A better anchor ancronym/checklist?

Hobo Greg wrote: ABCDEF
Anchor Better Catch Da Extreme Fall

one acronym to rule thrm all!!

People need to focus on good individual placements.
1.Rock Quality, Macro, Micro
2.Constriction, the bigger the better.
3.Nuts >50% contact with rock ; CAM < 50% closed
4.Unless you are using Totum cams or offset cams. Both lobe sets have the same expansion angle. I think this is the biggest cause of cam failure.

Things to think about.

1.Connecting anchor points together do not make them stronger or increase their holding power.
2.The bigger the mass the stronger the anchor system. (trees and rocks)
3.There is no such thing as equalizations and angle does not matter because you can NOT maintain true apex. So, one leg of a two-point anchor is ALWAYS taking more load. I propose that even > 90 degrees could be better, because you get a greater apex variance range, and that offsets any interior angle forces. You are less likely to put all the load on to one leg of the anchor system.
4.Unless you are anchoring on snow. Extensions do not happen. But limiting them cannot hurt just not that important.

Redundant is the key word.
Redundant of all components is essential. When I take a final evaluation of my anchor system. I ask if I CUT something is any think bad going to happen?

Efficient is also a key word.
Am I efficient with my time and materials? Misuse of time can lead to making mistakes, and misuse of materials can lead to taking shot cuts.

P- Placement
R- Redundant
E- Efficient

Jim Titt said it: "Get strong (multi-directional) placements and tie yourself to them" in a redundant fashion.

FWIW all of the macrame fiddling just dont matter much.

Only experience will make you efficient after that.

Bang In And Tie Clove Hitches

Last weekend a guy on his first trad lead came up to a ledge and started looking around for his requisite 3 solid placements. I pointed to the 8 inch tree trunk at head level above us and suggested that he throw a sling around that and call it done He got a look of surprise, then smiled, then said, "Can I do that?"

Yes, you can. 

A long time ago, I once got close enough to a small group of SAS (military) guys at an undisclosed cliff and overheard their chief/trainer talk about anchor systems.
It sounded like they used an acronym called 'SAFER'. I couldn't overhear everything they said but I gleaned enough to piece together the gist of their thought processes...

S = Solid and stable (to the extent that all individual anchor points resist against a persons attempt to move or otherwise easily destabilize them)
A = Angles (multi-directional where possible - and keep 'included angles' within defined limits)
F = Forces (what is the nominal force that the system must be capable of withstanding? Build the system accordingly.)
E = Equalized (if practicable to do but not always mandatory - not possible to achieve perfect distribution of force)
R = Reliable (can the anchor system be trusted to perform as intended? If the answer is 'no' - then need to go back and rework the system until it is reliable.)

They acknowledged my presence and actually engaged in a friendly conversation with me afterwards which was kind of cool.
I only found out later that they were SAS...

The thing I like about their approach is that it has a feedback loop.
That is, the last step (R = Reliable) is a question.
It is asking if the system is in fact reliable.
If the answer is 'yes' - then you can proceed.
If the answer is 'no' - it means you need to go back and rework the system until it becomes a 'yes'.
I haven't seen many acronyms/checklists that have this feedback loop built-in.

Of course, the wild card in any safety system is the human. It still requires a person to make conscious decisions.
All of these systems assume (in one form or another) that the person making the decisions is 'competent'.

Rick.Krause Krausewrote: People need to focus on good individual placements.
1.Rock Quality, Macro, Micro
2.Constriction, the bigger the better.
3.Nuts >50% contact with rock ; CAM < 50% closed
4.Unless you are using Totum cams or offset cams. Both lobe sets have the same expansion angle. I think this is the biggest cause of cam failure.

Things to think about.

1.Connecting anchor points together do not make them stronger or increase their holding power.
2.The bigger the mass the stronger the anchor system. (trees and rocks)
3.There is no such thing as equalizations and angle does not matter because you can NOT maintain true apex. So, one leg of a two-point anchor is ALWAYS taking more load. I propose that even > 90 degrees could be better, because you get a greater apex variance range, and that offsets any interior angle forces. You are less likely to put all the load on to one leg of the anchor system.
4.Unless you are anchoring on snow. Extensions do not happen. But limiting them cannot hurt just not that important.

Redundant is the key word.
Redundant of all components is essential. When I take a final evaluation of my anchor system. I ask if I CUT something is any think bad going to happen?

Efficient is also a key word.
Am I efficient with my time and materials? Misuse of time can lead to making mistakes, and misuse of materials can lead to taking shot cuts.

P- Placement
R- Redundant
E- Efficient

Everything you put is excellent information, the only part I don’t agree with is “ extensions do not happen”.  Why do you think they do not happen or am I misunderstanding what you meant?

Try going through an issue of Accidents in North American Climbing and looking for accidents that occurred because an anchor failed entirely. You're not going to find very many. Like, literally you may find zero for an entire year. If there are any, see if you find any where the anchor would have passed SERENE. I don't think there will be any.

SERENE isn't perfect, but it's good enough.

What basically shows up consistently, year after year, in ANAC is people who rapped without knots tied in the end of their rope. Secondary categories are stuff like people being overconfident about their lead level, people not placing enough pro, or people climbing stuff where there just aren't any good gear placements available.

A lot of the stuff that isn't directly referred to in SERENE just isn't suited to acronymization. We're not going to have a whole letter for "don't place cams behind loose blocks," or "don't use up all the pieces of a certain size that the leader is going to need for the next pitch," or "think about whether it matters in this situation whether you have a piece that will hold against an upward pull," or "if possible, don't make every piece depend on the same rock feature."

Nick Hahawrote:

Everything you put is excellent information, the only part I don’t agree with is “ extensions do not happen”.  Why do you think they do not happen or am I misunderstanding what you meant?

Actually there is some pretty bad advice in there.

Cams should be less than 50% closed.
Anchor legs should be greater the 90 degrees apart.

Both terrible advice! 

Michael Abendwrote:

Actually there is some pretty bad advice in there.

Cams should be less than 50% closed.
Anchor legs should be greater the 90 degrees apart.

Both terrible advice! 

I’m surprised you didn’t add calling them totums

INTAA

I never think about anchors

Solid

Hearty 

Ideal

Timely

so you can call down to your follower when they’re at the crux and say: this anchor is SHIT. 

NERDS all the way……..