[Boredboy]

Hi,

I was bouldering at Rivelin last weekend and noticed that one of the holds on 'Sparks' had been over brushed to the point of breaking the 'crust' of the rock and improving a hold (that you don't even need). While I'm sure it's a well worn subject (no pun intended) this kind of 'over brushing' is steadily eroding lots of grit bouldering and almost definitely won't help you get up the problem. Sorry if it's a bit tedious but I was gutted to see a good problem at one of my favourite crags looking like it did, pointless. 

Cheers

Dan

[yankcranker]

dont you guys use lapis brushes?

[slackline]

dont you guys use lapis brushes?

The majority of regulars on these forums know how to treat rock and not over-brush (be it with a lapis or anything else).

Not everyone who boulders is registered on these forums or knows what you should or shouldn't do when brushing.

[andy_e]

Lapis brushes are amongst the hardest bouldering brushes and can do the most damage.

[Drew]

Really? I thought they were supposed to be so good because they were really fine and soft, and got into all the tiny features? Surely the fibres on nylon brushes (Metolius etc) are stiffer?

[andy_e]

If they do get into pore spaces, then brushing with a Lapis brush would be more damaging than if the brush just skittered over the top.

[Drew]

That does make sense. But I've basically ruined a Lapis before now trying to clean moss/lichen from a hold, and the Lapis picked loads of it up, but left loads. surely the rock has more structural integrity than moss?
This is a genuine question by the way. I hope it doesn't sound sarcy.

[andy_e]

Yes, usually, the weathered outer surface of the rock is more structurally integral than lichen. I would imagine, however, that lichen can anchor itself quite well to the rock with roots and tendrils and the suchlike. Once the weathered outer surface is removed however, sandstone can be very weak indeed if there's no cement or other diagenetic processes to hold the grains together and any brushing (or even touching it) can remove grains. Think of a sandy crag such as Brimham for example.

[Bonjoy]

All seems rather beside the point to me given how much more damaging standing on/heel hooking a foothold in a pair of rock boots is than any amount of toothbrush/lapis brushing. 
I'm always wary of people claiming holds have been toothbrushed to destruction, usually they just look like they've been stood on to me.

[Danny]

Andi, you may be knowledgeable on the geology front (I am not), but that's clearly pure conjecture.

Anecdotal at best.

You're telling us that lapis is more damaging than nylon. That may or may not be true and, if there is a difference, it's surely a case of splitting hairs. We're not talking about wire brushing and blowtorching here.   

[andy_e]

Bonjoy:

Hmmm, it's a different force acting on it. Usually holds with lots of foot-traffic become polished (unless the outer layer is removed such as Hanging Arete at Higgar) because pressure is exerted downwards and the pressure is spread out over a wider area whereas brushing exerts downwards force and force backwards and forwards with brushing and is localised in a small area. Look at New Jerusalem for example, nobody stands on that hold and yet it's become massive through overbrushing.

Danny, despite your pun, it seems to be true from opinions I've heard over the years that Lapis brushes are far harsher to rock than any other type. I'm sure there've been discussions about it on here before.

[tomtom]

I very much doubt the fine hairs of a Lapis brush are fine enough to make it through the patina and into any pore spaces - which at largest would be incredibly small in the sandstone/gritstone of N.England...

There are lots of issues that can help/hinder the development of the patina (sorry harder armoured outer) on grit/sandstone - lichen and other biological activity may well help in this - as biofilms have been shown to have a large role in cementing together  and in some cases pretty much forming rock.

But something rarely discussed is the chemical changes that have occurred over the last 300 years on these outcrops.. 50 and especially 100 years ago, air quality was awful - smog, and associated large amounts of acidified rainfall linked to the industrial revolution and growth of towns/cities would have had some impact on exposed rock faces. This would have (likely) killed off any lichen/green on the surface and I expect would have some sort of impact on the formation of the harder outer layer (I dont know how acidic water running over the surface effects cementation etc.. but would be surprised if it wasnt a factor). In other words, the hardened surface we get at places like Almscliff (which has quite a few spots of softer rock too) may be due to us... There is anecdotal evidence of places such as Wimberry only recently developing the habit of getting very green quite quickly - which again reflects the better air quality found nowadays... I'm no expert on any of the above - its just my semi informed views/interpretations but I'd be interested what anyone better informed can say or if there is any SCIENCE to back this up...

[andy_e]

Fair enough, you're probably right about it getting into the pore spaces. Maybe the fact the bristles can deform more easily and are in denser clumps means it's like those toothbrush advert claims were they say "this toothbrush reaches bits others can't"...

[tomtom]

Fair enough, you're probably right about it getting into the pore spaces. Maybe the fact the bristles can deform more easily and are in denser clumps means it's like those toothbrush advert claims were they say "this toothbrush reaches bits others can't"...

I just use alternate bleach and acid sprays...

[andy_e]

On your teeth or the rock?

[tomtom]

On your teeth or the rock?

Only UV on my teeth... I get it done when I top up at Tantastic down the road..

[andy_e]

Ah, following the Adam Lincoln Training Plan I see...

[tomtom]

Ah, following the Adam Lincoln Training Plan I see...

I get my inspiration from The Only Way Is Essex...  Back sack and crack booked in for friday...

[yankcranker]

seriously lol @ lapis ruining rock..

peeps get BENT out here (east coast) over nylon brushes..they polish conglomerates + granite till they feel like gym holds. certain places in the south have active bannings on nylon, as it has + will easily carve holds in sandstone.

nylon's only really acceptable for cleaning new problems

[andy_e]

We're not talking about conglomerates or granite here though.

[yankcranker]

fair enough, but theres tons and tons of rock types here, with tons and tons of subsets....im sure you could find a few that share most of gritstone's characteristics. this topic was dissected on b3 pretty well about a year or so ago maybe? i know we got the lapis thing from the frogs, surprised you guys are still living in the dark ages...

[andy_e]

Have you got a link to this thread? Sounds like interesting reading.

We've been using lapis brushes since I were a lad... 

[SA Chris]

So one week then?

[yankcranker]

 

http://www.b3bouldering.com/2011/06/27/toothbrushes/


edited to add....currently rocking revolution's double sided brush (horse/boar). so tight. thing is clutch, has been the deciding factor in being able to pull onto certain problems.

the gunks get abused by visitors when the season is in....caked up black greasy balls come off holds when you use lapis. if you use nylon, it creates a bit of dust, but thats it. the holds remain greased to all hell.

gunks = most overrated zone on the planet

[andy_e]

Well I've trawled this forum for mention of lapis being worse than other brushes but I can't find anything. I'm sure I've heard of it though. I'll give that thread a read.