Accident Report - Rigging Failure During a Rappel [Archive]

ag23

07-24-2012, 09:21 PM

Hello,
I’d like to share an accident report that might be of interest to the larger community.

Six of us were doing Medieval Chamber and I rigged a Jester (see below for jester details) for the first 100’ rappel into the slot. Four people rappelled down, but when the fifth person started his rappel, the rope ran freely through the jester and he semi-free fell about 35’. Luckily he landed on a nice sandy ledge part way down and only received a hairline fracture in his ankle.

I watched him clip on his safety and test his device. I warned him it was a brand new rope (Canyon Fire 8.3mm) and might be a little fast so he did a quick extra friction test and then unclipped. A second later he was falling and the rope was being pulled through the jester. I tried to reach it, but he reached the ledge before I reached the anchor.

SAR was awesome and about 15 people were on scene within 45 mins to clean his spine and hoist him up. He was able to walk the short distance to the ATV and we got a ride back to our car.

So what happened?
For those not familiar with the Jester, it is a rigging for the Totem that is adjustable and secures both strands without a safety. Rich posted a picture of the rigging here: http://www.canyoneering.net/forums/showthread.php?2500-The-Totem&p=28978#post28978

I learned it at one of Rich’s workshops in January, and it’s been my “goto” rigging ever since. I tested it on my older canyon fire when I first learned it and I’ve run a few canyons with medium sized of groups since then, so I think there have been a few dozen rappels without any problems, even in a wet canyon.

I took a picture of the rigging before breaking it down so I confirmed it was correct. The only thing different about this setup was that the I used a brand new Canyon Fire - I know new ropes are a little slick, but I didn’t think it would comprise an rigging system.

The shocking part is that it failed on a dry rope under normal usage, which probably means even my used 8.3mms or a new 9mm ropes could have failed if stressed.

-Andre

ratagonia

07-24-2012, 09:49 PM

Thanks Andre -

Hard to know what you were rigging without the picture. I realize as a bogley noob you are not yet allowed to post pictures, but if you send the pic to me, I can post it on this thread. ( CanyoneeringUSA at gmail.com )

(UPDATE): thanks for the picture, Andre. As Andre noted, the purple 1" tubular sling is part of his safety leash, rather than part of the rigging.

Glad no more damage was done. It's good to be lucky!

Tom

ratagonia

07-25-2012, 05:48 AM

Bo_Beck

07-25-2012, 06:26 AM

Wow!? Maybe I'm not seeing the whole picture here? Is the object to rappel on one side of the rope or other and not on both strands? The way I'm viewing it is that if it is meant to be rappelled on one side or the other without one side not being secured it is an accident waiting to happen? Unlike a belay being provided on an ATC Guide or Reverso 3/4 set up in the "autolock" mode (which still isn't fullproof), the "Jester" is relying on much less friction for a "lockoff"? What if the descent side is unweighted momentarily such as in bouncing or other factors? Does this allow the lesser friction to allow slippage of the rope at the anchor? Why would someone use this method instead of a simple "munter/mule"? Seems that this method is "gear intensive"? I guess that I'm far behind the times?

Scott P

07-25-2012, 07:07 AM

Somewhat confused as to the advantage of using it. What is the advantage of using such a setup?:ne_nau:

Iceaxe

07-25-2012, 07:12 AM

I'm still confused as to why people take something as simple as rappelling and make it so complicated?

:ne_nau:

Deathcricket

07-25-2012, 07:58 AM

Somewhat confused as to the advantage of using it. What is the advantage of using such a setup?:ne_nau:

It looks like the last guy could just remove the clip and use the totem block as a rap device double stranded?

But yeah, if you can rap on it, it should be obvious that the rope will slide through it? Agree with Bo. I guess you could take the tail end from the rope bag and loop it once through the big circle on the totem, and secure it. But yeah, seems way to complicated to me and probably doesn't save that much time. Glad to hear the dude is ok!

Edit: Also I probably would put the top biner clip through the link and not on top of it, just swap the safety biner, orange with gold. Very unlikely, but if either of the 2 anchors failed or a single link, you would still be secure IMO. Small assurance hehe.

jman

07-25-2012, 08:23 AM

I'm still confused as to why people take something as simple as rappelling and make it so complicated?

:ne_nau:

A guess would be that people don't know how to do it correctly. They see pictures or people might explain how to set It up (such as on Bogley, or other forums) in a complex or confusing way.

That's mostly the reason behind our motivation in creating our how-to vids, as amateur as they are.

In my not-professional opinion, I would think American Canyoneers could use this market and create standardized, simple ways of how-tos for canyoneering. Informing and demonstrating to the public the correct and proper ways of rappelling, rigging, equalizing, etc.

And the most important part, in my opinion, making it free and open to the general public once its released. I don't see any downside to that...

Kishkumen

07-25-2012, 09:12 AM

I'm still confused as to why people take something as simple as rappelling and make it so complicated?

:ne_nau:

ditto

Scott Card

07-25-2012, 10:01 AM

tley430

07-25-2012, 10:10 AM

Wow! Thanks for sharing this report! I also learned the Jester rigging back in January while attending Rich's workshop. The Jester is similar to the stone knot in the fact that it isolates both strands. In addition, it allows for contingency on both strands, allowing someone up top to lower. And its actually easier than it looks to free up one strand to use for lowering under weight.

I had no idea this could happen.

ag23

07-25-2012, 10:15 AM

Thanks for the warning.

It looks to me like yes, clearly, the "stick" is dependent on the friction of the rope, as as the slots wear, it could slip if the rope is small or slick. And also the size and slickness of the carabiner.

I don't use this method as I don't carry one of those Totems. It does not look to me like you could free up one strand to use for lowering under weight; therefore I am not sure what the point is.

I am all for setting contingencies where they are useful; and also for practice, so we become proficient at using them. But, this particular "contingency rigging" seems like a poor choice.

Tom

In this case I couldn't see the bottom, had inexperienced rappels who might encounter a problem (they were fine), and figured I would have to recenter rope since it was exactly twice the height, so I went with an adjustable anchor.

It is actually easy to free up one strand when weighted... hard to explain how, but it is easier to release than a figure eight, faster to step up, and it (supposedly) secures both strands to avoid rappelling off the wrong side. I was a huge fan of it before the accident.

-Andre

ag23

07-25-2012, 10:28 AM

Huh... I will step into this mess. I have used the Jester a half dozen to dozen times now in canyons and on practice raps with youth and adults. I have never seen it slip at all. I have rapped on the Jester. The advantage is that you can send large groups more quickly down a rap and also that one strand is available to lower a stuck rappeller on the other strand if necessary. And yes, Tom, it is easy to free up a strand under weight. I have practiced a half dozen times with canyoneers of different weights. It is a very easy set up and I have found it very efficient and reliable. :ne_nau:

What sized ropes have you used? And have you tried shocking it?

I've used it a lot too, but after the accident I re-rigged it at the campsite and was able to make it fail consistently on that new Canyon Fire by standing on my tiptoes with a few inches of slack between me and the jester and sitting down hard.

-Andre

mzamp

07-25-2012, 10:49 AM

I don't see the advantage of this. If you are sending a large group through, then use the stone knot. Stuck rappeller? Yes, I know it can happen but how often? In my 30+ years I have only seen it once and that was in a college class with 30 beginers. If I have untrained individuals with me I will have them on belay. Otherwise they better be carrying a prussik and know how to use it.

KISS - keep it simple...

oldno7

07-25-2012, 10:51 AM

ag23

07-25-2012, 10:54 AM

A guess would be that people don't know how to do it correctly. They see pictures or people might explain how to set It up (such as on Bogley, or other forums) in a complex or confusing way.

That's mostly the reason behind our motivation in creating our how-to vids, as amateur as they are.

In my not-professional opinion, I would think American Canyoneers could use this market and create standardized, simple ways of how-tos for canyoneering. Informing and demonstrating to the public the correct and proper ways of rappelling, rigging, equalizing, etc.

And the most important part, in my opinion, making it free and open to the general public once its released. I don't see any downside to that...

Jman, that's completely incorrect. As I stated, I learned it a class, not off of youtube or something.

-Andre

jman

07-25-2012, 11:05 AM

Jman, that's completely incorrect. As I stated, I learned it a class, not off of youtube or something.

-Andre

I apologize for making that assumption about you. Before I posted that, we didn't know you had a class for the totem.

hank moon

07-25-2012, 11:06 AM

- Andre, thanks for sharing this. You might try using 2 carabiners to capture the 2 bights and then testing. I am curious what the result would be and would do it myself, but lack a Totem. Be interesting to test the same rope when wet, too.

Also I probably would put the top biner clip through the link and not on top of it

X2, w/o "probably"

I think there have been a few dozen rappels without any problems, even in a wet canyon. The shocking part is that it failed on a dry rope under normal usage,

Note that wet ropes generally give more friction.

ag23

07-25-2012, 11:09 AM

It looks like the last guy could just remove the clip and use the totem block as a rap device double stranded?

But yeah, if you can rap on it, it should be obvious that the rope will slide through it? Agree with Bo. I guess you could take the tail end from the rope bag and loop it once through the big circle on the totem, and secure it. But yeah, seems way to complicated to me and probably doesn't save that much time. Glad to hear the dude is ok!

Edit: Also I probably would put the top biner clip through the link and not on top of it, just swap the safety biner, orange with gold. Very unlikely, but if either of the 2 anchors failed or a single link, you would still be secure IMO. Small assurance hehe.

You're correct, it is really fast to unclip it and rap double stranded.

The difference is that as a block the second pass through the Totem adds fraction to what is effectively the break strand. It is the difference between using an ATC double stranded and having two ATCs rigged in series on a single strand.

Good note about the link.

-Andre

skiclimb3287

07-25-2012, 11:11 AM

Attached Images http://www.bogley.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=57001&stc=1&d=1343220151

I agree with Scott. I have used this rigging numerous times after taking a workshop from Rich. I certainly do not use it for every rappel. Every rappel requires different consideration, and therefore potentially different riggings. I find it very handy to have in the tool box. As Death Cricket pointed out, yes you can rappel without re-rigging: unclip top biner from anchor, clip lower biner to rappel loop, and off you go double stranded (called throttle mode). It acts as a sticht plate. In order to move down the rope, you need to pull on the "lever". If the lever is pulled vertical, you do not go anywhere due to too much friction in the system, which is how the jester works, but with the jester there is even more friction going up through the rapide. This way, there is no additional equipment needed, and no de-rigging/re-rigging required for last man.

As I said, I am practiced with this setup. I have bounced on it and never seen it shift. I have used both an 8.3 canyon fire and the 8.8 canyonator (the original version before Rich increased the diameter) without a problem.

Looking at the picture from ag23, I see a few problems that may have caused the failure (I am certainly no expert, so maybe I am wrong - maybe Rich will see this post and comment). The main issue revolves around how the totem is connected to the anchor. The biner, as Death Cricket mentioned, should be clipped into the rapide. Second, the safety tether should be clipped either to the bolt hanger or to the shelf in the webbing (here we have a chain, so slightly different. The way the tether is clipped here, it convolutes the whole rigging. The totem and rope do not lie in-line with one another. It appears that the biner for the tether goes between the rope and the totem (the rope is inside the biner). This pushes the rope away from the back surface of the totem, effectively eliminating some of the friction needed and lessening the angle of rope bends. I think this may be the cause of failure. If I get some time tonight I will try and play with both ways and see if this appears to be the cause. Please correct me if I am seeing the picture wrong. For reference, see the picture below for the correct way to connect to the anchor:

57004

Anyway, that is my 2 cents. Didn't have much time, so that was typed fast with no proofreading. Sorry if it sounds tangled up! Got to run! :ne_nau:

ag23

07-25-2012, 11:24 AM

I apologize for making that assumption about you. Before I posted that, we didn't know you had a class for the totem.

For years I used a figure-8 knot with a safety like I saw on some forum or something. :facepalm1:

Scott Card

07-25-2012, 11:52 AM

What sized ropes have you used? And have you tried shocking it?

I've used it a lot too, but after the accident I re-rigged it at the campsite and was able to make it fail consistently on that new Canyon Fire by standing on my tiptoes with a few inches of slack between me and the jester and sitting down hard.

-Andre
I have used the exact same rope as you and other similar diameter ropes. I didn't have the rappeller shock load per se but had them bounce mid rap after they had locked off. Again, the rope didn't budge. Maybe there is a flaw in the system at the beginning of the rap when the rope is slack??? New slick rope? My experience is that once the rope is weighted, it stays put. Hmmm. may have to go back to the double biner block. :haha:

Slot Machine

07-25-2012, 11:59 AM

Wow, I'm really glad that he only sustained a fractured ankle. Also, thanks Andre for sharing so we all can learn. :2thumbs:

I'm amazed that the rope slipped. If it normally doesn't slip, then I'm also amazed that it is releasable. I'm even MORE amazed that this is anyone's go-to rigging.

There is nothing wrong with the Canyon Fire rope. Yeah it is a little slick when new, but that is really obvious when you pull it out of the bag. The rigging method here is the REAL issue...

I'm still confused as to why people take something as simple as rappelling and make it so complicated?

x3

Where is my soap box? Oh there it is, up we go. :soapbox:

Einstein once said "Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler". This quote comes to mind every time I check out the ACA website because many of the anchors and device setups seem as complex as possible. Seriously, when you log into the website you will see the homepage photo is a cluster of guys in a waterfall doing something more complicated than I have ever seen or will ever do. :lol8: :ne_nau: :haha:

I'm self taught, but take serious consideration to every method that I come across. If I were the only canyoneer in the universe, I would never rig something so excessively complex as the Jester. Not because of lack of ingenuity, but because intuitively the margin of error is increased significantly. Humans make errors, especially with complex routine problem solving. People get distracted, people get bored, people miss details. Add an exponent to the equation when tired, cold, hungry etc.

Why do groups rig contingencies on a routine basis? We've had a shirt stuck in a device once, we've had hair stuck in a device once. :facepalm1: No biggie, didn't need to lower those gals, we worked it out, and we won't let it happen again. :cool2:

I could ask the same about routine biner blocks. Uh yeah, people clip into the wrong side of those...

Toss and go, ATC, make sure your rope is even and on the ground, fireman belay. Haven't heard a lot of problems with that set up lately. If everyone abandons the Jester I bet we don't see any more Jester related accident reports. :naughty:

It's sad to see people get hurt because they haven't considered that the simplest way is often the safest way.

Keep it simple. Have fun. Be safe.

Bob

Deathcricket

07-25-2012, 01:24 PM

You're correct, it is really fast to unclip it and rap double stranded.

The difference is that as a block the second pass through the Totem adds fraction to what is effectively the break strand. It is the difference between using an ATC double stranded and having two ATCs rigged in series on a single strand.

Good note about the link.

-Andre

Gotcha gotcha, makes sense.... Kudos btw for the accident report and shot of what the rigging looked like before the accident. Very cool learning experience!

One more thought.... Maybe tossing the rope bag down would add just enough pull to keep the other rope tight? Maybe having the rope bag right there with zero downward force on the opposing (not used) line was a factor in the whole equation? I wish I had one of those and could maybe do some test on it. Shucks!

oldno7

07-25-2012, 01:40 PM

I have 2 brand new totems I'll sell--$30ea.

I'll be in St. George tomorrow.

Selling cheap, because I just found out there dangerous.

Scott Card

07-25-2012, 01:58 PM

$30? You must not consider them too dangerous. :haha:

Brian in SLC

07-25-2012, 02:36 PM

I guess I'm confused about the rigging. Looks like a Kong Gi Gi plaquette type rigging (only not in autolock mode, but, like a sticht plate), so...what the heck keeps it from slipping? Just the mere friction of it passing around?

The rope is not locked off (tied off, blocked) at all?

Not getting all this complicated rigging stuff either. The device has a ton of options, which, makes it kinda cool, but, with all those options comes complicated rigging that can be easy to screw up.

I guess I prefer the figure eight for contingency...and those small Rock Exotica eights are sweet!

Brian in SLC

07-25-2012, 02:48 PM

X2, w/o "probably"

X3 most def without the probably. Its "Minnesota clipped" to the anchor chain. One of the bolts fail, bye bye. A known killer.

hank moon

07-25-2012, 04:27 PM

Why do groups rig contingencies on a routine basis?

I don't why others do, but I do it now and then in dry canyons to keep in practice for when it is needed in a whitewater environment (where single strand can be useful and toss and go, hazardous). But...Munter Mule all the way for me, baby. No Jokers, Jesters, or such like.

Brian in SLC

07-25-2012, 04:39 PM

Just played with this a touch at home...rigged off whatever that device was that preceeded the Totem, and, an ATS. Same rigging. 8mm rope. I couldn't get it to NOT slip.

Are folks really relying on rope diameter and friction for this trick to work? Scary.

Scott Card

07-25-2012, 04:47 PM

:hmm2: I gotta go out and mess with the Jester some more. The last thing I want is a sketchy set up. This accident report certainly has me thinking.....

And in case I wasn't clear, the Jester is very easy to rig and to me is not complex at all.

trackrunner

07-25-2012, 05:03 PM

what advantage does the jester have over the joker? both isolate the strands & both are releasable. what advantage as single strand over a normal contingency?

Scott Card

07-25-2012, 05:07 PM

For me the Jester is easier, faster and uses less stuff than the Joker. Two biners and a totem-- done.

Iceaxe

07-25-2012, 06:16 PM

For me.... thread the rope through the quick-link and done.... nothing faster, nothing simplier.

Everything else is just inviting an accident.

:cool2:

Aj84737

07-25-2012, 06:57 PM

I'd have to agree with ice here. No sense in adding in more pieces then need be. The more stuff added the more chances of failure there are.

ag23

07-25-2012, 07:41 PM

X3 most def without the probably. Its "Minnesota clipped" to the anchor chain. One of the bolts fail, bye bye. A known killer.

I remember now why the top orange carabiner isn't through the rapide - it was too big to go through any other links of chain, and I was worried that the rope might get squeezed between the biner and the rapide and make it impossible to adjust the anchor if the rope and biner where on the same one.

I should have just added a second rapide, but it didn't occur to me.

-Andre

ag23

07-25-2012, 07:56 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b8pvjSLvUk8

I did a quick video from the back alley. I'm just putting a just little slack in the line (as if leaning forward to unclip a tether) and then kind of leaning back hard. I can easily pull a foot or more through the rigging. Not exactly a scientific test, but this is failing with only a couple hundred pounds of force.

I should note again this is an almost brand new rope and is very slick. I can't make it fail on my older canyon fires that have a few seasons of use, but then I haven't tried especially hard.

-Andre

oldno7

07-25-2012, 08:07 PM

Andre
Did you consult the developer of the jester system with your problem?
If so, what was the developers consensus?

ag23

07-25-2012, 08:56 PM

Andre
Did you consult the developer of the jester system with your problem?
If so, what was the developers consensus?

I did email Rich a week or two ago with the accident report and asked for his thoughts, but I haven't heard back from him.

-Andre

ratagonia

07-25-2012, 09:44 PM

ratagonia

07-25-2012, 09:46 PM

I remember now why the top orange carabiner isn't through the rapide - it was too big to go through any other links of chain, and I was worried that the rope might get squeezed between the biner and the rapide and make it impossible to adjust the anchor if the rope and biner where on the same one.

I should have just added a second rapide, but it didn't occur to me.

-Andre

or use a different biner...

:moses:

flatiron

07-25-2012, 10:09 PM

OMG, glad he is OK, very very lucky methinks.

For me.... thread the rope through the quick-link and done.... nothing faster, nothing simplier. Everything else is just inviting an accident.

:cool2:

X100!!! It is one thing to KNOW contingencies, another to use as my standard OP. I gotta say, JUST LOOKING AT THE JESTER SETUP SCARES ME. :nono: I was taught when rapping to always check the whole anchor/rope setup, no matter who did it, b4 I commit. And that takes very little time if you have a simple bolts and rings/links, or bomber webbing & links anchor, and a rope thru the rings. If I saw the Jester, I would NOT rap until I knew 4sure that it was safe. And how in the HE-- can u tell??? :ne_nau: And then, as they should, ever person in the group has to stop and doublecheck the Jester b4 they rap too???
No thanks. :facepalm:

Scott Card

07-25-2012, 10:54 PM

ratagonia

07-25-2012, 11:36 PM

I wonder if it is just at the first of the rap that it slips-- no tension/force to a lot? I use the Jester at places where I need to move a group through a rap more quickly. One is hooking up as one is rapping at the same time. I will test this out a bit more however. Very curious. Tom, I have used two biners, one on one side and the other on the opposite side of the totem. I don't know what that did to the system other than add one more piece of equipment. It is funny but I initially didn't trust the Jester either until I used it a bunch. It is not the go to set up. Rap and go or biner block is the go to set up for me. The jester has a purpose and I use it when needed.

I meant, use two biners in the same position, essentially a double-wide biner. The back/front biner thing does not change the equation.

I'm not sure doing it plaquette style would then also allow it to be used to lower.

ahem...

I don't see how you can look at this and NOT be scared. There is no mechanism that 'locks' it.

I think you can see that with a small rope, it would not lock at all. Say, 6mm pull cord. But with a big fat rope it would lock for sure - say, 12mm. So somewhere between, there is a point where it would slip under some load. Where is that point? What is the "some load"?

I don't know where that point is. What I do know is that that point is in there somewhere, and I do not like systems like that.

Also, since it is essentially a rappel device set up with high friction, it may work fine for normal rappelling, but when you get a 'big-boned' individual on it, or some bouncing around, it could start slipping. Since dynamic friction is lower than static friction, it is likely once it starts slipping that it would accelerate until a kink in the rope stops it from running (or the victim lands on a ledge).

C'mon down sometime Scott, and I'll teach you the Stone Knot; and how to convert it to a lower. The Stone Knot LOCKS, is easy to tie, does not require another piece of gear, and works very well to achieve the same result...

jus' sayin'...

Tom

Bo_Beck

07-26-2012, 06:37 AM

BW123

07-26-2012, 07:52 AM

Scott P

07-26-2012, 08:09 AM

What happens if you want to descend high-flow canyons, first Descents, x/r?

What advantage would this have in a first descent or x/r? (Asking because I'm curious on the advantage, not because I'm arguing with this).

Also, I think that many are using this example as an excuse to trash Carlson.

So far, only the OP has mentioned Carlson. Who is trashing Carlson?

But they are also overlooking that fact that there are about 5 mistakes in this piss-poor rigging job....and they are all mistakes that Carlson teaches prior to even demonstrating the Jester.

It would be worthwhile discussion to point them out and discuss them.

Scott Card

07-26-2012, 08:10 AM

I meant, use two biners in the same position, essentially a double-wide biner. The back/front biner thing does not change the equation.
Yah, I didn't think it did. Thanks for the clarification.

Also, since it is essentially a rappel device set up with high friction, it may work fine for normal rappelling, but when you get a 'big-boned' individual on it, or some bouncing around, it could start slipping. Since dynamic friction is lower than static friction, it is likely once it starts slipping that it would accelerate until a kink in the rope stops it from running (or the victim lands on a ledge). What you say makes sense, oh engineering one. Although as a big boned one, I have never had a problem, personally.

C'mon down sometime Scott, and I'll teach you the Stone Knot; and how to convert it to a lower. The Stone Knot LOCKS, is easy to tie, does not require another piece of gear, and works very well to achieve the same result...

jus' sayin'...

I know how to do the Stone Knot but I am interested in the conversion. I may be an old dog, but I still want to learn new tricks.

Iceaxe

07-26-2012, 08:27 AM

No offence to Ice, but he is hardly a model in Canyoneering technique.

Let see..... I've been doing this for a really long time and never had even a minor injury in any of my groups. To me that sounds like a good model. YMMV

I know all of the silly rope tricks and can use them if required, I'm just smart enough to know they are inviting disaster.

But you guys are more than welcome to keep calling my techniques antique or simple while you keep injuring and killing each other.

Sent using Tapatalk

ratagonia

07-26-2012, 08:29 AM

I know how to do the Stone Knot but I am interested in the conversion. I may be an old dog, but I still want to learn new tricks.

How's your conversion?

In 200 days of guiding, I have had to do a lower 3 times. My preferred overall method is to use a Stone Knot, and have my conversion to a lower down pretty well. My current best time on the conversion is 2:15. Average time more like 3:00. Practice practice practice.

In a real class C canyon, I'd go with a real contingency anchor, specifically munter mule. I object to carrying a separate piece of gear for a contingency anchor - it's just not my style.

But, we all develop our own style. My style may be right FOR ME, but other people will make other choices.

=====

Overall, I find *something* shocking here. I am an engineer, and my style is to understand things. I worry when other people "appeal to authority". Just because Rich (or Spidey, or Jonathan, or Hank, or Bo, or ICE, or ME) present something, that does not mean it is "safe". Hank and I look at this and see a high-friction setting on a rappel device, which makes it inappropriate to use as an anchor, as it depends on various parameters to provide enough friction for it to not slip. I find it disturbing that other people don't see this...

Tom

ratagonia

07-26-2012, 08:31 AM

But you guys are more than welcome to keep calling my techniques antique or simple while you keep injuring and killing each other.

We need your permission for that? :roflol::roflol::roflol:

But thanks anyway. :cool2:

Tom :moses:

Scott Card

07-26-2012, 08:37 AM

Tom, I "see this". I didn't believe the Jester would work until I tried it. I have since used it many times, successfully. I also didn't believe the sand trap, until I tried it. I wouldn't want to shock load that or bounce on it either but it works. I don't see the Jester as an inherently bad thing. I think it has a place and a time. I would like, however, to see other options too and then pick for the situation. I am interested in the stone conversion process. If it requires prayer, I am there. :haha:

BW123

07-26-2012, 08:41 AM

BW123

07-26-2012, 08:53 AM

Bo_Beck

07-26-2012, 08:58 AM

I do agree to a point that it's 'just rappelling'; however, this simplification might also be blamed for several fatalities each year, ie, Kolob, Choprock, etc. What happens if you want to descend high-flow canyons, first Descents, x/r? Tell me what is wrong with learning a little more! Everything is situational and I think it's short-sighted to minimize the sport as 'just rappelling'. BW

My question/statement stands: Why the semi-complex "Jester Rigging" is taught at all if it has flaws?! The Munter hitch has been used for hundreds of years and may not be the most efficient method of lowering, but is proven to work, has minimal resource needs, is simple to rig and doesn't require special tools! I'm pretty certain that the photo of the rigging that was presented is actually taken prior to the accident and I didn't see the high flow? Maybe I'm missing something?

Also, I think that many are using this example as an excuse to trash Carlson. But they are also overlooking that fact that there are about 5 mistakes in this piss-poor rigging job....and they are all mistakes that Carlson teaches prior to even demonstrating the Jester. You can't teach experience or common sense and you can only tell people not to exceed their knowledge based-abilities!BW

Again......WTH! Why would you even suggest a technique that has 5? possible flaws possible to begin with? Please show the correct way the rigging should be executed BW! So far I've heard many chime in with comments that range from "It works for me" and "I've had it slip on me"? So now are we using a system that has percentages of successful use?

Bo

BW123

07-26-2012, 09:16 AM

rcwild

07-26-2012, 09:27 AM

Scott P

07-26-2012, 09:33 AM

What advantage would this have in a first descent or x/r? (Asking because I'm curious on the advantage, not because I'm arguing with this).

- My point was to increase your knowledge-base in general. I don't mean to elude that this actual technique would be useful in any of those situations.
OK, then what safety advantages does it have in a different situation? Which situation would this present a safety advantage? I’m asking because I am curious on the advantage.

So far, only the OP has mentioned Carlson. Who is trashing Carlson?

- Many familiar with Carlson's history and interactions with individuals on this forum might find this question naive.
[FONT=Verdana]
When it comes to Carlson’s history/interactions, you are correct that I’m pretty na

ratagonia

07-26-2012, 09:49 AM

ratagonia

07-26-2012, 09:59 AM

Brian in SLC

07-26-2012, 01:06 PM

Poster for the upcoming Italian rendezvous:

57020

What's interesting to note, is, how the contingency is rigged. Easy, fast, simple.

dustinsc

07-26-2012, 01:23 PM

That "brake" step looks critical to me.

Iceaxe

07-26-2012, 01:33 PM

It also seems strange/pointless for you to bring anything up on Heaps Canyon since anything that did happen (if it did) would have happened well over a decade ago.

The Heaps accident (http://www.bogley.com/forum/showthread.php?26059) was 5 years ago (2007) and I think it has a major relevance to this discussion. One of the contributing factors to the accident was needlessly complicating the rigging.

:cool2:

Scott P

07-26-2012, 01:36 PM

Original:

http://www.bogley.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=57001&stc=1&d=1343220151

Rich's:

http://www.bogley.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=57017&stc=1&d=1343321320

A few points of confusion (I guess I'd have to see it in person):

1. I'm still a bit confused about the purple sling in the first photo. It can't be used as a tagline and it isn't a backup anchor. Are people tying off to this at the top of the rappel?

2. I'm also slightly confused about the second upper biner (the one on the left) in the first photo; the rope goes through the biner and the RQ/L. Is this by design?

3. Seems like the system would work better in the second photo (Rich's) because it is clear of the rock. The one in the first photo it seems that there are several places where any horizontal movement of the setup would create lost of metal/rock drag. Also, the biner on the right should be reversed so the gate is facing out. Horizontal movement probably wouldn't be enough to unscrew the gate (or is this an autolock?-either way...), but it could drag it across the rock and it's always good to have them facing out (keeps them cleaner as well).

The Heaps accident (http://www.bogley.com/forum/showthread.php?26059) was 5 years ago (2007) and I think it has a major relevance to this discussion.

It sounded to me that he was referring to your Heaps descent (which I don't know much about).

Either way, it seems that this discussion gives one a headache reading through it all.

Slot Machine

07-26-2012, 01:43 PM

Rich,

I hope you stick around for a sec. It appears that *most* of the people on this thread think the Jester is not the best way to rig a contingency. I would like to hear your opinion on the matter. (I assume you invented the Jester)

What advantage does the Jester have over a Munter/Mule? Do you think it is more or less likely to be properly set than the Munter/Mule?

Bob

Deathcricket

07-26-2012, 01:57 PM

Forgive me if I spoil anyone's fun by providing accurate information ...

https://www.facebook.com/AmericanCanyoneeringAssociation

Feel free to copy any of the Jester rigging photos from the Facebook page and paste them here to continue your discussion.

Carry on.

LOL what a goldmine of misinfo this place is, who is this guy? Is he the teacher that originally devised this method? I'm really enjoying reading this garbage.

I have no idea why the purple webbing and brown carabiner are in the system. The brown carabiner appears to be clipped around the yellow rope between it and the Totem. This is incorrect and may have contributed to the slippage.

Pretty obvious it's just a safety clip so he can mess with it and not fall. But somehow having an independent webbing and extra biner makes this system fail? LOL part 1!

Received this photo in an email this morning. It was posted on a forum somewhere with a story about the rope slipping through. I'm not surprised. This was supposedly rigged in Jester mode, but I have never seen it so poorly rigged. Keep in mind the Jester works because it provides friction at three points, similar to the Joker.

I have seen rope slip a few inches when using new 8mm rope with a heavy person on rappel on only two occasions. Even though slippage is extremely rare when rigged correctly, with ropes under 9mm -- if you are setting up the Jester for a single-rope contingency -- tie a mule and overhand or a couple half hitches through the round hole with the brake strand of rope.

I think this is unnecessarily harsh and kinda douchey, I am hard pressed to see the ANY difference between the 2 setups....

5702157022

Yet somehow he has never seen one so poorly rigged? Assuming the one he posted is the correct way, and assuming the one in the accident is the worst one he's every seen. It becomes very obvious to me that this system is just too complicated to use. So either this guy is greatly exaggerating just to be mean to ag23 and discredit him, or this entire system is garbage.

I just learned where this was posted. Bogley. I can tell you what is transpiring on that forum without even looking. A handful of self-anointed experts who have never even seen the Jester, let alone actually learned how to use it properly, are offering their critiques. LOL Some things will never change.

Ha! LOL #3 in one thread, this place is comedy gold. :crazy:

http://www.canyoneering.net/forums/showthread.php?2500-The-Totem&p=28978#post28978

SECOND PHOTO -- BOTH STRANDS FIXED

Friction is provided in three places; (1) rope in left slot, (2) rope through rappel ring, and (3) rope in right slot. With this much friction, the rope is fixed allowing each strand to be loaded independently. Like the Joker. Someone rapping on left strand while another person rigs on the right strand. Etc.

If you need to lower someone to the ground (contingency rigging), remove the opposite bight of rope from the black carabiner.

Illustrating what I meant about tying off the brake strand with a mule and overhand or two half hitches. Used two half hitches in the photo. If you are using the Jester as a double rope contingency this is obviously not necessary. If you are using the Jester to creep the rope this is obviously not necessary.

It is not really necessary with the 9.2mm rope in the photo, but it only takes a few more seconds, so why not.

So use two half hitches to secure it or the ropes are fixed? Maybe it depends on this guy's mood. Or maybe it's a convenient retraction now that someone almost died. :ne_nau:

BW123

07-26-2012, 02:01 PM

ag23

07-26-2012, 02:03 PM

Original:

A few points of confusion (I guess I'd have to see it in person):

1. I'm still a bit confused about the purple sling in the first photo. It can't be used as a tagline and it isn't a backup anchor. Are people tying off to this at the top of the rappel?

2. I'm also slightly confused about the second upper biner (the one on the left) in the first photo; the rope goes through the biner and the RQ/L. Is this by design?

3. Seems like the system would work better in the second photo (Rich's) because it is clear of the rock. The one in the first photo it seems that there are several places where any horizontal movement of the setup would create lost of metal/rock drag. Also, the biner on the right should be reversed so the gate is facing out. Horizontal movement probably wouldn't be enough to unscrew the gate (or is this an autolock?-either way...), but it could drag it across the rock and it's always good to have them facing out (keeps them cleaner as well).

It sounded to me that he was referring to your Heaps descent (which I don't know much about).

Either way, it seems that this discussion gives one a headache reading through it all.

The purple is my safety tether and biner, so not relevant to the discussion. (I obviously wasn't NOT going to rappel) Sorry for the confusion, I should have included a description with it.

This was not a perfect rigging, but not in any way that contributed to the accident. You can watch my video where I have a rigging failing with just a slight tug.

And for the record, that "Brake" step was not part of the class I took. Here a picture of how Rich rigged it at that class - No Munter!

-Andre

Brian in SLC

07-26-2012, 02:08 PM

1. I'm still a bit confused about the purple sling in the first photo. It can't be used as a tagline and it isn't a backup anchor.
3.Also, the biner on the right should be reversed so the gate is facing out. Horizontal movement probably wouldn't be enough to unscrew the gate (or is this an autolock?-either way...), but it could drag it across the rock and it's always good to have them facing out (keeps them cleaner as well).

I think 1) is a tether.

3): great point. Since contingencies are rigged for, uhh, contingencies, if that locking carabiner's gate can't be opened because the screwgate mechanism is either jammed from debris from rubbing, or, screwed tightly due to rubbing against the rock, one might be a touch in a pickle if you needed to undo and go help. That, or you just left a spendy addition to the anchor...

Fun thread!

Brian in SLC

07-26-2012, 02:11 PM

And for the record, that "Brake" step was not part of the class I took. Here a picture of how Rich rigged it at that class - No Munter!

Hey, is that Stoney Point?

ag23

07-26-2012, 02:26 PM

ag23

07-26-2012, 02:37 PM

Hey, is that Stoney Point?

It was Stoney Point - where you there for that class?

-Andre

Brian in SLC

07-26-2012, 02:59 PM

It was Stoney Point - where you there for that class?

No, but I've climbed there. Thought I recognized the boulder in the background...

trackrunner

07-26-2012, 03:02 PM

I posted a video here from my back ally show how easily the rope pulled through the jester with only a moderate tug, essentially failing with only a couple hundred pounds of force. Have you had a chance to look at that?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VUm8PsumoiE&feature=plcp

note I've never used the jester & not pretending or claiming to be an expert. I do know you can release & lower using a bd atc-guide using leverage to lift the device to reduce friction with the rope. in your video the jester looks like it starts out with leverage. it appears to catch once the leverage lifting the device up and threading rope through stops. is this how it works & or problem?

ag23

07-26-2012, 03:08 PM

note I've never used the jester & not pretending or claiming to be an expert. I do know you can release & lower using a bd atc-guide using leverage to lift the device to reduce friction with the rope. in your video the jester looks like it starts out with leverage. it appears to catch once the leverage lifting the device up and threading rope through stops. is this how it works & or problem?

Nope, that rope isn't suppose to move at all. And it doesn't catch me - I just reach the ground.

-Andre

bjp

07-26-2012, 03:08 PM

I don't see how you can look at this and NOT be scared. There is no mechanism that 'locks' it.

I think you can see that with a small rope, it would not lock at all. Say, 6mm pull cord. But with a big fat rope it would lock for sure - say, 12mm. So somewhere between, there is a point where it would slip under some load. Where is that point? What is the "some load"?

I don't know where that point is. What I do know is that that point is in there somewhere, and I do not like systems like that.

Tom, I'm not sure I understand. Certainly you are correct that this system is like two stacked rappel devices with some extra friction in between, but you do not like systems that release under some load (which is less than the breaking strength of the equipment)? What about the sand trap? I suppose you don't like the water trap now, but what if that accident hadn't happened?

Would you recommend against other friction-only riggings like the Joker (same idea as Jester, but two figure 8's are used as the friction devices instead of two sticht plates)? What about a figure 8 block? It doesn't have any knot-like characteristics that apply the weighting tension to another strand to "lock" them in place either, so it is a friction-only rigging as well. I'll have to admit that I'm not scared when I look at a figure 8 block, but perhaps I've been overlooking something important. I definitely see that there is a distinction between "locking" riggings where increasing tension increases holding force by more than the tension increase, and "non-locking" riggings that will slip eventually and it's only a matter of how much force needs to be applied.

ratagonia

07-26-2012, 03:15 PM

The purple is my safety tether and biner, so not relevant to the discussion. (...)

-Andre

I think you will find, Andre, that it is a good idea to not put your safety leash into the rapid link where the rope goes. If your leash biner does not fit in the chain, toss a sling into one of the links and clip into that. Clipping around the chain (like the brown biner in the picture), aka the "Minnesota Clip", as has been pointed out, is not a good idea.

I disagree that the rigging shown did not contribute to the accident. The differences between Rich's configuration and your configuration are small, but they are significant. You have crap in the way that does not let the rope align tightly against the body of the Totem. This changes the friction generated; and may have contributed significantly to the accident.

Personally, for me the system is too sensitive to small changes. You made some small changes. Hard to say how those small changes effect the system friction without some specific testing.

Tom

Brian in SLC

07-26-2012, 03:26 PM

What about a figure 8 block? It doesn't have any knot-like characteristics that apply the weighting tension to another strand to "lock" them in place either, so it is a friction-only rigging as well. I'll have to admit that I'm not scared when I look at a figure 8 block, but perhaps I've been overlooking something important.

The figure eight, as far as I know it, its pretty "locked off" when you twist and put a sort of half hitch into it to secure the loop. And, I have always seen folks then clip that off as well, securing it for all but the last person.

Who has a good photo of a locked off figure eight, or, the current Stefan Hofmann riggin' of it? Post up!

Thanks.

ratagonia

07-26-2012, 03:31 PM

Tom, I'm not sure I understand. Certainly you are correct that this system is like two stacked rappel devices with some extra friction in between, but you do not like systems that release under some load (which is less than the breaking strength of the equipment)? What about the sand trap? I suppose you don't like the water trap now, but what if that accident hadn't happened?

Would you recommend against other friction-only riggings like the Joker (same idea as Jester, but two figure 8's are used as the friction devices instead of two sticht plates)? What about a figure 8 block? It doesn't have any knot-like characteristics that apply the weighting tension to another strand to "lock" them in place either, so it is a friction-only rigging as well. I'll have to admit that I'm not scared when I look at a figure 8 block, but perhaps I've been overlooking something important. I definitely see that there is a distinction between "locking" riggings where increasing tension increases holding force by more than the tension increase, and "non-locking" riggings that will slip eventually and it's only a matter of how much force needs to be applied.

You're talking apples and pomegranates.

Sandtrap:

We have some fancy anchor devices for use when other anchors are not available and/or terribly inconvenient. When we use the Sandtrap, (usually) only the last person rappels on it without a solid meat-anchor backup, and only after it has been thoroughly tested using a rappeller who is heavier and rougher than the final person will be. And the final person is not likely to be a beginner, and is unlikely to over-body-weight load the anchor.

As a product (and as a technique), the Sandtrap is released as a specialized tool for special circumstances, that requires considerable judgment to use, judgment best developed by using it with people that have already learned how to use it. Most of the sales of SandTraps have been to people who had previously used them in the field, and had already been trained (most, not all).

You might notice that the water trap has not been "released". It is not yet in a releasable state. Still working on it, slowly.

Joker/Jester:

This is a technique that people are trained to, using a specific piece of gear (Totem). Certainly Andre thought he could just go out and use it, with whatever ropes, and with a bunch of beginners. I think Scott has more or less said the same thing - he uses it frequently with beginners, and without a special concern about small/slippery ropes.

The Figure-8 blocks I have seen have an extra loop of rope that acts as a lock. It is not just friction partly because there is rope-across-rope interaction that tends to lock with more force.

To me, the other difference is that the Jester method is offered in a place where many other riggings could be used. Does this have advantages over other methods? Yeah, I can see that it would be great to have a system that sets up quickly, allows both strands to be used independently back and forth, AND provides contingency setup on each of those strands. That would be a nice system, if it worked.

Tom

bjp

07-26-2012, 03:48 PM

What advantage does the Jester have over a Munter/Mule? Do you think it is more or less likely to be properly set than the Munter/Mule?

The Jester and Joker are releasable versions of the Stone knot -- all three isolate both strands allowing people to rappel on either strand while the Munter/Mule does not. The reason one might want the option to rappel on both strands is to have someone rappelling at all times in a big group; the next person rigs while the previous person is on rappel. This is extremely useful in certain circumstances, like taking a group of 12 through Little Santa Anita with 10-12 small rappels.

I can only speak from personal experience, but I find it much easier to rig, teach others to rig, and check the Joker than a Munter/Mule. Like the Joker, the Jester essentially has just 3 simple steps -- clip Totem to anchor, push rope into sticht slots, clip carabiner through bights. The Munter/Mule has 4 steps and more details to get right -- clip quickdraw to anchor, tie Munter with rappel strand to lower carabiner, tie a slip knot with a bight from between the lower carabiner and quickdraw, tie an overhand with bight.

What's interesting to note, is, how the contingency is rigged. Easy, fast, simple.

East, fast, simple, and doesn't accomplish what the Jester does.

For me.... thread the rope through the quick-link and done.... nothing faster, nothing simplier.

Everything else is just inviting an accident.

And, y'know, not drowning in an Italian rendezvous.

I'm just putting a just little slack in the line (as if leaning forward to unclip a tether) and then kind of leaning back hard. I can easily pull a foot or more through the rigging. Not exactly a scientific test, but this is failing with only a couple hundred pounds of force.

I should note again this is an almost brand new rope and is very slick. I can't make it fail on my older canyon fires that have a few seasons of use, but then I haven't tried especially hard.

This is the important piece of information ag23 has graciously provided from his experience and follow-up testing: don't use a Jester with thin rope, especially if it's new. I'd be interested in how much force it takes to slip various rope types in the Jester. I'd do the experiment but I don't have a Totem.

bjp

07-26-2012, 04:03 PM

The figure eight, as far as I know it, its pretty "locked off" when you twist and put a sort of half hitch into it to secure the loop. And, I have always seen folks then clip that off as well, securing it for all but the last person.

Who has a good photo of a locked off figure eight, or, the current Stefan Hofmann riggin' of it? Post up!

Thanks.

Perhaps the photos by unripecoconut on the "Figure 8 block with lower" (7/30/2011) thread? A rigging/knot is "locked" when a strand with more tension is pinning a strand with less tension against something else. So it looks to me like the first picture in that thread is not locked off, nor is the demonstration in cerberuscanyons. Tom seems to think it's not important whether the figure 8 block is strictly locked off -- see 4/30/2012 response to unripecoconut on the same thread.

Putting a clove hitch in when securing it to the loop would certainly do the job :) A clove hitch is a great example of locking -- the only thing it does is pin the lower-tension strand against the thing it's hitched on using the higher-tension strand.

Scott Card

07-26-2012, 04:08 PM

You're talking apples and pomegranates.

Sandtrap:

.......
Joker/Jester:
.......

That would be a nice system, if it worked.

Tom
Tom, it does work. It really does. My compairison was not apples to pomegranates in the sense of equipment to equipment but the comments against the sand trap and the comments against the Jester seem to be very, very similar --particularly by those who haven't tried it (or them). This accident is quite the head-scratcher for me since I have actually used the Jester multiple time to send people, youth and adults alike, down rappels, the most recent a group of twenty or so girls. Not even a tiny slip of the rope. I know, I watch these things like a hawk. Liability is/ was a major concern for someone like me. :haha: Just for fun, I think I will mark the rope at the rapide and then check the back and forth of the raps when I use this again. *edit. I think I will add a biner block just to complicate things more on each strand just in case as I test this thing out with my ropes. Off to my swing set this evening. Wish I had a video... well actually I don't. This will look pretty stupid to the neighbors. :haha:

ratagonia

07-26-2012, 04:19 PM

Bjp - you have test equipment?

Tom

bjp

07-26-2012, 04:25 PM

You're talking apples and pomegranates.

Point taken -- fancy anchors are for special circumstances and users are taught to be extremely careful with them, while the Jester may have been represented as a rope-agnostic tool that can be used often. People should take note of ag23's discovery that friction slipping occurs in the Jester at unacceptably low tension with some ropes.

Joker/Jester:

This is a technique that people are trained to, using a specific piece of gear (Totem)

Well, I use it all the time using two overlapping opposed standard figure 8's (not a Totem). And my use case is the same -- beginners in large groups. So, I'd definitely be interested in whether you think the Joker is also a rigging that people shouldn't be using frequently.

The Figure-8 blocks I have seen have an extra loop of rope that acts as a lock. It is not just friction partly because there is rope-across-rope interaction that tends to lock with more force.

It's not just rope-on-rope that does the locking, it's high-tension on low-tension (like in the clove hitch). Most figure 8 blocks I've seen don't have this locking feature -- I'd be interested to see a picture of one that does.

To me, the other difference is that the Jester method is offered in a place where many other riggings could be used. Does this have advantages over other methods? Yeah, I can see that it would be great to have a system that sets up quickly, allows both strands to be used independently back and forth, AND provides contingency setup on each of those strands. That would be a nice system, if it worked.

Well, we can essentially always come up with other ways of doing things; it's just a matter of which way has the most advantages (including such advantages as "I know how to do it this way") How do you defined "worked"? Clearly the Jester doesn't work with all ropes and rigging variations, as ag23 has shown. But it works with a lot, and so does the Joker.

bjp

07-26-2012, 04:27 PM

Bjp - you have test equipment?

Tom

Sorta -- a 2000 pound tension gauge and a come-along. I occasionally have access to a 10k pound puller.

ratagonia

07-26-2012, 04:29 PM

Tom, it does work. It really does. My compairison was not apples to pomegranates in the sense of equipment to equipment but the comments against the sand trap and the comments against the Jester seem to be very, very similar --particularly by those who haven't tried it (or them). This accident is quite the head-scratcher for me since I have actually used the Jester multiple time to send people, youth and adults alike, down rappels, the most recent a group of twenty or so girls. Not even a tiny slip of the rope. I know, I watch these things like a hawk. Liability is/ was a major concern for someone like me. :haha: Just for fun, I think I will mark the rope at the rapide and then check the back and forth of the raps when I use this again.

I see your point, but...

I would say that we have an instance of it failing, therefore it is incorrect to say "it works". You have used it extensively, and it has NOT YET failed on you. I think this is a good thing.

I hope to do some testing on Sunday if we can find the dynamometer.

My suspicion is that the method is not "robust". Like Humpty-Dumpty, I have my own meaning for this word. The Jester fails under some circumstances. We have not yet revealed which circumstances. My suspicion is that the small rigging variations Andre made coupled with a new, smallish rope yielded a failure. A robust system is one that can be rigged slightly wrong or used with carabiners and ropes that are a little off-the-norm, and still work.

Now that YOU have been notified that there is a possibility it does not work in all reasonable circumstances, may I presume that you CANNOT use it until this has been investigated fully, and you will be going back to the Stone?

Tom

Scott Card

07-26-2012, 04:35 PM

I see your point, but...

I would say that we have an instance of it failing, therefore it is incorrect to say "it works". You have used it extensively, and it has NOT YET failed on you. I think this is a good thing.

I hope to do some testing on Sunday if we can find the dynamometer.

My suspicion is that the method is not "robust". Like Humpty-Dumpty, I have my own meaning for this word. The Jester fails under some circumstances. We have not yet revealed which circumstances. My suspicion is that the small rigging variations Andre made coupled with a new, smallish rope yielded a failure. A robust system is one that can be rigged slightly wrong or used with carabiners and ropes that are a little off-the-norm, and still work.

Now that YOU have been notified that there is a possibility it does not work in all reasonable circumstances, may I presume that you CANNOT use it until this has been investigated fully, and you will be going back to the Stone?

Tom
Hence my edited comment above... isn't the answer a biner block? :lol8: I will test it on myself under a controlled environment with soft grass below my swingset hut. :crazy: This sounds down-right scientific! Prepare for a big boned canyoneers' findings to come.

ratagonia

07-26-2012, 04:39 PM

Hence my edited comment above... isn't the answer a biner block? :lol8: I will test it on myself under a controlled environment with soft grass below my swingset hut. :crazy: This sounds down-right scientific! Prepare for a big boned canyoneers' findings to come.

I use a Stone Knot as my #1 rigging these days. Biner block #2.

T

bjp

07-26-2012, 04:41 PM

I hope to do some testing on Sunday if we can find the dynamometer.

If you have extra time/patience, I would personally find it extremely useful if you might consider testing the opposed-figure 8's version of the Joker. If you can't, I'll try testing it next time I pull on stuff.

ratagonia

07-26-2012, 04:43 PM

How do you defined "worked"? Clearly the Jester doesn't work with all ropes and rigging variations, as ag23 has shown. But it works with a lot, and so does the Joker.

I have a higher standard than "works with a lot".

Could you post a picture of the Joker you are using? Or is it the Jester?

Tom

Scott Card

07-26-2012, 04:44 PM

I use a Stone Knot as my #1 rigging these days. Biner block #2.

T I need to learn the convert to lower from a Stone Knot you speak of. That one for sure I can't picture in my mind.

ratagonia

07-26-2012, 04:46 PM

Maybe Brian could post a picture (however poor) of the Figure-8 block method he is currently using.

Tom

bjp

07-26-2012, 05:03 PM

Could you post a picture of the Joker you are using? Or is it the Jester?

Tom

I use the Joker; I don't have a Totem. I'll try to take one tonight. In terms of a description: start with the rappel rope passed through the quick link. Clip one side of a quick draw onto the shelf of an anchor and the other end to the big holes of two figure 8's. Rotate each of the figure 8's 90 degrees in opposite directions so that the little holes are on opposite sides but the big holes are still overlapping ("Mickey ears"). Make a bight on one of the rope strands, pass it through the big holes, and then around the little hole of one of the figure 8's just like you would when rigging for rappel. Repeat symmetrically for the other strand. Clip a quick draw to both little holes as a safety if desired.

Basically, it's identical to the Jester except that the two sticht plate friction points are replaced with figure 8's. But come to think of it, I'm not sure why the big and little holes couldn't be reversed for a bit more friction; I'll have to try that.

Also, looks like I'll be able to use the 10k puller next week. I have the samples of all your ropes; want anything broken? :)

Brian in SLC

07-26-2012, 06:45 PM

Fiddlin' about...here's the Rock Exotica smallish eight, rigged with a tie off on the T post. Kinda neat:

57035

ATS rigged ala Jester, methinks:

57036

Some rap device (Trango?) rigged ala Jester as well, methinks:

57037

Note the two above don't hold me, but, slip when rappelling single strand. Tom, recognize the cord? Its your old friend the teal trail line! 8mm. My guess is the friction holding of the Jester is very (VERY) rope diameter, and, maybe rappeller weight, dependant.

How I've rigged an eight, but, not sure if other folk do it this way, or, that its Stefan's way:

57038

Cheers!

ratagonia

07-26-2012, 07:14 PM

Thanks.

Yes, nice Teal "Trail Line". What a piece of junk. Sorry I ever had anything to do with that. I would call it 7.5mm by today's standards!

T

Brian in SLC

07-26-2012, 08:03 PM

Yeah, that rope is the one we harvested from being cut off and left in a canyon. Great for living room/stairwell use!

Bo_Beck

07-27-2012, 07:25 AM

Hey Beck! Did I say that I use the thing? And why am I suddenly having to defend learning basic techniques (this is not a basic technique but rather a use for the totem) ? In the context of these Canyoneering courses, a lot is thrown at relative beginners over a short amount of time including the use of many devices. BTW...I like the M/M but if you are stupid, you could really screw that up too!

BW

I apologize BW. I read what you said about Rich showing you 5 incorrect ways that the Jester could be set up, and just wanted clarification as to the correct way so that if at any time I was with someone insisting that we use this system, I might be able to understand if it were rigged properly or not? Once again...no mal-intent directed toward you.

Bo_Beck

07-27-2012, 07:44 AM

Slot Machine

07-27-2012, 08:09 AM

I need to learn the convert to lower from a Stone Knot you speak of. That one for sure I can't picture in my mind.

X2 :hmm2:

Slot Machine

07-27-2012, 08:20 AM

The Jester and Joker are releasable versions of the Stone knot -- all three isolate both strands allowing people to rappel on either strand while the Munter/Mule does not. The reason one might want the option to rappel on both strands is to have someone rappelling at all times in a big group; the next person rigs while the previous person is on rappel. This is extremely useful in certain circumstances, like taking a group of 12 through Little Santa Anita with 10-12 small rappels.

I can only speak from personal experience, but I find it much easier to rig, teach others to rig, and check the Joker than a Munter/Mule. Like the Joker, the Jester essentially has just 3 simple steps -- clip Totem to anchor, push rope into sticht slots, clip carabiner through bights. The Munter/Mule has 4 steps and more details to get right -- clip quickdraw to anchor, tie Munter with rappel strand to lower carabiner, tie a slip knot with a bight from between the lower carabiner and quickdraw, tie an overhand with bight.

Ah, you forgot the new important fourth step, hope it holds and pray you don't die. :lol8: I joke, I joke...

Really, this is the best "for" argument on the thread so far. I'm not sold yet, but thanks bjp for answering my question.

I'm looking forward to these fancy test results. :popcorn:

Iceaxe

07-27-2012, 08:38 AM

:popcorn:

BW123

07-27-2012, 09:04 AM

bjp

07-27-2012, 10:45 AM

ATS rigged ala Jester, methinks

Looks equivalent to the Totem version to me.

How I've rigged an eight, but, not sure if other folk do it this way, or, that its Stefan's way

Thanks for the great pictures. However, I still don't think this eight block is "locked". I've colored the rope according to how much tension is on it, for both the clove hitch and your eight block (I'm not sure which way the strands go in your eight block, so I have two versions; they differ only by a half-twist of the final bight):
57041
5704257043

In the clove hitch, note that a high-tension part of the rope (the diagonal segment) is on top of a lower-tension part of the rope (the vertical segment on the left) -- this is what locks/pins it to the bar. In the eight block, there is no high-tension part on top of a lower-tension part (or rather, there is no low-tension part in between the figure 8 and a high-tension part) -- it is not locked to the figure 8. For this reason, I would put the figure 8 block in the "non-locking" category along with the Joker, Jester, etc, and since I trust the figure 8 block (and it seems like pretty much everyone else does too), I don't think it's reasonable to categorically call the Jester unsafe simply because it doesn't lock. It may or may not be safe for other reasons (such as not providing enough friction), but unless I'm missing something, I take issue with this statement:

I don't see how you can look at this and NOT be scared. There is no mechanism that 'locks' it.

ratagonia

07-27-2012, 11:01 AM

I guess we disagree on what it means for something to lock.

As someone said - if you pull on it and it will go to full strength without slipping, it is (de facto) locked.

If you pull on it and at some force it starts to slip, it is (de facto) NOT locked.

Figure8 block - Locked (pretty sure). Because rope crosses rope, and the way the rope crosses rope.

Tom :moses:

p.s. Nice coloring job...

bjp

07-27-2012, 11:46 AM

I guess we disagree on what it means for something to lock.

As someone said - if you pull on it and it will go to full strength without slipping, it is (de facto) locked.

If you pull on it and at some force it starts to slip, it is (de facto) NOT locked.

Hmm, yes, we have different definitions. The key difference is that a rigging could be Tom-locked with one size of rope and not-Tom-locked with another size of rope. If a rigging is Ben-locked with one size of rope, it should be Ben-locked for all sizes of rope. So when we observe that the Jester is not Tom-locked with new, thin rope, that doesn't really tell us much about whether the Jester is Tom-locked with thicker, standard rope. In fact, "full strength" is relative; perhaps the Jester IS Tom-locked for new, thin rope if the system includes a sand trap ;)

Figure8 block - Locked (pretty sure).

Interesting; I'm inclined to think it's not Tom-locked under some circumstances. I'll test and report.

Because rope crosses rope, and the way the rope crosses rope.

Surely this isn't the reason it's locked. I can easily create a Tom-locked anchor where rope never crosses rope -- just put 6 normally-rigged figure 8's on a rope, one after another.

ratagonia

07-27-2012, 11:59 AM

Hmm, yes, we have different definitions. The key difference is that a rigging could be Tom-locked with one size of rope and not-Tom-locked with another size of rope. If a rigging is Ben-locked with one size of rope, it should be Ben-locked for all sizes of rope. So when we observe that the Jester is not Tom-locked with new, thin rope, that doesn't really tell us much about whether the Jester is Tom-locked with thicker, standard rope. In fact, "full strength" is relative; perhaps the Jester IS Tom-locked for new, thin rope if the system includes a sand trap ;)

Interesting; I'm inclined to think it's not Tom-locked under some circumstances. I'll test and report.

Surely this isn't the reason it's locked. I can easily create a Tom-locked anchor where rope never crosses rope -- just put 6 normally-rigged figure 8's on a rope, one after another.

"Full Strength"

"Going to full strength" in testing means that the rope breaks. If your anchor or test fixture breaks, that means you did a poor job of setting up the test. If I break my telephone pole anchor, I am in big trouble.

A system is much more useful if it "locks" independent of rope size. Knowing that the Jester works for some ropes but not for others is not real useful to ME - I want my rigging things to work with all (reasonable) sizes of rope. Wet or dry, new or well-used, full moon or new moon.

I think we are talking past each other, BJP. Perhaps some actual testing, rather than more talking would be a good idea, and would clarify meaning. No, tom-locked should be independent of rope size. Yes, it is possible to make something that locks without rope crossing rope, but that would be the difficult way. Most systems that "lock" have rope crossing rope.

"just put 6 normally-rigged figure 8's on a rope, one after another"

Our discussion has progressed to the "extension to absurdity" - suggesting that more back and forth is unlikely to be fruitful.

Tom

deagol

07-27-2012, 12:32 PM

..... I am hard pressed to see the ANY difference between the 2 setups....

(pics)

One thing I noticed is the rapide in Andre's version is through the top biner and perpendicular to it, while the rapide & top biner are parallel in Rich's pic. Not sure what effect this would have on the system.

Disclaimer: I have used the Totem in several ways, but never as a jester.

...A system is much more useful if it "locks" independent of rope size. ...

I have used the Totem in ascending mode with two different diameters of rope and overall I love the Totem. However, to my dismay, the Totem does slip when using the 8.3 MM rope. I thought I could use it for this use on all my ropes, but after noticing this, I am thinking I may need a device for that purpose.

Brian in SLC

07-27-2012, 03:30 PM

Looks equivalent to the Totem version to me.

Isn't the "Jester" a method for the "Totem"? I ask out of ignorance...

Thanks for the great pictures. However, I still don't think this eight block is "locked". I've colored the rope according to how much tension is on it

As the kids say (or, Kenny on South Park), thats "hella cool!"

I think mine's on the bottom, as, there's a half twist finish on my loop.

I get my full weight on the rappel strand, and, static on that, I just set there. Then, I can undo and lower easily whilst my full weight is on the rope. I like it. Also, for back up, out of the photo to the left, there's a clove hitch on a 'biner for back up.

Thanks for the "color" commentary!

ratagonia

07-27-2012, 05:12 PM

Isn't the "Jester" a method for the "Totem"? I ask out of ignorance...

The "Jester" is a rigging technology, that could be implemented with any piece of metal with appropriate geometry.

Tom

bjp

07-28-2012, 07:52 PM

Could you post a picture of the Joker you are using?

Joker:
57069

rcwild

07-28-2012, 08:07 PM

Seems Andre should have taken more than one photo and/or taken better notes and/or paid more attention during the course. I told his class, just like I tell every other class, that the Jester provides the core rigging system for a variety of applications. It can be used for lowering, single-rope contingency, double-rope contingency, creeping the rope with depth gauge, rigging plate for top rope belay, rigging plate for converting contingency to haul, etc. etc. etc.

I told Andre's class, just like I have told every other class, that the Jester, (correctly) rigged only in "core" mode slipped when I tested it in single-rope contingency mode with narrower diameter ropes (8mm Canyon Pro DS). Until someone is sure how it will behave with their particular rope, it should be either minded or tied off -- when used for single-rope contingency. Even if you are confident your rope won't slip in single-rope contingency mode, it only takes an extra 10 seconds to tie it off, so why not?

Needless to say (at least for those who understand the techniques) it is not necessary to tie off if it is rigged for creeping the rope or double-rope contingency.

After making all of those points, the students practiced with it using 8.9-9.2mm ropes. Their concerns went from "will it be enough friction" to "there is too much friction to lower". I demonstrated the normal-friction lowering mode and another low-friction lowering mode.

The Totem WORKS for rappelling and rigging with ropes from 8mm to 10mm. The Jester rigging system WORKS with ropes from 8mm to 10mm. Like virtually all devices, it is rigged differently to accommodate its diameter range. Kinda like how you need to rig a figure eight differently with various diameters, how you need to rig an ATC differently with various diameters, etc.

The Jester WORKS when it is used correctly (which includes minding it or tying it off when rigged in single-rope contingency mode, especially with narrow diameter ropes). It might not work when it is used incorrectly.

Stone Knot works when it is used correctly. It might not when it is used incorrectly. MaxxiPad works when it is used correctly. Might not when it is used incorrectly. Water version of MaxxiPad works when it is used correctly. Might not (did not?) when it is used incorrectly. Figure eight knot works when it is tied correctly. Might not when it is tied incorrectly. Etc. Etc. Etc.

I have been teaching the munter-mule since 1994 and can demonstrate at least 5 common mistakes people make when rigging it. Quite a few people avoid using it because they are not confident with their ability to do it correctly. The Jester is much much simpler to rig than a munter-mule. I can teach anyone the core Jester rigging system in a couple minutes and have never seen anyone get it wrong. Until now.

In future courses I will be showing Andre's photo to point out how improper rigging can cause problems. I will also make it a point to have people use the Jester with 8mm rope to add emphasis to my points about minding or tying off.

I learned the Stein Knoten (Stone Knot) in Austria in 1999 and taught it to Tom several years ago. Surprised to hear that it is anyone's "go-to" rigging. Converting it to lower in 2.X minutes? That's an okay time, unless there is water present and the rappeller in distress can't hold his breath that long. Jester will do everything the Stone Knot will do and much much much more. Lowering takes a couple seconds. In well under one minute I can solve the distressed rappeller's problem without lowering him more than a couple feet. Even converting to haul can be done well under 2.X minutes.

rcwild

07-28-2012, 08:11 PM

Joker:

Ben,

Try threading the rope on the right from front to back so the loop is on the front side of the neck on the figure eight. Opposing loops will hold the figure eights in position more securely. Not a big deal most of the time, but on occasion (like when the rigging is pressed up against the rock) it can make a difference.

rcwild

07-28-2012, 08:17 PM

One thing I noticed is the rapide in Andre's version is through the top biner and perpendicular to it, while the rapide & top biner are parallel in Rich's pic. Not sure what effect this would have on the system.

Doesn't make any discernible difference in friction.

I have used the Totem in ascending mode with two different diameters of rope and overall I love the Totem. However, to my dismay, the Totem does slip when using the 8.3 MM rope. I thought I could use it for this use on all my ropes, but after noticing this, I am thinking I may need a device for that purpose.

Which ascending system are you using? Stop-n-Go or Plaquette (autoblock).

When the Totem first came out, students were coming up with dozens and dozens of ways to use it. That was cool, but I now teach just a handful of what I consider to be the most beneficial uses. If you know you need to ascend, use ascenders. I only use the Totem in ascending mode if I need to go up and come right back down or visa versa.

bjp

07-28-2012, 11:12 PM

A system is much more useful if it "locks" independent of rope size. Knowing that the Jester works for some ropes but not for others is not real useful to ME - I want my rigging things to work with all (reasonable) sizes of rope. Wet or dry, new or well-used, full moon or new moon.

That is a sufficient but not necessary condition for a good system. The figure 8 block does not work (lock) with all sizes of rope, particularly under certain moons (when something gets between the quick link and the figure 8). Yet I still think it's a perfectly good system when used appropriately -- likewise with the Joker, which (almost) never locks. If you don't want to watch the whole video explanation, just check out 2:38 to 3:46:
---
EDIT: I've removed the video because it showed a version of the figure 8 block which does not lock when not pulled against the quick link; Tom's version a few posts below is a better rigging.

For historical purposes, the key portion of the video showed a non-locking figure 8 block jammed against a quicklink using 8.3mm Canyon Fire rope; that configuration locks by squeezing the rope between the figure 8 and quick link. When the figure 8 block is suspended above the quick link so that the figure 8 can't squeeze the rope against the quick link, the rope easily (perhaps 50-70 pounds) pulls through the figure 8 block.
---

To recap:
1) A locking system always must have a strand or component with higher tension/force squeezing a strand with lower tension
2) The figure 8 block's locking mechanism is squeezing a lower-tension strand between the quick link and figure 8
3) This mechanism does not necessarily occur in all riggings of the figure 8 block
4) A system does not need to be locked to supply friction force greater than the breaking strength of the rope
5) Not all systems/situations require that the supplied friction force exceed the breaking strength of the rope
6) The Joker and Jester are both non-locking systems that supply less friction force than the breaking strength of the rope under most circumstances
7) Particularly on the Jester (and probably on the Joker; not yet tested), there are some reasonable rope and rigging combinations where the supplied friction force is not sufficient

Thanks to ag23 for letting everyone know about #7.

dustinsc

07-29-2012, 08:51 AM

Like Rich said, moral is block it off. But I would say always, even when using both sides. If the system works as advertised, you should be able to get a biner block or a mule hitch off of it, right? Doesn't matter if your rope is thick. I'm not experienced with these types of riggings, but common sense tells me that if a system is at all dependent on rope size, you should be extraordinarily careful with it.

hank moon

07-29-2012, 09:18 AM

Like Rich said, moral is block it off. But I would say always. Doesn't matter if your rope is thick. I'm not experienced with these types of riggings, but common sense tells me that if a system is at all dependent on rope size, you should be extraordinarily careful with it.

Lotsa variables in any system. Rope: diameter, stiffness, state of wear, wet or dry, new or used, dirty, icy, etc. How worn is the friction device(s), and so on.

Question for the Joker/Jester users out there: is there a significant advantage gained by NOT tying off?

dustinsc

07-29-2012, 09:37 AM

Lotsa variables in any system. Rope: diameter, stiffness, state of wear, wet or dry, new or used, dirty, icy, etc. How worn is the friction device(s), and so on.

Let me roll it back then. If a system is that dependent on the metal on rope friction, then you should be especially careful. Not that you should ever be lackadaisical with any system....

Iceaxe

07-29-2012, 12:06 PM

Lotsa variables in any system. Rope: diameter, stiffness, state of wear, wet or dry, new or used, dirty, icy, etc. How worn is the friction device(s), and so on.

I read that as.... a lot of different ways this system can fail. :eek2:

Most folks only have one large chip to wager with in the big game of life.... bet yours wisely.

:popcorn:

ratagonia

07-29-2012, 01:02 PM

That is a sufficient but not necessary condition for a good system. The figure 8 block does not work (lock) with all sizes of rope, particularly under certain moons (when something gets between the quick link and the figure 8). Yet I still think it's a perfectly good system when used appropriately -- likewise with the Joker, which (almost) never locks. If you don't want to watch the whole video explanation, just check out 2:38 to 3:46:

To recap:
1) A locking system always must have a strand or component with higher tension/force squeezing a strand with lower tension
2) The figure 8 block's locking mechanism is squeezing a lower-tension strand between the quick link and figure 8
3) This mechanism does not necessarily occur in all riggings of the figure 8 block
4) A system does not need to be locked to supply friction force greater than the breaking strength of the rope
5) Not all systems/situations require that the supplied friction force exceed the breaking strength of the rope
6) The Joker and Jester are both non-locking systems that supply less friction force than the breaking strength of the rope under most circumstances
7) Particularly on the Jester (and probably on the Joker; not yet tested), there are some reasonable rope and rigging combinations where the supplied friction force is not sufficient

Thanks to ag23 for letting everyone know about #7.

Thank you for your efforts BJP.

However, you make some assertions that I think I can be demonstrate to be false:

"1) A locking system always must have a strand or component with higher tension/force squeezing a strand with lower tension"

Rats! A careful reading notices the phrase "or component" in there, which makes my dis-proof a non-dis-proof. But here it is anyway, the Garda Knot, which has no ropes crossing but still locks even on 3mm cord:

(Pictures 1 and 2 below, if I got them to load in the right order).

"2) The figure 8 block's locking mechanism is squeezing a lower-tension strand between the quick link and figure 8"

Well, I suppose, if you use the NON-LOCKING FIGURE-8-BLOCK, then the only locking mechanism is that. However, why would you use that? With a simple half-twist, you can make a LOCKING FIGURE-8-BLOCK, which seems to have all the bene's of the non-locking version, plus the benefit that it locks, no matter what the cord size.

(LATE ADDITION:
EXCEPT, as Benjamin has pointed out in a separate conversation, it is no longer a contingency anchor because it does not release! :facepalm1:

Tom
)

(see the rest of the pictures, below).

I personally do not use Figure-8-blocks, though I suppose I should practice it some so if I canyoneer in Ouray with Brian, I won't be surprised...

======

AND - perhaps you noticed that I did not prove my thesis. Correct. That was not the point. The point was to provide an example of a locking, non-rope-crossing system to refute the claim I THOUGHT you made; and to present a locking version of the Figure-8-block that people might find more secure than the non-locking version that you show.

Tom :moses:

Brian in SLC

07-29-2012, 01:49 PM

bjp

07-30-2012, 08:17 AM

With a simple half-twist, you can make a LOCKING FIGURE-8-BLOCK, which seems to have all the bene's of the non-locking version, plus the benefit that it locks, no matter what the cord size.

Thanks! I think I'd go so far as to say that this extra half-twist is "right" and the way I (and a number of other people, apparently) have been doing it is not right. I haven't tried the locking version myself yet, but I see what's going on by looking at your picture. I'll try to color that picture a little later so everyone else can see how it works a little more easily. I'm going to remove my video because I don't want to perpetuate the non-locking way of rigging an eight block; I'll edit my previous post to include a note of what it used to contain.

ratagonia

07-30-2012, 09:46 AM

Yeah, Tom, that half twist make a big difference to me.

I'd be good with whatever contingency rig folks want to use, munter/mule, stone, figure eight... I wouldn't be overly psyched to dive onto a jester rig with a 8mm canyon pro rope, though, unless one side is tied off.

Cheers!

Seems like, using the Jester rigging there is a touchy balance. The friction has to be low enough so that once you have changed to a lower, the lower works. Which means other versions that lock become a problem, because they then do not convert easily to a lower. Or you can lock off one side, but then you do not have a dual-line system, so use a different contingency system.

Very hard to set up the dual-line easily convert to lower system. Hard to say why one would want that - I don't. In a true Class C, seems unlikely to use the dual-lines (but could). Having another person on the other rope would delay applying the contingency to an under-water canyoneer who needs to be lowered.

If I really wanted dual lines in a Class C situation, I think I would set up two separate systems, with contingency.

But why are people setting up contingency anchors in Class A canyons? Perhaps I am floggin this horse again and again and again, but... seems like setting up dual lines using a Stone, and having your conversion to a lower from a Stone practiced and polished is going to be, long term, a better system than setting up a dual-line pseudo-contingency system like the Jester, that has some problems with small-diameter ropes.

Tom :moses:

Deathcricket

07-30-2012, 10:02 AM

Seems like, using the Jester rigging there is a touchy balance. The friction has to be low enough so that once you have changed to a lower, the lower works. Which means other versions that lock become a problem, because they then do not convert easily to a lower. Or you can lock off one side, but then you do not have a dual-line system, so use a different contingency system.

Very hard to set up the dual-line easily convert to lower system. Hard to say why one would want that - I don't. In a true Class C, seems unlikely to use the dual-lines (but could). Having another person on the other rope would delay applying the contingency to an under-water canyoneer who needs to be lowered.

If I really wanted dual lines in a Class C situation, I think I would set up two separate systems, with contingency.

But why are people setting up contingency anchors in Class A canyons? Perhaps I am floggin this horse again and again and again, but... seems like setting up dual lines using a Stone, and having your conversion to a lower from a Stone practiced and polished is going to be, long term, a better system than setting up a dual-line pseudo-contingency system like the Jester, that has some problems with small-diameter ropes.

Tom :moses:

Agreed. Also having something simple you can visually inspect and know (at a glance) if it's either right or wrong is mandatory IMO. This whole "maybe with this size rope, maybe not with this size rope" argument when your life is on the line is pretty lame IMO. Just to save a minute "maybe" in a class C canyon? Yeah I'll pass..... Stone knot all the way.

Scott P

07-30-2012, 10:03 AM

I thought I knew how to rappel, but after reading this thread, I've come to the conclusion that I don't know jack.:facepalm:

ratagonia

07-30-2012, 10:22 AM

I thought I knew how to rappel, but after reading this thread, I've come to the conclusion that I don't know jack.:facepalm:

Careful of the Jack guy. he talks big, but he is a danger to himself and others.... :cool2:

Tom

bjp

07-30-2012, 11:17 AM

With a simple half-twist, you can make a LOCKING FIGURE-8-BLOCK, which seems to have all the bene's of the non-locking version, plus the benefit that it locks, no matter what the cord size.

Here's a colored version showing the high-tension strand (yellow-green) pinning the low-tension strand (blue) against the figure 8 and locking the block; it seems like this is the version everyone should use.
57102

bjp

07-30-2012, 11:23 AM

This whole "maybe with this size rope, maybe not with this size rope" argument when your life is on the line is pretty lame IMO.

You have that argument every single time you select the rigging style for your rappel device. Having it one more time for the block may or may not be appropriate depending on the circumstances.

Just to save a minute "maybe" in a class C canyon? Yeah I'll pass..... Stone knot all the way.

In a class C canyon, the rappeller would presumably be unable to breathe for that minute. Contingency riggings are good ideas in C canyons, even if not the Jester.

Deathcricket

07-30-2012, 12:27 PM

You have that argument every single time you select the rigging style for your rappel device. Having it one more time for the block may or may not be appropriate depending on the circumstances.

I do agree with you, yes. Nothing wrong with what you said. But if you start a rap and your device needs more friction, there are many ways to correct the situation. If you start a rap using the joke(r) and it starts to slip, you simply splat on the ground. IMO this is a huge distinction and why one side should always be tied off. *shrug*

Deathcricket

07-30-2012, 12:45 PM

[QUOTE=ag23;505440][B]Hello,
[FONT=Arial]I

hank moon

07-30-2012, 01:10 PM

Hey thanks again for bringing this to the community. I think you did a great service, and it takes courage to come forward when the $#!t hits the fan on your shift. And not only that but you did a followup test and posted a picture of your exact rigging before the accident. This is no small thing you did! Great thread I think.

X2, Andre - thank you for braving the poonami - great info and glad your friend wasn't seriously injured - how is he, btw?

Iceaxe

07-30-2012, 02:03 PM

X3

Thanks Andre

Sent using Tapatalk

ghawk

07-30-2012, 02:16 PM

x4

what they said :nod:

moab mark

07-30-2012, 02:24 PM

Went out and played with this in my garage. I can see why the Card Shark likes this. It is easy to set up and doing everything I could from swinging to jumping up and down I could not make it slip. Obviously it will because someone is wearing a cast but I could not get it to budge one inch. I also set it up using my ATS and seems to work the same. If you had the first guy down rappel double and then belay the lines I would have no concern using it. I shot a video of how I think you make it release but I cannot get it to load. Without removing the unloaded strand from the biner I could not get it to slide. Once you remove unloaded strand you can lower. I am using an 8.3 canyon fire rope. How do I get a video from my I phone which is downloaded onto my computer upload here?

Mark
Here is the video not the best but gives an idea of how the jester is suppose to be released.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5l8LJ9RM2g&feature=plcp

I just went over to the ACA site and looked at a picture that was hard to understand but it looks like you are suppose to feed the non loaded strand without removing it from the biner? I tried that with my test and could not make it slipped that way. So at this point just take the video as entertainment only, have no clue how you are suppose to lower a victim.

Mark

Brian in SLC

07-30-2012, 02:31 PM

X5.

Not a lot of threads get me to the hangboard to practise rigging configurations. Good fodder.

Thanks!

Iceaxe

07-30-2012, 02:51 PM

How do I get a video from my I phone which is downloaded onto my computer upload here?

I post them to YouTube, because that is usually the easiest and many phones are only one click to upload straight to YouTube. Once they are on YouTube I post the link on Bogley.

I'm sure there are numerous other ways to skin this cat.

deagol

07-30-2012, 06:00 PM

Which ascending system are you using? Stop-n-Go or Plaquette (autoblock).

....

I used it in Plaquette mode. I asked the question of how to rig it a year or two ago (??) on the ACA website (the master Totem thread) and followed your example. I think it worked great at first, but as the Totem wore-in a bit, it slipped. I really like the versatility and it still works great with my 9 MM rope. Also, for the record, I don't use it often at all in ascending (plaquette) mode- Just messing around with it in practice sessions in case I needed it for real out in the field.

marlowequart

07-30-2012, 08:28 PM

It sounds like your friend was very lucky with the ledge and quick sar response. One question i had, is the jester supposed to work just as good on say 30' of rope as 100'? It seems like the weight of the rope could add friction to the system too.

Also, thinking that since something has worked successfully many times in the past then it will continue to work successfully in the future seems risky to me. Every system has some failure mode. Its a balance of risk to reward.

canyoncaver

07-31-2012, 07:38 AM

But why are people setting up contingency anchors in Class A canyons? Perhaps I am floggin this horse again and again and again, but... seems like setting up dual lines using a Stone, and having your conversion to a lower from a Stone practiced and polished is going to be, long term, a better system than setting up a dual-line pseudo-contingency system like the Jester, that has some problems with small-diameter ropes.

OK, I'll bite. Sometimes in class A and B canyons, you can't see the bottom of the rappel. In this situation, we often use a contingency 8 to lower the first person down in order to set rope length. Or, if we "think" we have the rope on the bottom, but aren't quite sure, we will go ahead and rig the 8 block so that the first person doesn't have to ascend back up when the rope is actually not on the ground.

Overall, we use biner blocks as the go-to, but the 8 does come in handy from time to time. Unless the pull is completely clean, we even change out the 8 to a biner block for the pull. I have found that 8 blocks dragged over sandstone = mucho sheath damage. Biner blocks do not seem to share this issue.

While I was shown the Stone and Joker in canyoneering merit badge school, I have never seen the need to rig either one. Having two ropes hanging down the pitch is not usually something we find desirable. But, it depends on everyone's personal situation. We don't do any guiding, and everyone we canyon with is capable of rigging their descender in 7 seconds or less, so the advantages of dual line systems don't really add up to much for us.

moab mark

07-31-2012, 07:55 AM

OK, I'll bite. Sometimes in class A and B canyons, you can't see the bottom of the rappel. In this situation, we often use a contingency 8 to lower the first person down in order to set rope length. Or, if we "think" we have the rope on the bottom, but aren't quite sure, we will go ahead and rig the 8 block so that the first person doesn't have to ascend back up when the rope is actually not on the ground.

Overall, we use biner blocks as the go-to, but the 8 does come in handy from time to time. Unless the pull is completely clean, we even change out the 8 to a biner block for the pull. I have found that 8 blocks dragged over sandstone = mucho sheath damage. Biner blocks do not seem to share this issue.

While I was shown the Stone and Joker in canyoneering merit badge school, I have never seen the need to rig either one. Having two ropes hanging down the pitch is not usually something we find desirable. But, it depends on everyone's personal situation. We don't do any guiding, and everyone we canyon with is capable of rigging their descender in 7 seconds or less, so the advantages of dual line systems don't really add up to much for us.

Double strands help move large groups thru a canyon, especially Youth Groups. If the anchor is bomber you can have two Youth rappeling at the same time. If one Youth is extremely slow several other Youth may descend the other strand while the other Youth is still on Rappel. When the group is big and the anchor can support it, it is the only way to fly.

If your group is experienced and you cannot see the bottom just drop the bag and biner block it. Adjust for pull at the end.
Mark

hank moon

07-31-2012, 07:59 AM

:iagree:

except...block before drop :mrgreen:

canyoncaver

07-31-2012, 08:14 AM

Double strands help move large groups thru a canyon, especially Youth Groups. If the anchor is bomber you can have two Youth rappeling at the same time. If one Youth is extremely slow several other Youth may descend the other strand while the other Youth is still on Rappel. When the group is big and the anchor can support it, it is the only way to fly.

Sorry if I wasn't clear, but yeah, I know all that. I make it a point to not canyon with large groups, especially Youth Groups. That is why none of those "advantages" really add up to much for us, as I said in my earlier post. We consider six persons to be a "large" group, for wilderness and safety reasons.

Tom was asking why folks set up contingency anchors instead of Stone knots in non-class C canyons so I responded with the reasons that we sometimes do.

We like to keep the bag at the top, for rope management and rescue reasons. Your "drop the bag and biner block it" method is messier than our current setup. But thanks anyway.

ratagonia

07-31-2012, 08:26 AM

ratagonia

07-31-2012, 08:30 AM

Sorry if I wasn't clear, but yeah, I know all that. I make it a point to not canyon with large groups, especially Youth Groups. That is why none of those "advantages" really add up to much for us, as I said in my earlier post. We consider six persons to be a "large" group, for wilderness and safety reasons.

Tom was asking why folks set up contingency anchors instead of Stone knots in non-class C canyons so I responded with the reasons that we sometimes do.

We like to keep the bag at the top, for rope management and rescue reasons. Your "drop the bag and biner block it" method is messier than our current setup. But thanks anyway.

Different strokes for different folks...

C'mon, we been playing nice - let's not get snippy! :killen:

Tom :moses:

Mountaineer

07-31-2012, 08:41 AM

I'm reading through these threads and learning from the experienced folks... I've done shy of a hundred canyons now (still a beginner among giants), and have never had to lower anyone in an emergency yet (doesn't mean it will not happen). It seems that with 3-4+ people, the efficiency gained with a stone knot method outweighs the figure eight block "ready to lower" method. As long as you are proficient, confident, and safe at converting the stone to a lower method.

canyoncaver

07-31-2012, 09:49 AM

Different strokes for different folks...

C'mon, we been playing nice - let's not get snippy! :killen:

Tom :moses:

Thanks for the admonishment Mr. Pot. I will try to behave myself better in the future.

-Mr. Kettle.

ratagonia

10-29-2012, 03:50 PM

2) The figure 8 block's locking mechanism is squeezing a lower-tension strand between the quick link and figure 8"

Well, I suppose, if you use the NON-LOCKING FIGURE-8-BLOCK, then the only locking mechanism is that. However, why would you use that? With a simple half-twist, you can make a LOCKING FIGURE-8-BLOCK, which seems to have all the bene's of the non-locking version, plus the benefit that it locks, no matter what the cord size.

EXCEPT, as Benjamin has pointed out in a separate conversation, it is no longer a contingency anchor because it does not release! :facepalm1:

Tom

bjp

10-30-2012, 09:12 AM

EXCEPT, as Benjamin has pointed out in a separate conversation, it is no longer a contingency anchor because it does not release! :facepalm1:

That is indeed my view of the locking modification (half twist of the second bight that captures a low-tension strand under a high-tension strand), though to be fair, I think it is contingency-releasable sometimes and secure always. In some circumstances, that may be more desirable than contingency-releasable always and secure sometimes. A different way I'm using now that I haven't seen anyone else use is to add an extra half-wrap around the stem just before feeding the second bight back through the big hole. In my limited testing, that seems to be contingency-releasable always and secure almost-always -- a slight but noticeable improvement over the non-wrap versions (both the non-locking half-twist and the no-twist for the second bight). More info here, and I hope to keep updating it:
http://ropewiki.com/index.php/Figure_8_block