Lately, I have been more interested in doing some trad climbing...hoping to follow on some 5.0 - 5.6 climbs in Eldo/Lumpy to start. I have been climbing for ~6 years primarily on moderate sport routes and harder TR's. I have a light rack that I primarily used to setup TR anchors on routes with no (or unreachable) bolt anchors. I am well read on anchor construction, gear limitations, opposition, fall forces, etc, but other than TR anchors I have little experience with belay anchors in the real world of trad climbing. I have placed pro on the ground and built SRENE belay anchors to practice, and it seems like a straightforward enough process (at least while standing on the ground). However, during the process of learning about gear placements and anchor construction, I began to ask myself many questions.

Consider the following anchor setup: a minimum of 3 pieces using two slings...one sling equalized with a sliding X between 2 pieces (like 2 bomber nuts in a horizontal crack), and the other sling statically equalized to the other pieces (in a crack below the top pieces). Ideally, if the belay anchor was built for a following second that was going to continue on lead for the next pitch, this anchor setup would provide horizontal dynamic equalization (because of the sliding X) while the bottom piece would resist an upward pull in the event that the leader fell once past the belay on the next lead.

Ideally it would be best to have two pieces at the bottom instead of relying on a single piece for most of the upward force. These pieces would be equalized to eachother with a sliding X in the same manner as the top anchors. This would give you dynamic L-R equalization with little top-bottom extension in the anchor.

Another situation might be where you have a single vertical crack (or horizontal crack) at the belay. In this case, I would try and load up the crack with 3-4 pieces...each pair equalized with a sliding X in 2 slings and clipped off a single tie-in point. Both setups would provide resistance to a downward and upward pull, while providing L-R equalization.

Obviously, the rock dictates what kind of placements you'll get when setting up belay anchors, not to mention having to build a strong anchor with only the remaining pieces you have left on your rack. I also have no problem with using longer lengths of 6-7mm cord statically equalized to all pieces, but I think I prefer the sliding X for its ease of setup and dynamic equalization.

Assuming all the pieces in the scenarios above are bomber (if not, reasonably so) do the setups described above seem sound and reasonable? How do you all approach the construction of SRENE belay anchors when you arrive at a good belay?

This thread was inspired by reading Mark Nelson's thread regarding Bombproof Anchors here.

Thanks.

Two things to consider:

1. Get a cordelette (20 ft of 7mm perlon or 5.5 mm spectra). I was hesitant to use this at first, but with practice it is the easiest set-up to use and provides a true RENE anchor as opposed to the slider knot which can extend if one of the pieces blows.

2. Learn the equalizing figure 8. with this knot you can build a RENE anchor with 3 pieces and the rope, ideal if you're swinging leads.

Just my 2 cents.

3. Learn how to tie a clove hitch. Three pieces in a vertical crack can be linked via cloves directly into the rope. Very fast, and uses no slings or extra biners.

First, Nice User ID. Who wouldn't feel just comfy cozy a few hundred feet off the ground with the sugar-coated undead??

A couple of things I comment about your setup:

One sling between your main 2 anchor points. I would add another sling as a sliding X. So you have 2 slings performing the sliding X; in case one sling fails, the other sling provides your redundant.

Your 2 main anchor points are passive pro, I would rather they be active cams. Or better, make your 2 nuts as one anchor point and tie them in tight with no extension; then place a cam as your second main anchor point; then use 2 slings for the sliding X between the two nuts as one anchor point and the cam as the second anchor point.

No use of limited extension, overhand knots, to mitigate some impact force should one main anchor point get pulled out.

One piece for upward is fine with me (this piece is in addition to your two main anchor points); I would also use an active cam for this placement. The single static connection is fine with me. I would keep the sling slack in this upward to the anchor so the sliding X can move without obstruction.

Also, review of angle. You may have already assumed an adequate angle; but I didn't read it in your post.

I like 45 degrees or less (benchmarks are 20 degrees is 50% force, 60 is 60%, 120 is 100% force applied to each main anchor point); going from 20 to 60 degrees offers little percentage change (10%) so working within this range is acceptable to me & is easy to eyeball. Also, distance with angle from master point to anchor points are not critical with this setup as they would be with the cordalette. As provided from the previous post thread referenced, my argument is that in using the cord, you can only assume equalization. This setup is not perfect equalization as the sliding X offers. Static equalization based upon "eyeball" construction is not a practical end result to mitigating force, thus I believe this term "static equalization" is a misnomer. The kinetic energy generated from a lead fall will move to the shortest distance with the least resistance. Within a cordalette setup wherein a factor 2 lead fall comes from a traverse, most of the force will move to one protection point, then to the next, and to the next. What comes to my mind is water moving over the bulkheads in the Titanic.

This redundant sliding X sling setup would need 4 slings, 6 biners (8 if you belay direct off the anchor), 2 nuts, and 2 cams.


I do like the construction of the rope anchor in your application best. I would still add a cam as one protection point and have another as upward go to your belay loop by sling. Your harness becomes the inflexible master point, but you save some slings & biners for the next lead.

An issue I foresee within the rope anchor though is a buddy rescue of your second, you aren't using a direct belay off of the anchor; so any hang-dogging is going to be on you (but you can mitigate this with a redirect). However, performing a belay escape, if needed, is more cumbersome than the direct setup. To get down to your second, you will need to rework your anchor to allow you both to stay fixed at the baseline position. If you both are climbing free and easy, I wouldn't be very concerned about falling/hanging and go with the rope anchor; but I would incorporate a terminal knot (figure 8) along with your clove hitches.

Another issue would be if your second couldn't lead the next pitch, you would have to rework the rope anchor to get you in lead position.

Overall, the best things I see climbers do for lead climbing which don't have anything to do with building a solid trad anchor for multi-pitch climbing: protect the anchor from a factor 2 by placing gear during the lead, use a dynamic belay, and climb in control & don't take a lead fall. There are some situations where you have to accept the fact that falling is not an option; and/or make a decision to bail, or even fire up some aid/french free.


In general, I still like the cordalette because it is the most versatile setup even though I believe equalization within no extension is false when the fall occurs at a lateral angle to the master point. The cord does maintain 2 redundant tie-in points to work with any situation.

But to summarize your question about your setup being sound & reasonable - I think it depends on the terrain you are climbing; straight low angle alpine, I'd be ok with it BUT, I would use at least one cam & I would just add another sling to get the R (Redundancy). High angles & traverses, I would incorporate my other thoughts. When swinging leads within both your abilities, the rope anchor is a great advantage in time & material savings.

Mark...as far as swing leads are concerned, my original anchor setup would be rigged adequately for belaying the second (downward pull) and the new leader (upward pull), would it not? Assuming I added a fourth equalized piece to the bottom (opposed) anchor.

I do like the cordelette option and have used it on some TR setups, but because it is not a dynamically equalized anchor, I have always favored the sliding X.

I understand that rope anchors are clearly the easiest to setup and require much less gear, which is very advantageous. However, I seem to have trouble assessing the strength of the anchor using clove hitches (in my very limited experience with them on the ground). Suggestions??

It would seem to me that creating one solid belay anchor using slings or cordelette that could be used for belaying the second and the leader (despite taking longer to setup and requiring a bit more gear), would save you time in the long run by not having to re-work the anchor.

Can someone explain the "equalizing figure 8"?

Thanks again...
Brian

In the way a rope anchor works, it takes into account how energy can move. What you do is incorporate your harness, clove hitches, a terminal knot, the dynamic & high strength properties of the climbing rope, and the dynamic properties of the belay device. When done correctly, the rope anchor will equalize better and absorb more energy than the no-extension cordalette setup. Don't be concerned about the clove hitches, they will adjust to energy applied, but you need to incorporate a terminal knot somewhere in the system and make sure energy can distribute through the system by eliminating slack/rock-obstruction between certain points.

As far as re-working the rope anchor during the exchange, I've found that when we both are climbing well on the terrain & swinging leads; having to re-work the anchor is just not an issue. So in the long run of climbing a multi-pitch route with 2 person team during the day; the rope anchor will be the fastest way to send the route.

Why do I favor the cordalette on a free trad line then? Generally, because I would rather belay seconding climbers direct off of the anchor; I'm climbing with 2-3 seconds that are on terrain possibly at their ability limit, they need to hang to clean gear, and/or I'm leading all the pitches. I've found the cordalette is more user friendly by having the additional top shelf for tie-in.

By the way, my view of the cordalette is one of preferred use; the cordalette connects multiple protection points and allows you to extend the master point out and away from rock obstructions. The discussion on the previous post forum is one of not-typical circumstances in which I try to present the worst of force extremes when a climber runs out vertical terrain traversing into a pendulum fall; having a non-dynamic belay; and introducing a pulley effect directly to the anchor. My posts were to engage critical thinking and present theories only to which they are unsubstantiated and not scientifically presented. I don't think I could ever put myself to intentionally factor 2 any type of trad anchor when climbing.


With that said, I believe just protecting the anchor when leading is the basic but huge safety consideration that can save any anchor type from the energy applied in a factor 2 fall; by definition, placing pro on lead is what displaces the energy on the anchor; along with placing lead pro, all you should need is one upward active placement to the anchor to save the entire anchor, a leader that knows how to protect a pitch (and a route that allows for protection), and a competent & attentive lead-belayer. Not falling is great also, but this lulls some into not applying sound anchor and/or protection techniques; and when a fall does occur, there is no time to make any adjustments other than offer a dynamic belay.

Mark, another advantage of the rope anchor is that it removes elements from the system. The more elements (in series) in a system, the higher the probability of failure. Furthermore, the rope is pretty much the strongest piece of equipment one will typically have with them while climbing.

As for belaying seconds off the anchor, this is still reasonable and easy with a rope anchor, whether the anchor is a string of cloves or an equalizing Figure 8.

I also concede that self-rescue while using a rope anchor is more involved (though not impossible) than with a cordalette.

CC, find someone who will demonstrate the equalizing Figure 8 in person. If done improperly, and one anchor point fails, the entire system can likely fail. Done properly, this setup is as good as a cordalette, but uses a lot of rope (another disadvantage of rope anchors). Another good knot to learn is the butterfly knot. Again, find personal expert instruction.

Addendum: when using double ropes, rope anchors are definitely the way to go. They are very easy to equalize, and the issue with self-rescue and escaping the belay is easily mitigated.

I read most of the post, however skipped the last couple of posts for later, I just thought I would post what I usually do.

I guess I change things from time to time when I decide to get off route and run out of rope etc. Basically I look for the best feature, or better yet multiple features where I can get atleast 2 pieces (hopefuly where I can get down and up covered with 2 pieces like good cams that can rotate in a paralell vertical crack or cracks). If circumstances call for it I will add a 3rd (or sometimes a 4th) main piece(depending if I need to protect upward pull or if I question any of the 1st 2 pieces). I tie things together with the death X (AKS sliding x) I think it is the best means of equalization of all the weight between the pieces (I use a 6-9 foot loop of 7-8 mm cordalete). I know everyone hates it because if a piece blows or the cordalette blows it is less then perfect, so I replace my cordalette when I even question it once. Also I use a back up piece in different features then my main anchor.

So ideally I would get 2 perfect cams, use the sliding x to equalize them,and tie in via clove hitching the rope to a locker(first I would just clip the anchor like I was leading thought). Then I would place a backup piece in a different feature, and another piece up higher to belay through. so the rope would be cloved to the sliding x, then run tightly to the back up piece and cloved to it(with the hope that if a piece blew it would catch me long before shock loading the other piece, then back to me (belaying) then up through the piece I am belaying off of.

I think it works well, if you are super worried you could do this, clove to the sliding x, then tightly clove to the 2 main pieces individually (like the back up) then clove to the back up then belay(obviously it takes practice to figure out how much rope to tie everything together). I feel it is important to belay from a seperate piece in a seperate feature (although equally bomber) so that you and the anchor are never loaded directly.

I just read the rest of the posts and thought I would add something about rope anchors. I have heard the bowline on a bight can be a great knot for making an equalizable anchor point. basically take a bight of rope and tie a double loop bowline. When you finish the knot it should be obvious how it works. but personally I just use the cordelette.

I was really interested in getting my anchor building better, so I bought the climbing anchors 1 and climbing anchors 2 books by falcon I think and I really thought what a waste of time. From what I could bring myself to read (I read most of it but was very bored and dissapointed) it just showed a bunch of anchors that sucked and told you why they sucked. Most if not all the anchors were less effective then what I usually do, and if they weren't they were too complex for their own good. Just my opinion. Then again I usually stick to the no falling rule, and also the protection of the belay anchor of factor 2 falls by using a multidirectional piece no more then 5- 10 feet off the belay(when possible).

Get someone to show you the equalizing figure 8 since it would be hard to explain how to tie it in this forum. Also there are two versions of this knot, the 2 loop and 3 loop versions.

As for clove hitches, they should never be used as the main tie in knot since they slip and have have a tendency to unclip unless you babysit them. I know someone will say you can remedy the unclip issue by using locking carabiners, but you'll still end up with a strand lying against the gate, so if you use cloves exclusively, vaya con dios. Also with cloves, make sure the load strand of the knot is on the spine side of your biners.

I prefer the equalizing figure 8 when only using the rope and it is the only knot recommended by the AMGA for building a RENE anchor with just the rope.



Cordelettes are the best all around anchor. Not sure what you mean by dynamic equalization, but a properly tied cordelette will not extend in ANY direction if one piece fails. This is the standard among European guides and is increasingly gaining favor among AMGA guides. You can also usually avoid the high load angles common to sling rigged anchors.

p.s. take a course from a qualified guide, it's worth the investment and it cleared up a bunch of questions i had as well as eliminated all of my bad habits (which i didn't think were bad until i took the clinic.)

Another useful piece of gear for setting up anchors is the Trango Alpine Equalizer



It quickly equalizes all the protection points in the system, and is faster to set up and tear down than a cordelette.

The 6' length is ideal for 3-piece anchors; the 3' length is perfect for 2-bolt sport anchors.

It's great for anchors where you may change belay position from one pitch to the next. The Alpine Equalizer will re-equalize as you shift, unlike a cordelette. I find this feature extremely useful.

It can be made non-extending by tying an overhand knot in the center loop, or by tying clove hitches at each protection point. I usually skip this step and use it only when every piece in the anchor is bomber.

Some people criticize it because the webbing is not redundant, but with a 25-kN breaking strength, that's good enough for me. If you're worried about this possibility, clip a backup sling to one of the anchor points, or tie your rope to a bomber anchor point with a quick clove hitch.

Thanks again for the thoughtful replies everyone. Great stuff to keep me thinking.

Did some climbing in Eldo today (as a second) and got to check out the belay anchors. My partner's setups seemed pretty straightforward to me based on what he had to work with crack-wise at the top of the routes. Mostly equalized cordelette anchors with the occassional clove hitch thrown in for opposition and/or tie-in.

Is the Equalizing Figure 8 the same as the Double Figure Eight?

Brian

double figure 8 is one version of equalizing figure 8. you can also tie it to get 3 loops. the downside of these knots is that they use ALOT of rope which can be a bummer on routes with long pitches.

click below to see an animated view of tying the double figure 8.

http://www.animatedknots.com/fig8loopdouble/index.php

i like the alipne equalizer, but i'm just too cheap to buy one. i happened to have a bunch of spectra left over after tying old school hexes, hence my owning a cordelette.

yea you are right, it is safer to have your main tie in point be say a figure 8 or butterfly, I never worry about the un-cliping with a locker, I cinch the shizzy out of the knot and load it how the biner is supposed to be loaded (bottom of the spine, in the groove) I have heard of the clove holding to 1000 lbs. As rare as it seems it would be an issue (that a fall would rip my belay piece, load me and the anchor till atleast 2 clove hitches sliped at 1000 lbs where I would likely be dead anyway).

I guess it is safer to use the figure 8, but I hate figure 8's and am lazy, the clove is quick and convienient, and for the most part bomber enough (it will hold 500 lbs more then a daisey chain is rated for and people use those to link to their anchors all the time). That's just me though, if you all really think it's that unsafe I will make sure to only use the Approved knot the figure 8. Oh and double bowlines suck too even when done with the yosemite finish and backed up.... (but you won't see me using the figure 8 to tie in). What's a hip belay rated to? (just curious, because that was once the norm for belaying)

man I guess I am just a stick in the mud.

The Trango device is too specialized a piece of equipment for me. At least with a cordalette, you can cut it up and use it for prusiks or rappel slings. (You could do the same with the Alpine Equalizer, but you won't want to). Also, to change the length of the thing, you're gonna need to put knots in it anyway.

Exactly my thinking also Bobby.

In reading some of the descriptions about what constitutes a rope anchor & knots, it seems like some are putting way too much into the construction of one. But it's hard for me to say so without a visual.

Some of the anchors in the Jong Long's books are completely adequate (& possibly overbuilt depending on the terrain being climbed). But I also like very much the Basic Skills book from Craig Luebben, I wish the Mountaineers would release his new anchor book so we could see the engineering behind trad anchor systems. Anyone else have thoughts on this?

Hip belay, it works, but in comparison, belaying off your harness with a device is probably a hell of lot more workable. Imagine catching a whipper with a hip belay? Ouch!

I hear you mark, I just thought it was a relevant point when discussing the strength of a clove hitch before slipping (in relation to the hip belay and forces generated not overcoming a person). I prefer a figure 8 belay device to a hip belay anyday, I was using a hip belay yesterday because I was top roping a 160 Ft route and it was easier then dealing with passing the knot with out my ascender. I am however soar today, only from holding hang dogs and lowering people. I couldn't imagine catching a lead fall with that technique, you really would have to be down for the cause. Guess that's where the no fall mentality came about.

I have read a lot of books, I don't remember the names of all of them, some beginner books and some like the freedom of the hills. I just thought that the anchors books I bought were more of a pain to absorb then worth my time (it seemed to really grasp what was going on you had to just be building the anchor, and if I could be building an anchor I would probably be climbing because I usually read when I can't do anything else). I agree that some of the anchors were adequate however so is what I have been doing in comparison (and in the past I have usually used a figure 8 instead of a clove hitch to attach to the main anchor point, I just find the ease of adjustment convenient in comparison to how much of a pain it is to re-adjust the figure 8).

From a slightly different angle (but still related to belay anchors), do any of you have any tips/tricks/suggestions on protecting a leader off the belay before they happen to get that all important first piece slotted? I understand the whole "leader must not fall" notion, but sh*t can happen...even on easier routes.

I guess you could try and get a cam in just above your head (if possible) before you take off, but I doubt that would provide any more security to the anchor/belayer.

Belaying through the anchor rather than directly from the belayer's harness seems like one possible option (knowingly forsaking the idea that the belayer disipates some of the factor 2 fall forces). But if your anchor is bomber...

Are there specific belay techniques (or rope tricks) that could be implemented to reduce the factor 2 fall onto the anchors and the impact on the leader?

Agree with Kirk. I like to clip a runner to the highest anchor piece (if it's totally bomber) when there's dicey climbing before I can get in a piece of gear.

After I get in a good piece of gear, the belayer can unclip the rope from the runner on the anchor if that will improve the rope line.

Like mentioned before I like to use a seperate piece up above me (and the anchor whenever possible) to belay through, when I leave the anchor to lead the second pitch this is usually the first piece I use(just change how it is cliped and sometimes extend the runner depending on how rope drag will be). The only thing that you must remember is that this piece is not always multi-directional so I always get a multi-directional piece ASAP after but for the time being it is safer then factor 2 falling onto the anchor.

BTW Mark, Awsome route! sounds like you and I end up on similar routes.

Stumbled across this (not so little) gem of a thread on rc.com...http://www.rockclimbing.com/topic/106467. It's a very long winded but educational discussion of the new take on the common cordelette anchor John Long and company are calling the "Equalette/DuoGlide".

Those of you willing to trudge through the thread want to comment here on the suggestions and anchor ideas presented?

Brian

I think the fear of the cord on rc.com is way overblown. Many of the anchor systems people suggest to replace it are way too complex to make them very useful on a longer trad or alpine route. Also, I find that clusterf*ckage is much reduced on the cordalette if you use it right. For example, in a guiding situation, I will almost always clip myself into the shelf and my clients into the master-point so that I am always on top of them. This reduces the possibility that people will have to tango in order to leave the belay. Or if I'm swinging leads, I will clip into the master-point and have my partner clip into the shelf, for the same reasons.

One thing to remember when clipping into the shelf though; you must have something clipped into the master-point, especially if the loop is short (you can get away with it if you have a foot long loop), because if the knot rolls off the end the shelf falls out of the system. Usually this isn't an issue for me if I'm clipped into the shelf, because I'm belaying off the master-point.

I use the cord for 90% of my anchors, although I'll clove the rope to pieces or throw in sliding-x's, sometimes with load-limiting knots, if the anchor requires it; for example when I must build a 4 or 5 piece anchor or the pieces are far apart so that I cannot tie off the cord without extending and simplifying the anchor somehow.

I almost always tie into my anchors using a clove hitch. To begin with, it is easy to do one handed if you are in a hanging belay. Also, it is easy to adjust so that you can put yourself right at the edge of a ledge or bulge in order to see your second. Since I am almost always belaying off the anchor, I will never have more than body-weight on the knot. I don't remember where I heard it, but somebody told me once that clove hitches don't slip, and that this person had personally tested it (Allan Jolley maybe?). Figure-8's are just far too hard to adjust to the right length. I am often extending myself when the second is climbing, then sucking back up for gear exchange and what-not.

Here is a pic of an intriguing anchor setup relying solely on the use of the cordelette and a couple extra biners. The "mooselette" (from rc.com thread, no idea who came up with it) seems to be very straightforward to setup and meets all the requirements of a SRENE anchor...provided the cord doesn't fail.

The "Mooselette"...



Thoughts?