top rope anchor setup with webbing instead of static rope
|
This top rope setup seems to be the most often recommended setup: |
|
I can't tell you how many times I did the exact set up that you described, except I wouldn't bother with the separate sling around the tree on the right just do both sides the same with the water knot. Make sure your tails are long enough on the water knots and that the trees/boulders are stable and strong enough and you'll be fine. |
|
You're going to be fine with what you suggest, Noah. The CH is only used on the tree to facilitate adjusting the length of the leg to better achieve a semi-equalized anchor. Some (most) will see the dangling end of that CH in the diagram as a problem, but I've posted before about why "closing the system" is not a concern there. Not that it causes any real harm to do so. |
|
Noah Brenowitz wrote:I would replace the clove hitch on the right with an overhand on a bightYou can use a clove hitch with webbing to adjust and equalize that anchor. I think 20KN had tested a CH with webbing. I don't think it's necessary, but if you're worried about cyclic loading and loosening, after making your adjustment close the system with an overhand loop. |
|
thanks for the replies everyone! |
|
With webbing, do three wraps and then tie your water knot. Now pull two of the wraps and put your lockers on those. |
|
Stich. I'm not sure that method would work for me since I would like to use a single piece of webbing for the whole system. |
|
Can someone explain what's going on with the double bowline in the image? Did they bring the tail back up through the loop? |
|
Jesus what is this east coast BS? It would take half a day to build that. Why dont you just put some bolts up there? |
|
303scott wrote:Can someone explain what's going on with the double bowline in the image? Did they bring the tail back up through the loop?It's this: chockstone.org/techtips/Bow… |
|
Kinda old thread but not mentioned yet and SUPER important... tubular nylon webbing stretches... sometimes significantly depending on the length of the various "legs". This stretch can lead to significant abrasion, and in some cases failure, when the material is repeatedly stretched and released over the cliff edge. |
|
Yah...it seems like static is less of a hassle overall. Other issues aside, the 50' of tubular webbing just isn't long enough for most of the anchors I would want to build. |
|
Hmm...old thread but it seems we're reviving it, so... |
|
Noah Brenowitz wrote:Stich. I'm not sure that method would work for me since I would like to use a single piece of webbing for the whole system.You use one long piece of webbing. Sorry if I was being unclear. It's called a Wrap-3-Pull-2 anchor. A 25 to 30 ft. single piece of webbing works nicely. Here's a picture: In rescue literature you'll see it abbreviated W3P2. Now of course you have to choose a BFT(Big Fuckin' Tree) or a PBFT(Pretty Big Fuckin' Tree) to wrap it on. Otherwise, you're SOL. Lately the trees I have been doing webbing anchors on have been so big, that I can only wrap it twice, so I just clip both wraps. But we are just using the anchor to rap down to place bolted anchors, so no shock loading. Also, if your massive tree has massive, healthy branches, you can wrap around the saddle between the trunk and branch to keep your anchor elevated. This makes the angle that the rope goes over the edge of the cliff less severe. |
|
Stich wrote: You use one long piece of webbing. Sorry if I was being unclear. It's called a Wrap-3-Pull-2 anchor. A 25 to 30 ft. single piece of webbing works nicely.When not limited by rope length, an easier, faster, and more robust solution is to get rid of the webbing entirely and just put the static rope around the tree / rock / whatever, tied off with a bowline. The bowline is easily adjusted to equalize the anchor, less prone to slipping than a clove hitch, and eliminates two potential failure points in the system (the carabiner and webbing). When there is excess rope involved, wrap the tree and pull a bight of the tail to form the bowline (treating the bight as you would the end of the rope in a typical knot, with a long tail and stopper knot). |
|
Webbing is typically chosen as it can be daisy chained into a small, light package. But a nice piece of static rope is better for extending an anchor over a sharp edge as it is a lot tougher. |
|
Stich wrote: But a nice piece of static rope is better for extending an anchor over a sharp edge as it is a lot tougher.I believe the exact opposite, the webbing conforms to the sharp rock and doesnt roll all over it. I've been using the same 100' piece for many years and have seen many partners static lines get partially cut/retired in that same time. Of course living in the TR capitol of the NE , I see folks use static that has been threaded through webbing for a double whammy of safety! |
|
T Roper wrote: I believe the exact opposite, the webbing conforms to the sharp rock and doesnt roll all over it. I've been using the same 100' piece for many years and have seen many partners static lines get partially cut/retired in that same time. Of course living in the TR capitol of the NE , I see folks use static that has been threaded through webbing for a double whammy of safety!Where is the TR capitol of the NE by chance? And I'll have to say a properly set up extended TR setup will always be safer, more durable, and longer lasting than a webbing equivalent. It is industry standard in the guiding industry for good reason. |
|
NEAlpineStart wrote: Where is the TR capitol of the NE by chance? And I'll have to say a properly set up extended TR setup will always be safer, more durable, and longer lasting than a webbing equivalent. It is industry standard in the guiding industry for good reason.If guides really wanted the most bomber TR anchor they would haul around 3/8" chain for TR anchors. I do agree, a properly set up anchor is the best. |
|
Thought this was already beaten to death by Joey from NEGuiding... |
|
wivanoff wrote:Thought this was already beaten to death by Joey from NEGuiding... rockclimbing.com/cgi-bin/fo…;post=2581632;page=1;sb=post_latest_reply;so=ASC;mh=25;wow, that site still exists! I wonder who pays for it? |