Goto Chockstone Home

  Guide
  Gallery
  Tech Tips
  Articles
  Reviews
  Dictionary
  Links
  Forum
  Search
  About

      Sponsored By
      ROCK
   HARDWARE

  Shop

Set of 11 "Wallnuts" (1 to 11) N/B NEW Anodized colours!!! New "lighter" version. Steve's favourite wired Nuts.  $169.00
15% Off

Chockstone Photography Australian Landscape Photography by Michael Boniwell
Australian Landscape Prints





Chockstone Forum - General Discussion

General Climbing Discussion

 Page 2 of 4. Messages 1 to 20 | 21 to 40 | 41 to 60 | 61 to 61
Author
buying boulders

Duang Daunk
24/06/2013
12:30:42 PM
On 24/06/2013 Snappy wrote:
>Unfortunately the wiki articles for other kinds of rock aren't as well
>layed out as the granite one. However I found this: http://geology.about.com/cs/rock_typesa/aarockspecgrav.htm
>Granite: 2.6-2.7g/cm^3
>Rhyolite: 2.4-2.6g/cm^3 (so a little lighter, but not as much as I would have thought).
>Sandstone: 2.2-2.8g/cm^3
>
>That doesn't give a complete picture, as the porosity of the different
>kinds of rock comes into play. My assumption (which you can feel free to
>disregard, or google, if you want) is that extrusive rock such as rhyolite
>would have a higher porosity than intrusive rock such as granite.
>

You are not saying anything a common garden variety retard couldn't read in your reference, as rhyolite came in 7 places below granite on that link.

The only thing I read there that was half worht reading was this bit,
"Rock density is very sensitive to the minerals that compose a particular rock type. Sedimentary rocks (and granite), which are rich in quartz and feldspar, tend to be less dense than volcanic rocks."

Which by the way backs up my initial point.

Meh, as I said, I'm no geo so am not going to argue the case any further with ignorant internet posters.
One Day Hero
24/06/2013
12:35:05 PM
On 24/06/2013 Snappy wrote:
>My assumption (which you can feel free to
>disregard, or google, if you want) is that extrusive rock such as rhyolite
>would have a higher porosity than intrusive rock such as granite.

Not the case with Canberra Rhyolite.

Snappy
24/06/2013
12:39:16 PM
On 24/06/2013 Duang Daunk wrote:
>On 24/06/2013 Snappy wrote:
>>Unfortunately the wiki articles for other kinds of rock aren't as well
>>layed out as the granite one. However I found this: http://geology.about.com/cs/rock_typ
>sa/aarockspecgrav.htm
>>Granite: 2.6-2.7g/cm^3
>>Rhyolite: 2.4-2.6g/cm^3 (so a little lighter, but not as much as I would
>have thought).
>>Sandstone: 2.2-2.8g/cm^3
>>
>>That doesn't give a complete picture, as the porosity of the different
>>kinds of rock comes into play. My assumption (which you can feel free
>to
>>disregard, or google, if you want) is that extrusive rock such as rhyolite
>>would have a higher porosity than intrusive rock such as granite.
>>
>
>You are not saying anything a common garden variety retard couldn't read
>in your reference, as rhyolite came in 7 places below granite on that link.
>
>The only thing I read there that was half worht reading was this bit,
>"Rock density is very sensitive to the minerals that compose a particular
>rock type. Sedimentary rocks (and granite), which are rich in quartz and
>feldspar, tend to be less dense than volcanic rocks."
>
>Which by the way backs up my initial point.
>
>Meh, as I said, I'm no geo so am not going to argue the case any further
>with ignorant internet posters.

Having a bad morning eh? Not sure the reason for the hostility.

I simply stated that I thought granite was denser than other kinds of rock I commonly climb on - based on my gut feel and limited knowledge of geology (highschool level, some internet reading, talking to some actual geologists and basic reasoning skills).

I backed this up with some links stating that yes, granite is denser (which is what I originally said).

I'm not really sure what point you are arguing here, or who the "ignorant internet poster"/"garden variety retard" is....

Snappy
24/06/2013
12:44:17 PM
On 24/06/2013 One Day Hero wrote:
>On 24/06/2013 Snappy wrote:
>>My assumption (which you can feel free to
>>disregard, or google, if you want) is that extrusive rock such as rhyolite
>>would have a higher porosity than intrusive rock such as granite.
>
>Not the case with Canberra Rhyolite.

Yep, turns out rhyolite has quite a range (including less porous than granite).

On 24/06/2013 Snappy wrote:
>Seeing as I am interested now:
>http://lmrwww.epfl.ch/en/ensei/Rock_Mechanics/ENS_080312_EN_JZ_Notes_Chapter_4.pdf
>Page 2.
>
>Granite: Dry density: 2.53 – 2.62 Porosity:1.02 – 2.87%
>Rhyolite: Dry density:2.40 – 2.60 Porosity:0.40 – 4.00%
>Sandstone: Dry density: 1.91 – 2.58 Porosity:1.62 – 26.4%
>

I am guessing that the Canberra rhyolite you are talking about falls closer to the 0.4% than the 4% then.



One Day Hero
24/06/2013
1:13:21 PM
On 24/06/2013 Snappy wrote:
>Yep, turns out rhyolite has quite a range (including less porous than
>granite).

For the purposes of "climber geology", most granite is essentially non-porous. Unlike DD (who's gonna cop a spray in a second) I think that basic geology is for everyone, and isn't something which should be left to "the educated elite". Here's a tip I picked up from a first year uni geology course; The silicate minerals and carbonate minerals which compose most of the rocks we climb on (granites, volcanics, sandstones, and limestones) all have densities of roughly 2.5 (given that you're "weighing" these irregular shaped rocks with your hand, that approximation is as near as you need to go). Any noticeable differences in rock density (among these common rock types) is usually down to pore space.

Eduardo Slabofvic
24/06/2013
3:12:40 PM
On 24/06/2013 One Day Hero wrote:
> Here's a tip I picked up from a first year uni geology course;


Is that the one where they teach you that there's no such thing as overhanging granite?
One Day Hero
24/06/2013
3:25:41 PM
You're not referring to that thread where I suggested that most granite gets washed when it rains, and therefore chalk buildup isn't a major problem, are you?

And then a bunch of retards posted up a series of photos of rhyolite, trachyte, and gneiss, claiming them all as "overhanging granite", because in their minds igneous and granite are interchangeable terms.

shortman
24/06/2013
3:38:08 PM
On 24/06/2013 One Day Hero wrote:
>You're not referring to that thread where I suggested that most granite
>gets washed when it rains, and therefore chalk buildup isn't a major problem,
>are you?
>
>And then a bunch of retards posted up a series of photos of rhyolite,
>trachyte, and gneiss, claiming them all as "overhanging granite", because
>in their minds igneous and granite are interchangeable terms.

I think the Nerd Meter is gonna go into overdrive soon Damo. Take it easy on the poor thing.

Duang Daunk
24/06/2013
3:51:13 PM
On 24/06/2013 One Day Hero wrote:
>For the purposes of "climber geology", most granite is essentially non-porous.
>Unlike DD (who's gonna cop a spray in a second)
What happend on Straddie stays on Straddie.

>I think that basic geology
>is for everyone, and isn't something which should be left to "the educated
>elite".

I disagree. Your climbing experiences will determine your medium of choice when it comes to rock type, and you don't have to know much more other than will it rain, to climb well. Your hypothesis is kinda like you gotta know how the electronics and jet engine works in order to fly to your country of climbing destination?
You are in nerd status with that logic.
One Day Hero
24/06/2013
4:31:57 PM
On 24/06/2013 Duang Daunk wrote:
>Your hypothesis is kinda like you gotta
>know how the electronics and jet engine works in order to fly to your country
>of climbing destination?

Nope.....but if you fly more than once on the miracle of technology known as an A380, and yet lack the curiosity to even investigate the most basic principles of aerofoils or turbofan engines, you're probably a deadshit sportclimber who's got nothing more interesting to talk about than the crux sequence of some piece of crap at South Central!

Likewise, if you spend a large part of your life climbing rocks but don't ever get curious about how those rocks came to be as they are, chances are you're pretty fuching dim. Wikipedia and maybe a second hand textbook on process geology are frankly just as good as a year of tertiary education when it comes to understanding "crag geology"
mikllaw
24/06/2013
5:00:36 PM
Agree with ODH, geology is awesome! Rock and wear and fracture and surface effects and re-coating and crystallisation, pockets and crimps and slopers.

Climbing and not being interested in rock is like having sex without a working knowledge of genitalia.

Anyway - once the MUMC arranged to cart the Golden Streak boulder back to Melbourne, and hired a small truck and a 5 ton crane. Simple maths says it's volume is ~ 6x6x5 = 180 cubic meters. Guessing 2.5 tonnes/ m^3 gives about 450 tonne.

Eduardo Slabofvic
24/06/2013
5:02:56 PM
...... and you shouldn't post on Chockstone without knowing the full life history of Alan Turing
Karl Bromelow
24/06/2013
5:39:35 PM
On 24/06/2013 mikllaw wrote:
>, geology is awesome!

I saw a lecture by Greg Stock last September in Yosemite Village as part of the program of events at the 9th annual Yosemite Facelift. "The Geology of Yosemite Climbing". It was great. The jam packed East Auditorium loved it too. Hooting and cheering at every image and every description of the chemistry and the forces that shaped the valley. It was every bit as entertaining as Sean Leary's following presentation of a preview of the climbing film "Autana". Even my 5 year old was mesmerised!

Devout nerds all of us.

Duang Daunk
24/06/2013
5:55:56 PM
mikl is bent because he likes testing things to breaking point, ie a special kind of interest in how things work, but ODH is another kind of bent, because he climbs all sorts of rock but only understands enough to slag others, which is still short of being a geo.

To illlustrate my point, would a boulderer give a rats arse about whether or not the crimp has a density of xx, or the rock spent time being preheated by mother earth before we are allowed to climb on it after erosional forces take their toll?
I reckon the boulderer would say watch me, and the spotters would be cheering them on to greater height. If they are worried about anything enough to enquire further, it would be whether or not the filming of it will be easy to upload to Utube.
You lot would be better off arguing the toss about the density of the boulder mats.

Miguel75
24/06/2013
6:52:11 PM
Since the only way to settle a quarrel like this is a duel, and we all know duels are passé; I propose a challenge!

Everyone go climb something tomorrow, (out of bed doesn't count), and report back on all the heavy rocks you find. Special prize for whomever is hit by the greatest amount (weight wise) of falling stone... With or without a helmet;)

ashfall tuff
24/06/2013
7:18:12 PM
for a second the dreams of having a 'boulder park' with all the rock types under the sun, layed out botanic gardens style was all but reality... seems like the density problem isnt going away.





ashfall tuff
24/06/2013
7:28:44 PM
hang on, as another proclaimed rock geek elite, density is effected by the speed at which it cools (for igneous), faster cooling the grains are smaller, the slower the rock cools the bigger the crystals and more likely your fingertips will be bloodied.

gnaguts
24/06/2013
9:38:27 PM
On 23/06/2013 Ashfall tuff wrote:
>Is it possible to buy boulders?
>
You already own heaps. They are in the National Parks.

gnaguts
24/06/2013
9:42:39 PM
On 24/06/2013 One Day Hero wrote:
>if you spend a large part of your life climbing rocks but don't
>ever get curious about how those rocks came to be as they are, chances
>are you're pretty fuching dim. Wikipedia and maybe a second hand textbook
>on process geology are frankly just as good as a year of tertiary education
>when it comes to understanding "crag geology"

I would sooner spend my time reading a training for bouldering book than dim dark geology history. Better still I would sooner be out bouldering instead of reading about it.

Tell us more about your "fuching dim" theory, as I can see you at the crux now exclaiming, this is a tertiary hold so it should be good!

gnaguts
24/06/2013
9:45:53 PM
On 24/06/2013 Duang Daunk wrote:
>To illlustrate my point, would a boulderer give a rats arse about whether
>or not the crimp has a density of xx, or the rock spent time being preheated
>by mother earth before we are allowed to climb on it after erosional forces
>take their toll?
>I reckon the boulderer would say watch me, and the spotters would be cheering
>them on to greater height. If they are worried about anything enough to
>enquire further, it would be whether or not the filming of it will be easy
>to upload to Utube.
>You lot would be better off arguing the toss about the density of the
>boulder mats.

Most of that makes sense to me, except the part about uploading to Utube, unless it is a hard problem and worth posting.

 Page 2 of 4. Messages 1 to 20 | 21 to 40 | 41 to 60 | 61 to 61
There are 61 messages in this topic.

 

Home | Guide | Gallery | Tech Tips | Articles | Reviews | Dictionary | Forum | Links | About | Search
Chockstone Photography | Landscape Photography Australia | Australian Landscape Photography

Please read the full disclaimer before using any information contained on these pages.



Australian Panoramic | Australian Coast | Australian Mountains | Australian Countryside | Australian Waterfalls | Australian Lakes | Australian Cities | Australian Macro | Australian Wildlife
Landscape Photo | Landscape Photography | Landscape Photography Australia | Fine Art Photography | Wilderness Photography | Nature Photo | Australian Landscape Photo | Stock Photography Australia | Landscape Photos | Panoramic Photos | Panoramic Photography Australia | Australian Landscape Photography | Mothers Day Gifts | Gifts for Mothers Day | Mothers Day Gift Ideas | Ideas for Mothers Day | Wedding Gift Ideas | Christmas Gift Ideas | Fathers Day Gifts | Gifts for Fathers Day | Fathers Day Gift Ideas | Ideas for Fathers Day | Landscape Prints | Landscape Poster | Limited Edition Prints | Panoramic Photo | Buy Posters | Poster Prints