Cordalette anchor variation

Hi MP folks,

This post is to get general input on an anchor variation I came up with. I've always had a problem with getting equalization right on my 3 point anchors. I'm usually left with a little slack on the center piece. So after doing some research and testing I came up with putting a Purcell prusik on the center line. This allows for the adjustment of the small amount of slack and also allows for vertical adjustment as well.

What I'm looking for mostly is if I've overlooked something that is fundamentally wrong with this set up that would cause it to be unsafe and go against the SERENE set up. I do welcome general input but I hope for it to be constructive. I'm not trying to reinvent the wheel or over think things. I know with more anchor building I'll be able to get to where I won't have that slack. I just came up with a solution to a problem.

EDIT: I should have mentioned that the prucell prusik does not get tied every time I set up the anchor. this stays in the cordalette and I simply clip the loop into the center piece of gear. I tie the anchor like I normally would and once I put the masterpoint in I simply give the Purcell a small slide in either direction to remove the slack from the center arm. I still find it to be very simplistic for those of you who think it might be overcomplicating things. think of it more as an extra convenience for equalization rather than extra work. it doesn't create any extra steps while creating the anchor

Yer gonna die...

But seriously, nothing wrong with that from a safety standpoint, although there are better solutions. If you have too much slack in one of the legs another option (less cluster-fuck IMO) is to add an extra wrap or two to that leg's biner.

youll almost never get true equalization on a cordelette anchor

the difference in leg lengths and the BFK makes its pretty unlikely

even a shift in weight of the belayer or tying it slightly off axis will affect the loading

just give up on equalization with those anchors and look for redundancy

KISS

;)

if there is slack on a leg i usually double/triple wrap it or use a clove hitch to get all legs taught

bearbreeder wrote:youll almost never get true equalization on a cordelette anchor the difference in leg lengths and the BFK makes its pretty unlikely even a shift in weight of the belayer or tying it slightly off axis will affect the loading just give up on equalization with those anchors and look for redundancy KISS ;)

Bearbreeder is right- you're adding undue complexity to your anchor for what is not going to be a real world benefit.

I'd argue this is less safe because you're more likely to mess it up, and you're unlikely to yield any benefits in the equalization department. You're also going to slow yourself down tying this monstrosity.

I hate to agree with bearbreeder, but I agree with bearbreeder.

your solution is more complicated than it needs to be. Just tie it "close enough" and be done.

A pre-tied equallete will do the same thing, it uses cloves on the legs that can be adjusted as needed and would be faster to build IMO.

Spend more time on your gear placements, that door jamb looks sketchy to me.

Rick Blair wrote:A pre-tied equallete will do the same thing, it uses cloves on the legs that can be adjusted as needed and would be faster to build IMO. Spend more time on your gear placements, that door jamb looks sketchy to me.

Simplicity, redundancy and speed are more important. Equalization never happens and the climber or the belayer moving even slightly to the left or right will make any perceived equalization change. Don't get hung up on super safety. It's a common mistake for over cautious new trad leaders. Just put in 3 bomber placements (they ARE bomber...right?) and tie the cordellete as best as you can. Don't waste time freaking yourself out about achieving absolute perfect equalization. It'll tire you out, piss off your partner as they're waiting at the bottom to climb, clutter the anchor and besides that it's just not needed. Keep it simple. Hundreds of people build anchors everyday and no one dies from anchors pulling out of the rock unless thier placements are absolute crap.

Kurt G. wrote:I know with more anchor building I'll be able to get to where I won't have that slack.

Looks like you are wasting most of the Cordalette with the making the the Purcell that can limit your options. The clove hitch at the biner works well and it is faster than untying the purcell.

Don't forget locking biners all the time everywhere or you know what will happen

While I have never used the idea of a Purcell Prussic to build an anchor, it is not a new idea; it is an accepted technique used by riggers.

Attached are two photos showing its use/reference source.

I would imagine one scenario where it could prove useful is bringing up the 2nd. where the anticipated force is straight down, but the next pitch traverses right - after the 2nd. arrives, extend the purcell prussik to make the arm longer moving the masterpoint to the right toward the traverse.

Thanks Marty C for the info. while it may not be the most efficient at least its safe

^^^ The reason it is used in rigging, because loads are higher and impact of slight shifts in alignment are more severe. Purcell there is not only for tightening but also for easier releasability. For recreational climbing, it is an overkill, unless you already have a pre-tied purcell that you are not using (your personal tether for example). Like others said, you can easily shorten the leg by a clove hitch, or just simply wrapping your cord around the biner several times.