UKC

Spotted while taking a stroll to refresh my memory of the belay options at the Hawcraig. I'm not sure I'd be happy with this.  What are your thoughts? 

For reference, the interestingly shaped block slopes away from the camera so the sling would fail a saw test (i.e. pull back and forth from the front to see if it rolls). Nut seems solid enough though. Only other obvious  options out of shot are some straggly gorse bushes. 

In reply to A.C.Gull:

Did you set it up, or have you taken a photo of someone else's belay? 

In reply to A.C.Gull:

Pointless use of the blue sling.  Doesn't contribute amything until the nut has failed.  Should have extended the nut so that the rope loaded both it and the sling.

Gorse bushes?  If push comes to shove, I'd get a sling around everything i could reach 😬

In reply to A.C.Gull:

Problem with that belay (IMO) is that both the sling and nut are on the same pieces of rock so although there's redundancy in the gear if the rock fails...

Would have to be a pretty pathetically straggly gorse bush for me to ignore it as a second belay point.

But assuming there's nothing else available I'd improve the current setup by either making the sling into a figure of 8 twisted over the two bits of rock with the nut above the sling in the crack - helping to stop the sling riding up, or maybe two separate slings one for each bit of rock. If necessary tie knots on the slings to shorten them so that they're not completely loose. Also, I'd be looking to have 2 nuts in the crack. Probably wouldn't want a cam in the crack since it would be more likely to force the 2 blocks apart.

In reply to A.C.Gull:

I wouldn't hang my granny off it.

In reply to A.C.Gull:

It's not clear what is going on here.  This could be one of three points (the others being hidden over the edge) I can't see if the sling is even tied in.  It might be they started with the sling and changed there mind and couldn't be bothered to pick it up at the time.

In reply to A.C.Gull:

If sitting (as you should) would the slings lift?

Are those blocks solid etc? 

About 2m nearer the sea there looks like placements. If i doubted your two blocks with a sling then I'd equalise with these other placements?

Are you abseiling or belaying someone up so can always observe your anchors? 

Edit. You'll start the whole debate about bolts there again. 

In reply to A.C.Gull:

What is it a belay for? I really hope it's not a bottom rope setup. It looks like all kinds of awful.

In reply to C Rettiw:

I'm going to say abseil... Wing and a prayer abseil.

In reply to Michael Hood:

Intuitively we tend to think this is the case. But recently I was climbing with an actual (retired) physics professor, who was firmly convinced that the wedge angle of a nut exerts much the same outward force as the camming angle of a cam. I'm genuinely not sure whether he was right or if not, why not.

In reply to AlanLittle:

In both cases, what would happen if one of the blocks was loose? It would get pushed to the side regardless of whether it's a nut or a cam in the crack. So the direction of the force must at least be broadly similar.

In reply to A.C.Gull:

Wouldn’t be unusual to see that as part of my setup for belaying that route. I don’t leave a sling, though many climbers do leave surplus gear like slings, etc, attached.

My belay stance is actually lower down the stepped top of the face where there are various protection possibilities which I’ve use for the belay. I do use that nut slot though to give some backup protection whilst setting up the main protection, and for after I’ve removed the main belay protection at the end to get back up to the top with the ropes and other gear. A bit of backup protection for me. I personally wouldn’t use it as a sole piece; there are other options.

BTW check the rock yourself when there is no nut in place before deciding if it is suitable. One side wobbles without a nut in place; climbers have been talking about its suitability and questioning how it remains for as long as I have climbed there.

Are the stakes not there anymore? There were last year - at least two stakes - for use as well. Further back from the face. You could use them if they are still there and solid. 

In reply to AlanLittle:

https://www.vainokodas.com/climbing/cams.html
 

The maths is probably beyond me but the outward force is double the downward force, I think!

In reply to john arran:

I used to climb regularly at that crag. There aren't a lot of options up top but you can generally get a decent belay just before topping out. Theres also a few decent sized hawthorn bushes and then being a sea cliff there are some stakes kicking around and one solitary bolt squirrelled away out of sight.

Cant quite work out from the photo where it is but there used to be a row of 3 fins of rock you could use that over time have started wobbling.

In reply to A.C.Gull:

honest opinion, it's sub optimal.... that means it's shyte by the way.

those vertical flakes have lasted longer than I thought they would. There used to be three, smaller flake was left of shot, but it was a wee bit loose. must have gotten too loose. 

I also thought there used to be a couple of metal rods a bit further back, but I couldn't find them the last time I was there. Or am I just imagining that. I'm not talking about the more recent ones, these were rust coloured iron things.

anyone who thinks just bang a stake in it welcome to try, you've got about 50mm of topsoil over compact rock. 

Anyway. are you wanting to revisit the debackle from 2009, 2010? You'll need to get the arbiter of everythin involved again. 

In reply to john arran:

Three instant downvotes with no suggestion as to why the logic might be wrong?

In reply to A.C.Gull:

It’s a long time since I was there but it looks like the top of Pain Pillar, and from memory (going back to c.1988) one of those flakes moves a bit. There used to be one or maybe two bolts near it, is that dark spot one of the holes? 

Despite it moving I must have belayed off it many times and abbed off it a few times.

In reply to deacondeacon:

Sorry, I thought my post was clear enough; obviously not, so for the record, I am not now nor have I ever  been...

In reply to birdie num num:

Neither would I! Mind you I've not met your granny...

In reply to john arran:

I was also a bit confused by your downvotes. My only guess is that people thought the direction of the force was never in question and that the only real question is the size of it, so maybe they downvoted you for stating the 'obvious' rather than addressing the tricky question?

In reply to DubyaJamesDubya:

Sorry, I didn't want to make my OP bible length and I couldn't take a pic of the rest of the set up without causing embarrassment. It is in fact a leader belaying his second. The leader was seated and no further pieces in the system. The second was nearly up when I walked past.

In reply to Climbing Pieman:

Thanks for the reply. Agreed re placements nearer the edge. I'll have a look for those stakes if I ever climb there (the recce was to asses suitability for self plus daughter and wife). 

'One side wobbles without a nut in place; climbers have been talking about its suitability and questioning how it remains for as long as I have climbed there.' Interesting beta, thanks.

'Are the stakes not there anymore?' Didn't see them but possibly because i wasn't looking for them. 

In reply to A.C.Gull:

Thoughts:

If the nut placement somehow fails, would the loose blue sling survive the shock loading? Seems like tying it off would help?

Presumably theres a krab(s) that we can't see that connects the blue sling and nut. How was the sling connected to it? Were the ends clipped separately or tied in a fig8?

I don't like the way that the gate of the visible krab is lying on or near a rock edge.

Seems sketchy. I personally wouldn't ab on it except in an emergency or if there was no other choice, which clearly aren't the case here. But everyone has a different risk tolerance.

In reply to daWalt:

'Anyway. are you wanting to revisit the debackle from 2009, 2010? You'll need to get the arbiter of everythin involved again.'

Heavens no. I still remember you getting slated for naming yourself after a certain brand of tool (IIRC)😂

In reply to ExiledScot:

'You'll start the whole debate about bolts there again.'

Nooo! Sheesh, you only mentioned the b-word and got three down-votes😁

In reply to AlanLittle:

I dont know anything about physics but surely for a nut to slide (and thus open the blocks as in this case) it also has to overcome some surface friction and 'bite' of the texture of the rock, whereas for a cap to open in a crack the lobes don't have to overcome any friction as the movement happens within the (smooth, well designed, and perhaps even lubed) camming mechanism.

This is purely an intuitive judgement.

In reply to Andy Johnson:

Your thoughts mirror mine, Andy. And the clincher would be 'everyone has a different risk tolerance.'

Given that, should I feel bad for not saying anything, I wonder? I didn't think it was appropriate for me to comment but I'd be interested to hear others thoughts. 

In reply to A.C.Gull:

You see those two holes in the slab just behind your anchor, briefly there were bolts there over a decade ago. I suspect both sides have pent up angst.

In reply to Mike-W-99:

That is the same spot: one of the fins disintegrated a few years ago, and what remains is not convincingly solid. There are two good stakes about 10m further back, which is what I always use these days.  You do need 60m ropes to reach the stakes and double back to a stance on the edge, though. 

AKAIK, the mystery of the pair of large bolts was never solved: https://www.ukclimbing.com/news/2011/05/hawkcraig_trashed-62114 

In reply to A.C.Gull:

yea, I'v had worse 😂 . I'll not accuse you of having only thoughts of nesting or guanoing in the area. 

2011, I'm crap at remembering dates. 

to anyone who doesn't know the crag, there's about 10 to 20 routes that top out onto that promontory. Where the belayer's sat/stood, you can sling a jutting block of two as your main anchor.  seems not eveyone sees this because you kind of have to build your belay before you've reached the top. Don't think this works on all the routes (I'v not climbed them all).

In reply to A.C.Gull:

Depends on the situation, I think. If the climbers who set it up were clearly inexperienced, or if an obviously inexperienced person was trusting the person who rigged it, then I think I'd feel obliged to say something if they were present. I wouldn't go looking for then though. Perhaps I'd leave them a note.

If I was seconding a route and the leader had built a belay anchor like that then I'd have an honest conversation with them and probably wouldnt climb with them again. I can think of a couple of occasions when I've had to do that in the past.

In reply to Andy Johnson:

It used to not be uncommon at that "anchor" when it was 3 fins for multiple parties to be sharing it! The classic of the crag(Pain Pillar (VS 4c)) tops out there so it gets well used, I certainly belayed off of it the 1st time I led it when I was very naive and inexperienced.

In reply to A.C.Gull:

How you would feel if someone took a photo of you handiwork and offered it up for criticism on social media?

I know the person or persons who set that up aren't identified, but I don't think this is a very kind thing to do.  Completely thoughtless in fact I'd go as far as saying. 

In reply to Iamgregp:

I'd have no problem with it provided the criticism was constructive and advised on how to do it better next time.  The climbing community really needs to be more like the flying community in not taking such things personally, as this sort of discussion saves lives.

In reply to Iamgregp:

Like Neil, with the same caveats, I'd also be fine with it. If I'm doing something wrong or could do something better, I'd like someone to tell me. Peer review in climbing is often hard as I often climb with the sane small group. I always ask my peers for feedback on gear and belays but this is obviously prone to heuristic traps.

In reply to A.C.Gull:

I guess it worked!

The low blue sling probably has enough friction if/when loaded to stay in place despite the slope to the blocks but it's not clear it would or could ever be loaded.

The nut could be good or bad, depends how good the blocks are. The whole thing hinges on how good the blocks are really but I'd expect the nut to pull through wobbly blocks at a lower load than would be required for the sling to trundle them.

Not ideal. I'd have wanted something else I think, too many 'probably's, 'if's and 'but's in my assessment for my liking. Looks like there are possibilities closer to the edge and even scrappy plants tend to be pretty tough.

jk

In reply to galpinos:

If the OP had genuine concerns regarding the safety of the climbers involved, would it  not have been better to discuss it with them! I've helped beginners a few times when they've been struggling with Belays and they've always been grateful. 

Posting photos on social media isnt much use to the climbers if that belay fails. 😅

In reply to deacondeacon:

Yes, and I have also spoken to people about belays as well but I also understand not everyone is happy to do that and am conscious that it might not be a positive interaction. I know I have been told my "feedback" was unwanted.

In reply to Blackmud:

That's a fair point, though I'm not convinced it's significant, since we're not talking about wires moving against the rock so much as outward forces acting to move a rock sideways - though I accept that friction must come into play to a certain extent.

When considering the direction of the force acting on the rock, clearly a cam will typically exert a force in a line between the axel and the cam lobe's point of contact. This will depend largely on the cam angle the device has been made with but typically the force will be very much more outwards than downwards.

For a basic v-shaped nut in a symmetrical constriction, I think you'll need to draw a straight line between the wire's entry point into the nut and the contact point with the rock on one side, then the force applied will be perpendicular to this line at the contact point. How this compares to the cam example will depend on the degree to which the nut makes a wide V rather than a narrow one. The wider the V, the greater the downward force compared to the outward force.

I don't think it's at all clear that either the cam or the wire will typically be exerting a greater outward force on the rock.

In reply to galpinos:

On the flip side, I had some random stranger once take over my friend's belay-building unrequested. Seemed a bit rude at the time, but I became significantly more upset when I tried to retireve the masively-overcammed cam our hero had wedged in an inappropriately-sized crack.

I'd hope to not be in the position of random strangers identifying that my belay is unsafe, but I'd be quite pleased to be informed of it. Random men taking over at the top of Windgather because there's a woman who's spent more than 30s looking for gear is less alright.

In reply to the.last.thesaurus:

They have mostly been positive to very positive interactions, there was only one guy belaying an inexperienced female partner who didn't take kindly to me. A combo of me probably not approaching the situation very well and him not liking being challenged in front of his partner.

I might actually be less inclined to intervene is the belayer was female, not wanting to fall into the mansplaining role........... (I would never try to "take over" though)

In reply to A.C.Gull:

It's not ideal.

I don't know that crag, so can't say for certain, but I'd be looking up to the top middle/right of your picture for a couple more placements.

In reply to A.C.Gull:

I dont know the crag, but it appears that belay options there are limited. It's not ideal, but sometimes you have to make do with whatever you can find, and pray your luck holds.

In reply to galpinos:

Yeah, it can be awkward when you feel compelled to intervene, but if the need is real then I think you absolutely should, every time. 

You don't want to tread on toes or offend anybody. You don't want to reveal to the novice 2nd that their trusted leader might not be so trustworthy. You know that trust is such an important component of all our relationships both on and off the wall. But then you really don't want to be the person that didn't speak up. Broken bodies trump hurt feelings though so we've got to look after each other with a "see it, say it" culture and not be too proud to take feedback.

When rocks are flying, we don't dither about shouting "ROCKS" quickly and loudly to warn others, nor do we regret disturbing their peace and quiet. Same situation really but without time for our overthinking minds to 2nd guess the correct call.

In reply to the.last.thesaurus:

Funnily enough I was on Windgather recently and felt the urge to glance over at some of the belays. I saw people carefully reviewing options. I think I shared a joke about how awkward it sometimes is, not needed here but how people react starts a conversation. Nobody needed my infinite wisdom though.

In reply to john arran:

If there was no friction at all, the angle of the nut would have to be 45 degrees to apply the same force outward as downward. So the worse case scenario for a nut would be 1:1

However, the nut is probably 15 degrees which would make the 'gearing' of the nut is 1:7.60 (nearly eight times the outward force for the same downward). 

However again, if you include friction, this is reduced a lot! Presuming a coefficient of 0.4, the outward force multiplier is now 1:1.78

Compared to the 1:4 of the typical cam. 

So nuts should be approximately half the outward force of cams. 

Tim

In reply to Holdtickler:

I've always taken the 'will it kill* someone?' approach to bad ropework, if the answer is 'not this time.' and they're strangers I just leave them to it, if the answer is 'probably!' then I offer opinion, advice and or help as constructively as I'm able.

*or worse

jk

In reply to Neil Williams:

This is kind of the point that I'm making - You'd have no problem with it, I'm the OP wouldn't either.  And so it didn't occur to the poster to think that someone else might. I'm not suggesting that the OP had any negative or malicious intent, it's just something that hasn't occurred to them.

For the record, if I'd set up that belay and had people offering up "constructive criticism" such as "shyte" I'd feel a bit annoyed. 

Additionally, the OP may want to ask themself how they'd feel if, having taken a photo and offered it up for all of our criticism, that they then read of a climber being killed at the venue on that day due to their belay failing?

Not sure that would sit well with me.  

Like I say, I know the intentions were good from the OP and the other contributors, but as other have suggested unless you need to intervene in order to prevent an emergency (something I've done a number of times!) I reckon we should just mind our own onions. 

In reply to Iamgregp:

So would I, but almost entirely at myself, which I think is the appropriate response.

In reply to timparkin:

I'm intrigued as to where the 0.4 value for the coefficient of friction comes from. I'm not an engineer so maybe that's a recognised guestimate for metal on rock. But I'm aware that different rock types have massively different friction characteristics.

Does that mean that if the coefficient of friction was notably low, such as on slate, say 0.2, that a nut would be expected to exert a similar outward force to a cam?

In reply to john arran:

If it's actually 'loose' then yes, obviously neither a cam nor nut are going to hold. But I always thought the force on a nut was all downwards, whereas a cam only works at all because it exerts the same sideways force as downwards? The accepted wisdom for hollow blocks, flakes etc is place nuts rather than cams, and there has to be a reason why this is the case...?

In reply to A.C.Gull:

It's impossible to assess the actual rocks in the belay from a photo, so I won't. Assuming they are solid, the glaring issue is that the nut is not equalised with the sling. OK there's rope in the system so nothing to necessarily say the sling would break if the nut pulled, but why take that risk? Basically the whole system is dependent on the security of one nut. 

In reply to john arran:

I am intrigued as well but its 50 years since I got my engineering degree , I do however have ample experience , like yourself , of pulling bits of metal out of cracks, though usually, fortunately, they stay in the rock.

Its complicated regarding crack side loads .

Vague memories of studying static and sliding/ dynamic/kinetic friction.

Static is invariably greater than sliding , which is possibly a part reason why once a cam starts moving it usually doesn't stop.

There is also micro and macro friction , the friction available between two smooth materials is complicated by the interaction of imperfections and bumps , a nut might even be mainly held by a small edge.

Trying to do theoretical force calculations is fraught with assumptions and unknowns when trying to calculate for a naturally varying material, rock.

For a cam , these are probably less relevent and the outward force is probably close to 4 times the load  as  1 /tan 13.75 deg suggests.

For reasons listed above , and probably others, the nut outward force is probably far less than simplistic  calculations would suggest.

Short answer. I would try to use as large a nut as possible and look for back up belay points.

In reply to Michael Gordon:

If you try to pull a nut downwards then you are trying to force a wider part of a nut into a part of the crack that is narrower.  Either the nut is compressed inwards (to make that part of the wedge narrower) or the crack is forced outwards for that wider part of the nut to fit. There’s no other way the nut can move further down the crack without that happening or something failing.

In reply to Michael Gordon:

In fact here you go , wedge forces 

https://mechanicsmap.psu.edu/websites/7_friction/7-3_wedges/wedges.html

In reply to john arran:

I don't think 0.4 aluminum/granite COF is right; the "generally accepted" figure I've seen is ~0.25.  This can be inferred from the manufacturer's stated cam angle, since the minimum coefficient of friction needed for a cam to hold is the tangent of the cam angle. Metolius uses 13.25 degrees, corresponding to a minimum COF of 0.2355.  DMM and Wild Country use 13.75 degrees, corresponding to a minimum COF of 0.2447.  Black Diamond C4's have a 14.5 degree cam angle, corresponding to a minimum COF of 0.2586. Totem cams are weirder and, depending on compression, have a cam angle between 12.52 and 13.13 degrees, corresponding to a minimum COFs between 0.2221 and 0.2333  So there's nothing anywhere near 0.4.

In reply to rgold:

Exactly! That's the stuff I think about when I'm setting up a belay. 

In reply to john arran:

Yes - that 0.4 was a bad case scenario. The values for granite on aluminium the values sometimes get as high as 0.6 (aluminium and steel is supposedly about 0.5) and smooth aluminium on wet slate may well be 0.3 or lower. I'm not sure it would get down to 0.2 but perhaps.

In reply to rgold:

Maybe the values I'm finding are different in some way but I researched a few. 

The old Valley Giant page had this

"The friction force V that prevents the lobe from sliding down is equal to the force H times a friction coefficient. If the friction coefficient between the lobe and the rock is greater than 0.25, or 1/4, the cam will not slide. If the friction coefficient is less than 0.25, it will slide. The friction coefficient between aluminum alloy and smooth granite is around 0.5, which implies that an aluminum alloy climbing cam with a camming angle of ratio of 4-to1 (typical for many brands and sizes) may be used as a secure anchor in a smooth granite crack - a conclusion that over 35 years of evidence has proven to be correct."

The low value of 0.25 is probably an effort to to make sure it doesn't slip in wet granite/slate/schist perhaps?

In reply to Brass Nipples:

So if cams are no worse than nuts, can someone explain why everyone places nuts, not cams, in hollow flakes? Is it less about the forces and more that the crack may not open wide enough for the nut to drop out, whereas the cam will lose its frictional properties? And if it's not about the forces, why did the Parthian Shot flake break with the use of a cam but not all the times nuts were used?  

In reply to Michael Gordon:

I think a lot of people are under the impression that wires don't apply a significant outward force in a fall and that cams do. But there's still a very good reason for preferring wires in many cases, which is that people will typically place a considerably smaller wire deeper in the same flake instead of a bigger cam further out. This might not cut down the outward force to a great extent but would apply it much closer to the fulcrum and therefore would be much less likely to prize a flake off.

In reply to aln:

6 likes. Hmmm...I was taking the piss...

In reply to aln:

I can't be certain how anyone else read it, but I think that was abundantly clear. I'd be very surprised if the likes came from people who were confused about your intention.

In reply to A.C.Gull:

Without knowing the climbing scenario, its hard to comment on the belay.  For top roping, it's not ideal.  For a heavy leader sitting with their feet braced bringing up a light climber, its fine.

In reply to A.C.Gull:

IIRC I've used that nut as a belay before and there is atleast one other good bit of gear there. Probably the ground level slanting crack you can see in the pic.

In reply to A.C.Gull: If the belayer has a decent seated position and is bringing up a second, then I’d probably be ok with it. I’m sure the force on the belay if a second comes off is pretty low if you have a decent stance. You have to learn to deal with what’s available and assess the risk and other options.

There have been plenty of times when I’ve called down to my second “I think my belay is fine….but try not to fall off!” 

In reply to A.C.Gull:

Cheeky pink tricam in that round pocket maybe?

In reply to john arran:

Two examples immediately come to mind. 1, Try and pull a lump of material larger than a letter box through a letterbox: No outward force. 2. Wire in a perfectly parallel or outward flaring groove: no outward force. The cam exerts a lot of outward force in the latter two examples.

In reply to DubyaJamesDubya:

Did you actually read the post you replied to?

In reply to john arran:

More misread it but too late to retract