Don't know for sure, but I would guess red. I don't see how the biner could normally get cross loaded at those other locations with the angle that's between the spine and gate. Mixed is obviously what is called Sabet loading.
Don't know for sure, but I would guess red. I don't see how the biner could normally get cross loaded at those other locations with the angle that's between the spine and gate. Mixed is obviously what is called Sabet loading.
With friction, I can get a static load similar to green on my heliums. It is hard to see in those pictures, but my red heliums have a change in angle at that notch. It isn't too hard to get a load occuring on the gate.
The blue actually has a bump there to hold it in place as well.
I am also asking for application to all biners. Not everything looks like a helium.
Agreed. I don't know a general definition. I bet it's up to the manufacturer since there's so much difference in geometry. I'd hope with the oval that it's center of gate.
i don't think a cross load could be sustained at red or blue - i think the biner would "flip" and/or re-orient. but if loaded in the center it may last long enough to allow 8kn or so to be seen.
Good question. I would hope the manufacturer would test each and indicate the weakest of the bunch as the cross-load strength. I think this would be a better question for the manufacturers than for this forum. A poll will tell you nothing.
i don't think a cross load could be sustained at red or blue - i think the biner would "flip" and/or re-orient. but if loaded in the center it may last long enough to allow 8kn or so to be seen.
I disagree in the case of heliums. I have them on all of my trad draws and I think that the helium's shape would be most conducive to cross loading as shown by the red arrows (this is assuming that the draw end is loading the spine on the corresponding "red arrow spot", not dead center in the middle of the spine which should allow it to re-orient itself properly). If it loads dead in the center of the spine and gate I think it would have a better chance of "flipping" into another position (possibly that of red).
It is good to note that my opinion doesn't address which is actually the tested cross loading orientation. Good job bringing up such a good question, the only definitive answer would probably be that of the manufacturer.
yes - actually the oval is worst. the taper or asymetrical nature of the spine seen in most other biners tends to deflect the "pressure monent" if you will.
Red Green and blue are all cross loaded. I think in the last picture you would need to have a force description of each arrow before a judgment could be made. There are several arrows that if appropriate force was applied the whole system could cancel itself out or at least be properly loaded.
Ah, not necessarily. If the mechanism applying the load uses smooth bars, the 'biner will likely shift/slide to a point of equillibrium other than where the arrows are drawn in this figure. Good link, but I don't think this figure provides a definitive answer to the question.
Ah, not necessarily. If the mechanism applying the load uses smooth bars, the 'biner will likely shift/slide to a point of equillibrium other than where the arrows are drawn in this figure. Good link, but I don't think this figure provides a definitive answer to the question.
The equilibrium referenced above is clearly unstable for a smooth bar. I think it's implied that something has to fix the bar in place.
Ah, not necessarily. If the mechanism applying the load uses smooth bars, the 'biner will likely shift/slide to a point of equillibrium other than where the arrows are drawn in this figure. Good link, but I don't think this figure provides a definitive answer to the question.
The equilibrium referenced above is clearly unstable for a smooth bar. I think it's implied that something has to fix the bar in place.
I disagree... I don't believe the figure makes any implcation about how the load is applied, other than the general direction (across the minor axis of the carabiner).
Ah, not necessarily. If the mechanism applying the load uses smooth bars, the 'biner will likely shift/slide to a point of equillibrium other than where the arrows are drawn in this figure. Good link, but I don't think this figure provides a definitive answer to the question.
The equilibrium referenced above is clearly unstable for a smooth bar. I think it's implied that something has to fix the bar in place.
I disagree... I don't believe the figure makes any implcation about how the load is applied, other than the general direction (across the minor axis of the carabiner).
As you said, across the minor axis of the biner. How is it going to stay in that orientation without something to fix the point of application of the force? -I know, we're back to the beginning question again. That's why I think it's implied. Now granted, this includes the human element who dreamt up the standard so logic may not be an appropriate tool to use in this discussion.
"Please tell me what biner is cross loaded as defined by the strength ratings"
The strength rating for the minor axis per UIAA is defined as the Green. If you look at the document it says
"... does not contain the full details of the test methods and requirements in these standard..."
This document "defines" minor axis strength rating (which is what the OP wanted). It doesn't address how to anchor and test each style of karabiner. This would be another topic.
as an example "How to setup and conduct a minor axis strength rating test for a non oval biner"
7 /
19%
Blue.jpg
1
