Hello to all. I'm sure this has came up at one time or another. I have a grillon and was curious about the backing up that up. I know it's an ascender and if you're using just that to support you with your spurs to walk up the tree do you have to have a back up. Or do you count a figure eight or other type of larger termination whether it be a Krab or other snap at the end?
Ascension/adjuster on lanyard
- Thread starter PUClimber
- Start date
- Location
- Retired in Minneapolis
I am a huge supporter of backing up ascenders and never do an ascent without one. That said...think about the thousands of miles of climbs that have been done by arbos with only a friction hitch. No backups have ever been advised for a traditional climbing system.
Now...how to do a simple backup? Every few feet, depending on how far you feel like falling, tie a stopper knot. An overhand on a bight or a slipknot could be used.
Grillon is not really meant as an ascender, It's a lanyard adjuster even though it looks like a Gri-Gri. think of them as cousins.
Are you using the G in a RADS setup?
Now...how to do a simple backup? Every few feet, depending on how far you feel like falling, tie a stopper knot. An overhand on a bight or a slipknot could be used.
Grillon is not really meant as an ascender, It's a lanyard adjuster even though it looks like a Gri-Gri. think of them as cousins.
Are you using the G in a RADS setup?
- Location
- Nashville, TN
IMHO i think that there are a few ascenders that do not require a backup... think about it.... Lockjack, grillion, spyderjack, lineboss, grigri...
none of these can come off of the line with out uncliping the support carabiner, or unscrewing a bolt..
if we need to back these up, then we should be backing split tails too
none of these can come off of the line with out uncliping the support carabiner, or unscrewing a bolt..
if we need to back these up, then we should be backing split tails too
- Location
- Retired in Minneapolis
Google RADS and 'rope ascent/ascending descent system'
- Location
- Victoria, BC
[ QUOTE ]
IMHO i think that there are a few ascenders that do not require a backup... think about it.... Lockjack, grillion, spyderjack, lineboss, grigri...
[/ QUOTE ]
If I'm not mistaken none of these are ascenders anyways...They are all either belay/self belay or rappel devices.
The whole reasoning behind backing up ascenders is in the event that the mechanical cam fails. If this occurs you will not likely be able to reach it for a start (if using SRT) Or even if you could they cannot be 'set' like can be done by simply grabbing a fricition hitch.
Hopefully you have a stopper knot in your lanyard and wouldn't go far in any event. I'd still rather not drop the 6' and so use a knot but that is just my personal preference.
IMHO i think that there are a few ascenders that do not require a backup... think about it.... Lockjack, grillion, spyderjack, lineboss, grigri...
[/ QUOTE ]
If I'm not mistaken none of these are ascenders anyways...They are all either belay/self belay or rappel devices.
The whole reasoning behind backing up ascenders is in the event that the mechanical cam fails. If this occurs you will not likely be able to reach it for a start (if using SRT) Or even if you could they cannot be 'set' like can be done by simply grabbing a fricition hitch.
Hopefully you have a stopper knot in your lanyard and wouldn't go far in any event. I'd still rather not drop the 6' and so use a knot but that is just my personal preference.
Well this was just a thought I had the other day. I use the grillon solely as an adjustment on my lanyard and back up all my ascenders when using srt. But a stopper knot would be considered a back up as that way the rope would only feed in as far as the end of the rope where it would be stopped by a knot.
A very interesting thread which raises several issues and references into so many of the other topics discussed (Back up, mechanical v ropes etc).
Back up is a term that is often banded about (and I have no problem with it at all). However, if we are using a single system of any type- you can make refinements e.g. a stopper knot on the end of a line, an energy absorber around components. It is backing up that system- but in the true sense of the word it is not giving you an independent back up against whatever incident occurs to cause that single system to fail. You can put as many components and stopper knots into a single system and it will not make any difference if you cut the line.
Back up can be a difficult concept to truly achieve in our job. I’ve seen (and done so my self) – put a belay on a novice climber – but ran the rope through the same branch work that the climbers system is on. Now – I am not been deliberately argumentative or obtuse – but even that is not truly independent despite the (in my opinion) small risks involved against the benefits gained.
Generally, a system based around rope on rope is likely to be stronger than one with mechanical components: but this is of no use to us if the system is intact but the forces are not survivable or result in major injury. Conversely, many of the mechanical devices mentioned in the thread are likely to slip and dissipate energy- which initially may be good news, but (depending upon component, rope and configuration) can quickly conspire against you. Will your component slip ? how far ? if it greets a stopper will all the remaining force hit your system (and body), will it eat the rope ? is it the correct rope for the device in the first place?
There are subtleties in application (and major differences in SRT to tradditional double rope work position) and this is why I believe you have to look at the system(s) as a whole (the components used -and the failure risks eg cutting rope, a fall, anchor failure etc)to make the appropriate decisions on your level and type of back up. Here in the UK we have the Work at Height Regulations – no one has adequately explained the full implications to us as practitioners – but in theory the reasonableness of the systems we use could be tested in Court.
I have no definitive answers or even coherent responses to the thread!: but 20- years climbing experience has taught me that the unexpected and remote possibility have a nasty habit of appearing when you least expect them.
Back up is a term that is often banded about (and I have no problem with it at all). However, if we are using a single system of any type- you can make refinements e.g. a stopper knot on the end of a line, an energy absorber around components. It is backing up that system- but in the true sense of the word it is not giving you an independent back up against whatever incident occurs to cause that single system to fail. You can put as many components and stopper knots into a single system and it will not make any difference if you cut the line.
Back up can be a difficult concept to truly achieve in our job. I’ve seen (and done so my self) – put a belay on a novice climber – but ran the rope through the same branch work that the climbers system is on. Now – I am not been deliberately argumentative or obtuse – but even that is not truly independent despite the (in my opinion) small risks involved against the benefits gained.
Generally, a system based around rope on rope is likely to be stronger than one with mechanical components: but this is of no use to us if the system is intact but the forces are not survivable or result in major injury. Conversely, many of the mechanical devices mentioned in the thread are likely to slip and dissipate energy- which initially may be good news, but (depending upon component, rope and configuration) can quickly conspire against you. Will your component slip ? how far ? if it greets a stopper will all the remaining force hit your system (and body), will it eat the rope ? is it the correct rope for the device in the first place?
There are subtleties in application (and major differences in SRT to tradditional double rope work position) and this is why I believe you have to look at the system(s) as a whole (the components used -and the failure risks eg cutting rope, a fall, anchor failure etc)to make the appropriate decisions on your level and type of back up. Here in the UK we have the Work at Height Regulations – no one has adequately explained the full implications to us as practitioners – but in theory the reasonableness of the systems we use could be tested in Court.
I have no definitive answers or even coherent responses to the thread!: but 20- years climbing experience has taught me that the unexpected and remote possibility have a nasty habit of appearing when you least expect them.
