Lignotuber
Participating member
- Location
- Socal
Exactly why I'm asking before taking it up. Wasn't asking for different configurations, more just if anyone knew of any technical docs, testing, etc regarding the safety.
swivel loading
- Thread starter Lignotuber
- Start date
Lignotuber
Participating member
- Location
- Socal
This is all just theoretical for me but mostly just simplicity. I still kinda like the idea of being able to clip a secondary system to the bottom of the swivel. Seems like it wouldn't side load like an MRS system clipped back to it and the ring is already there, why not use it. Idk I'll probably just go back to my rook, just playing with different systems. Here's the axis chart from DMM, I can see how it might not be in line with it but kinda suggests multiple anchor points would be ok.
Lignotuber
Participating member
- Location
- Socal
Not asking for solutions, it's good to know the limitations of gear incase you ever run into a situation where it could be of benefit.
Lignotuber
Participating member
- Location
- Socal
As Dan Cobb was saying, it looks like the scenario of clipping the end of MRS system to the bottom of the swivel would cause a bit of side loading. Probably ok under my weight but not worth it for a primary system. This is an example of the secondary scenario I was considering where I just clip my lanyard or tail as a secondary system for work positioning. This one seems pretty ok for me, doesn't seem to side load and the swivel is still able to swivel for one system. Open to thoughts and discussion 
Attachments
- Location
- Franklin, MA
Check out Taylor Hamel's video. DMM seems to have no problem with the setup.
DMM Axis Swivels: Multiple Anchor configurations
DMM Axis Swivels: Multiple Anchor configurations
Last edited:
I don't understand why this would be more simple than just clipping directly to your bridge.
Lignotuber
Participating member
- Location
- Socal
More simple than keeping another ring on the bridge as you said. The bottom of the swivel already kind of acts as a ring/master point and less to shift and clank around. Biner straight on would be simpler I guess but less desirable to me. Doesn't matter, I think I've gathered the information I was looking for. 1st scenario was pretty crappy, second seems super legit. Pros and cons to everything.
Last edited:
Lignotuber
Participating member
- Location
- Socal
Hey! Just saw this response, that's pretty much what I was looking for thanks!
Lignotuber
Participating member
- Location
- Socal
Lignotuber
Participating member
- Location
- Socal
Agreed, the first scenario in question is pretty crappy. I wouldn't recommend it.
Chris Schultz
Carpal tunnel level member
- Location
- Minturn
I’m still scratching my head about the original photo….. and the cinching knot on your lanyard that looks like its tail is stitched? I’ve never seen that.
Lignotuber
Participating member
- Location
- Socal
First pic is just hitchclimber in MRS configuration that's clipped to bottom of swivel instead of back to hc pulley. Was exploring that as a potential option if a termination knot hits the hitch or for cleanly running a mechanical like an akimbo in an MRS configuration without something like rook or gyro.
For the lanyard, that's just some tape to keep the dangle out of the way (not stitched). I don't untie it until I need a new lanyard.
Last edited:
- Location
- Franklin, MA
I have used the DMM large swivel like this quite a lot, both with 2 climbing systems, a lanyard, and the hook.
Remember that the lower ring is not held statically. In my experience, the upper ring will tend to orient itself along the axis of the swivel.
The lower ring is in equilibrium, and the only force that really matters is that acting on the swivel(1A). As long as the lower ring is able to rotate, the upper will necessarily orient itself well along the axis of the swivel.
Remember that the lower ring is not held statically. In my experience, the upper ring will tend to orient itself along the axis of the swivel.
The lower ring is in equilibrium, and the only force that really matters is that acting on the swivel(1A). As long as the lower ring is able to rotate, the upper will necessarily orient itself well along the axis of the swivel.
Last edited:
Lignotuber
Participating member
- Location
- Socal
Thanks Scott!
I started with pencil and paper, but thought actual testing might be faster, so... to the garage. My testing showed you should be in good shape until the free orientation of the loads is restricted.
If the carabiner in the "bottom" half of the swivel can't freely orient itself (for example it runs into the swivel), then you can get some side loading.
If the carabiner in the "bottom" half of the swivel can't freely orient itself (for example it runs into the swivel), then you can get some side loading.
- Location
- Franklin, MA
Bingo. In practice, it's quite clear when the lower system runs into the swivel that it's not a good situation, as two systems will tend to interfere with each other, and side loading would result.
Lignotuber
Participating member
- Location
- Socal
Woah that's awesome Dan, thanks for testing/validating!
