Testing the Primary Support Point for Canopy and Basal Anchors.

Who knows of a climber whos PSP failed?

  • Total voters
    23
If anybody has time it may be interesting to here personal run-down's or check lists in regard to remote anchor setting. I'll go first.
1. Can I see the branch? YES/NO
2. With knowledge of species strength plus branch angle (lever arm) does it retain a suitable safety factor? YES/NO
3. Is the throw-line fully set against the crotch/trunk/strongest part of the anchor? YES/NO
4. Is the trunk anchor release a climber only or ground person release? AERIAL RELEASE/GROUND RELEASE
5. Do I have adequate means to bail out of the tree and/or change anchor points? YES/NO
 
SoftBankHawks said:
If anybody has time it may be interesting to here personal run-down's or check lists in regard to remote anchor setting. I'll go first.
1. Can I see the branch? YES/NO
2. With knowledge of species strength plus branch angle (lever arm) does it retain a suitable safety factor? YES/NO
3. Is the throw-line fully set against the crotch/trunk/strongest part of the anchor? YES/NO
4. Is the trunk anchor release a climber only or ground person release? AERIAL RELEASE/GROUND RELEASE
5. Do I have adequate means to bail out of the tree and/or change anchor points? YES/NO
Click to expand...
I like your list Paul, mine's similar, I don't fully understand #4 though.

For me it's:

Visual inspection, 90% of the time I can see the PSP.

If it looks dodgey I make sure there are other crotches the rope could fall into (base tie 99% for me)

Pre-tension, bounce test, ascend!
 
Number 4 has a practical value. Wether the line is trunk anchored or cinched into the crown it is helpful for the climber to be able to release it when and if needed; to re-adjust the anchor placement, remove an anchor leg from rigging or chainsaws etc. When the line is tied off at the base in the normal fashion it takes a ground worker to untie it - so I call it Ground Release or 2 Man System. The line may be rigged in a variety of ways to give the climber the capability to release the trunk anchor aerially, the most easy of which to think about is like a floating DdRT anchor, but you do it by connecting 2 SRT lines together and hoisting that up to wherever you need to go.
Hope that makes a little sense, I'm half asleep after a hot day.
I have attached a PDF with anchoring flow chart, please tell me what you think.
 

Attachments

Since making this video and doing some research and testing...
I set the primary support point, either basal or cinched.
If I'm totally comfortable with it I climb it, no stress test or bounce check.
If I think it needs verification, I give it a sustained stress to 2 times the anticipated load.
If there are three of us, I will have two of us stand on the line with foot ascenders while the 3rd makes observations.
If there are two of us, I will do the mechanical advantage to 2X the load while the other observes.
If I'm by myself, I set the MA method and quietly and with patience observe the anchor giving it time to respond.

Whether by foot ascenders or MA or any other means, I hope that we see less TIP failures.
 
Last edited:
I would not be comfortable with a TIP that was questionable to begin with and then had 2 people bouncing on it or MA applied. Why push it? After all, there's a lot "on the line"
 
Levi.CO said:
I would not be comfortable with a TIP that was questionable to begin with and then had 2 people bouncing on it or MA applied. Why push it? After all, there's a lot "on the line"
Click to expand...
I choose the words "needs verification" to avoid that very statement of questionable. Usually there are too many other options to try to make a questionable support acceptable.
And to be clear, I'm not proposing bouncing on anything, one person, two or any number, that is kind of the point of this. No bounce, it is inducing an ineffective and unknown load.
Test the anchor with something that is sustained and very measurable and observable, then climb with a safe margin from that load.
Or don't use the support point at all, or never use anything that needs verification, but I don't think that is real world.
We use tested and engineered equipment then toss it all into a tree where so much is unknown, why not add some predictability to all of this by doing an engineered type test when we think it is needed.
 
I climb trees to get high. But honestly this is not about me.

I would say real world is what you might see on a work climb at TCC. In fact I can see this being applied very well at a competition. The climber and one official stands on the line with foot ascenders for 30 seconds while it is observed by other officials.
 
That's funny! Sometimes when I read your posts or watch your vids I think, "this fella is really high"

Right on. Some of the officials at our local comp are quite large, I'm not sure I'd want them hanging on my anchor!
 
yoyoman said:
....observe the anchor giving it time to respond.....
Click to expand...

Yoyoman, you have mentioned this several times now and I couldn't agree more. The two most important tests I do are to observe and feel. Because even a small limb or trunk may safely support a climber's weight, when loaded in compression, any observed movement whether seen or felt should ring warning bells.
 
yoyoman said:
Well now that would not be a 2x the anticipated load would it.
I think we keep missing the point.
Click to expand...
I think you missed the point from the get go... You're over complicating it.

Set the rope, climb the tree, get paid, go home. What did I miss?
 
  • Like
Reactions: evo
Levi.CO said:
I think you missed the point from the get go... You're over complicating it.

Set the rope, climb the tree, get paid, go home. What did I miss?
Click to expand...

The well thought out system to test that 3-4" crotch that is a solid ten feet higher than the next best access point...
 
If you're that doubtful of
SomethingWitty said:
The well thought out system to test that 3-4" crotch that is a solid ten feet higher than the next best access point...
Click to expand...
Oh man thanks for pointing that out, I could have been really screwed without that!

If your that doubtful of your tip you should pick another one. Look at Richard here, teaching the noobs to crank on their TIP with MA before climbing:endesacuerdo:
 
Levi.CO said:
If you're that doubtful of

Oh man thanks for pointing that out, I could have been really screwed without that!

If your that doubtful of your tip you should pick another one. Look at Richard here, teaching the noobs to crank on their TIP with MA before climbing:endesacuerdo:
Click to expand...

I thought it was funny...

You have this cute little quote under your posts: "you ain't gonna learn what you don't wanna know"

I'm 5 years in, brother Levi. Lead climber since the end of year 2. I ain't the strongest or the smartest, but I am good at my job. We're all trying to accomplish the same thing here.
Lets make big sticks into little sticks and try to get safer and more efficient as we go.
 
Levi.CO said:
Let's start with "cousin" maybe...

I bet your mom is proud of you though, what with being the lead climber and all. And only after 2yrs...


Well that is something witty! So damn clever
Click to expand...


That was geared directly towards the noobs comment. I haven't seen it all, but nobody has. I'm not green.

I just don't understand the need to talk shit. We all fight trees. This system for checking a TIP is a good idea. All of the reasoning is in the thread already.


The username was only because I use tree things on other forums. I wanted it to be something witty. That is how it came to be. It was not some sort of implied agreement to provide anyone with quality entertainment...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom