Do Screamers Work?

what ever happened to the chicken screamer? I'm curious

It went the way of the snow bolt.

brenta wrote:It went the way of the snow bolt.

What about the bolt gun?

Some products are too far ahead of their time.

Kyle Tarry wrote: Tim just wants to make sure that we are taking the relativistic effects into account. For example, the time dilation that occurs due to high speed motion may have an affect on the behavior of the screamer, we should test one in the Large Hadron Collider to be sure.

And you'd have more time to wonder whether or not the screamer would work...

Curt

Kyle Tarry wrote: Tim just wants to make sure that we are taking the relativistic effects into account. For example, the time dilation that occurs due to high speed motion may have an affect on the behavior of the screamer, we should test one in the Large Hadron Collider to be sure.

Lol!

In that case I'm a bit rusty on my second year physics. To be honest I don't think I've done time dilation calculations for over ten years. Though you are quite right that the effect of relative motion haven't been considered...

Also due to the doppler effect the name screamer may be a little of a misnomer during high speed motion. A deeper sound would result and the name "roarer" might be more appropriate.

Meanwhile an extended version of string theory needs to be examined on how it changes things when ropes are involved.

While we're at it, no one has taken real world manufacturing variance and tolerance range of the various components in the system into account. Even if a screamer reduces force by 1.78% in a specific scenario doesn't mean that a different but supposedly identical screamer from the same manufacturer/batch might only reduce it by 1.28% or 2.32% in that same scenario. The same issue exists with different instances of the same rope.

This is enough to explode the minds of those looking for specific rules to follow, like some of our newer posters.

patto wrote: What about the bolt gun?

What about it? You mean the new and improved version?

Sweet bolt gun.Betcha Sloan has one just like it. Woot!

:0

T340 wrote:Eric, There, of course, is nothing wrong with trying to understand some of the theory behind how a screamer works. However, with all due respect, I think you place too much emphasis on theory and not enough on intuition, or experience, perhaps?Healyje has a wealth of experience in climbing(rope soloing specifically) so I would be inclined to listen to his input/advice when it comes to the use of screamers. Good climbing!

Eric isn't here to "try to understand," he's here to troll the forum by arguing with people who know a lot more than he does.

Phooey. You need someone who understands climbing and understands the physics underlying the issues posed. There are quite a few professions that could satisfy those requirements, and some engineers would surely qualify, but there is no reason to think engineers have any intrinsic advantages.

JulianG wrote:I'm curious is a device like Knong Kisa or Slyde better than a screamer? They work on friction so it should be a continuous decrease until nut at the end of the rope.

The CAI tests showed the Kong Kisa was better than a screamer. Not really the sort of thing you´d want to rack 3 or 4 of though. There are a few more modern ones using Dyneema tape which are more compact but never seen any tests.

rgold wrote:Phooey. You need someone who understands climbing and understands the physics underlying the issues posed. There are quite a few professions that could satisfy those requirements, and some engineers would surely qualify, but there is no reason to think engineers have any intrinsic advantages.

The advantage is a physicist can only take data provided by someone else and work out the theory, an engineer can make the equipment to gather the data AND work out the physics involved since it is simple mechanics.
It´s a bit like gravity, engineers can measure it and use it in their daily lives but physicists still can´t explain it.
Still don´t understand my wife though:-)

Im no tech guy so i cant give you numbers and all. But i do climb alot of fun aid lines..I feel much more confident moving above a marginal placement with a screamer attached, than one without!! I'll keep using them.

Kauait wrote:Im no tech guy so i cant give you numbers and all. But i do climb alot of fun aid lines..I feel much more confident moving above a marginal placement with a screamer attached, than one without!! I'll keep using them.

Yeah, but the person who resurrected this dead 9 year old thread to troll wants specific numbers that show precisely how much energy screamers dissipate and from that formulate exact, unvarying rules about when and where to use them. Apparently calming the mind doesn't enter into his rigid world.

rgold wrote:Phooey. You need someone who understands climbing and understands the physics underlying the issues posed. There are quite a few professions that could satisfy those requirements, and some engineers would surely qualify, but there is no reason to think engineers have any intrinsic advantages.

I think all the sensible responses recognise that. :-)

Either way, it's a good conversation. Let's keep it rollin'.

Jim Titt wrote: The advantage is a physicist can only take data provided by someone else and work out the theory, an engineer can make the equipment to gather the data AND work out the physics involved since it is simple mechanics. It´s a bit like gravity, engineers can measure it and use it in their daily lives but physicists still can´t explain it. Still don´t understand my wife though:-)

Jim has a point folks.

Except that physicists have been known to conduct their own experiments and make their own equipment...

Applied mathematicians, on the other hand, typically collaborate.

True, wives are hard to figure out.

Healyje wrote:True, wives are hard to figure out.

I was waiting for that. ;)