, shouldn't be a problem as they both move through the biner at the same rate, as long as no earlier biners were doubled up in.
Also, as far as an above response goes, worrying about the state of ropes given above treatment, the burns I mentioned were visibe big burn marks! Checking ropes regularly, as normal, applies.
In reply to Anonymous:
I would try and steer clear of saying "safe" or "unsafe" in these complex trade offs.
Twin ropes are genearally used in a hostile environment but often in situations where high fall factors are less likely. In their general sphere of use, the added slight risk of breaking the back of a krab is well worth trading off for the extra shock absorbancy, redundancy and ability to perform long abseils afforded by this system.
It still doesn't get away from the fact that there is some (small) risk attributed to double clipping which is reduced by thinner ropes. OK, the weren't "unsafe" then, but they are less "unsafe" now.
I would try and steer clear of saying "safe" or "unsafe" in these complex trade offs.
Twin ropes are genearally used in a hostile environment but often in situations where high fall factors are less likely. In their general sphere of use, the added slight risk of breaking the back of a krab is well worth trading off for the extra shock absorbancy, redundancy and ability to perform long abseils afforded by this system.
It still doesn't get away from the fact that there is some (small) risk attributed to double clipping which is reduced by thinner ropes. OK, the weren't "unsafe" then, but they are less "unsafe" now.
In reply to Leeds Ben: I was taught that the combined width of 2 x 9mm ropes did put excessive strain on the krab so I don't do it and now the seed of doubt has been planted I can't go back. On a similar theme what does everyone think about the direction of the gates on krabs. There seems to be a trend to reverse gates on draws i.e. one gate facing left the other right, I assume because any load is taken by the spine. Personaly I don't like this as, on bolts at least, one krab gate is always ends up pressing against the rock. I see the danger of the gate opening being a far greater risk than a krab breaking.
In reply to Max Gough:
Mammut Genesis 8.5mm are half ropes. Half ropes can be used as twin ropes but not vice versa.
A lot of Americans in Joshua Tree were interested to see us using two half ropes over Xmas. It gave us a lot of chances to describe the advantages: on wandering lines (reducing rope drag), longer abseil escapes, safeguarding awkward clips, helping tricks like back roping and reducing the seriousness of rope locks. One group following us up a multipitch 5.5 were visibly amused until their single rope locked.
Mammut Genesis 8.5mm are half ropes. Half ropes can be used as twin ropes but not vice versa.
A lot of Americans in Joshua Tree were interested to see us using two half ropes over Xmas. It gave us a lot of chances to describe the advantages: on wandering lines (reducing rope drag), longer abseil escapes, safeguarding awkward clips, helping tricks like back roping and reducing the seriousness of rope locks. One group following us up a multipitch 5.5 were visibly amused until their single rope locked.
In reply to Anonymous:
Yes, but ropes aren't classified according to thickness; they're classified according to impact force (amongst other things). Twin ropes back then had the same amount of stretch as they do now, as do double ropes. Although as I understand it, there are a number of ropes available nowdays that qualify as both.
Mark
> yeah, but consider that at some point in the recent past (say mid 90s) most twin ropes were actually thicker than a lot of the double ropes available today...
Yes, but ropes aren't classified according to thickness; they're classified according to impact force (amongst other things). Twin ropes back then had the same amount of stretch as they do now, as do double ropes. Although as I understand it, there are a number of ropes available nowdays that qualify as both.
Mark
In reply to Leeds Ben: Both ropes are clipped into the 1st krab to guide the rope away from the belay device. After that, only 1 rope is usually clipped into each krab as it reduces drag. In a vertical climb, they may be alternated; but if a traverse is involved, or an overhang, it is usual to only clip 1 rope in until the route changes direction (left, right, in or out); henceforth, the second rope is used for a few krabs, then, if the route is vertical again, both may then be clipped into the same krab. Beware though, of, in the case of a long fall, if one rope has more distance to travel than another, friction between the ropes may occur as one stops and the other goes over it. This is only for a short time though, as one rope should hold you. Belay karabiners may have several lengths of rope tied into them. It is the loading that is important for fail factors, and the direction of stress, but krabs may take many ropes as long as the loading is not exceeded and the direction of stress is preferably longitudinally and not across the gate (lower breaking strain in that direction).
In reply to iain abernethy:
One reason to clip both ropes into the 1st clip is if you've made your first piece multidirectional. This can then stop all your gear being lifted out by your belayer standing in the wrong place when you fall off. If you're worried about the ropes rubbing against each other, just use two quickdraws on the gear. Though then you'd want to make sure the gates can't lever each other open. Locking biners maybe?
> (In reply to Leeds Ben) iv been told that apart from the 1st clip in to only clip with a single rope, dont understand why i should clip with both at the bottom though
One reason to clip both ropes into the 1st clip is if you've made your first piece multidirectional. This can then stop all your gear being lifted out by your belayer standing in the wrong place when you fall off. If you're worried about the ropes rubbing against each other, just use two quickdraws on the gear. Though then you'd want to make sure the gates can't lever each other open. Locking biners maybe?
In reply to Dave Stelmach:
>Both ropes are clipped into the 1st krab to guide the rope away from the belay device.
I've always found that the leader heaidng off up the next pitch guides the ropes away from the bely device very successfully!
Doubling the impact force of the rope (by clipping both through) at the first and most vulnerable runner (ie the one with least available stretch in the rope) seems to me to be at the worst counter-productive and at the best unnecessary.
>Both ropes are clipped into the 1st krab to guide the rope away from the belay device.
I've always found that the leader heaidng off up the next pitch guides the ropes away from the bely device very successfully!
Doubling the impact force of the rope (by clipping both through) at the first and most vulnerable runner (ie the one with least available stretch in the rope) seems to me to be at the worst counter-productive and at the best unnecessary.
In reply to nniff:
Might also be a problem if you misread the route and the way you start turns out to be different to the way you have to go, or more simply if the route wanders.
Might also be a problem if you misread the route and the way you start turns out to be different to the way you have to go, or more simply if the route wanders.
In reply to Monkeymagic:
>It's funny just how few people realise the danger of using double ropes inapropriately i.e. - once 2 ropes have been put through one biner, they cannot be separated later in the pitch because if you were to fall primarily on one rope, massive friction is created between the 2 ropes inside the biner. A couple of friends of mine have seen badly burnt ropes from these kind of mistakes!
Not sure I understand what you are saying. I am in the same school and understanding as Dave Stelmech. I have always been taught to clip both ropes in a half rope system into the first piece of protection to guide the rope and protect the belay then alternate clip them in multi pitch climbing and especially alpine climbing. In alpine climbing, after a long run-out section, clip both ropes of a half rope into a single piece too to lessen the fall if one rope cuts.
Also, it is the safest to never clip both ropes into a single krab even though everybody seems to do it whether a twin or half rope. Ropes rubbing each other can cause undo friction.
Even climbing with two identical ropes with both clipped into a single krab and a fall happens, the ropes do not absorb fall force the same and one rope will have more force applied to it, albeit this amount is nominal.
> > Is this correct?
>
>
> Yes, though putting both ropes through the last clip, i.e. you're scared off your chops and the last piece of gear was a long way behind and 2 ropes in your eventual piece of gear would make you fill your pants slightly less, shouldn't be a problem as they both move through the biner at the same rate, as long as no earlier biners were doubled up in.
> Also, as far as an above response goes, worrying about the state of ropes given above treatment, the burns I mentioned were visibe big burn marks! Checking ropes regularly, as normal, applies.
>
>
> Yes, though putting both ropes through the last clip, i.e. you're scared off your chops and the last piece of gear was a long way behind and 2 ropes in your eventual piece of gear would make you fill your pants slightly less, shouldn't be a problem as they both move through the biner at the same rate, as long as no earlier biners were doubled up in.
> Also, as far as an above response goes, worrying about the state of ropes given above treatment, the burns I mentioned were visibe big burn marks! Checking ropes regularly, as normal, applies.
>It's funny just how few people realise the danger of using double ropes inapropriately i.e. - once 2 ropes have been put through one biner, they cannot be separated later in the pitch because if you were to fall primarily on one rope, massive friction is created between the 2 ropes inside the biner. A couple of friends of mine have seen badly burnt ropes from these kind of mistakes!
>
>
>
Not sure I understand what you are saying. I am in the same school and understanding as Dave Stelmech. I have always been taught to clip both ropes in a half rope system into the first piece of protection to guide the rope and protect the belay then alternate clip them in multi pitch climbing and especially alpine climbing. In alpine climbing, after a long run-out section, clip both ropes of a half rope into a single piece too to lessen the fall if one rope cuts.
Also, it is the safest to never clip both ropes into a single krab even though everybody seems to do it whether a twin or half rope. Ropes rubbing each other can cause undo friction.
Even climbing with two identical ropes with both clipped into a single krab and a fall happens, the ropes do not absorb fall force the same and one rope will have more force applied to it, albeit this amount is nominal.
In reply to nniff:
It won't double the force. The increased impact force causes more stretch in the ropes, which goes some way towards compensating. It will, however, cause a significantly increased impact force. I agree that this is pointless and unnecessary, especially on your first runner.
Mark
> Doubling the impact force of the rope (by clipping both through) at the first and most vulnerable runner (ie the one with least available stretch in the rope) seems to me to be at the worst counter-productive and at the best unnecessary.
It won't double the force. The increased impact force causes more stretch in the ropes, which goes some way towards compensating. It will, however, cause a significantly increased impact force. I agree that this is pointless and unnecessary, especially on your first runner.
Mark
In reply to Leeds Ben: In danger of repeating myself in saying that what I said above was correct, putting both ropes through the first runner can be dangerous and as pointed out, in terms of impact force, counterproductive. This will seem surprising as so few people know this, including many guides I know - only for everyone to go, oh yeah, shit!
In reply to Old SchoolClimber:
But just think what will happen if you fall off with both ropes clipped to the first piece, then clipped alternately:
At first, both ropes will move down through the first peice, then, as the climber falls past the highest peice of gear, the rope clipped to that peice will start to move up through it, whilst the other rope continues in the opposite direction. Eventualy a huge load will come on the rope that is being loaded, whilst the other rope will still be moving the other way. It isn't hard to see how you could do serious damage to your ropes. Besides, why would 2 ropes protect the belay any better than 1 rope?
I agree with you that this risk coud be superceded by a high risk of one rope being cut; as always be flexible.
Mark
> Not sure I understand what you are saying. I am in the same school and understanding as Dave Stelmech. I have always been taught to clip both ropes in a half rope system into the first piece of protection to guide the rope and protect the belay then alternate clip them in multi pitch climbing and especially alpine climbing. In alpine climbing, after a long run-out section, clip both ropes of a half rope into a single piece too to lessen the fall if one rope cuts.
But just think what will happen if you fall off with both ropes clipped to the first piece, then clipped alternately:
At first, both ropes will move down through the first peice, then, as the climber falls past the highest peice of gear, the rope clipped to that peice will start to move up through it, whilst the other rope continues in the opposite direction. Eventualy a huge load will come on the rope that is being loaded, whilst the other rope will still be moving the other way. It isn't hard to see how you could do serious damage to your ropes. Besides, why would 2 ropes protect the belay any better than 1 rope?
I agree with you that this risk coud be superceded by a high risk of one rope being cut; as always be flexible.
Mark
In reply to Anonymous:
The only reason, as far as I can see, to attach both ropes to the first gear is if the first runner is multidirectional. In this case, it will prevent the pitch from unzipping. There is no reason why the ropes have to run throught the same krab to achieve this, though.
The only reason, as far as I can see, to attach both ropes to the first gear is if the first runner is multidirectional. In this case, it will prevent the pitch from unzipping. There is no reason why the ropes have to run throught the same krab to achieve this, though.
In reply to Leeds Ben: I'm kind of amazed that in 30 or so answers no one has given what I understand the prime reason for not clipping double ropes into one krab is. The danger is not in a normal fall - but in a fall where the krab gate comes open. This is said to happen much more often than people think (although presumably less so now wire gates are more and more common). Any krab gate closed will have no problem with the increased leverage of two ropes side by side, but the leverage on the nose with the gate open is potentially large. I remember speaking to, I think it was, Paul Williams who worked for DMM about this many years back and he said that even 7kn gate open strength might not be enough in larger falls which are 'gate open' with a single rope - that krab can fail. Two ropes side by side increase the chance of this significantly. I think it was Paul who told me that it was the realisation of this that meant that the twin ropes system has been totally ignored in the UK.
This both ropes through the first runner sounds to me bizarre. I've read all the magazines for over a decade, lots of different instructional books from different countries, climbed around the world and with dozens of different partners from total hardcore vetrans to complete beginners and I've never seen anyone do this.
These are the type of things like many climbing tips that you realise are very small chances - but even if you say there is a 1% chance of a krab failure if you clip two half ropes together, that's an unnecessary risk to me. In my climbing career I've must be heading towards 100 falls and I hardly do any sport climbing. Suddenly a 1% chance doesn't seem so small!
This both ropes through the first runner sounds to me bizarre. I've read all the magazines for over a decade, lots of different instructional books from different countries, climbed around the world and with dozens of different partners from total hardcore vetrans to complete beginners and I've never seen anyone do this.
These are the type of things like many climbing tips that you realise are very small chances - but even if you say there is a 1% chance of a krab failure if you clip two half ropes together, that's an unnecessary risk to me. In my climbing career I've must be heading towards 100 falls and I hardly do any sport climbing. Suddenly a 1% chance doesn't seem so small!
In reply to Leeds Ben: When using half ropes, keep your ropes separate and always clip them into separate krabs. If there is a need for a directional runner on both ropes, place two pieces of gear, or if there is only one possible good placement then clip a second draw into the gear. But there will be no need for a directional on the second rope because you can just leave this unclipped until the angle of the rope at the gear is not a problem. I've never done a route where I thought I needed to clip both ropes near the bottom. Clipping both ropes because you're scared is an understandable reaction but the same comments about placing two pieces or using a second draw apply, however, unless there is a real chance of cutting the rope over an edge, using one rope is fine, since ropes just don't break - it's gear that rips so you should be placing more than one piece if you're worried, not clipping two ropes.
I hope that is a helpful addition to this debate.
http://www.dizzy-heights.co.uk
I hope that is a helpful addition to this debate.
http://www.dizzy-heights.co.uk
In reply to Leeds Ben:
The leaflet that you get with new Mammut ropes currently states that with half ropes "you have the choice between twin rope technique, where both ropes run parallel through the protection, and half rope technique, where the left and right ropes run separately through different protection points".
I understand that to mean that Mammut don't think it matters either way.
The leaflet that you get with new Mammut ropes currently states that with half ropes "you have the choice between twin rope technique, where both ropes run parallel through the protection, and half rope technique, where the left and right ropes run separately through different protection points".
I understand that to mean that Mammut don't think it matters either way.
In reply to tobyfk:
Arrrgh..... not again! This same topic was the subject of a long and acrimonious before in October, might be worth looking at for anyone with a few hours to spare (or might not be).
http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=104183
I too came across this advice but on the Mammut site at:
http://www.mammut.ch/mammut/uploadedFiles/seilfibel_030617-E-PDF(2).pdf
What is true for Mammut ropes should also be true for stretchier ropes like Beals.... but I really don't want to get involved in another marathon so I'll say no more.
Arrrgh..... not again! This same topic was the subject of a long and acrimonious before in October, might be worth looking at for anyone with a few hours to spare (or might not be).
http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=104183
I too came across this advice but on the Mammut site at:
http://www.mammut.ch/mammut/uploadedFiles/seilfibel_030617-E-PDF(2).pdf
What is true for Mammut ropes should also be true for stretchier ropes like Beals.... but I really don't want to get involved in another marathon so I'll say no more.
In reply to TobyA:
That makes a lot of sense.
The first runner thing is different, in my view, from running the ropes through the first krab. There are often good reasons for wanting both ropes running through a solid anchor at the foot of a pitch but there is no reason why this can't be done with two (preferably different length) extenders on the one piece of gear.
That makes a lot of sense.
The first runner thing is different, in my view, from running the ropes through the first krab. There are often good reasons for wanting both ropes running through a solid anchor at the foot of a pitch but there is no reason why this can't be done with two (preferably different length) extenders on the one piece of gear.
In reply to GrahamD: Or just a screw gate I suppose? Personally I'm not sure what a "directional runner" really does. Can't say I've felt I've need one in my climbing career. Thats not to say that I don't understand protecting the anchor with a bomber first runner when you have a bit of a shoddy belay. I remember such an occasion on the Shelf Route: running out of rope and having to make a slightly dubious belay of two small nuts and bulldog being used like skyhook. Leading off again in a couple of metres I came to a good crack and got some good bits in and felt a lot happier with the ropes clipped trough them.
In reply to TobyA:
Last one I really needed was when I did a route at Swanage which traversed in then went up an overhanging chimney. Without the multidirectional bottom runner, you just knew everything would unzip if you took a lob. I remember taking ages arrangeing that one !
Last one I really needed was when I did a route at Swanage which traversed in then went up an overhanging chimney. Without the multidirectional bottom runner, you just knew everything would unzip if you took a lob. I remember taking ages arrangeing that one !
In reply to Bruce Hooker:
Yes that's the same leaflet. Frankly in these litiginous times I reckon any rope manufacturer would print warnings notices right onto the rope if the number of strands you put through a krab really made much difference.
> I too came across this advice but on the Mammut site at:
>http://www.mammut.ch/mammut/uploadedFiles/seilfibel_030617-E-PDF(2).pdf
Yes that's the same leaflet. Frankly in these litiginous times I reckon any rope manufacturer would print warnings notices right onto the rope if the number of strands you put through a krab really made much difference.
In reply to tobyfk:
Even in a twin rope system if one rope inadvertantly had more slack than another (say one got slightly stuck) differential movement friction burns would be likely. Having no significantly additional risks for a half rope used as a twin from a true twin system is very different from occasionally clipping both ropes through the same runner which is significantly more risky than clipping gear seperately. Hence, I think Mammuts advice is OK as either you allow this (unless the half rope properties are so different it prevents comparitive use) or you dont sell twin ropes. So climbers using Mammut half ropes should use them as twin ropes or as half ropes but not halfway between. Of course if you are running out of strength and need a fast clip on both ropes to a directional runner (to avoid drag, unzipping or tangles) all this theory goes out of the window.
Even in a twin rope system if one rope inadvertantly had more slack than another (say one got slightly stuck) differential movement friction burns would be likely. Having no significantly additional risks for a half rope used as a twin from a true twin system is very different from occasionally clipping both ropes through the same runner which is significantly more risky than clipping gear seperately. Hence, I think Mammuts advice is OK as either you allow this (unless the half rope properties are so different it prevents comparitive use) or you dont sell twin ropes. So climbers using Mammut half ropes should use them as twin ropes or as half ropes but not halfway between. Of course if you are running out of strength and need a fast clip on both ropes to a directional runner (to avoid drag, unzipping or tangles) all this theory goes out of the window.
In reply to Leeds Ben:
Hmmm, I think I feel more informed now - not sure! Basicaly, in future, if climbing something that goes in a straight line and using half ropes I will clip them altrernately. Then again, I'd probably just use a single rope if it went straight up! The time in question i think I must have borrowed someone elses gear.
But here's a related point that I've never understood.
It is considered ok to use two half ropes rather than a 10/11mm rope in order to reduce drag etc. When doing this is it considered safe/safer to only clip one rope at a time. However it is not considered ok to climb using one 8.5/9mm rope. Isn't this a paradox? Either it will hold or it won't. If it will then i should be ok with one rope, if not then using two won't help unless they're both clipped into the same gear all the way up in which case i'd be safer with a 10.5/11mm rope?
Now if they were clipped alternately with loads of runners you could argue that if one rope did break, the other would cach you once a lot of the force had been take out of your fall, but often when using half ropes the situation is that a route goes up, then traverses then goes up again. In this situation one rope would protect the first half of the climb and the other the next, effectively climbing at any one time on one half rope. Am I missing something?
Hmmm, I think I feel more informed now - not sure! Basicaly, in future, if climbing something that goes in a straight line and using half ropes I will clip them altrernately. Then again, I'd probably just use a single rope if it went straight up! The time in question i think I must have borrowed someone elses gear.
But here's a related point that I've never understood.
It is considered ok to use two half ropes rather than a 10/11mm rope in order to reduce drag etc. When doing this is it considered safe/safer to only clip one rope at a time. However it is not considered ok to climb using one 8.5/9mm rope. Isn't this a paradox? Either it will hold or it won't. If it will then i should be ok with one rope, if not then using two won't help unless they're both clipped into the same gear all the way up in which case i'd be safer with a 10.5/11mm rope?
Now if they were clipped alternately with loads of runners you could argue that if one rope did break, the other would cach you once a lot of the force had been take out of your fall, but often when using half ropes the situation is that a route goes up, then traverses then goes up again. In this situation one rope would protect the first half of the climb and the other the next, effectively climbing at any one time on one half rope. Am I missing something?
In reply to Leeds Ben:
Agai, its a balance of the different risks. Half ropes are rated to take a full fall, just not as many as a single rope. On trad routes, the extra safety afforded by double half ropes (two ropes, extra shock absorbancy) combined with the lower probability (usually) of multiple lobs on trad routes make it (genearally) a better system.
Not a paradox,just a different balance of risks for different situations.
Agai, its a balance of the different risks. Half ropes are rated to take a full fall, just not as many as a single rope. On trad routes, the extra safety afforded by double half ropes (two ropes, extra shock absorbancy) combined with the lower probability (usually) of multiple lobs on trad routes make it (genearally) a better system.
Not a paradox,just a different balance of risks for different situations.
In reply to Leeds Ben:
Generaly both ropes come tight, what with stretch and slippage, so the force is shared. People often climb on a single 9mm, but it's cutting the safety factor down and most would only do it on easy ground.
Generaly both ropes come tight, what with stretch and slippage, so the force is shared. People often climb on a single 9mm, but it's cutting the safety factor down and most would only do it on easy ground.
In reply to Bruce Hooker: Seconding on a single 9 is pretty safe though - and handy when in a group of 3. I wouldn't like to lead on one though.
In reply to GrahamD:
Not to disagree with you, but dropping into pedant mode...
If by "rated" you mean tested then the drop test for a half rope only uses a 55kg mass, rather than the 80kg mass used for a full rope. I can easily find you a half rope which is "rated" to take more falls than a single - eg Mammut Genesis 8.5mm 12 falls vs Mammut Galaxy 10mm 8 falls - but since they are different falls, it's not a valid comparison.
Conversely and contrariwise, it would certainly seem logical to draw the conclusion that given a half rope and a single rope "rated" at the same number of falls, the half rope wouldn't rate the same as the single if the test mass were 80kg in both cases.
If you think of a rope's capacity to take falls in terms of energy absorption, then a half rope tested with an 80kg mass should take about 70% of the falls it could take with a 55kg mass. That is in the basis that the energy of a fall is directly proportional to the falling mass, but it doesn't take into account things like the recovery times allowed between falls in the tests. Call it a first approximation.
If you now look at some real rope ratings, for the Genesis half rope that would work out at roughly eight falls - which is actually the same as the Galaxy single. To look at it another way, for a half rope to take as many 80kg falls as the Mammut Flash 10.5mm rated at 11 falls, the half rope would need to be rated at 16 55kg falls. In fact the Beal Verdon 9mm half rope is rated at 17 falls, so it's in the right area. As a final comparison, the Mammut Pheonix 8mm half rope rated at 8-9 falls could be expected to take about 5-6 80kg falls - which turns out to be exactly what the Mammut Revelation 9.2mm hybrid single/half rope is rated at.
Pedantry, number-crunching and catalogue figures aside, though, I agree with everything else you say: it's balance of risk vs utility/effectiveness. Like a lot of things in climbing, in fact.
> Half ropes are rated to take a full fall, just not as many as a single rope.
Not to disagree with you, but dropping into pedant mode...
If by "rated" you mean tested then the drop test for a half rope only uses a 55kg mass, rather than the 80kg mass used for a full rope. I can easily find you a half rope which is "rated" to take more falls than a single - eg Mammut Genesis 8.5mm 12 falls vs Mammut Galaxy 10mm 8 falls - but since they are different falls, it's not a valid comparison.
Conversely and contrariwise, it would certainly seem logical to draw the conclusion that given a half rope and a single rope "rated" at the same number of falls, the half rope wouldn't rate the same as the single if the test mass were 80kg in both cases.
If you think of a rope's capacity to take falls in terms of energy absorption, then a half rope tested with an 80kg mass should take about 70% of the falls it could take with a 55kg mass. That is in the basis that the energy of a fall is directly proportional to the falling mass, but it doesn't take into account things like the recovery times allowed between falls in the tests. Call it a first approximation.
If you now look at some real rope ratings, for the Genesis half rope that would work out at roughly eight falls - which is actually the same as the Galaxy single. To look at it another way, for a half rope to take as many 80kg falls as the Mammut Flash 10.5mm rated at 11 falls, the half rope would need to be rated at 16 55kg falls. In fact the Beal Verdon 9mm half rope is rated at 17 falls, so it's in the right area. As a final comparison, the Mammut Pheonix 8mm half rope rated at 8-9 falls could be expected to take about 5-6 80kg falls - which turns out to be exactly what the Mammut Revelation 9.2mm hybrid single/half rope is rated at.
Pedantry, number-crunching and catalogue figures aside, though, I agree with everything else you say: it's balance of risk vs utility/effectiveness. Like a lot of things in climbing, in fact.
In reply to PeteA:
Of course, totally safe seconding but generally someone has to get up there first!
Of course, totally safe seconding but generally someone has to get up there first!
In reply to Martin W:
Most half ropes can (from what I've heard, I've not tested it myself) take one, maybe two, falls on the full single rope test with the full single rope mass before they fail. They just can't make the 5 (I think) required for it to be passed as a single rope. Maybe thats what the poster you are replying to means?
AJM
Most half ropes can (from what I've heard, I've not tested it myself) take one, maybe two, falls on the full single rope test with the full single rope mass before they fail. They just can't make the 5 (I think) required for it to be passed as a single rope. Maybe thats what the poster you are replying to means?
AJM
In reply to Bruce Hooker:
Agreed, but I was talking about a situation where you are leading and if you fell only one rope would take the fall. E.G a oute which goes straight up for 30 ft, then traverses right, then up again. In this case I would clip one rope for the first 30 feet and the other for the rest, therefore lesding the first 30 ft on one rope only. Come to that, if the second part of the route was long ebnough, I'd be leading part of that on only the second rope.
> Generaly both ropes come tight, what with stretch and slippage, so the force is shared.
Agreed, but I was talking about a situation where you are leading and if you fell only one rope would take the fall. E.G a oute which goes straight up for 30 ft, then traverses right, then up again. In this case I would clip one rope for the first 30 feet and the other for the rest, therefore lesding the first 30 ft on one rope only. Come to that, if the second part of the route was long ebnough, I'd be leading part of that on only the second rope.
In reply to AJM:
So an 8.5 mm rope should hold a lead fall just as well as an 11mm one, it would just have to be retired after less falls. Is this right?
So an 8.5 mm rope should hold a lead fall just as well as an 11mm one, it would just have to be retired after less falls. Is this right?
In reply to Bruce Hooker: Yup - but I lead on 2 9's, just have a 2nd on each of them. And never tried this one yet, but if you have 3 ropes in a triangle then each person can swing the lead without untying.
In reply to Leeds Ben:
I don't know for sure, but that's what I've been led to believe. Most half ropes will not pass the sharp edge test (holding a fall, I don't know what factor, whilst running over a particular radius edge, or something similar, I'm sure the UIAA website will give you an exact answer), one of the advantages of having either a single rope or two halves, but as far as I am aware, it ought to hold maybe one big fall before being retired (assuming no edges are involved).
Unfortunately I can't remember who/what told me this, so I am unable to provide any backup to this statement, so check it out before relying on it.......
AJM
I don't know for sure, but that's what I've been led to believe. Most half ropes will not pass the sharp edge test (holding a fall, I don't know what factor, whilst running over a particular radius edge, or something similar, I'm sure the UIAA website will give you an exact answer), one of the advantages of having either a single rope or two halves, but as far as I am aware, it ought to hold maybe one big fall before being retired (assuming no edges are involved).
Unfortunately I can't remember who/what told me this, so I am unable to provide any backup to this statement, so check it out before relying on it.......
AJM
In reply to AJM: I know that the Stratos rope passes extensive edge tests in 9 & 11mm forms. They have additional braided cores, handy on sharp limestone I reckon
In reply to AJM:
According to the card that comes with them, Mammut Genesis 8.5 mm's
will take 1 sharp edge fall.
Neil.
According to the card that comes with them, Mammut Genesis 8.5 mm's
will take 1 sharp edge fall.
Neil.
In reply to Neil Curtis:
But how sharp is a sharp edge? It's all down to what level of risk you are prepared to take and the standards of safety of nylon climbing ropes for at least 30 years is pretty high. If anyone is really worried simply stick to standard practice: a thick single or slightly thinner double ropes - it's not really that complicated. And if you don't like the idea of clipping two ropes in the same crab, for whatever reason, simply don't do it!
It's not really possible to say what is safe or not as it's always a compromise - the only 100% safe way enjoy climbing is to watch it on a video.
But how sharp is a sharp edge? It's all down to what level of risk you are prepared to take and the standards of safety of nylon climbing ropes for at least 30 years is pretty high. If anyone is really worried simply stick to standard practice: a thick single or slightly thinner double ropes - it's not really that complicated. And if you don't like the idea of clipping two ropes in the same crab, for whatever reason, simply don't do it!
It's not really possible to say what is safe or not as it's always a compromise - the only 100% safe way enjoy climbing is to watch it on a video.
In reply to Bruce Hooker:
For half ropes the test is to drop a 55 kg weight for a fall factor of 1.77 over
a sharp metal edge with a radius of 0.75 mm (for single ropes it's 80 kg over
an edge of 5 mm radius) (this is from a Beal booklet). Seems to me that an
edge of 0.75 mm is pretty sharp... getting on for a slate edge (although not
a slate "dagger").
Assuming you don't electrocute yourself plugging the video in.
> (In reply to Neil Curtis)
>
> But how sharp is a sharp edge?
>
> But how sharp is a sharp edge?
For half ropes the test is to drop a 55 kg weight for a fall factor of 1.77 over
a sharp metal edge with a radius of 0.75 mm (for single ropes it's 80 kg over
an edge of 5 mm radius) (this is from a Beal booklet). Seems to me that an
edge of 0.75 mm is pretty sharp... getting on for a slate edge (although not
a slate "dagger").
> the only 100% safe way enjoy climbing is to watch it on a video.
Assuming you don't electrocute yourself plugging the video in.
In reply to Neil Curtis:
Is that 5mm, or should it be 0.5mm?
A 5mm radius edge is 10mm across, which isn't that much less than a carabiner bar, and is certainly more than the usual thickness of abseil tat (6mm?).
AJM
Is that 5mm, or should it be 0.5mm?
A 5mm radius edge is 10mm across, which isn't that much less than a carabiner bar, and is certainly more than the usual thickness of abseil tat (6mm?).
AJM
In reply to PeteA:
"I wouldn't like to lead on one though". Hasnt it dawned on you that half ropes are often used in situations where lead falls are going to be taken on one rope. There is no major saftey problem at all with leading on one half rope in good condition: like the twin rope clipped through the same crab problem, if this was as serious as some posters imply you wouldnt be able to buy one.
All this talk of breaking ropes is completely missing the point that most ropes are recommended to be retired for potentially loosing the capacity to absorb energy. How many ropes have you heard of breaking just through being loaded (no sharp edges, friction burns etc)?
"I wouldn't like to lead on one though". Hasnt it dawned on you that half ropes are often used in situations where lead falls are going to be taken on one rope. There is no major saftey problem at all with leading on one half rope in good condition: like the twin rope clipped through the same crab problem, if this was as serious as some posters imply you wouldnt be able to buy one.
All this talk of breaking ropes is completely missing the point that most ropes are recommended to be retired for potentially loosing the capacity to absorb energy. How many ropes have you heard of breaking just through being loaded (no sharp edges, friction burns etc)?
In reply to AJM:
Sorry, I misread it. The booklet states:
"The standard UIAA test involves a mass of 80 kg, with a fall factor of 1.77, held over a
metal edge of 5 mm radius to simulate a karabiner. The new test uses the same weight
of 80 kg (55 kg for one strand of double rope), and the same fall factor, but this time
over a sharp edge of just 0.75 mm radius."
So the standard test is 5 mm, the sharp edge test 0.75 mm.
(Both radii for both rope types).
So, as pointed out by others, a modern rope isn't going to snap first time it takes a
big fall. But that may not be true the second time...
Neil.
> Is that 5mm, or should it be 0.5mm?
>
> A 5mm radius edge is 10mm across, which isn't that much less than a carabiner bar
>
> A 5mm radius edge is 10mm across, which isn't that much less than a carabiner bar
Sorry, I misread it. The booklet states:
"The standard UIAA test involves a mass of 80 kg, with a fall factor of 1.77, held over a
metal edge of 5 mm radius to simulate a karabiner. The new test uses the same weight
of 80 kg (55 kg for one strand of double rope), and the same fall factor, but this time
over a sharp edge of just 0.75 mm radius."
So the standard test is 5 mm, the sharp edge test 0.75 mm.
(Both radii for both rope types).
So, as pointed out by others, a modern rope isn't going to snap first time it takes a
big fall. But that may not be true the second time...
Neil.
In reply to Leeds Ben:
One big advantage of twin ropes the fact that a thin rope will stretch more, and put less load on the placement - thus clipping alternately is a good idea
One big advantage of twin ropes the fact that a thin rope will stretch more, and put less load on the placement - thus clipping alternately is a good idea
In reply to Tom Phillips: Not had time to read all these postings,but suggest 2 krabs through the runner,if possible;one rope in each.
P M
P M
In reply to Leeds Ben:
I haven't had time (or inclination) to read all this, but what I have seen is over-complicating rubbish.
It's simple. Double ropes, alternate clips (or, as dictated by terrain, use one in several biners, then the other, etc). Twin ropes, clip both. Single rope, whatever diameter, speaks for itself. And 9mm ropes are very strong and can take numerous falls, either as one of a pair or as a single.
On most routes there is no need to clip double ropes into the first runner. If there is a need, use separate biners.
Nuff said!
I haven't had time (or inclination) to read all this, but what I have seen is over-complicating rubbish.
It's simple. Double ropes, alternate clips (or, as dictated by terrain, use one in several biners, then the other, etc). Twin ropes, clip both. Single rope, whatever diameter, speaks for itself. And 9mm ropes are very strong and can take numerous falls, either as one of a pair or as a single.
On most routes there is no need to clip double ropes into the first runner. If there is a need, use separate biners.
Nuff said!
In reply to Offwidth: <"I wouldn't like to lead on one though". Hasnt it dawned on you that half ropes are often used in situations where lead falls are going to be taken on one rope.>
Eeeer.. yes. Your point would be valid if I did sports routes where weight is a major factor. But as most of my leads tend to zig zag and run over areas of sharp edges, ledges and crap rock and perhaps are under threat of falling rocks, and as a lot of my climbing is on ice where there is the additional risk of cutting through a single rope with an axe placement then I stick by my statement. I suggest that you pay particular attention to the use of "I" as opposed to a presumed generalistic statement.
Eeeer.. yes. Your point would be valid if I did sports routes where weight is a major factor. But as most of my leads tend to zig zag and run over areas of sharp edges, ledges and crap rock and perhaps are under threat of falling rocks, and as a lot of my climbing is on ice where there is the additional risk of cutting through a single rope with an axe placement then I stick by my statement. I suggest that you pay particular attention to the use of "I" as opposed to a presumed generalistic statement.
In reply to PeteA: At least follow up offy - I'm bored here!!!
In reply to Everyone.
Is there anyone who is MIA or MIC who could answer this?
If people stated that they were qualified to answer such questions a lot of confusion would be saved.
Is there anyone who is MIA or MIC who could answer this?
If people stated that they were qualified to answer such questions a lot of confusion would be saved.
In reply to therealwill:
I am completely unqualified to answer your question so please ignore my posts above. I dont even have an SPA. I am a danger to the climbing community, as I will keep 'pretending to teach' people to lead, worst still mulitpitch in winter.
I am completely unqualified to answer your question so please ignore my posts above. I dont even have an SPA. I am a danger to the climbing community, as I will keep 'pretending to teach' people to lead, worst still mulitpitch in winter.
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...