CT test procedures

according to the NWAC, CT21 is the second tap from the "elbow+shoulder"... but according to the "3x10" method described on the avalanche-research website you are correct that CT21 is the first tap from the shoulder. I guess if I am going to use the 3x10 method, I will have to call this new method out... is there an official name for it? Between the two methods, the same scoring is technically a slightly different result.

This is reminding me of comparing the US Inch vs. Metric system.

3 sets of 10 taps (wrist, elbow, shoulder) is the standard given in the Snow, Weather, and Avalanches: Observational Guidelines (SWAG).
I was not aware of other procedures. I recommend using SWAG standards, especially if you are going to communicate your observations with other people. We need to be speaking the same language to communicate effectively, which is why the SWAG exists.

Otter cut to the bone of the matter - three sets of 10 taps (10 each from wrist, elbow, shoulder) is the given standard in the SWAG (printed by the USFS) and the Canadian Observation Guidlines and Recording Standards for Weather, Snowpack, and Avalanches (OGRS, printed by the Canadian Avalanche Association).
If you wish to communicate your observations, you need to apply the same procedures to your tests to make them relevant to others.
I too am unaware of any other CT procedure - the 3x10 is virtually unchanged since at least 1998 (the column size has changed, and so has the emphasis on the shear quality). Koda, where did you learn this 5x6 method?

I have only heard of the 3X10 CT method as well. I looked at the NWAC Correlation document and I am not sure they are presenting a different CT method, but rather trying to correlate a global stability assessment to the 3X10 CT. Their stability level groups happen to fall into groups of six compression blows, but it looks like they are still following 10 wrist, 10 elbow, and 10 shoulder procedure. That is how it looks to me anyway...

Orion

Koda, where did you learn this 5x6 method? from the NWAC Correlation document in my OP, but I may have mis-interpreted something....

I have only heard of the 3X10 CT method as well.  I looked at the NWAC Correlation document and I am not sure they are presenting a different CT method, but rather trying to correlate a global stability assessment to the 3X10 CT.  Their stability level groups happen to fall into groups of six compression blows, but it looks like they are still following 10 wrist, 10 elbow, and 10 shoulder procedure.  That is how it looks to me anyway...

Orion

Orion thank you for pointing this out. I will look deeper into the NWAC Correlation document, It could be I have been mis-interpreting this. But in my opinion this is confusing if they are still following the 3x10 method. Reviewing the two documents linked in my OP... interpreting the results in the 3x10 document (table 2.11, avalanche-research.com) mentions nothing of "wrist+elbow, etc." and led me to believe the NWAC Correlation document a different procedure... it doesn't make sense to me to analyze a 3x10 procedure with 5x6 results.

As my local regional avalanche forecasting site, I have been referring to the NWAC information focusing on the rough correlations document for my personal use. this season, I did a web search for more resources to confirm the "3x10" method. A quick glance at the avalanche-research.com document clearly describes not only the procedure but scoring and interpretations... I'm going to print this out and study the subject over focusing on the 3x10 procedure now (as well as other stability methods)

I will go back and look more thoroughly through the NWAC website, it's discouraging I have missed any information on proper procedures. I know the subject of avalanche prediction is complicated, but it would be nice if the material was easily presented and available to the recreational skier... like it is in the avalanche-research.com article.

Koda,

Keep us posted with what you find.  I interpreted the "7-12 (wrist+elbow)" to mean tap at the wrist to 10 taps and switch to tapping at the elbow at 11.  So, the group of 7-12 included both 4 wrist taps and two elbow taps - not 6 wrist/elbow taps.  The group of CT 7-12 group being the stability group of 'Unstable 3'.

I agree though the NWAC correlation document is not clear in this regard and I am 'reading between the lines'

Orion