Climbing Anchors: The Girth Hitch Master Point (don't do this)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 3 ноя 2022
- Here is some testing on the Girth Hitch Master Point (GHMP) and why you need to think twice before using it. As always application is everything,
#rockclimbing #anchor #testing
Always appreciate succinct / focused & detailed vids with testing data shown for real life applications!
Great video and beautiful testing set up as well. That footage really drives home the point.
Thanks
The addition of the testing shorts was a positive. Overall a good description of the anchor with great value at the end about when/why not to use the girth hitch anchor and when it might be appropriate.
Thx! The testing was a bit eye opening. Even if only a few in the sample size and it being slow pull.
Happy to see provocative content that instructs with context for viewers and challenges the trend
Thx!
As a structural analyst really insightful video with the data. Actually appreciate it and definitely have seen where I’ve maybe made a mistake in the past.
Excellent video, thanks! I'd never seen the sliding-X variation and it's really interesting how well it works in comparison.
I really appreciate your honesty and information
Excellent video, Karsten! You summarized in one, easily digestible video what took me a half day of researching through reading various articles. Thank you!
Awesome! And your welcome!
This is a very useful piece of info. Thanks!
Another thought: we are very often focusing on slow pull. This is not very representative of real climbing forces, except possibly in rescue. It would be interesting to see how the same setups would behave in a drop tower! 😊
I am very confident that when you hit 50, your body will start to slow fall. So do this anchor style now, as a fast fall anchor, and later, you switch to a more slow fall anchor style.
They were tested on the drop tower with similar results. I didn’t have any video of that.
@@howtoclimb Proof or didn't happen.
I remember being taught to put the twist in one of the sides of the sling when I was a kid in boy scouts. Great to see some objective results. Thanks!
Huge difference in kN rating when adding the magic X. Thanks as always Karsten!
Kinda crazy eh!?! I still want to see more tests but whoa.
Thanks a lot for that. Really important issue 💚
The girth x is a handy anchor if you have limited sling length that prevents you from doing an overhand and no gear left! Quick to do too. I've used it a few times.
Definitely!
Thanks for sharing! A thought: if your main reason to use a girth hitch is that you want a top rope master point that cannot be opened, you might as well tie a big fig8, as with a normal redundant two point anchor. Then use the now isolated bottom two loops to make your girth hitch. Less simplicity, but when the use case is say rigging a top rope for kids for a day of climbing, the extra complexity is not really an issue.
Clear explanation of a very... exceptional situation. We're assuming here that not only has one of your two "primary" anchor points failed, but that it did so without tightening the knot or damaging the sling. If "slip-through" is your main concern, why isn't tying a knot to equalize the forces (or otherwise distribute them in the case of unequal anchor strengths) be a better choice? I don't have access to a testing facility, so perhaps I'm missing something simple...
Cool to see the testing
Re video and viewer comments:
- 5 min in, the logic against rings is disproven as the sling with X held beyond 20kN. The X, not the biner profile, is the most significant factor.
- Ring pluses: you can't cross-load a ring; it has no gate to open; it has no corners to snag; modern fat rings stamped with 22 kN are strong in any direction.
- Ring minuses: it has less capacity (but still likely a fat girth plus two biners) but this equates with a smaller item than the carabiner otherwise needed.
Ring +/-: a ring is often carried anyhow for a rap scenario, otherwise goes unused; using for master point frees up a carabiner.
- older methods with equalizing sliders, giant wadded figure eights, etc. can be hard to untie, re-equalize, and overthinking loads and equalizing has been largely found to be ineffective and even introduces greater shock loads when one anchor fails.
- balancing the directional loads into the girth when building is sufficient to provide "equalizing," as loss of any strand just moves more load to the remainder, without any sliding or shock.
- the beauty of the girth is its easy adjustment and high final strength with the X added; more complexities are superfluous and not needed.
- clove hitches do not behave in the same fashion, in slippery Dyneema type fibers, and may not provide the same final strength; many test videos show this.
Great video. Thanks for sharing
Your welcome!
Very interesting. The girth-x is isomorphic to the girth hitch, but the loading of the strands exiting the knot is different. It's like the difference between the edk and the water knot - isomorphic knots, but the different loading makes a world of difference to the slippage. I wonder if that's enough for dyneema cord or the new bd slings. Anyway I'm sold, it's easy enough to do for a little extra reassurance.
Was wondering how slippy/redundant the girth actually is. Solved. Thank you
Great info!
I agree with the premise here. Carrying those rings for a girth hitch master point doesn’t seem necessary. With a sling I’d just do a standard overhand or figure 8 on a bight for a master point. Or I’d just build a quad.
Exactly!
The point was to enable using a ring, which cannot be opened by mistake by little kids fingers! Of course, there are more ways to do this. Like tying a clove around the ring. (Not sure how that would behave in the same pull test!) Or taping your screw gates.
@@johnliungman1333 Taping closed your screw gate, now there’s a good way to keep little kid fingers from messing with your gear. Sometimes simple is good. 👍
@@johnliungman1333 I don't follow.... You still have to have biners attached to the chains or bolts above the master point. Those are both as equally susceptible to little kid fingers. This argument doesn't seem to hold as a reason to use a ring and two biners instead of three biners and no ring.
nice.... dude, subs are coming along, sheesh.
How does one make the X with a 3 point trad anchor ? Just by twisting two (or all 3?) of the loops as they come down? Thanks
Very informative!
Thx!
I feel like the elephant in the room is those tiny diameter dyneema slings not the rings. They are near frictionless when new and they are prone to cuts due to the lessor width.
You should do a test with a clove hitch anchor.
If I like it?? Hell yea!! 😆😆😆 Thanks Karsten Delap again for some great tips! The Girth-X is a great improvement over the Girth in this case 😉😉.
Didn’t you have a video on this as well at some point? You should post the URL here for folks or send it to me and I will!
Here it is: ruclips.net/video/UMuCkC3jshA/видео.html
@@howtoclimb Thanks Karsten!!
Great stuff! I recently saw in IG that the normal girth hitch is still used
I think you can use the normal one. But I think that you must understand that a failure of one leg could mean total failure of the anchor. If one is ok with this risk vs taking a small amount of time to make an X, then ok.
@@howtoclimb really great videos, this one specially because it’s something that went under my radar…thank you for sharing, thank yiu
@@howtoclimbThis reply, coming from a guide, seems contrary to the central thesis of this video. When using any "normal" system that could totally fail, in the event of one leg being cut, that would seem like a very poor practice to adopt, period.
The evolution of techniques is towards greater redundancy, level of strength, and yet simplicity. Being "OK with this risk level" is the prelude to every mountain tragedy, and when a three second half twist effectively eliminates the one weakness of a system, it would seem prudent to adopt that technique without exceptions.
I have to track down Dale Remsberg's videos on the girth hitch, as I recall no such advisories or precautions in his fondness for the method.
@@z1522 well we have to understand not everyone has the same risk acceptance and or reasons for climbing, probably a conversation that is much to long on here. I just try to be open that someone might be ok with not making the x. My part here is more for one to understand the risks that they are taking and not to impose my risk management on them. I am sure many folks think I am too risky, possibly even reckless, however there are some that think I manage risk too much. The key is to know the risk you are engaging with so that you can manage appropriately. Hope that helps see some of the thinking on my end!
Which is the safer way way to utilize the sliding X using a 'biner, girth hitching it as shown here or clipping the biner into the X?
Well I guess you achieve some redundancy in the girth hitch. So likely that. But I would still heavily think about applications and what might be a better solution like a fixed focal point anchor.
I carry a ring as a master and use girth hitch for single day multi pitch climbing. And great to see how this can be strengthened using the magic X. I was not clear on the safety differences between the ring and the biner. You mentioned a type of technology but can you clarify what this means? The rings I have (stainless and aluminium) are both rated for high loads.
I believe they were referring to I-beam construction. The name describes the profile of the carabiner, the "I" being somewhat more rectangular than a pure rounded edge adds slightly more friction and helps reduce slipping of the sling in this scenario. It's a bit hard to see from the video but the Petzl Attache had an I beam profile along the length of the nose, newer versions have a hybrid of the round stock and I beam, where the I beam is still present towards the nose and along the spine.
1-2kn load not being an issue is a bit of an understatement. Given 1-2kn translate to about 100-200kg of static weight pulling on the master point under gravity. A load easily achieved by two climbers hanging from the master point whom do not suspend any weight otherwise. If that's enough to start making an anchor point move it's actually scary.
Well I do agree with that!
Is this sliding x girth hitch different than a bull girth hitch? And would your advice differ if it's a 3 point anchor?
Even if it is a 3 point anchor you should x one of the strands.
Also, different than a bull hitch.
Bull hitch would probably be great. Or a clove on a biner. Although I prefer a soft master point anyway
Here is Yann Camus video on the girth hitch! : ruclips.net/video/UMuCkC3jshA/видео.html
Nice suggestion! Do you have results with polyamid slings, too? UHMWPE (dyneema) is inherently slippery so this behaviour is exactly what we would expect. Imho dyneema should not be used with ANY knots in the same context due to the slippage and extremely low melting point which can cause local, in-knot melting and eventually failure.
I agree! In an actual high ff fall, heat build up becomes a problem in a way that slow pulling does not fully capture.
The low melting point of Dyneema is not a problem exactly because it has such low friction. Think about it, you can’t have low friction and high heat at the same time. In high forces it will slip more and always introduce new surface area to the knot. Dyneema slings are very susceptible to damage from UV radiation and since knots reduce the strenght of slings caution is adviced when using thin Dyneema-Slings (=
Good info! Interesting to see the testing
Pretty eye opening!
I would like to know if IFMGA has banned the use of dyneema slings or tape slings as an anchoring component ? If i got it correctly magic x + girth hitch + pear shaped carabiner with the loading axis majority on the spine will reduce risk considerably. Correct me
Dyneema is still fine to use in the anchor.
please... blink , great video!!!
Thanks!
Why not just use the clove hitch master point? Any disadvantages?
When you start getting more strands in the anchor it doesn't really make sense. Also you have to open the carabiner up for the clove, not a huge deal but...
Why not clove? Can't do it on a ring for this comparison vid?
You could, but you would have to pre tie it before you clipped the last piece.
@@howtoclimb had not thought of that option. Seems a bit cumbersome, but maybe has it's application.
Seems like a workeable solution, but would be nice to see tested on a fat ring too!
This concept would be improved and stronger if you go through the ring, and around then through again, then form the girth. Doubled girth
Ever been rock climbing? Less equipment is actually an advantage.
That will pretty much fill the ring space, leaving little room for even one carabiner. The Magic X solves the one weak link in the concept.
Surely using a ring is just so you can show off some of your nice slack line kit 😂
😂
Rings are meant to be non retrieved gear
why not use 2 shorter slings without knots... That hitch reduces strenght of master point like 40% or so...
1 KN is equal to how many Kilograms roughly
Well it is force. So it would be 101.9716212978 kgf
Its called a sliding x rather than a magic x.
Nope - sliding X is within a quad or sling where a section of material allows horizontal movement, supposedly to offer self-equalization between anchor points. This Magic X is within the girth hitch, no sliding equalization at all except during initial setup, when distributing the slings and load for desired direction is done; once set, the girth hitch is tightened and no further sliding can occur.
Equalization, especially when the anchors are considered to be other than marginal, has been sort of debunked as unnecessary and difficult to actually achieve in real loading. The shift in impact, should half the system fail, is greater within the slack of the "equalizing" system, than the very small pendulum effect when the full load swings over to the other half of a static setup.
Bro looks like you hit randomize on the oblivion character selector
I don't like that ring...
please... blink
They are both wrong, zero attention to equalisation should the line of load change,,,,bollox
Not a huge issue. Really high forces tend to be caused by gravity, ie straight down. Like an ff2 fall directly off the anchor.
@@johnliungman1333 Agree; equalization has been sort of debunked, as irrelevant or difficult to achieve, and loading consecutive pieces in practical situations is more realistic, than using a bundle of marginal ones, and expecting them to create a safe cumulative strength when "equalized."
Lots coming out on not needing "equalization" and how really most anchors are not "equalized". It is more about distributing the load to the strongest pieces.
How does a sling get cut at the belay station? And how often?
I would have to think that it is rare. I mean maybe if it is over an edge and used for a while. But this application isn't really meant for that anyway.