Guide Explains "Redundancy"
Вставка
- Опубліковано 15 лип 2024
- SRENE, STRADS, NERDS, ERNESTA: All of these acronyms espouse "redundancy" as a core principle, but what is it? In this video, we'll look into this concept and pick apart the ways in which we often overdo redundancy. I also offer some insight into how we can simplify our understanding by thinking about redundancy in an unexpected way.
DONATE ON VENMO:
@thecodybradford
*All donors receive "first-in-line" responses and subjects for future videos!
LEARN MORE ON INSTAGRAM:
@thecodybradford
READ MY BLOG:
www.codybradford.com/blog
VIDEOS RELEASED WEEKLY! See you next week!
Great explanation. I've tried to explain this to climbing partners before and never been able to put is quite so well.
Thank you thank you very much, my friend!
RIP Cody Bradford I feel I can speak for the whole climbing community when I say you will be missed but never forgotten
Glad I found this channel recently. RIP. The videos will continue informing and helping climbers.
I appreciate the video! I've had this same conversation with so many people and the look on their faces when I say "well yeah, but at the end of the day you're climbing on one rope" or "you're only ever belaying off one carabiner" is always worth it.
Cheers, my friend!
Cody, these topics are fantastic! I tell everyone I instruct to think critically and dig for the why (not just the how) behind what's happening. Doing so allows people to have a deep understanding of the concepts we're trying to pass along. With that skill, one can expand their existing repertoire to work in novel situations. They can see things like a girth hitch masterpoint and decide for themselves if it's something they want to use in their own systems. I find these conversations about underlying concepts incredibly useful.
Thank you so much, my friend! If this is what folks want, I will keep delivering them!
Miss this guy. Forever a legend
These were insightful expansions on the seemingly simple topic of redundancy. Great depth and analysis.
Ive watched this video maybe 5 times and i just love it! It helped me out so much and i feel extremely confident after watching your videos
Really awesome to hear those kind words, my friend! Really meaningful to know that it is helpful! Cheers!
Great take on redundancy. Quality content! Thanks Cody.
Awesome video and explanation of the concept! Keep em coming!
Thank you very much, my friend! I will do my best!!
Right on. I think you took a really good approach to the topic and that you also gave some good “thought tools” for climbers out in the wild to use. Another great video Cody!
Very much appreciate it!!
Thanks Cody! Good information
Thank you, my friend!!
Man! I've always loved your viewpoint and different perspective on the climbing realm of life
Really appreciate your kind words, my friend! One day I hope to make a transition to online content and courses more, but in the meantime guiding is still quite busy!
Cody, Very nice video. Especially good was the "proximity" concept; Hopefully that comes into broader use and understanding regarding anchors.
Thank you so much, John!!!
That was an excellent way to present that information. Plenty of people lower from single pitch climbs on just 2 opposite and opposed quickdraws but if multiple people are going to toprope it afterwards then it probably makes sense to at least have a locking draw as one of them. That said, I have had to setup a top rope anchor with a single triple-action locker on the rope side due to a lack of materials on my harness, but it was only for 1 person after me, the anchor was free-hanging in space so no chance of rubbing and my partner was comfortable with doing 1 lap on it.
Thanks for the video Cody! A question I usually get asked when I’m using my quad is why use non locker carabiners on the sides that attach to the hangers. My usual guess it’s because as you said we got eyes on them and also because you’re not gonna be bouncing on the quad to cause them to fail. But a more thoughtful answer would be nice. Thanks a lot for taking the time making these
Bowline Dandy I think you are also spot on! I can add that those attachments, located so high in the anchor are coming in contact with no immediate forces like the masterpoint does. They are only accepting force in one direction, whereas forces at the Masterpoint, while sometimes subtle are changing loads and forces in more dramatic ways since that is where the rope interacts with our system and it is also where all forces meet and are dispersed to elsewhere in our system. For these reasons, the masterpoint is a place for “critical links” using lockers!
That is a great question about non-lockers on the hangers. Cody addresses is that pretty well in the "proximity" point he makes. If it's a multi pitch route and you're right there to keep an eye on things, then standard carabiners are fine on the hangers. If it's a top rope anchor in an instructional setting, and you're going to have multiple people on it for a long period of time, you lose your close proximity. For that reason you may want to take the extra security step of putting locking carabiners also on the bolt hangers. There may be some people that might diss you for doing this, but I don't think any of the climbers who are going to be on YOUR anchor will be upset that you took that extra security step. Remember, never let anyone else dictate your level of risk tolerance, no matter what their credentials or experience.
@@johngo6283 After over fifty years of climbing, I add more locking biners to my rack all the time. Small streamlined twist-open D lockers I never hesitate to substitute even on QDraws, if the spacing makes any one absolutely crucial, and catastrophic were it to fail or more feasibly come unclipped, a more frequent phenomenon than generally considered. As to his non-lockers to clip a quad style sling into two bolts, experience and videos show clearly how dramatically a long serious fall can throw the belayer, lifting and heavily loading an anchor from above, not just in a controlled downward direction. Such wrenching movements can compromise those clips, even unclipping ordinary biners from bolts, or slings from the biners. Friends have survived rappel ropes coming unclipped, just from twisting and re-directing one's position; others have died. If you can create a scenario for any unclipping potential, that has to be considered in need of redundancy. I believe the greatest problem in safety right now, is the fashion emphasizing Speed, at the expense of safe practices evolved over a hundred years. When in doubt, Stop, pause, re-check everyone's situation before proceeding; don't apologize for being safe, and if partners can't cope, find new partners. RIP Cody.
THANKS FOR TELLING
Absolutely!
great video! great content! well spoken! :)
Thank you so much for the kind words, my friend!
Godspeed sir.
Moore's Wall @ 6:47
my home crag ❤️
I love the thoughtfulness you put in this, and other videos. I especially loved you pointing out the clove hitch plus personal tether as unnecessary and unhelpful. I spent ages a year ago winding myself up about how to best anchor myself redundantly for cleaning anchors and setting up a rappel...only to realize what took you minutes to explain. It was both a massive relief and a little embarrassing. Thanks so much for your content!
That means a great deal, my friend! Thanks for the feedback! I was also caught up in that confusion when I started for a year or more thinking that it needed to be redundant throughout, without knowing anything about the deeper principles at play. I still do not see this play out in instruction, so I am trying to find a framework to rework these principles.
@@CodyBradford I am, in general, frustrated by the lack of theory underlying a systematic approach to climbing safety. We have mnemonics and some best practices but no theory of everything to provide the mental "muscle memory" people need when they need when they're mentally drained. Obviously there is no substitute for experience, but we have seen even experienced climbers make fatal mistakes...or in the case of Todd Skinner, failed to understand the potential consequences of an uninspected habit.
Anyway, ramble over. I am very much loooking forward to your forthcoming framework. You make great vids here and on IG, so I am sure it will be great too. Thanks for taking the time to respond!!
@@arnoldkotlyarevsky383 Well always psyched to hear such encouragement and discussion! Anytime you want to discuss, always feel free to reach out!
Some institutions still teach to clove hitch yourself in the anchor and then add a figure 8 on a bight a few feet down the rope also clipped to the anchor. I generally find this to be unnecessary extra security, takes more time and adds clutter, but if you want to move around and constantly adjust your clove hitch the backup can give you some reassurance that you won't go too far if you were to slip while your clove was loosened.
@@Govanification I have seen some backing up their clove's, however I along with the AAC have done a lot of research on clove hitches slipping and realistically, the slippage is minimal until the loads finally cut the rope.
Nice video! For me personally I like to think about it in terms of probabilities. If you are using your own locking carabiner, the probability of it breaking is for all practical purposes so small that it can be ignored. I haven't climbed enough to have a good feeling for the reliability of anchors but always assumed the anchors have 2 bolts because the probability of one coming loose is not negligible (could be wrong). Also since the anchor is something you personally don't have knowledge of it probably pays to be a little more careful. One nice thing about thinking about probabilities is that it sometime clears up what to do in a complex situation. Sometimes in a complex situation it may be better to sacrifice redundancy for simplicity since the probability of screwing up with a complex set up is higher than the added security of the redundant set up (this is basically what you said).
Again thanks for the vid. Good to think about these things!
Another way of considering probabilities where you have little input, i.e. fixed anchors, is where can you add something? Easiest is to climb above, and place the first protection for the next pitch, extending back down to your anchors. Not always convenient, but if any doubts about the anchor, look beyond the immediate proximity, and be creative.
Good video!
Cheers, my friend!
I know the videos are old, but I'll add my thoughts:
I consider redundancy to be to prevent unforeseeable failures, and is only strictly necessary in gear with unknown integrity. We know our own gear, we know how old it is and what it's rated to. This gear doesn't really NEED to be redundant, though it gives peace of mind. Things like bolts or traditional placements are unknowns, and thus redundancy is needed.
Additionally it could be argued that the integrity of the rope in a fall where it slides against the rock, or if rocks fall, is an unknown, and if this was a concern you could climb on half ropes.
When it comes to what I consider reasonable, I tether in with a clove and a sling when belaying, and a sling alone with a locker when rappelling, and I don't consider need for redundancy in belay devices or ropes unless in particularly sketchy terrain.
Any physical therapists out there recognize the song?? Great video and very informative.
Evan Lewis haha from iMovie??
Thank you very much for the support!
It’s also the same song from some physical therapy continuing education courses, they must have used iMovie as well
Good content
Cheers, my friend!
BIG like
BIG Thank you!
so with instances of single material (one carabiner/one rope) "redundancy" of those points would be gear checks before/after climbs to verify they're in good condition. would a freak accident (rock fall destroying those points) just be accepted risk that has been mitigated to the best of our ability (terrain selection)?
jarvo essentially that is the easiest risk to mitigate in those instances, yes. I would also argue that there are subtle redundancies built into something like a rope in that (especially with Unicore) it has a sheath protecting the core. Ropes do cut in unfortunate accidents, but generally that is tough to accomplish which is great news for us! That said, our decisions of placement and protection lend us more as you said.
Also, bonus: our figure-eight follow-thru is also redundant in that it takes two steps to make it fail!
@@CodyBradford i had never heard of unicore and just watched a few videos on it, sheath slippage looks pretty scary! whenever i hear of accidents that involve a rope cut i imagine a full sever. any idea if sheath slippage accidents are just reported as rope cuts?
If freak accident risks aren't acceptable then choice of activity should be considered. If work your way down a list of risks from most to least likely and have made it down to catastrophic anchor failure then you have already accepted a lot of unmitigatable risks that are much more likely.
Accidents in North American Climbing is a good pickup if you are interested in trying to understand what can go wrong and what, if anything, you can do about it. The old cliche that climbing is inherently dangerous is very much true. You're never 'safe' in the mountains.
@@jarvo7723 Pretty much what RippDrive said about looking into purchasing (or joining) the Accidents in North American Climbing book from the American Alpine Club!
It seems worth mentioning that when the risk of a rope being cut is increased, one can choose to use two ropes
Ok this has been my biggest worry about my systems. Especially when guide belaying using a mega jul, that thin steel loop just seems sketchy.
RIP Cody 😥
You could clutter it and adding redundancy by adding an auto block 😁
My only question...
You ask, "what about the climbing rope, why doesn't it need to also be redundant", you basically answer "because it is strong and reliable enough on its own".
This is an unsatisfying answer to me, because you could say the same thing about any dyneema sling, a bolt, a biner, etc. And yet you give other more satisfying answers for redundancy for those pieces of gear.
If the climbing rope severs , you have no redundancy, and ya die. Which does happen.
The more honest answer seems to be that the climbing community is generally not willing to trade the inconvenience of making the rope redundant by carrying two (except instances where you need to climb on half's, etc) for safety against an event that happens quite rarely.
Other types of gear failure at the anchor might be just as rare as severing the climbing rope, but we are willing to make it redundant anyway, because doing so comes at a much lower cost in convenience and pack weight.
Do you think this is right? Or no?
I would agree and I think that I rushed that answer. I think you are mostly correct here in that it really comes down to inconvenience, but I would also like to add something about the rope. The rope does have a somewhat redundant mechanism in that it is a Kernmantle design (inner core, outer sheath). This means that there is a protective sheath to protect the vulnerable core. There are even ropes with the sheath interwoven with the core (Unicore) that makes cutting very difficult.
Because of how we tie in with the rope and often tether, these connections are a lot stronger and more versatile than other attachment systems such as a PAS. In this way, redundancy is gained through the application of the rope rather than its structure.
Long winded and a good topic, but as goes redundancy and climbing topics in general. Thanks for bringing it up!
The rope is the weakest part of the system. Theres no redundancy in using one rope.
Woah… your sound effects for your transitions were so familiar. Then it hit me! MedBridge.
MedBridge Continuing Education Videos use the same sounds between chapters and quizzes. Though you use a longer version.