Equalized VS Focused Anchors

Thank you for visiting my channel. My passion is helping people like you grow through technical excellence and personal accomplishment. If you feel you received value from this video, please give it a thumbs up, subscribe to the channel and return often. If you feel others could benefit from my content, please share it in your favorite social media.
ABOUT THIS VIDEO
Acronyms such as EARNEST exist as mnemonics for anchor construction or evaluation of existing anchors. It is not always possible to address each item perfectly, so we sometimes need to prioritize some items over others. But how do we make these decisions? If you are a canyoneer, caver or climber this video will help you with the thought process.
MORE CONTENT FROM RICH:
Embark on a journey of learning and exploration. Visit Canyons & Crags for the training and tools you need to become safe, proficient and self-reliant for a lifetime of canyoneering, rappelling and climbing adventures.
canyonsandcrags.com
ART OF ROPEWORK KNOWLEDGE BASE
An indexed list of online learning resources for you to geek out about anchors, rigging, rappelling, ascending, technical rescue, cool gear and all things rope.
canyonsandcrags.com/knowledge...
COMPREHENSIVE TRAINING
I offer training for recreational canyoneers from beginner to advanced, for leaders and professional guides, for rappelling and rappel masters and for technical rescue teams. Check out my standard course offerings or contact me to arrange for private customized training.
canyonsandcrags.com/canyoneer...
JOIN OUR CANYONEERING KARMA COMMUNITY
Without your support, Canyons & Crags would not be able to provide free online learning resources or to change the lives of those less fortunate around the world. Membership in our Canyoneering Karma communitity is free. Your optional donation will provide needed support for our service projects.
canyonsandcrags.com/canyoneer...
RICH'S BIO
Over the past 30+ years I have helped thousands of people follow their adventure dreams. Students around the world have included recreational canyoneers and climbers, professional guides, rescue teams, backcountry rangers, law enforcement and the military. Check out my complete bio on the Canyons & Crags website.
canyonsandcrags.com/about

[@BananaWormski]

The bob Ross of ropes, I love this channel 😁

[@johngo6283]

Great overview for new folks about the foundations of anchor building.

[@lloydwhite3198]

Great show sir. Godspeed.

[@jeffm9227]

Great explanation, as usual!

[@ChartTracks]

great videos .. thank you soo much

[@nathankenny7454]

Awesome stuff

[@danahollister4084]

Nice work. Lots of detail. This is really important for new climbers and old. Thanks. D

[@CanyonsCrags]

Thanks, Dana.

[@Govanification]

So for favoring one anchor over the other, would you put the shorter leg under the weaker or stronger anchor? My thought is that the shorter leg will stretch less and therefore load that anchor more than the longer leg. Doesn't the leg angle relative to the load also impact the amount of force put on the anchor due to trigonometry, i.e. a load applied directly below an anchor will impart less total force on it than a load applied offset from the anchor?

[@feudiable]

First of all congrats to your 1k, I'm sure there are a lot more people out there who just haven't discovered your great videos yet. In this video you thread webbing directly through those bolt anchor plates - I learned to never directly thread rope or webbing through those due to the more or less sharp edges (but using carabiners or maillons), but I've now seen it a couple of times. How safe is that? Or in what situations would or wouldn't you use it? (Perhpas it might also be a topic for a future video:)

[@CanyonsCrags]

Look closely at those two bolt hangers. They happen to be Metolious Rap Hangers -- designed with very smooth rounded edges so you can actually pass your rope directly through the hangers. Should I add carabiners or maillons because it's something I should ALWAYS do? Or should I develop the ability to discern when it is safe to pass my webbing directly through the hangers and when it is not? There are hangers out there with sharp edges and burs that call for an additional interface. So ... It depends. It is easy (or maybe just lazy) for an instructor to teach "rules". More difficult to teach good judgment.

[@feudiable]

Oh well that changes my view completely, thanks a lot for your detailed answer! I never came across such hangers, I didn't even know they existed, but that is certainly good to know. Are these primarily used in canyoneering or also rockclimbing?

[@CanyonsCrags]

They are not very common. Expensive. I do believe this topic might warrant a video. :-)

[@crisgarcia4400]

Woah woah woah... If you're watching this please ignore him saying that you don't need to put a twist in the rope when creating a quad anchor at 6:36 . That's the one where you put the two overhand knots into the system creating a self equalizing anchor. I've been climbing on this anchor since I started climbing and the reason why you most certainly would put a twist in the top knot and thread the biner through BOTH the loop you created and the other strand is in case one of the strands fails. The way he has it set up, if there was a failure on the loop he's attached to you would plummet to the ground. There would be no extension at all, you would just plummet until you decked. It is highly unlikely that the system would fail at that point but for the extra 1/4 second it takes to twist the loop and thread the biner through both, I'll loose a quarter second....

[@CanyonsCrags]

Thank you for taking the time to comment, but ... picking nits, there is no quad anchor in this video. “Quad” referring to four strands. In an actual quad anchor there would be even less reason to add the twist because the bottom TWO strands would provide redundancy. Moments after the point in the video to which you referenced I pointed out that the focal point of this webbing anchor is the only place there is no redundancy so care should be taken to insure that point “floats” to avoid abrasion. Now, having said all that, if the extremely remote chance of that one spot in the webbing failing concerns you that much, go ahead and add the twist.

[@crisgarcia4400]

@@CanyonsCrags You're right about me wrongly calling it a quad, force of habit on my end so thanks for correction. If it was an actual quad then indeed it would be even less of a reason to add the twist in the top strand. However, the one you showed wasn't and I feel that it's not the greatest thing to teach not to add in the twist. There is no benefit in not adding it other than saving a fraction of a second. The benefits far out way the loss. In either case I suppose I was the one who was feeling the need to be critical for some reason and I appreciate the response.

[@equallivesda]

Maybe I missed something, but in the limiting knot scenario you show, what would be the down side of incorporating both strands of the webbing (via a twist). I have read the friction created from the twist in webbing makes it harder to get total equalization, but the non redundancy of the webbing at the "masterpoint" gives me more pause.

[@CanyonsCrags]

The purpose of adding a twist in the typical "sliding X" configuration is to make sure the carabiner or quick link stays inside the webbing loop if one anchor point fails. If the webbing is cut through, the sliding X won't make any difference. In the limiting knot scenario the ring will stay inside the small focal point loop in the event of an anchor point failure. Personally, I make sure my focal point "floats" so there is no abrasion concern. If you are concerned about the focal point webbing failing and feel better adding the twist, by all means add it.

[@equallivesda]

Jeez, I need to finish my coffee before commenting as my brain must have been still alseep :) Agreed, the twist does nothing for redundancy. I haven't used the sliding x much for my applications since the 90's (when it was still considered "the" anchor configuration). I use the quad these days if I need more sliding equalization in my anchors. Thanks for you reply!

[@CanyonsCrags]

No worries. I don't function well without caffeine fix. A sliding X in that second strand of webbing could conceivably add redundancy if the failure point just happens to be the single strand at the focal point. Quad addresses that by having two strands of cord on top and bottom of the focal point loop.

[@xoommoto6338]

But there is another point to make the sliding X with the twisted loop also between the stopper knots: ln the configuration from the video only the lower part (2 straints) is holding the complete load. --> Produces an unnecessary weak point! If you would make the twisted loop both parts -upper and lower- (all 4 straints!) would carry the load.

[@mr.byoungadventures7292]

Hello Rich, I have a question, in regards to terminology. The terms that I have heard in regards to anchors are "Multi-point Load Distributing". and Multi-point load Sharing" which one in your opinion is equalizing?

[@CanyonsCrags]

I am not familiar with your terminology, so I can only guess with a 50-50 chance of getting it right. Distributing equalized. Sharing focused. ??

[@mr.byoungadventures7292]

@@CanyonsCrags Thank you, I figured it out. I find it strange how terminology gets in the way alot. Sharing is adjustable if your fall line changes and focused is not.

[@ripapa6355]

6:50 - equalized anchor with stopper knots, why not add the twist for redundancy on the clip-in point? Everything else (minus rope) is redundant. If you wanted redundancy at the clip-in point, would it be better to put a different biner through each loop, or put a twist in the webbing and biner through both?

[@CanyonsCrags]

Answered in the video.

[@ripapa6355]

@@CanyonsCrags Where? You say the reason you don't need it is because the biner is already captured between the knots. Agreed, but it still doesn't address the lack of redundancy on the single strand you clip to. Would the twist and clipping of the second strand not provide redundancy to the first?

[@ryandevries1261]

@RIPapa I thought the same thing. Like you said you could clip into both strands and put a twist in one making the system that much more redundant. That's a 2 second task that makes it that much safer! Better safe than sorry!

[@crisgarcia4400]

@@ryandevries1261 the twist for redundancy is absolutely an important part of that anchor. No clue why this guy think's it's not but please go ahead and ignore his recommendation. You almost certainly wont die of course, that is unless the system happens to fail where youre clipped, but as you've both stated, adding the twist indeed adds a layer of redundancy that any guide worth their salt would tell you to do.

[@GabrielMendezC]

@@crisgarcia4400 What you all guys seems to fail to understand it's the fact that we are are not climbing off of these anchors. As Canyoners, we almost always use these type of anchors to abseil only. Not what you would typically find in a sport climbing scenario where the master point takes a beating with all those whippers from sudden falls. I understand you all have a background formation on sport climbing and clearly do not approve what Rich teaches here but it doesn't mean he is wrong, because he is not. I can point out a lot of climbing anchors videos here on KZbin, thought by so called "professional climbers" and their teaching its just full of mistakes. For instance, who would in their right mind use wire-gated carabiners with a quad anchor. Definitely not me. Agree to disagree. And by the way, remember. There's a reason the guy has it's own documentary on Canyoneering and not you. Years of experience. Cheers.

[@z1522]

I suspect the physics would bear out that the very short, shallow arc of the shift if one side failed would impart far less load, and almost no shock load, in comparison to that generated even if limiting knots were used, when an equalizing concept is applied that allows a sudden drop of a few inches. I have never seen a simple dynamometer test, measuring the loads on the upper anchors in these situations, and suspect this entire history of "anchor know-how" is premised on untested hypotheticals.

[@CanyonsCrags]

I like your hypothetical comment about hypotheticals.

[@kc22in]

Why are you not using carabineers on the bolts?

[@CanyonsCrags]

Why would I use carabiners on Metolius Rap Bolts?

[@unbridledwomenar]

Or, you might have responded, "Great question! These are Metolius Rap Bolts, which are designed in a way that you don't need to use carabiners on the bolts." You might also have mentioned that in the video, so folks unfamiliar with Metolius Rap Bolts wouldn't assume this set up is safe on other bolts. . . .

[@Andreyanswer]

Hello, I really liked your video. But, in this device, you can do without nodes by simply adding a loop. This will give freedom of movement and protect against falling if one of the mounts suddenly breaks out. Have a good time all day.

[@Achisachis73]

I did not like the demonstration with webbing directly on anchors, they would cut the webbing like butter

[@CanyonsCrags]

I am always fascinated by absolute statements like this one. There are some old (thin) hangers out there that might cut webbing. In those cases it would be prudent to add another interface, like a quick link between hanger and webbing. The majority of modern hangers will not cut through webbing - especially not the hangers shown in this video. Look closely. They are Metolius Rap Hangers designed to allow the rope to pass directly through the hangers. You might benefit from another of my videos - “Quick Links, Bolt Hangers, Bailout Rings”

[@xoommoto6338]

facebook.com/RichardDelaneyRopeLab/photos/a.1599755523677745/2449915591995063/?type=3&source=54 7kN aren't that much! I would also avoid putting webbing in such anchors...