Fixed Anchors .... without chains

"The force from rappelling on this setup will be less than the force of a top rope fall. So I doubt that's the real contributor to your spinner problem."

True that a tr fall has more force than rappelling. Also true that lowering has the potential for more force than rappelling, especially if it is varying speeds and involves stopping and starting, like most lowers. I would say that both definitely contribute to the bolts becoming spinners.
But the main reason the anchor bolts become spinners is because the bolts are pulling inward, towards each other, like in the classic junky anchor, the American triangle.
This is easily fixed with a foot or two of chain, because instead of pulling mostly inward the force is mostly downward.
I noticed this problem most obviously in Indian Creek, where crappy old anchors were replaced with 2 fixe rap ring anchors, then became spinners within the month. Some of these anchors now have 4 bolts, half of which are junk. I believe this could easily be fixed with chain. Guess i better throw some in the pack next time i am there. Then if people insist on top-roping and lowering through the anchor (which they do), at least the bolts will be ok and just some quick links will need to be replaced.

climberz wrote:I noticed this problem most obviously in Indian Creek, where crappy old anchors were replaced with 2 fixe rap ring anchors, then became spinners within the month.

I would blame the bolts placement or the bolt choice rather than your inward forces "issue".

Also I would have though softer sandstone like indian creek would have had glue in bolts.

climberz wrote:Some of these anchors now have 4 bolts, half of which are junk. I believe this could easily be fixed with chain.

Or simply install bolts properly.

Russ Keane wrote:Yeah, anytime you actually participate in something, you understand it better. I would love to do some "cliff work" - I'm sure it's hard. Where I climb, the process of adding any hardware to a wall is pretty serious. There's a process, a consensus, and then certain people are doing these things based on the decision of "the committee". This being the case, I would never think to add anything. In fact I would think that because of so much thought being put into it, the rap stations would be as ideal as they can be. I see how the angle is only sharp at the beginning of the rappel.... that makes sense. And Sprague's point about minimal visual impact... that also makes sense. It must be the combination of these two factors.

Why don't you tell us where this is? Why the ambiguity? Where do you climb? Personally, I call bullshit on a community getting in an uproar about adding two nice new shiny stainless links and rings on a couple hangers that need them. Either that, or you don't know wtf you're talking about.

don'tchuffonme wrote:Personally, I call bullshit on a community getting in an uproar about adding two nice new shiny stainless links and rings on a couple hangers that need them. Either that, or you don't know wtf you're talking about.

The breadth of your climbing knowledge about bolting wars seems a little bit limited.

Uproar, chopping of bolts and heated debates are common in many areas regarding fixed gear. Discussions among the self appointed custodians is common. It certainly is in my local area. If unnecessary bolts are put in then they'll get chopped pretty quickly.

Have a read about the Dawn Wall and Royal Robbins back in 1971!

don'tchuffonme wrote: Why don't you tell us where this is? Why the ambiguity? Where do you climb? Personally, I call bullshit on a community getting in an uproar about adding two nice new shiny stainless links and rings on a couple hangers that need them. Either that, or you don't know wtf you're talking about.

The snake strikes again! I've been noticing this routinely, at many anchors. But most recent example is North Ridge of Table Rock, at the top of P1 -- it also serves to lower people doing White Lightning.

patto wrote: The breadth of your climbing knowledge about bolting wars seems a little bit limited. Uproar, chopping of bolts and heated debates are common in many areas regarding fixed gear. Discussions among the self appointed custodians is common. It certainly is in my local area. If unnecessary bolts are put in then they'll get chopped pretty quickly. Have a read about the Dawn Wall and Royal Robbins back in 1971!

Yeah. I have, so I wouldn't say my knowledge is limited. And I'm aware of Mr. Nichols's escapades in the northeast as well. I follow this stuff pretty closely. Let me clarify: If this is indeed an anchor meant primarily for rappelling, and gets used as such regularly, it probably at one point had something other than just two hangers bolted into the rock. To be clear, I'm talking about two bolts and hangers that already exist. Unless I'm mistaken, Russ was asking about why there are no chains. Chains facilitate a nice rounded surface for threading a rope. No, chains aren't necessary, of course. But something other than hangers (unless they are the larger radius Metolius rap hangers) should probably be there for someone to rappel from. I can't imagine a huge uproar from someone adding rounded, rap-friendly hardware to two bolt hangers that already exist and probably have for some time. This has nothing to do with adding completely new hardware- with regard to making new holes in the rock. It's adding hardware to existing to facilitate what sounds like the intended purpose of the anchor in the first place.

Russ Keane wrote: The snake strikes again! I've been noticing this routinely, at many anchors. But most recent example is North Ridge of Table Rock, at the top of P1 -- it also serves to lower people doing White Lightning.

What do you mean serves to lower people while doing White Lightning? You mean the belayer lowering them when the route is complete? This isn't a route you routinely lower from. You can either top out, or rap off. If you're toproping one of the pitches of this route, you don't need chains or rings. Use your quickdraws. Don't ever top rope through rings or chains. And generally speaking, unless otherwise specified, (especially in NC on multi) any rings that are there are probably for rapping. This doesn't hold true at most single pitch sport climbing areas where lowering off rings when you're finished with the route is commonplace.

don'tchuffonme wrote: What do you mean serves to lower people while doing White Lightning? You mean the belayer lowering them when the route is complete? This isn't a route you routinely lower from. You can either top out, or rap off. If you're toproping one of the pitches of this route, you don't need chains or rings. Use your quickdraws. Don't ever top rope through rings or chains. And generally speaking, unless otherwise specified, (especially in NC on multi) any rings that are there are probably for rapping. This doesn't hold true at most single pitch sport climbing areas where lowering off rings when you're finished with the route is commonplace.

Dude, relax. You misunderstood completely. I am not toproping White Lightning or lowering down a 90 degree angle. I meant lowering off the buttress, as in rappelling. I am fully aware of climbing etiquette, I know how to use my own gear, I know what the rings are for, etc. Don't forget, I am a glorified gumby, not just a gumby. There's a difference!

And to re-clarify the OP- Curious as to why a fixed two-bolt anchor intended as a rap station, would not be installed with chains, especially when it's at an area where so much thought/debate went into the process in the first place. I believe there have been cogent answers to my question.

patto wrote: The breadth of your climbing knowledge about bolting wars seems a little bit limited. Uproar, chopping of bolts and heated debates are common in many areas regarding fixed gear. Discussions among the self appointed custodians is common. It certainly is in my local area. If unnecessary bolts are put in then they'll get chopped pretty quickly. Have a read about the Dawn Wall and Royal Robbins back in 1971!

Actually, Robbins stopped chopping Dawn Wall after he realized the quality of the climbing.."harding did some really hard nailing up there"

Russ Keane wrote: Dude, relax. You misunderstood completely. I am not toproping White Lightning or lowering down a 90 degree angle. I meant lowering off the buttress, as in rappelling. I am fully aware of climbing etiquette, I know how to use my own gear, I know what the rings are for, etc. Don't forget, I am a glorified gumby, not just a gumby. There's a difference! And to re-clarify the OP- Curious as to why a fixed two-bolt anchor intended as a rap station, would not be installed with chains, especially when it's at an area where so much thought/debate went into the process in the first place. I believe there have been cogent answers to my question.

Lowering is quite different from rappelling. I'm completely relaxed. Words matter. To restate: "Chains" don't matter. Having something more than thin bolt hangers on a two bolt rap station matters. Could be chains, could be a link and a ring on each hanger, etc. A more succinct question would have been "Why are there only hangers (i.e. no hardware conducive to rappelling) on this rap anchor?" To which my reply was and still is: If it's an anchor used primarily for rappelling, and there's nothing but hangers there, do your community a solid and take two stainless links and two rings up there and make it a proper rap anchor. That's all.

I'm not coming down on you, but if you're going to ask vague questions and want technical answers, you should definitely learn the technical jargon so as to convey your point, or in this case your question more accurately. Take the step from glorified gumby status into knowledgeable climberhood.

Agreed. I'm used to rapping straight off bolts. But these are 'P' or 'U' bolts so that is all good. Rapping off hangers is not ideal but I've done it before when bailing off scary X-rated climbs in the meadows.

patto wrote: Also I would have though softer sandstone like indian creek would have had glue in bolts.

If you can convince the Utah climbing community of glue-ins you would be my hero. Tons of the state would be better served by glue-ins, yet you hardly ever see them. In southern Utah (especially climbing around St George, or canyoneering in Zion) I've seen well placed glue-ins ripped out an replaced with expansion bolts within a couple months because people didn't know what they were/that they were actually designed for climbing. I've even seen glue-ins removed and replaced with drilled angles.

J.k
Do you (or anyone out there) have any findings/ studies showing that glue in's are safe in zion sandstone?

Kauait wrote:J.k Do you (or anyone out there) have any findings/ studies showing that glue in's are safe in zion sandstone?

Safe? Well it still depends on rock quality.

However a good glue in bolt is pretty much always going to be stronger and more reliable than an expansion bolt. This is particularly the case in soft rock. The rock will be failing far before the glue does.

JK- wrote:I've seen well placed glue-ins ripped out an replaced with expansion bolts within a couple months because people didn't know what they were/that they were actually designed for climbing. I've even seen glue-ins removed and replaced with drilled angles.

That is idiotic beyond belief.

I've never placed a bolt or chopped a bolt but if I was going to do so I'd be damn sure I knew what I was doing. (Placed plenty on construction sites, which are pretty much the same thing minus the hanger.)

I'm more concerned of the glue to rock connection/strength. (Considering weather variables, expansion and contraction wet dry.)Then the strength of the bolt. Help? Anyone?

Kauait wrote: I'm more concerned of the glue to rock connection/strength. (Considering weather variables, expansion and contraction wet dry.)Then the strength of the bolt. Help? Anyone?

How similar is it to Corbin sandstone? Glue-in's seem to be the defacto bolt to use in re-bolting a lot of the RRG now, and have been for at least the past 5 year's. No failures I know of. If you want information you may try contacting the RRG Fixed Gear Initiative. They provide a lot of ClimbTech glue-in's right now, and may have some data about suitability in sandstone.

Kauait wrote: I'm more concerned of the glue to rock connection/strength. (Considering weather variables, expansion and contraction wet dry.)Then the strength of the bolt. Help? Anyone?

That's what patto was talking about. When people talk about the "strength of a bolt" it's usually not about the metal of the bolt itself (*unless* the discussion is about corrosion and/or age).
To reiterate: glue-ins are by far the superior and stronger option in soft rock.

Kauait wrote:J.k Do you (or anyone out there) have any findings/ studies showing that glue in's are safe in zion sandstone?

There is lots out there demonstrating that glue-ins a significantly stronger in soft rock. Google.

patto wrote: That is idiotic beyond belief.

I agree. It pisses me off to no end when people mar the rock to put in a worse option just because they don't know/didn't do the research when they saw something new.

If you see something new that you don't trust, that's fine. We need to trust our gear. But do some research before you rip it out and replace it.

JK- wrote:If you see something new that you don't trust, that's fine. We need to trust our gear. But do some research before you rip it out and replace it.

Recall that there was a person on MP who was willing to top rope on a pair of bolts but was terrified of hanging off of them to rig a lower, resulting in another macrame de-evolved reinvention of the wheel.

Kauait wrote: I'm more concerned of the glue to rock connection/strength. (Considering weather variables, expansion and contraction wet dry.)Then the strength of the bolt. Help? Anyone?

In all the testing I´ve seen and done a glue-in is stronger in soft rock than a bolt-in everything being equal (hole diameter and depth. Since the normal weak point with with bolt-ins is the hanger generally you can go smaller with a glue-in than a bolt-in anyway if the rock is strong enough, we´ve tested down to 40mm deep and still easily exceeded the standard in granite.
There are huge numbers of glue-in bolts in use in sandstone in Europe, nobody in their right mind would use a bolt-in because we know that over the years they come loose.
Glue-ins have tha advantage they come in whatever size and length you need to get a satisfactory result no matter how soft the rock, we´ve made plenty of 200mm bolts for soft sandstone areas and even 300mm ones on occasion for guys bolting chalk caves. I only know Zion from a brief visit but would think a 150mm glue-in would exceed the standard requirements by 50% and keep doing it for the next 50 years.