Loose resin anchors

[Wayland Smith]

Perhaps this has been covered already, but.
Is there any pattern to the resin bolts being found loose?
Type, resin, rock age or other?

 

[andrewmcleod]

Two probably pretty stupid questions (betraying my ignorance of the practical here):
A) what is the standard hole cleaning for 'BCA' resin bolts - is a brush or compressed air used? Are the holes often wet? What about when these anchors were being placed? (my limited understanding was that the bond between rock and glue should be stronger than between glue and bolt)
B) I assume that when pulled the bolts came out with glue still attached to them, but when non-loose BP bolts are pulled out for testing do they come out with glue on them? There is a picture on the BP site of bolts with different levels of cleaning coming out with lots (bad) or no (good) glue on them; I assume a problem with the resin would produce a similar effect.

 

[Simon Wilson]

Perhaps this has been covered already, but.
Is there any pattern to the resin bolts being found loose?
Type, resin, rock age or other?

That is an excellent question, your timing is perfect and I'm very glad you asked.

That is precisely why I want cavers to report all loose resin anchors.

I have just returned from the CNCC meeting where we had a lively debate about loose anchors.

A quick look at where loose anchors have been reported will tell you that they tend to be in caves that had anchors installed early in the programme in the early 1990s. Bull Pot, Swinsto, Heron, GG, Hardrawkin etc. However, we also know that methods of installation changed, different installers did slightly different things, different resins were used and there are a few other possible variables. We need to be able to isolate the different variables. Possibly the most important variable is age and the crucial question is about how much we might expect anchors to continue to become loose in the future and on what timescale.

We have a population of about 1500 anchors installed over a period of about 12 years with the number installed each year varying. That's quite a good amount of data if we can get information on all of them. If need be and if she's interested the CNCC have the services of a highly qualified statistician.

Is there a pattern? The answer is yes but what is the pattern? I, for one, would like to find out.

 

[droid]

Is there a pattern? The answer is yes but what is the pattern? I, for one, would like to find out.

Amount of use is another factor to consider. Both number of trips, and length of prussik....

 

[Simon Wilson]

Two probably pretty stupid questions (betraying my ignorance of the practical here):
A) what is the standard hole cleaning for 'BCA' resin bolts - is a brush or compressed air used? Are the holes often wet? What about when these anchors were being placed? (my limited understanding was that the bond between rock and glue should be stronger than between glue and bolt)
B) I assume that when pulled the bolts came out with glue still attached to them, but when non-loose BP bolts are pulled out for testing do they come out with glue on them? There is a picture on the BP site of bolts with different levels of cleaning coming out with lots (bad) or no (good) glue on them; I assume a problem with the resin would produce a similar effect.

In the past the hole cleaning methods varied and I have been told that it was mainly done dry. Sometimes holes were wet and then they had to be cleaned with water.

The IC resin anchor was tested in holes cleaned with water so they must only be installed in holes cleaned with water. This not only ensures a cleaner hole it also removes doubt and provides consistency.

I have pulled out a fair number of loose DMM anchors and the way the bond has broken varies. Resin technology has changed over the years and resin bonded anchors have become more reliable. The Fisher FIS V resin that I have chosen to use is a more modern type of resin. The properties that make stainless steel corrosion resistant also mean that it is impossible to get a chemical bond between the resin and the steel. So the bond is purely mechanical. I have been informed that the FIS V 'hybrid mortar' forms a chemical bond between itself and the limestone. So with a newly installed IC anchor it is impossible to say which bond is stronger because they are different types of bond. When tested to destruction they always come out consistently with some resin in the hole and some on the anchor which is what you would want to happen.

It is complex but the earlier types of resin used with the DMM anchors in some cases is detached from the rock. I don't want to say much more than that at present. I want to see the data.

 

[Simon Wilson]

Is there a pattern? The answer is yes but what is the pattern? I, for one, would like to find out.

Amount of use is another factor to consider. Both number of trips, and length of prussik....

That is quite correct and there does seem to be an 'interesting' number of loose anchors which are loaded often. Good examples of this are the ones at the top of the first pitch on Alum Pot, South East Route which is a fairly long pitch where the anchors are loaded and the pitch is popular. However, I will say again that I don't want to say much until we have the data.

 

[Simon Wilson]

Someone said recently that there are more resin anchors on crags than there are in caves. Do you think there are more DMM Eco hangers on crags than in caves? There are about 2,500 in caves in the UK.

 

[andrewmcleod]

Someone said recently that there are more resin anchors on crags than there are in caves. Do you think there are more DMM Eco hangers on crags than in caves? There are about 2,500 in caves in the UK.

I wouldn't be surprised - I will try and find out on the other side...

 

[andrewmcleod]

Someone said recently that there are more resin anchors on crags than there are in caves. Do you think there are more DMM Eco hangers on crags than in caves? There are about 2,500 in caves in the UK.

I just got half-way through my Cheddar guide which states number of bolts (they are usually actual bolts at Cheddar) and counted (roughly, some estimations required for overlapping routes) 1100 bolts, so there are probably 2000+ bolts in Cheddar alone. Portland, for example, is a much larger area than Cheddar for sport, and nearly all the bolts there are (often home-made) glue-ins. I don't know about Eco anchors (but I have asked on UKClimbing).

 

[Tommy]

Someone said recently that there are more resin anchors on crags than there are in caves. Do you think there are more DMM Eco hangers on crags than in caves? There are about 2,500 in caves in the UK.

One key difference is 99% of the bolts underground see a prussicing load (or abseiling which could be higher for rapid deceleration). However with climbing, most never see more than the weight of a quickdraw and some rope drag.

As an engineer currently in my third year, they must have taken the bolt/anchor definitions quiz off the syllabus in recent years because when I say bolt in caving terms, I mean either Bolt with a capital 'B' or an anchor. This does seem to the be the vernacular on the streets.

As a climber I agree with Andrew, there's the 'placement' and 'anchor' (system of placements) nomenclature too...

I might specify it as bolt (resin), through-bolt, and spit. Calling a single point an 'anchor' for SRT makes me uncomfortable as it implies 100% trust. Though I'd call a sling around a tree, or a bomber nut an 'anchor' in climbing where appropriate though. Just a few thoughts.

 

[Tommy]

Someone said recently that there are more resin anchors on crags than there are in caves. Do you think there are more DMM Eco hangers on crags than in caves? There are about 2,500 in caves in the UK.

One key difference is 99% of the bolts underground see a prussicing load (or abseiling which could be higher for rapid deceleration). However with climbing, most never see more than the weight of a quickdraw and some rope drag.

As an engineer currently in my third year, they must have taken the bolt/anchor definitions quiz off the syllabus in recent years because when I say bolt in caving terms, I mean either Bolt with a capital 'B' or an anchor. This does seem to the be the vernacular on the streets, I'd be happy to be called out on my youthful ignorance though!

As a climber I agree with Andrew, there's the 'placement' and 'anchor' (system of placements) nomenclature too...

I might specify it as bolt (resin), through-bolt, and spit. Calling a single point an 'anchor' for SRT makes me uncomfortable as it implies 100% trust. Though I'd call a sling around a tree, or a bomber nut an 'anchor' in climbing where appropriate though. Just a few thoughts.

 

[andrewmcleod]

One key difference is 99% of the bolts underground see a prussicing load (or abseiling which could be higher for rapid deceleration). However with climbing, most never see more than the weight of a quickdraw and some rope drag.

True for most of them probably, but belay bolts will take a lowering load (actually twice as much as abseiling, if normally quite smooth) and crux bolts on popular routes will often take repeated whippers all weekend, every weekend

As an engineer currently in my third year, they must have taken the bolt/anchor definitions quiz off the syllabus in recent years because when I say bolt in caving terms, I mean either Bolt with a capital 'B' or an anchor. This does seem to the be the vernacular on the streets, I'd be happy to be called out on my youthful ignorance though!

The BMC installer (and user) guidelines also refer to glue-ins as 'bolts', although they say that explicitly at the start.
https://www.thebmc.co.uk/bolts-guidance-documents

 

[Simon Wilson]

Someone said recently that there are more resin anchors on crags than there are in caves. Do you think there are more DMM Eco hangers on crags than in caves? There are about 2,500 in caves in the UK.

One key difference is 99% of the bolts underground see a prussicing load (or abseiling which could be higher for rapid deceleration). However with climbing, most never see more than the weight of a quickdraw and some rope drag.

As an engineer currently in my third year, they must have taken the bolt/anchor definitions quiz off the syllabus in recent years because when I say bolt in caving terms, I mean either Bolt with a capital 'B' or an anchor. This does seem to the be the vernacular on the streets.

As a climber I agree with Andrew, there's the 'placement' and 'anchor' (system of placements) nomenclature too...

I might specify it as bolt (resin), through-bolt, and spit. Calling a single point an 'anchor' for SRT makes me uncomfortable as it implies 100% trust. Though I'd call a sling around a tree, or a bomber nut an 'anchor' in climbing where appropriate though. Just a few thoughts.

But there is a need to be clear what we are talking about. By definition a bolt has a thread and is designed to engage with a nut. I prefer to follow the established terminology used in industry. http://www.the-cfa.co.uk/

Climbers over a long period have had an irresponsible attitude to the damage done to crags. They have created an unholy mess and the BMC have not dealt with it very well. Not only have they created a chaotic mess on our crags they have also created  a mess in terminology.

Cavers on the other hand realised what was happening in the 1970s, showed much more community spirit and got together to stop bolt rash. And from 1991 we have been very successful. It slipped back into a bit more anarchy after 2003 and things deteriorated quite badly but hopefully we are now back on track in the North. We have 1,778 CNCC approved resin anchors in caves in the North and for every single anchor, we know who installed it, when it was installed, what type of anchor it is, what type of resin is used and the batch number of the resin. And if people are at all concerned about these things they should also be concerned about using correct terminology in order that we can communicate effectively and banish chaos.

 

[Tommy]

But there is a need to be clear what we are talking about. By definition a bolt has a thread and is designed to engage with a nut. I prefer to follow the established terminology used in industry. http://www.the-cfa.co.uk/

Not everyone is in 'the industry' though and uses words their peers are most familiar with. It is important to have strict technical definitions so we engineers and the legal eagles can do our jobs, but flexibility and consideration must be allowed in communication with wider audiences, such as those on this forum.

Climbers over a long period have had an irresponsible attitude to the damage done to crags. They have created an unholy mess and the BMC have not dealt with it very well. Not only have they created a chaotic mess on our crags they have also created  a mess in terminology.

I don't disagree, but you are ignoring the ongoing war between Trad climbing purists (who advocate that bolts should never be placed) and sport climbers (who think crags should be safe and accessible like theme park). There is a spectrum in between of course with sound arguments on bolting specific lower-offs on trad crag to save tree damage or whatever reason. We have it pretty good in the UK with regards to staunch trad ethics conserving our crags as we figure it all out from a technical standpoint. Thankfully the bolts are mostly on chossy or overhanging limestone (too steep for most climbers), or on blank slate walls where they can be sparse and much appreciated.

The issue here was commencing bolting without a clear plan for the future, something that both 'climbers' and 'cavers' are guilty of, but should not be faulted for, after all we all just want to play and explore.

Cavers on the other hand realised what was happening in the 1970s, showed much more community spirit and got together to stop bolt rash. And from 1991 we have been very successful. It slipped back into a bit more anarchy after 2003 and things deteriorated quite badly but hopefully we are now back on track in the North. We have 1,778 CNCC approved resin anchors in caves in the North and for every single anchor, we know who installed it, when it was installed, what type of anchor it is, what type of resin is used and the batch number of the resin. And if people are at all concerned about these things they should also be concerned about using correct terminology in order that we can communicate effectively and banish chaos.

Yes caving is very heavy on bureaucracy and management in comparison to climbing, for better or for worse. All of my caving peers are BCA members, not many of my climbing peers are members of the BMC or have any sort of insurance, those that do do so for professional reasons. Climbing is much more popular and growing rapidly so the BMC have a serious task on their hands. Much of this growth is from people learning to climb indoors then wanting to go on and climb outdoors with a lack of appreciation for nature (no fault of theirs necessarily), does this mean a coming wave of bolt rash in climbing?

I appreciate the work that goes in to bolting and managing the caves on this island of course thanks to you and the other teams, I'm just trying to discuss how different views may come about, thanks for engaging.

 

[andrewmcleod]

Climbers over a long period have had an irresponsible attitude to the damage done to crags. They have created an unholy mess and the BMC have not dealt with it very well. Not only have they created a chaotic mess on our crags they have also created  a mess in terminology.

I think climbers would disagree quite strongly

It is still only a very small fraction of UK rock that is permitted to be bolted. Nearly all of it is horrible choss anyway (albeit usually cleaned up by traffic) and usually quarried. Not that there is any body that says you can't bolt this or that - certainly the BMC would never be seen to make such a statement. The BMC regions do have bolt policies but these are written by local climbers, not dictated by the BMC. In any event the BMC would say it was not their job to dictate to climbers - and I would agree. They do do a great job of facilitating dialogue, which is why there is broad agreement across the UK on most issues. Can you say the same in caving?

Nobody owns language or has the right to dictate terminology as 'better' or 'more correct' outside of a specific context: you will never get climbers to call glue-ins anchors and not bolts because it will just cause confusion where there was none (in the climbing community)

 

[Simon Wilson]

Please can the mods sort these threads out. People seem to be getting threads slightly mixed up. This is a reply to something at least partly about loose anchors posted on another thread.

Jim Titt has pointed something out on the other side and there may very well be a counter-argument, but I can't think of what it is...

First let me say that me and Jim have corresponded by email, we got on well and I think he is a sound guy.

The requirement to be able to pull out resin bolts cleanly may not actually be as important as it seems. Why would you ever pull a resin bolt out? Either because:

a) the bolt is showing corrosion (but 316 SS), in which case the bolt is liable to snap rather than coming out anyway, or more likely
b) the resin has failed, in which case the claim is that the bolt will come out cleanly anyway?
(or I guess if the bolt gets worn away by running loaded rope through it which is never required in caving)

If a DMM is loose it needs replacing because you just don't know how strong it might be. Sometimes they take a lot of force to pull out and sometimes they don't which tells me that I was right in removing them.

Do _loose_ DMM Eco anchors, when pulled, cause cratering that prevents the hole being reused?

No. They have always pulled out without damaging the rock.

He also suggests pulling the bolt out through a small hole, so the downward force is on the rock directly around the bolt, in order to prevent cratering.

I have tried that. What happened was that the rock was pulverised underneath the metal ring. People in the UK have been trying to find a way of removing BP 'bolts' but haven't found one yet. Jim says that BP 'bolts' can be removed without damaging the rock. I'm not saying he is wrong but that we haven't found out how to do it. If he thinks it is important then maybe he could come and show us how to do it in our carboniferous limestone.

 

[MarkS]

Please can the mods sort these threads out. People seem to be getting threads slightly mixed up. This is a reply to something at least partly about loose anchors posted on another thread.

Unless threads cleanly diverge to different topics into which they can be split, it's very hard to reorganise threads.

[mod]Everyone: please try and keep posts on topic to avoid potential confusion.[/mod]

 

[Simon Wilson]

People who have seen my IC resin anchor website hopefully will know that I am a strong believer in openess and sharing information.

I want to keep people up-to-date and informed about what is happening about the problem of loose anchors, what we at the CNCC are doing about it and encourage people to get involved in maintaining their own caving gear. Their own caving gear being in this case the anchors - your anchors - your caving gear that happens to be attached to the cave rather than attached to your harness.

The CNCC hold a set of installation records which told me that all the caves reported in this thread were some of the earliest installations. So I assumed a probability that all of the earliest installations were those most likely to be loose. With that information I made a list of caves to inspect and went for a look at them. I was working during Eurospeleo week but I went caving every evening and inspected a few of the caves that were rigged. This was just a quick trip to shoot down caves and give every anchor a waggle without taking detailed notes just to get a rough idea of the scale of the problem. I counted an anchor as being loose if it had any movement whatsoever.

This is a list of the caves I've looked at and the number of loose anchors I found in each cave.

Bull Pot  13
Hardrawkin 6
Juniper Gulf 6
Diccan 5
Tatham Wife 4
Swinsto  4
Heron 2
Alum 2
Upper Long Churn 1

The only loose anchor reported to the CNCC was in Bull Pot and that was dealt with as matter of urgency. Heron Pot has also been sorted. That is where we are at the moment.

At the CNCC meeting last Saturday I said that I would like to see all caves inspected for loose anchors and I asked the CNCC to organise a systematic inspection of all anchors. That's roughly 1500 anchors in about 60 caves. Obviously there was overwhelming support for this suggestion. The purpose of the inspection is so that we can gauge the scale of the problem and gather data to enable us to gain understanding of the causes of the anchors becoming loose and make predictions about what might happen in the future.

The inspection is now in the planning stage and in due course there will be a request for volunteers to help out doing the inspections.

In the mean time - watch this.

! No longer available

 

[MarkS]

Out of interest, do you have any feel for the strength of these loose anchors or is it too early to say?

 

[Badlad]

My guess is that many of these loose anchors will still take a considerable force to pull out - even with an axial load.  Radial loads will be strong even without a bond.  The drill hole is not smooth so this helps a lot.  However, this can never be guaranteed as it is possible some may just pull out under low loads.  Inevitably loose anchors will get looser.

To add to your list, and apologies for not reporting it in the correct manner, but I did notice a loose anchor on the Dolly Tubs pitch.  It was on the traverse half way down but I can't remember exactly which one.