Outer Space whipper in Eldo yesterday

Long Ranger wrote:

OOOOOOHHKAY Kyle.

Lemme know if I need to drop some Newtonian physics on that ass.  :()

Hamish Malin wrote:

Lemme know if I need to drop some Newtonian physics on that ass.  :()

I got this covered. 

Tradiban wrote:

Ummmm....no. Sorry, but an over cammed cam IS more likely to pull. I'm no engineer but the angle at which the lobe is contacting the rock doesn't allow for the proper force to engage properly. Thus, they can slide out. There's a sweet area on every cam where that force is optimal.

I'm sure someone else will now draw a picture and dive deep into the minutiae.

I'm pretty sure that's why they use a logarithmic spiral.  The ratio specifically changes with the size so that the holding power is always constant.  When people talk cam angle its not like a regular angle in a triangle.  Think about that really annoying part of math class with radians and theta ect

An over-cammed cam (placed in a tight placement) should be as safe or safer than a "good" placement, just likey to get stuck.

see stuff from metolius: https://www.metoliusclimbing.com/cam-range.html

A friend also had a tango cam pull.  

Bill Lundeen wrote: The only cams I've ever seen pop right out like they weren't even in at all in my 25 yrs of climbing have been overcammed units.  If you read the goods put out by SLCD manufacturers they say an optimal placement is from 10% to 50% open.  That means open just slightly to 45 degree angles on the cam lobes.  Overcammed units have no room to expand out to send the force laterally into the rock. 

I can't argue with your experience, but regularly cammed units also have no room to expand out, because rock is made of rock and doesn't move from a cam (assuming good rock, not a shitty flake or whatever) 

the cam can put just as much force out laterally because once again, logarithmic spiral,

Edit to add one of many available  sources to try an not derail thread further
http://www.valleygiant.com/cam_math.html

Oh and if overcammed cams come out then why do they get stuck and fixed on routes for ages?

Bill Lundeen wrote: The only cams I've ever seen pop right out like they weren't even in at all in my 25 yrs of climbing have been overcammed units.  If you read the goods put out by SLCD manufacturers they say an optimal placement is from 10% to 50% open.  That means open just slightly to 45 degree angles on the cam lobes.  Overcammed units have no room to expand out to send the force laterally into the rock. 

So if the cam is expanding than no force is actually being put into the rock. The force happens when the cam is pushing against solid rock and no longer expanding. For any force to develop in the unit, the cam most be pressing solidly against the rock. Besides anecdotal examples, I would like to hear any real reason behind this thinking? 

Good thing he didn't hit the ledge.

This is the best, most assertive, entertaining cam discussion ever. Highlights:

Exponential spiral.  Love it.
More surface area when more retracted.  Good one.
Not like a triangle angle.  Nice angle.
And my favorite, a fully retracted cam has no ability to expand.

Back to outer space. Pretty good gear for the first 15’ or so through the crux. Bomber gear after that, assuming you place it.  Musta run it out I’m guessing.  Hope to hear what happened.

Sean C wrote:

No need to; couldn't do it if I tried. What you're saying was more of my understanding, but I was open to being wrong because maybe it wasn't as simple as I thought.

Lol. Dude you just started one of the more hilarious conversations I've read here. 

Bill Lundeen wrote: The only cams I've ever seen pop right out like they weren't even in at all in my 25 yrs of climbing have been overcammed units.  If you read the goods put out by SLCD manufacturers they say an optimal placement is from 10% to 50% open.  That means open just slightly to 45 degree angles on the cam lobes.  Overcammed units have no room to expand out to send the force laterally into the rock. 

Can it be?!! Another real climber, with real experience, telling y'all how it really is?!! So rare these days on MP.

All y'alls school boy theories mean nada unless you got proof. So here's what ya are gonna do. Take your best cam and overcam it to the max, then take a 20ft whipper on it. According to you, it will hold, right?!! So, who's gonna put their cam where their mouth is?! 

Howzabout I put my cam where your mouth is? Haha.
But I’ve already done your experiment on an overcammed  .5  Camalot on a roof when I got off route.    

Not quite 20’ footer but a good 15’ whip.  Bent and broke the cam (still usable) but held perfectly.

Mark Pilate wrote: Howzabout I put my cam where your mouth is? Haha.
But I’ve already done your experiment on an overcammed  .5  Camalot on a roof when I got off route.    
Not quite 20’ footer but a good 15’ whip.  Bent and broke the cam (still usable) but held perfectly.

If it held and you were still able to retrieve it than it obviously wasn't over-cammed.

Tradiban wrote:

Can it be?!! Another real climber, with real experience, telling y'all how it really is?!! So rare these days on MP.

All y'alls school boy theories mean nada unless you got proof. So here's what ya are gonna do. Take your best cam and overcam it to the max, then take a 20ft whipper on it. According to you, it will hold, right?!! So, who's gonna put their cam where their mouth is?! 

Haha yeah screw physics and science, I don’t want engineers designing my gear, I want a real climber to design. Kinda like BITD when 2x4s were used to protect wide cracks. That’s the kind of tech I need. Books are for nerds

Tradiban wrote:

If it held and you were still able to retrieve it than it obviously wasn't over-cammed.

So you’re saying it has to be a fixed/unretreiveable cam?   

And since you’re a slippery devil and will claim “wrong cam, wrong placement, wrong rope, wrong FF, wrong belay device, wrong type of rock” etc on any data not in your favor, please specify your conditions better....just to help all of us out who are taking your challenge this weekend-  I sure would hate to whip under false conditions!   hahaha. 

Mitchell Dalton wrote:

Lol. Dude you just started one of the more hilarious conversations I've read here. 

Haha that's what I get for asking a question I probably should have just looked in FOTH or even Google for. At least this is entertaining

It's funny that Tradiban asked for a scientific explanation for why overcamming is not a safety risk-- he posed this as if he felt it was a difficult challenge.

Then the explanation was given.

So now he has shifted to relying on anecdotal personal stories and folk wisdom.

This debate was settled a long time ago by people who actually know what they are talking about.

Can we please get back to the search for video of the forty-foot whipper on Outer Space?

SethG wrote:
Can we please get back to the search for video of the forty-foot whipper on Outer Space?

There is no video. It was my girlfriend who whipped when her piece blew on the upper bit. We're not sure why it blew, but she had been running it out a bit previous to that -stoked to be past the "crux overhang" part.

Yes it was gnarly AF but she is ok. Mostly just fell into space, but did smash the wall a little bit with shoulder/head after the rope caught. 

Nothing like seeing your significant other free-falling into view from above an overhang, to wake you up!

Glad all turned out OK.  What belay device did ya catch her on?

When in doubt....

Let’s keep it civil people. This is an important topic. Don’t post bile and don’t post unless you know what you’re talking about. That way we can have a good discussion about a topic that could very easily save your life. 

i want to hear about a 40' hoagie.