This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Been a damn fool and left my rope right next to a radiator which was on for several days.. I know ropes should be kept away from heat.
Reckon it will be unsafe to use?
Post edited at 19:55
In reply to Rassapotimus:
Run the rope carefully through your hands. Does it feel the same along the whole length ? Does it have any markedly stiffer sections ?
Is it a central heating radiator ? Can you hold the radiator when it is hot ?
I seem to remember reading something years ago about ropes being heated up during production. Does anyone know anything about that ?
Run the rope carefully through your hands. Does it feel the same along the whole length ? Does it have any markedly stiffer sections ?
Is it a central heating radiator ? Can you hold the radiator when it is hot ?
I seem to remember reading something years ago about ropes being heated up during production. Does anyone know anything about that ?
In reply to Andy Manthorpe:
Cheers Andy, it feels ok. Yeah central heating on a timer, can be held for a short time..
Cheers Andy, it feels ok. Yeah central heating on a timer, can be held for a short time..
In reply to Rassapotimus:
It will be ok I think.
Mammut (probably other manufacturers too) shrink the diameter of the rope by heating it up - just confirmed this with a net search.
"Mammut uses high quality Polyamide 6 (Nylon) for the production of its filaments, which run the whole 50 - 60m length of a typical rock climbing rope. In the first stage, between two and six filaments are spun together to make a strong yarn. Depending on the precise end use of the rope 4, 5 or 6 yarns are then combined in the next stage to produce a braid. Several braids are then combined to form the core of the rope. This part of the rope's structure gives it the majority of its strength.
The braiding process gives the braids a crucial spiralling twisted structure, which also increases the rope's elasticity, an incredibly important factor in protecting a falling climber. Without elasticity, the fall would end too abruptly, generating an intolerable shock loading that breaks the rope - or the falling climber.
Additional elasticity is gained in the next stage, which involves the braids being coated and thermally shrunk."
Hope that helps.
It will be ok I think.
Mammut (probably other manufacturers too) shrink the diameter of the rope by heating it up - just confirmed this with a net search.
"Mammut uses high quality Polyamide 6 (Nylon) for the production of its filaments, which run the whole 50 - 60m length of a typical rock climbing rope. In the first stage, between two and six filaments are spun together to make a strong yarn. Depending on the precise end use of the rope 4, 5 or 6 yarns are then combined in the next stage to produce a braid. Several braids are then combined to form the core of the rope. This part of the rope's structure gives it the majority of its strength.
The braiding process gives the braids a crucial spiralling twisted structure, which also increases the rope's elasticity, an incredibly important factor in protecting a falling climber. Without elasticity, the fall would end too abruptly, generating an intolerable shock loading that breaks the rope - or the falling climber.
Additional elasticity is gained in the next stage, which involves the braids being coated and thermally shrunk."
Hope that helps.
In reply to Rassapotimus:
I think it's OK but you'll have to decide. How hot was the radiator?
Would you use it if you had left it in the trunk of the car in hot sun?
For comparison:
BITD, Larry Penberthy at Mountain Safety Research sold "unprocessed" Nylon6 11mm climbing rope. I never bought it and am going strictly from memory, but I recall that you "processed" it for energy absorption by boiling it for a period of time. I guess it would shrink. I don't know what modern manufacturers do.
'course, MSR used to middle mark their ropes by spraying with red Krylon Laquer spray paint, too.
I think it's OK but you'll have to decide. How hot was the radiator?
Would you use it if you had left it in the trunk of the car in hot sun?
For comparison:
BITD, Larry Penberthy at Mountain Safety Research sold "unprocessed" Nylon6 11mm climbing rope. I never bought it and am going strictly from memory, but I recall that you "processed" it for energy absorption by boiling it for a period of time. I guess it would shrink. I don't know what modern manufacturers do.
'course, MSR used to middle mark their ropes by spraying with red Krylon Laquer spray paint, too.
Post edited at 20:11
In reply to wivanov:
God no. Death on a stick. I always take my rope & rack out of the car and bury it at the side of the road instead. (Sealed in nitrogen filled containers, obviously.)
In reply to thread:
Get a grip you lot, the rope hasn't been sitting in a bucket of acid, it wasn't gnawed by a crocodile, he just left it by a domestic radiator. The rope will be fine.
> Would you use it if you had left it in the trunk of the car in hot sun?
God no. Death on a stick. I always take my rope & rack out of the car and bury it at the side of the road instead. (Sealed in nitrogen filled containers, obviously.)
In reply to thread:
Get a grip you lot, the rope hasn't been sitting in a bucket of acid, it wasn't gnawed by a crocodile, he just left it by a domestic radiator. The rope will be fine.
In reply to deepsoup:
Agreed, deepsoup. The car trunk wouldn't bother me, so neither would the radiator - unless it was hot enough that I felt a change in the texture of the rope.
Now that I think about it, MSR "unprocessed" rope was processed in hot but not boiling water. IIRC, boiling water was said to stiffen the rope. They also gave instructions for dying the rope with Rit dye. That process involves soaking in pretty hot water.
@Lusk:
The link you posted from Beal also says don't pressure wash your rope because it will drive sharp particles into the core. They're the manufacturer but this link seems to contradict what they say:
http://caveworthy.blogspot.com/2009/05/pressure-washing-rope.html
Agreed, deepsoup. The car trunk wouldn't bother me, so neither would the radiator - unless it was hot enough that I felt a change in the texture of the rope.
Now that I think about it, MSR "unprocessed" rope was processed in hot but not boiling water. IIRC, boiling water was said to stiffen the rope. They also gave instructions for dying the rope with Rit dye. That process involves soaking in pretty hot water.
@Lusk:
The link you posted from Beal also says don't pressure wash your rope because it will drive sharp particles into the core. They're the manufacturer but this link seems to contradict what they say:
http://caveworthy.blogspot.com/2009/05/pressure-washing-rope.html
Post edited at 12:26
In reply to Rassapotimus:
Personally seeing as it is against (many) manufacturers recommendations I would ask the manufacturer of your rope but ideally you'll need to estimate the heat of the radiator.
That said I have some data from beal that states that polymide (ropes) and aramide (some slings etc) can be left in certain liquids at 100 degrees C for fairly long periods (10 hrs polymide 100 hrs aramide) with no reduction in strength so I think you'll be OK. The polymide data doesn't suggest longer periods will harm the rope I just don't have data for that.
I think some stiching used in climbing gear is made of a material more akin to polyester which may be less heat tollerent. Grivel certainly state on their website that climbing gear should not be left in a hot car, my car has never got anything like as hot as a radiator.
Personally seeing as it is against (many) manufacturers recommendations I would ask the manufacturer of your rope but ideally you'll need to estimate the heat of the radiator.
That said I have some data from beal that states that polymide (ropes) and aramide (some slings etc) can be left in certain liquids at 100 degrees C for fairly long periods (10 hrs polymide 100 hrs aramide) with no reduction in strength so I think you'll be OK. The polymide data doesn't suggest longer periods will harm the rope I just don't have data for that.
I think some stiching used in climbing gear is made of a material more akin to polyester which may be less heat tollerent. Grivel certainly state on their website that climbing gear should not be left in a hot car, my car has never got anything like as hot as a radiator.
Post edited at 12:41
In reply to wivanov:
I often think cavers must have a good laugh at some of the ridiculously risk-averse advice offered in "how to wash your rope" threads on here.
I often think cavers must have a good laugh at some of the ridiculously risk-averse advice offered in "how to wash your rope" threads on here.
In reply to deepsoup:
Cavers have a massive safety margin on their ropes though right, I think most climbers treat there ab lines in a similar way cavers treat there ropes. Climbers in the normal worst use case (factor 2 on to a single dynamic rope) take that safety margin much closer to the breaking point of the rope.
Cavers have a massive safety margin on their ropes though right, I think most climbers treat there ab lines in a similar way cavers treat there ropes. Climbers in the normal worst use case (factor 2 on to a single dynamic rope) take that safety margin much closer to the breaking point of the rope.
In reply to CurlyStevo:
I think we all do, which is why ropes don't break unless they're already damaged (NOT by being inadvertently left by a radiator) or they're loaded over a sharp edge.
Doesn't seem to be the case, based on what I've read on here over the years; people posting here seem every bit as risk-averse regarding abseil/rigging ropes as they are about lead ropes. I think climbers just wash their ropes (and other textile gear) very infrequently and so tend to be excessively nervous about it.
There's also, I suspect, a touch of SPA-itis at work where the instructions people have read, or received from some authoritative source are absolutely correct and the only way, and therefore any tiny deviation from the one true way means instant death. (Just as surely as using a Grigri to belay on a trad route does.)
> Cavers have a massive safety margin on their ropes though right
I think we all do, which is why ropes don't break unless they're already damaged (NOT by being inadvertently left by a radiator) or they're loaded over a sharp edge.
> I think most climbers treat there ab lines in a similar way cavers treat there ropes.
Doesn't seem to be the case, based on what I've read on here over the years; people posting here seem every bit as risk-averse regarding abseil/rigging ropes as they are about lead ropes. I think climbers just wash their ropes (and other textile gear) very infrequently and so tend to be excessively nervous about it.
There's also, I suspect, a touch of SPA-itis at work where the instructions people have read, or received from some authoritative source are absolutely correct and the only way, and therefore any tiny deviation from the one true way means instant death. (Just as surely as using a Grigri to belay on a trad route does.)
Post edited at 13:42
In reply to deepsoup:
Absolutely. Isn't that the truth.
> There's also, I suspect, a touch of SPA-itis at work where the instructions people have read, or received from some authoritative source are absolutely correct and the only way, and therefore any tiny deviation from the one true way means instant death. (Just as surely as using a Grigri to belay on a trad route does.)
Absolutely. Isn't that the truth.
In reply to deepsoup:
Certainly most people I know that use abseil lines regularly at swanage are far less inclined to rinse them etc mostly based on the fact the rope is rated to something like 30 kn yet will only ever likely need to hold about 2kn! Lead lines will need to hold forces far in excess of that.
Whilst I take your point about sharp edges and acid plenty of other factors can weaken a rope, and in turn these may make cutting by a sharp edge more likely (middle markers for example can cause this). I beleive its wise to respect your gear and treat it as well as you can, but accept that in practice stuff is going to happen to your gear which isn't ideal but probably isn't the end of the world either.
Certainly most people I know that use abseil lines regularly at swanage are far less inclined to rinse them etc mostly based on the fact the rope is rated to something like 30 kn yet will only ever likely need to hold about 2kn! Lead lines will need to hold forces far in excess of that.
Whilst I take your point about sharp edges and acid plenty of other factors can weaken a rope, and in turn these may make cutting by a sharp edge more likely (middle markers for example can cause this). I beleive its wise to respect your gear and treat it as well as you can, but accept that in practice stuff is going to happen to your gear which isn't ideal but probably isn't the end of the world either.
Post edited at 14:20
In reply to CurlyStevo:
Really? Ten quid to MR if you can find a single, solitary, real life situation of this EVER happening.
> Whilst I take your point about sharp edges and acid plenty of other factors can weaken a rope, and in turn these may make cutting by a sharp edge more likely (middle markers for example can cause this).
Really? Ten quid to MR if you can find a single, solitary, real life situation of this EVER happening.
Post edited at 15:49
In reply to Oceanrower:
I didn't say it had ever happened outside tests, that doesn't mean it won't.
Various tests by respected bodies like UIAA have shown that rope marker pens used on other manufacturers ropes can weaken them by up to 50%. I've also read elsewhere that the portion of the rope which has been marked using rope marker pens is often notably weaker if the rope is loaded accross that.
For ropes that have failed by being cut / abraided by rock in real scenarios - I doubt its possible to tell for sure if having a brand new rope of the same type would also have failed but IMO it's highly likely that in some cases it wouldn't have. Ageing of the rope through mechanical, chemical and temperate means will all likely have had a part to play in some of these accidents even if they weren't the primary method of rope failure.
If I know a given checmical will weaken my rope by a significant amount thats a good reason to keep it away from my rope as far as I'm concerned. However when I found out my beal ropes may have been weakened by the tendon marker I used on them, did I replace them.... Ofcourse not!
Respect your climbing kit, it may save your life, but there is not need to handle it with kid gloves..
I didn't say it had ever happened outside tests, that doesn't mean it won't.
Various tests by respected bodies like UIAA have shown that rope marker pens used on other manufacturers ropes can weaken them by up to 50%. I've also read elsewhere that the portion of the rope which has been marked using rope marker pens is often notably weaker if the rope is loaded accross that.
For ropes that have failed by being cut / abraided by rock in real scenarios - I doubt its possible to tell for sure if having a brand new rope of the same type would also have failed but IMO it's highly likely that in some cases it wouldn't have. Ageing of the rope through mechanical, chemical and temperate means will all likely have had a part to play in some of these accidents even if they weren't the primary method of rope failure.
If I know a given checmical will weaken my rope by a significant amount thats a good reason to keep it away from my rope as far as I'm concerned. However when I found out my beal ropes may have been weakened by the tendon marker I used on them, did I replace them.... Ofcourse not!
Respect your climbing kit, it may save your life, but there is not need to handle it with kid gloves..
Post edited at 16:43
In reply to CurlyStevo:
How do you know this? The evidence that I can find says that markers don't weaken the rope; in fact, they don't even penetrate the rope deeper than the sheath and marked areas are stronger than rope weakened by being tied into a figure of 8:
http://www.geir.com/mythbuster.html
http://blackdiamondequipment.com/en/qc-lab-can-i-use-a-sharpie-to-mark-the-...
> Whilst I take your point about sharp edges and acid plenty of other factors can weaken a rope, and in turn these may make cutting by a sharp edge more likely (middle markers for example can cause this).
How do you know this? The evidence that I can find says that markers don't weaken the rope; in fact, they don't even penetrate the rope deeper than the sheath and marked areas are stronger than rope weakened by being tied into a figure of 8:
http://www.geir.com/mythbuster.html
http://blackdiamondequipment.com/en/qc-lab-can-i-use-a-sharpie-to-mark-the-...
In reply to CurlyStevo:
If this were the case, would we not have a number of ropes (at least a few) that had broken or nearly broken at the middle marker? There is no shortage of practical tests, but a marked lack of instances of middle-mark breakages.
You would notice wouldn't you, not least of all because some eejit would come on here asking if that marker on the rope was where it was supposed to break, because his mate had sent him a text from hospital asking.
If this were the case, would we not have a number of ropes (at least a few) that had broken or nearly broken at the middle marker? There is no shortage of practical tests, but a marked lack of instances of middle-mark breakages.
You would notice wouldn't you, not least of all because some eejit would come on here asking if that marker on the rope was where it was supposed to break, because his mate had sent him a text from hospital asking.
In reply to tlm:
because I could be bothered to use google and this has come up many times before on ukc. I did actually cite the UIAA in one of my posts.
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=UIAA+ROPE+MARKER
more info here too http://www.alpineclubofcanada.ca/services/safety/forms/Marking%20of%20Ropes...
> How do you know this?
because I could be bothered to use google and this has come up many times before on ukc. I did actually cite the UIAA in one of my posts.
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=UIAA+ROPE+MARKER
more info here too http://www.alpineclubofcanada.ca/services/safety/forms/Marking%20of%20Ropes...
Post edited at 18:39
In reply to nniff:
So we now know using a rope marker of another manufacturers rope can weaken it by 50%, would you knowingly do this? I certainly would not. However like I said I had already done it to some of my ropes and I carried on using them to the end of their natural life span. So it didn't bother me that much but it's not something I'd do again. Leaving your rope against the radiator falls in to that category for me. Manufacturers do not recommend it so I try and avoid it but if it happened I probably wouldn't worry about it!
So we now know using a rope marker of another manufacturers rope can weaken it by 50%, would you knowingly do this? I certainly would not. However like I said I had already done it to some of my ropes and I carried on using them to the end of their natural life span. So it didn't bother me that much but it's not something I'd do again. Leaving your rope against the radiator falls in to that category for me. Manufacturers do not recommend it so I try and avoid it but if it happened I probably wouldn't worry about it!
In reply to CurlyStevo:
It doesn't weaken the rope by 50%, it reduces the number of falls the rope can take in tests by up to 50% and that is not the same thing. A 50% weaker rope would probably fail 100% of the tests.
It doesn't weaken the rope by 50%, it reduces the number of falls the rope can take in tests by up to 50% and that is not the same thing. A 50% weaker rope would probably fail 100% of the tests.
In reply to Offwidth:
Well the correct terminology is actually a decrease of up to 50% of the energy absorption capacity of the rope. However the UIAA article does use the terminology a decrease in strength which is the definition of weaken. I think you are splitting hairs.
Anyway without defining which aspect of the rope is weakened I don't think the terminology is wrong as such. Certainly in some cases the energy absorption capacity of the rope was found to be weakened. I guess you read it as the max force the rope can take without breaking is weakened.
Well the correct terminology is actually a decrease of up to 50% of the energy absorption capacity of the rope. However the UIAA article does use the terminology a decrease in strength which is the definition of weaken. I think you are splitting hairs.
Anyway without defining which aspect of the rope is weakened I don't think the terminology is wrong as such. Certainly in some cases the energy absorption capacity of the rope was found to be weakened. I guess you read it as the max force the rope can take without breaking is weakened.
Post edited at 19:23
In reply to CurlyStevo:
As well as this not actually being correct, we also know that using a marker weakens the rope less than tying a figure of 8 in it. Do you use figure of 8 knots?
> So we now know using a rope marker of another manufacturers rope can weaken it by 50%, would you knowingly do this?
As well as this not actually being correct, we also know that using a marker weakens the rope less than tying a figure of 8 in it. Do you use figure of 8 knots?
In reply to tlm:
Firstly as I have already pointed out my terminology was not incorrect. Not only was it inline with the UIAA article (decrease in strength == weaken in most dictionaries), but without specifying which aspect of the rope was weakened you can not assume I was implying the tensile strength which is a specific property of the rope as is the energy absorption capacity.
Secondly you are now confusing the tensile strength tests that BD did with the UIAA max fall tests I linked to.
In factor 1.7 UIAA falls (as used in the UIAA rope tests) rope markers were found to weaken the rope by up to 50% by decreasing the energy absorption capacity of the rope. This would not have failed at a figure of eight knot in these tests (the standard method of attaching the rope to the dead weight for the UIAA test is using a knot youtube.com/watch?v=_J_Eu6IO6DE& ) and as we well know figure of eight knots in climbing ropes are well able to handle factor 2 falls in real life scenarios without breaking ropes).
The test black diamond did was on the tensile strength of the rope that is a different factor and we already know that rope markers don't have a marked effect on that, so it would have been expected that the rope would break at the knot.
Firstly as I have already pointed out my terminology was not incorrect. Not only was it inline with the UIAA article (decrease in strength == weaken in most dictionaries), but without specifying which aspect of the rope was weakened you can not assume I was implying the tensile strength which is a specific property of the rope as is the energy absorption capacity.
Secondly you are now confusing the tensile strength tests that BD did with the UIAA max fall tests I linked to.
In factor 1.7 UIAA falls (as used in the UIAA rope tests) rope markers were found to weaken the rope by up to 50% by decreasing the energy absorption capacity of the rope. This would not have failed at a figure of eight knot in these tests (the standard method of attaching the rope to the dead weight for the UIAA test is using a knot youtube.com/watch?v=_J_Eu6IO6DE& ) and as we well know figure of eight knots in climbing ropes are well able to handle factor 2 falls in real life scenarios without breaking ropes).
The test black diamond did was on the tensile strength of the rope that is a different factor and we already know that rope markers don't have a marked effect on that, so it would have been expected that the rope would break at the knot.
Post edited at 08:40
In reply to CurlyStevo:
It fails to meet test conditions sooner with a fewer number of test drops (that are all at close to the performance limits of the rope) and which varies and at the very worst is measured as 50% of the normal number of drops to failure. This is not splitting hairs because if the rope was 50% weaker it would snap on the first test drop. This is another form of abuse that some ropes face yet we still don't have examples of marked ropes snapping unless cut by an edge. You are right to highlight it can be bad practice depending on what you use to do the marking.
It fails to meet test conditions sooner with a fewer number of test drops (that are all at close to the performance limits of the rope) and which varies and at the very worst is measured as 50% of the normal number of drops to failure. This is not splitting hairs because if the rope was 50% weaker it would snap on the first test drop. This is another form of abuse that some ropes face yet we still don't have examples of marked ropes snapping unless cut by an edge. You are right to highlight it can be bad practice depending on what you use to do the marking.
Post edited at 10:55
In reply to Offwidth:
I didn't define which property of the rope had been weakened - you incorrectly assumed I meant the tensile strength.
I quote from the UIAA article
"The test results have shown a decrease of up to 50% of the rope strength"
If the rope strength has decreased by 50% then the rope has weakened.
": to make weak : lessen the strength of "
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/weaken
I agree if you want to be more specific then referring to the number of UIAA falls or the energy absorption capacity is a better description.
I didn't define which property of the rope had been weakened - you incorrectly assumed I meant the tensile strength.
I quote from the UIAA article
"The test results have shown a decrease of up to 50% of the rope strength"
If the rope strength has decreased by 50% then the rope has weakened.
": to make weak : lessen the strength of "
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/weaken
I agree if you want to be more specific then referring to the number of UIAA falls or the energy absorption capacity is a better description.
In reply to Offwidth:
In fact you could say that if the rope was really 50% weaker as a result of marking it with a pen, that marking the middle with a nick using a very sharp knife could almost be safer!
In fact you could say that if the rope was really 50% weaker as a result of marking it with a pen, that marking the middle with a nick using a very sharp knife could almost be safer!
In reply to jon:
how do you measure (generic) strength of a rope? There are many ways to skin a cat.
I think my use of the word 'weaken' is in line with the UIAA articles use of the word 'strength' so I'm not going to further argue semantics.
how do you measure (generic) strength of a rope? There are many ways to skin a cat.
I think my use of the word 'weaken' is in line with the UIAA articles use of the word 'strength' so I'm not going to further argue semantics.
In reply to CurlyStevo:
It was a light hearted comment Stevo. I'm sorry if you thought I was arguing with you.
It was a light hearted comment Stevo. I'm sorry if you thought I was arguing with you.
In reply to jon:
Im not, as it appears we steves both enjoy arguing I do know exactly what he means though, problem is others reading might not, so I think its best to be clear rather than say strong or weak: most people think 50% weaker is synonymous with a rope having its thickness halved. On that knife point, the fairly recent BMC sling test demos showed a new sling cut half through was stronger than a new sling rubbed heavily across its full surface: this surprised me!
Im not, as it appears we steves both enjoy arguing I do know exactly what he means though, problem is others reading might not, so I think its best to be clear rather than say strong or weak: most people think 50% weaker is synonymous with a rope having its thickness halved. On that knife point, the fairly recent BMC sling test demos showed a new sling cut half through was stronger than a new sling rubbed heavily across its full surface: this surprised me!
Post edited at 14:22
In reply to Rassapotimus:
Most water heating systems use a boiler thermostat temperature in the range of 60 to 80 deg C.
By the time the water gets to the radiators, it has lost a little heat so perhaps somewhere between 55 and 78 deg C. A tiny heat gradient exists in the steel of the radiator and the radiator will be hotter at the top.
If fitted with a thermostatic radiator valve, the air around the lower part of the radiator will never be hotter than 30 deg C. The air directly above the radiator will be significantly hotter but no more than a crag in the Balearics in summer.
Nylon 6 melts at 250 deg C and is often described as having a working temperature of about -50 to +100 or +110.
This UIAA document mentions testing ropes at 70 to 80 deg C being equivalent to testing a wet ropes.
http://theuiaa.org/upload_area/files/1/Conference_on_nylon_and_ropes.pdf
You describe "right next to a radiator which was on for several days". Not touching? Not on top of?
Most water heating systems use a boiler thermostat temperature in the range of 60 to 80 deg C.
By the time the water gets to the radiators, it has lost a little heat so perhaps somewhere between 55 and 78 deg C. A tiny heat gradient exists in the steel of the radiator and the radiator will be hotter at the top.
If fitted with a thermostatic radiator valve, the air around the lower part of the radiator will never be hotter than 30 deg C. The air directly above the radiator will be significantly hotter but no more than a crag in the Balearics in summer.
Nylon 6 melts at 250 deg C and is often described as having a working temperature of about -50 to +100 or +110.
This UIAA document mentions testing ropes at 70 to 80 deg C being equivalent to testing a wet ropes.
http://theuiaa.org/upload_area/files/1/Conference_on_nylon_and_ropes.pdf
You describe "right next to a radiator which was on for several days". Not touching? Not on top of?
In reply to Offwidth:
half the thickness would be akin to 1/4 'strength' would it not (subject to blah blah blah)
> Im not, as it appears we steves both enjoy arguing I do know exactly what he means though, problem is others reading might not, so I think its best to be clear rather than say strong or weak: most people think 50% weaker is synonymous with a rope having its thickness halved.
half the thickness would be akin to 1/4 'strength' would it not (subject to blah blah blah)
In reply to Offwidth:
You get a similar drop in performance when the rope is wet. As a result I always take great care not to take repeated fall factor 1.78 or greater falls when my ropes are wet.
> at the very worst is measured as 50% of the normal number of drops to failure. This is not splitting hairs because if the rope was 50% weaker it would snap on the first test drop.
You get a similar drop in performance when the rope is wet. As a result I always take great care not to take repeated fall factor 1.78 or greater falls when my ropes are wet.
In reply to Adam Long:
My rule is considerably more general than that!
OP, your rope is absolutely fine.
> I always take great care not to take repeated fall factor 1.78 or greater falls when my ropes are wet.
My rule is considerably more general than that!
OP, your rope is absolutely fine.
In reply to lithos:
Sure, but we were discussing cut half through to illustrate the point.
In reply to Adam Long
Naughty, you told me 1.71 before and I look up to you and might have risked my life
Sure, but we were discussing cut half through to illustrate the point.
In reply to Adam Long
Naughty, you told me 1.71 before and I look up to you and might have risked my life
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Elsewhere on the site
Fri Night Vid Le Toit de Ben - Quebec 1958
This week's Friday Night Video whisks us back to Val-David, Quebec, in the Autumn of 1958. Two daring young climbers embark on the ascent of a route that seemed unattainable, resembling a roof suspended in the air, defying all the conventions of the time....
3 May
Loading Notifications...