|
dynosore
May 8, 2007, 6:57 PM
Post #101 of 354
(20531 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 29, 2004
Posts: 1768
|
So they pull test the cables only, not the assembled cam? 
That's like a car company checking the brake pads at the factory and declaring the car stops well, but they neglect to put a brake pedal in a car every so often......
I would be ROFLOL if these weren't potentially life-saving (or not) devices!
(This post was edited by dynosore on May 8, 2007, 7:00 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
j_ung
May 8, 2007, 7:21 PM
Post #103 of 354
(20489 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18690
|
There's a context to that picture:
CCH wrote: It has been recently reported to CCH that the main cable broke on an Alien. We were e-mailed photos of the cam, however it isn't possible to make any conclusions from a photograph. We have asked the individual to forward the cam to a certified metallurgist for analysis, as of today April 27th, 2007 it has not yet been received by the lab. We will post the results as soon as we receive them from the metallurgist. Since January 2006 every main cable is tensile tested using an Omega electronic strain gauge to measure the load. The .33 through 1" main cables are tested to 1750 lbs and the 1.25 through 2.5 are tested to 2400 lbs. After testing they are stamped on the cable eye to indicate the test was made. Ultimate strength of a 3/4 Alien is over 2700 lbs.
So, those photos are posted in response to the assumption that the cable itself broke. We still don't see anywhere in there whether or how the completed units are tested. If those photos show the only testing that occurs, CCH is in a world of shit. But then, I guess they're in a world of shit regardless.
(This post was edited by j_ung on May 8, 2007, 7:22 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
mojomonkey
May 8, 2007, 7:24 PM
Post #104 of 354
(20482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 13, 2006
Posts: 869
|
I see the problem, according to their site:
http://www.aliencamsbycch.com/recall/nw_report.html wrote: Since the recall, all main cable silver brazed connections are tinsel tested .33-1/2= tested to 1800 pounds ¾ -1”=tested to 2000 pounds 1.25”-2.5=tested to 2500 pounds.
They are only tinsel testing them. I'm sure the one that failed was still stronger than tinsel.
And more seriously, that link claims the brazed connections are tested. So it doesn't sound like they are just pulling cable. It doesn't say the cam lobes are actually attached at that point though.
|
|
|
|
|
jakedatc
May 8, 2007, 7:38 PM
Post #105 of 354
(20454 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 12, 2003
Posts: 11054
|
Ahhh i see... their pictures suck but it does seem like they braze the head and then put it into the tester for pulling.. makes sense.
Anyone want to post a pic of where the TT stamp is supposed to be? Mine are pre-TT but the one in this thread should have it somewhere but i don't see it in the pictures
|
|
|
|
|
medicus
May 8, 2007, 8:01 PM
Post #107 of 354
(20416 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 2, 2006
Posts: 727
|
It's obvious on mine... they are stamped on the copper thing that makes the loop a loop... as in it holds the main wire together... don't have mine with me right now, nor do I have a decent camera or I would post them.
|
|
|
|
|
jakedatc
May 8, 2007, 8:07 PM
Post #108 of 354
(20409 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 12, 2003
Posts: 11054
|
Medicus.. that's all i wanted to know.. thanks.
there is only one pic of the swage in Pin's photos.. and you cant see anything in that.. but it could be on the other side..
|
|
|
|
|
rhyang
May 8, 2007, 8:51 PM
Post #109 of 354
(20352 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 140
|
They are apparently able to test fully-assembled cams, since at one point they offered to do so for any made before Jan 2006. I made use of this service myself - about 3 cams worth.
Most of the newer aliens I have are already stamped 'tested', except for two. I phoned up CCH about this and Dave called my attention to the letter L stamped on the stems. This apparently indicates that he brazed these units personally, and that they had been tested.
I also have a red alien which was dimpled, and sent back for recall. They returned it with a tag which said 'tested to 1800lbs'.
FWIW
|
|
|
|
|
shockabuku
May 8, 2007, 11:42 PM
Post #110 of 354
(20261 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 20, 2006
Posts: 4868
|
Exactly.
|
|
|
|
|
curt
May 9, 2007, 1:22 AM
Post #111 of 354
(20220 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
j_ung wrote: curt wrote: j_ung wrote: As for buying a company... it's a bit easier said than done. For the record, a purchase of CCH and/or its design for Aliens has been attempted more than once before. Most recently an attempt was made around the time of last year's recall. I don't think CCH can stand up to due diligence. Only a complete retard would buy CCH, the company. The smart thing for some good gear manufacturer to do is buy the exclusive rights to manufacture and market the "Alien" technology. That way, the acquiring company is not exposed any potential liability that the company CCH may have. Curt How easy is that to do?
It's pretty easy--if the buyer and seller can agree on price, of course. Also, this is not the same thing as "buying a patent" as some have suggested. The patent would just be one of the items included in the overall asset sale to the buyer. Other things such as manufacturing fixtures, records, data, complete manufacturing and assembly drawings, etc. would also likely be included.
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
112
May 9, 2007, 2:38 AM
Post #112 of 354
(20132 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 15, 2004
Posts: 432
|
rhyang wrote: I also have a red alien which was dimpled, and sent back for recall. They returned it with a tag which said 'tested to 1800lbs'.
That's a collectors item!
Seriously though, what is up with CCH's webpage for this incident?
They have a chart of recommended uses. They don't design my protection systems, I do! All I want to know is how a PROPERLY manufacture Alien will behave. I will do the rest. But, when the devices don't behave as they are suppose to, then, well, you know...
|
|
|
|
|
scrapedape
May 9, 2007, 6:48 PM
Post #113 of 354
(19981 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 2392
|
Looks like a yellow, or maybe an orange, TCU would be bomber in there.
|
|
|
|
|
rhyang
May 9, 2007, 7:34 PM
Post #114 of 354
(19928 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 140
|
rhyang wrote: They are apparently able to test fully-assembled cams, since at one point they offered to do so for any made before Jan 2006. I made use of this service myself - about 3 cams worth. Most of the newer aliens I have are already stamped 'tested', except for two. I phoned up CCH about this and Dave called my attention to the letter L stamped on the stems. This apparently indicates that he brazed these units personally, and that they had been tested. I also have a red alien which was dimpled, and sent back for recall. They returned it with a tag which said 'tested to 1800lbs'. FWIW
Someone asked me to clarify about the red dimpled alien. The full text of the tag read "New main cable tested to 1800lbs". The head no longer appeared to be dimpled. I would guess it was repaired, but am no metals fabrication guru, so your guess is as good as mine, actually probably better than mine :)
Again, FWIW.
|
|
|
|
|
soillclimber
May 9, 2007, 10:48 PM
Post #115 of 354
(19842 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 21, 2005
Posts: 31
|
More pics are being taken and I will post them asap. I can't believe with the overwhelming slant to these posts that CCH has still said nothing. What pisses me off most is that they immediately tried to say that it must of been over and edge or something. THEY HAD THE PHOTOS!!!! Wait...maybe they are blind. Yep, that explains everything. Well I feel better now, we can all go home.
|
|
|
|
|
m2j1s
May 9, 2007, 10:54 PM
Post #116 of 354
(19832 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 8, 2006
Posts: 77
|
soillclimber wrote: More pics are being taken and I will post them asap. I can't believe with the overwhelming slant to these posts that CCH has still said nothing. What pisses me off most is that they immediately tried to say that it must of been over and edge or something. THEY HAD THE PHOTOS!!!! Wait...maybe they are blind. Yep, that explains everything. Well I feel better now, we can all go home.
|
|
|
|
|
gramps
May 9, 2007, 11:33 PM
Post #117 of 354
(19793 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 22, 2004
Posts: 40
|
Someone asked for an example of a similar situation from a different climbing company. Here's a link to Metolius' response to 2 different micro-TCU failures.
http://www.coolclimbing.com/rockgearbroken01.htm
Professional, clear, and reassuring.
|
|
|
|
|
medicus
May 10, 2007, 12:17 AM
Post #118 of 354
(19737 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 2, 2006
Posts: 727
|
gramps wrote: Someone asked for an example of a similar situation from a different climbing company. Here's a link to Metolius' response to 2 different micro-TCU failures. http://www.coolclimbing.com/rockgearbroken01.htm Professional, clear, and reassuring.
Thanks for the post gramps. It is very reassuring, and I am very glad I went ahead and invested in some TCU's now.
|
|
|
|
|
JtotheS
May 10, 2007, 4:56 AM
Post #119 of 354
(19624 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 27, 2007
Posts: 11
|
I thought I 'd add my 2 cents, after seeing the pictures, the pics of the cam that started the recall and the background info...but not knowing what corrective action was taken in response to the recall I still want to let you all know what it looks like to me, (I am braze certified in the aerospace industry)
The recall looks like a cold braze, and as someone mentioned only held in place by the lip you see formed over the sleeve, my guess would be that they tried to fix the problem by adding more "heat" (generically called "heat" because most likely used induction brazing which really adds such a magnetic force around the part that it excites all the molecules and heats it that way....way simplifed... any way... by adding more heat they may have over heated and therefore weakened the swaged cable; you can see that some strands are left in the braze, this could look normal to any Inspector if they didn't do any physical testing, also some brazing is done with flux, and with any residue left over this would definately corrode the swaged cable thus weakening it further... but I'd put my money on overbrazing, and not tested, ...if this was our product, our customers would be screaming for a corrective action, but of course the FAA would pull our licenses far before that even happened, IMO were all so stringent on aircraft safety, why, because so many lives are at stake, and climbing is the exact same thing, I wish the retailers who buy these cams in bulk would pressure CCH for a corrective action, are these things even UIAA approved?
Thanks to everyone for this informing post.
BTW, brazing like welding should bond the parts together so that the braze or weld is actually stronger than the part around it, but if done wrong your'e FUBAR, I'd hate to put my life in the hands of some poor underpaid brazer, that could care less about the safety of the end user, which is why we need QA/QC to actually give a damn,
I hope the victim here, gets paid big time.
|
|
|
|
|
medicus
May 10, 2007, 5:12 AM
Post #120 of 354
(19605 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 2, 2006
Posts: 727
|
If this cam is marked TT and it in fact wasn't, I think that should be grounds for CCH's termination/huge payout to him. I think if a test should have exposed this weakness easily, and especially given CCH's history, it is complete BS that this happened, and corrective action on a large scale needs to be done.
|
|
|
|
|
bent_gate
May 10, 2007, 5:23 AM
Post #121 of 354
(19607 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 1, 2004
Posts: 2620
|
Very insightful, I didn't even see the strands that were left in the braze.
Perhaps that was CCHs reason for providing an initial statement of "Cable Failure", even if ultimately caused by overheating during the brazing. No matter what It seems almost all of these failures could have been caught with pull testing.
|
|
|
|
|
medicus
May 10, 2007, 5:27 AM
Post #122 of 354
(19600 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 2, 2006
Posts: 727
|
bent_gate wrote: No matter what It seems almost all of these failures could have been caught with pull testing.
Which is why even though I have sent mine back into CCH for testing, I will still be bounce testing the heck out of them in the future. As in, if I break my aliens during a bounce test, I will feel no remorse whatsoever... i.e., I may just try to break them, and if they somehow manage to survive, I *might* consider using them, but only when a TCU can be within a max of about 5 feet. 
|
|
|
|
|
jakedatc
May 10, 2007, 5:51 AM
Post #123 of 354
(19585 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 12, 2003
Posts: 11054
|
i love how you think TCU's are the perfect cure.. they don't go in all places aliens do.. they are not as easy to clean.. especially vert crack where they like to rotate like little bastards inside.. they get loaded over edges in a bad way and the trigger wires tend to get all fuckered up when you fall on them loaded over an edge (think gunks horizontals)
personally i think tcu's suck and won't be on my rack :) My aliens will get bounced on and maybe pull tested if wideguy gets a rig put together that we can
JtotheS the dimpled recalled cams were brazed and then dunked into water to cool them faster.. which i guess caused it not to bond properly
|
|
|
|
|
medicus
May 10, 2007, 6:02 AM
Post #124 of 354
(19578 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 2, 2006
Posts: 727
|
I'm not saying TCU's are the perfect Cure. I hate when people put words in my mouth. Currently TCU's are the only other small cams I have. No freaking kidding that they don't fit in all places aliens will, which is why I will still have aliens and still use aliens. My point is, the way things are, I will have my aliens backed up. The chances of two things going wrong are drastically less than just one going wrong. If there were a 100% perfect cam out there, only then would I think it was the perfect cure, but it's freaking obvious there isn't a perfect cure, or we would all have the exact same cam set up. Personally, I'll have a mix so that potential QC issues, will have less of a chance of drastically affecting me.
|
|
|
|
|
soillclimber
May 10, 2007, 1:06 PM
Post #125 of 354
(19511 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 21, 2005
Posts: 31
|
Yes it was stamped "tensile tested." Which there is no way that it was. 60 feet out on a Beal (7.4kN impact force) and a dynamic belay, does not equal 2/3 of the rated strength of a yellow alien. Not positive, but I think that means it was tested to around 1850 lbs. Whatever CCH. Will someone post the 2/3 rating of the yellow. I know it is up already somewhere, but I gotta get to work.
|
|
|
|
|
|
