Bolts at Strubens valley

Ask. Answer. Discuss. Any bolting related issues.
Posts: 434
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 6:09 am

Post by Marshall » Thu May 18, 2006 3:23 pm

My strongest cam is rated 14KN...strongest nut 12KN. So 24KN is quite a lot.

SKY chain is the same chain that they use for logging ships. It is semi-high tensile. Is cut then MIG welded back toegether. Currently they are drum electro galvanised, then powder coated. The coating does chip off & they will rust.

Most TA are not rated....check it out. This is because welding is not a totaly stable process.

Posts: 304
Joined: Thu May 05, 2005 5:39 pm
Location: JHB

Post by MarkM » Thu May 18, 2006 4:53 pm

That's the point I was trying to make! :D

It's a case of how safe is safe enough and that will obviously vary from person to person.

I see the Fixe anchors are rated to 30kN, the Faders however give no indication of thier rating. Why do we need 30kN anchors on sport routes when most biners (along with the bolts) will fail well below that?
Open hand, open mind...

User avatar
African Climber
Posts: 73
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2006 2:40 pm

Post by African Climber » Fri May 19, 2006 9:25 am

Firstly I must say that I have not read all these postings, so I maybe a little off on this subject.
WTF ???? who on this earth is ever going to need ancors that take 30kn ???? I for one have never taken a \"winger\" on hangers and I am sure no one has, unless you have a shoddy belayer and the run out is 20 meters and you some how manage to clip and then duff it up and bail, all that with you being a 200kg monster!!!!

I have never had issues with galvanised chains(ps, ask your local hardwarestore ? You get different grades and strenghts.), barring the ones that you cant get your rope through for a rap. Well placed, equalised ancors are in my opinion fantastic and bomber, regardless of type or material(within reason) . SKY TA's rock, Raumer TA are wicked, so if you are in doubt, carry some nuts and cams and place them if you are that worried!

brave up or stop taking risks!

Posts: 293
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 8:49 pm

Post by Grigri » Fri May 19, 2006 10:14 am

Good lord! I actually give up! My point: The people who make anchors as a business have a far better idea what is appropriate than your average Joe climber. So if you are an average Joe (like me) then just use the commercialy available equipment designed for the job. -simple!

I do not understand why people insist on straining their brains over this point. I would never consider making my own Cams or biners or rope, why do people think their design of TA is better than that made by recognised equipment manufacturers????????

Derek; while your insights into the workings of chain manufacture and the various strengths of steel are facinating from an academic perspective, I still feel you are inadvertantly encouraging people to construct their own anchors. Your energies would be better directed toward producing more ready-made anchors for ignorant average Joes like me to use!

Lets not forget the liability aspect! While this monster has not yet reared its ugly head in our country, I have it on very good authority that an accident resulting in serious injury or death and caused by a failed homemade set up, will most certainly land the route setter in a whole world of legal shit!!! Think about having to pay for: Rescue and hospital costs, the mortage the injured/dead climber still owes on his house, repaying the insurance company what they paid out in life insurance, compensation for loss of earnings to the climbers family, compensation for grief and suffering of the climbers family, not to mention the guilt and being shunned by the rest of the climbing community for causing access to be closed to their favourite area! All because you thought you'd save yourself R100 by not buying purpose built equipment!! Slight difference in cost dont you think? (liability vs anchors). In all likelyhood if this situation arose involving proper anchors set correctly there would no fault found with the route setter - and no liability costs.

For pities sake: DONT F__K AROUND WITH OTHER'S SAFETY!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Use proper anchors!!!!!!

I have nothing further to say on this topic!

Posts: 434
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 6:09 am

Post by Marshall » Fri May 19, 2006 1:41 pm

\" All liability suits over matters involving rock-climbing or other risky sports are immoral. \"Climb at your own risk\" - no one is holding a gun to your head and forcing you to climb. If your rope breaks or your partner drops you or you just happen to fall for no particular reason, you have no one to blame but yourself. Period. Stay home and watch TV if you are apt to want someone else to take responsibility for your injuries.\"
Nobody is charging you cash to use a route.

I just can't believe that two of any reasonable Top anchors could break on the some lower off occasion. Come on Greg...what are the odds?

All fixed anchors have a shelf life. All will reach failure point at some stage... some will be replaced before they fail....many in SA will not. Sport climbing is safer, in the short term. But as a route gets older it becomes much more risky. Can the bolter or gear manufacturer really be held responsible? Is VolksWaggen still responsible for a vehicle they manufactured 20 years ago? No. How then can a bolter be responsible for a bolt placed X years ago? Especialy when weathering can be blamed. Along with so many other factors. You choose to take the risk on a route. Who knows what nature has done with the anchors?

Is the bolter also responsible for any rocks that may come loose on his/her line? Forever & ever... Is a person who opens a bouldering route responsible for an injury due to bad landing?

X = ?

Posts: 304
Joined: Thu May 05, 2005 5:39 pm
Location: JHB

Post by MarkM » Fri May 19, 2006 2:20 pm

I have to agree with Derek on that one. There are way too many factors involved to point the finger at one person (especially outdoors). Yes the route setter is resonsible for the kit he/she puts in but there is no real governing body regulating what goes in anyway, only guide lines so who is going to testify that the gear was substandard. It certainly couldn't be anyone from the MCSA as they do not regulate the anchors, nor are the anchors that they do provide always availabe (that's not a dig at you Derek but if they really wanted to regulate the anchors they could source anchors from elsewhere).

Should FA's of dangerous trad routes or serious sport routes (like INXS) be sweating everytime someone ropes up below them? I think not. There are loads of rusty pegs (which I doubt would hold body weight) in the Magaliesberg. Whos responsibility is it for someone clipping those? Ultimately it's the person climbing the route. If he/she doubts the integrity of that piece he/she has three choices:
1) Rope up and take the route on as is.
2) Replace the piece with a new piece or make a plan (pre-place a piece above and extend a sling).
3) Walk away from the route and go climb something else.

I feel this holds true for all fixed gear.
Open hand, open mind...

Posts: 429
Joined: Mon Jan 16, 2006 8:21 pm

Post by Hector » Fri May 19, 2006 2:31 pm

I agree with most of Derek's points. Bolters can not be held liable. I climb mostly in the kloofs where if you (occasionally) come across a bolt, you treat it with serious suspicion, cos its probably 4mm thick, placed in the early '80's and more rusted than the peg you clipped below. At most sport crags, however, we often dont have the luxury of knowing if a bolt is good or not. This, I think, is the value of up-to-date RD's. Surely for a sport route, the most important info is when it was opened and what type of bolts were used (and if any bolts have subsequently been replaced). I think anyone compiling new RD's should put this kind of info in, so that someone about to attempt a route can decide if they're willing to risk it or not. But at the end of the day, people just need to use their brains!

Posts: 236
Joined: Mon Jan 16, 2006 9:28 pm


Post by guest » Fri May 19, 2006 3:18 pm

Everyone has the right to opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.
Last edited by guest on Mon Nov 13, 2006 8:52 am, edited 1 time in total.

Posts: 434
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 6:09 am

Post by Marshall » Sun May 21, 2006 8:23 pm

\"it must be clearly made a standard that ONLY official TAs get used....they must be certified, tested and batch stamped.\"....when anyone finds one of these, please send me one. Especialy one with a batch code.

Guest's \"shiny STRONG bolt\", becomes a 5 year old bolt, which becomes a 10 year old potentialy dodge bolt....becomes a 15 year old dodge bolt... Bolts don't stay shiny. Nature will eventuly have it's way with every thing. So who is going to keep all these bolts shiny & strong? Seriously...

Post Reply