|
mnutz
Jul 14, 2004, 1:28 PM
Post #1 of 31
(4322 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2001
Posts: 334
|
A couple of questions... First, the black alien, Z1, red (I think) Microcamelot, or any other of the smallest microcams (0.33-0.55 range). It's my understanding that these are all rated for body weight only, is that correct? Are any microcams rated for higher loads?
Second... Has anyone fallen on one of these and what was the result?
|
|
|
|
|
dredsovrn
Jul 14, 2004, 1:34 PM
Post #2 of 31
(4322 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 24, 2003
Posts: 1226
|
Placed small gear like that, but the smallest I have fallen on is a #1 TCU. That one held fine.
|
|
|
|
|
p_grandbois
Jul 14, 2004, 1:40 PM
Post #3 of 31
(4322 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 28, 2004
Posts: 328
|
I've fallen on a 0 TCU and it held fine. If you worry a lot about the small gear, place a couple peices in opposition, or double up and sling them together(properly equalized of course). This is what I still do from time to time.
|
|
|
|
|
snod_ix
Jul 14, 2004, 2:17 PM
Post #4 of 31
(4322 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 6, 2002
Posts: 63
|
In reply to: A couple of questions... First, the black alien, Z1, red (I think) Microcamelot, or any other of the smallest microcams (0.33-0.55 range). It's my understanding that these are all rated for body weight only, is that correct? Are any microcams rated for higher loads? Second... Has anyone fallen on one of these and what was the result?
Check out Dean Potter falling on his free ascent of tombstone onto a .2 camalot http://www.bdel.com/community/vids.html
|
|
|
|
|
mnutz
Jul 14, 2004, 2:34 PM
Post #5 of 31
(4322 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2001
Posts: 334
|
I've seen Potter's vid before, but I'd forgotten how small that cam was. That's balls.
|
|
|
|
|
ricardol
Jul 14, 2004, 3:49 PM
Post #6 of 31
(4322 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 11, 2002
Posts: 1050
|
the black alien will hold a fall (i know this from experience) .. took a 12' on a black alien
-- ricardo
|
|
|
|
|
kevindubrau
Jul 14, 2004, 3:59 PM
Post #7 of 31
(4322 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 23, 2004
Posts: 42
|
In reply to: ... If you worry a lot about the small gear, place a couple peices in opposition...
Correct me if I'm wrong, but placing pieces in opposition won't ease the strain on either piece, it will only help keep them in position.
Just my 2 cents
|
|
|
|
|
bigga
Jul 14, 2004, 4:00 PM
Post #8 of 31
(4322 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 25, 2002
Posts: 365
|
I've gone into this myself a bit and I've spoken to quite a few people about it. Some say that if they place it well its bomber, some say never. I think it was rrradam who said that he has taken a huge full on a small cam and it held.
In theory the concept of a cam always works. It'll convert your downward force to a much larger sideways force...creating friction etc. etc.
But there are things that a good placement cant get around. For one thing the axle inside the cam gets smaller as the cam gets smaller and therefore so does the stress it can hold. Now some climbers have told me they have never seen a cam break and doubt they ever will, others say they have seen. Each to his own experience, but if you go and ask the companies that make them, they will tell you that it definitely is a factor, and physicaly that makes sense.
Also, since all the force on the rock from the cam is directed only at the very tiny surfice area where the cam touches the rock, there is a chance that the rock will chip ( even a slightly higher chance than bigger cams since the area of contact is smaller), and since the range of small cams is so small a rock can chip and the cam may find itself out of range.
And thats why the ratings for these cams are so low, I think about 7000-8000 Newtons? less? like hanging a 750 kg weight on it. Not all that much.
Its held falls with alot more force than that for alot of people on this site. But the companies have covered there asses and warned you because they know its got a serious possible limit.
I have been told (though there are probably ppl here who can tell you for sure) that they are tested using paralel surfaces of different materials and applying different forces while the the cam is or isn't in its perfect position.
Lowered the results a bit and slapped them on the side as a raiting.
|
|
|
|
|
sspssp
Jul 14, 2004, 4:28 PM
Post #9 of 31
(4322 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 2, 2003
Posts: 1731
|
In reply to: In reply to: ... If you worry a lot about the small gear, place a couple peices in opposition... Correct me if I'm wrong, but placing pieces in opposition won't ease the strain on either piece, it will only help keep them in position.
Yes and no. I know a partner that fell and ripped out four micro cams (a blue alien, black alien, and two small TCUs) that were spaced 3 or 4 feet apart. It was his first four pieces so the fall factor was moderately large. All four pieces showed damaged to the cams and/or bent axles. His belayer could feel a strong tug before each piece ripped out (sort of a slow motion fall before decking). His theory is that the pieces moved so they were sticking straight out as he climbed by them. When he fell, the pieces twisted back into the "down" direction but this twisting motion helped shear the cams and bent the axles. Just a theory, but holding the pieces in place with opposition (and/or using longer slings) might have kept the pieces from ripping. He's an experienced climber with over ten years trad experience. The placements were somewhat awkward granite, but he didn't think they all would rip out.
|
|
|
|
|
p_grandbois
Jul 14, 2004, 5:11 PM
Post #10 of 31
(4322 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 28, 2004
Posts: 328
|
Kevin, you are right, but it does act as a backup, and it also does ease the strain. as long as they are equalized.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Jul 14, 2004, 5:15 PM
Post #11 of 31
(4322 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: A couple of questions... First, the black alien, Z1, red (I think) Microcamelot, or any other of the smallest microcams (0.33-0.55 range). It's my understanding that these are all rated for body weight only, is that correct? Are any microcams rated for higher loads? Second... Has anyone fallen on one of these and what was the result?
The 00 and 0 TCUs are rated for 1000 lbf, and will hold more if placed perfectly.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
mnutz
Jul 14, 2004, 9:02 PM
Post #12 of 31
(4322 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2001
Posts: 334
|
Thanks everyone, for all the replies so far.
The black alien is what I really want. The strength rating is 1860 lbs, if I'm doing the math right, I think that converts to like 8.2 Kn. The Black Diamond 0.1 Micro is 7 Kn. And for me, those 2 are the easiest to place in a tricky (blind) spot. The 00 TCU and the Wild Country Z3 are both 6 Kn. The piece that I think looks and feels the most bomber is the Metolious 00 FCU Power Cam, but it's only rated at 4.4Kn. Anyone know why?
|
|
|
|
|
mattm
Jul 14, 2004, 9:56 PM
Post #13 of 31
(4322 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 20, 2003
Posts: 640
|
In reply to: A couple of questions... First, the black alien, Z1, red (I think) Microcamelot, or any other of the smallest microcams (0.33-0.55 range). It's my understanding that these are all rated for body weight only, is that correct? Are any microcams rated for higher loads? Second... Has anyone fallen on one of these and what was the result?
With the small micro cams two factors play a role in their placement strength. 1) Physical construction and material strength. 2) Quality of placement and holding strength.
Very small cams are, to some degree, limited in their strength by the size of the cables and axles in their design. In particular, because of their Super-Micro size - WC zeros Z1 and Z2 are recommended only for body weight. Regardless of this - many of those british hard men and women use them as pro in the fright-fests they put up on gritstone. Manufacturers don't, to my knowledge, specify if their strengths are based solely on material failure or if they include other factors so you need to take this number with a grain of salt.
The second factor and in my opinion the more important one is placement quality. As mentioned above, these small cams have very little surface area contacting the rock and thus create very large forces on their "retaining rock". Poor placements with cause rock failure and subsequently placement failure. I've seen a .3 camalot get absolutely mangled because the placement was in a flared pin scar with axle not in line with the direction of pull. The rock (squamish granite) was bomber but the placement was not. In contrast - that huge wipper the Dean P took on Touchstone on the .2 camalot help because that crack provided a great, parallel sided placement. Even though the rock is soft(er), the quality of the placement was such that a 50 footer was held.
I believe that metolius takes this small cam placement factor into account when they rate the small tcus to 1000lbs. Not sure if other companies do the same.
Bottom line - small cams can and will hold large falls but many factors influence the result. A climber can control a certain amount of these.
Physical strength - buy beefy gear.
Placements - Place small cams in good, parallel sided placements with the cams well retracted. Try to find a natural slot where the cams can catch (like placing a nut) . Try to put the stem in the direction of loading.
Avoid High Fall Factors (Force) Situations - One reason Deans whipper wasn't that bad was he was WAY OUT on his rope. So even though he took a big fall, there was lots of rope to absorb the impact. With this in mind, be more wary of placement close to the belay as they will have to sustain high fall factors and thus higher forces that could approach the cams failure point.
Small cams are harder to place and require more diligence when using. If the placement is well thought out and done well and the fall forces don't exceed what the piece is capable of then small cams can and do hold many falls. But as always, caveat user.
|
|
|
|
|
mattm
Jul 14, 2004, 10:04 PM
Post #14 of 31
(4322 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 20, 2003
Posts: 640
|
In reply to: Thanks everyone, for all the replies so far. The black alien is what I really want. The strength rating is 1860 lbs, if I'm doing the math right, I think that converts to like 8.2 Kn. The Black Diamond 0.1 Micro is 7 Kn. And for me, those 2 are the easiest to place in a tricky (blind) spot. The 00 TCU and the Wild Country Z3 are both 6 Kn. The piece that I think looks and feels the most bomber is the Metolious 00 FCU Power Cam, but it's only rated at 4.4Kn. Anyone know why?
In more detail - it's my understanding that Metolius realizes that small cams will fail more often due to a placement blowing out so they adjust their strengths to account for this to some degree - correct me if I'm wrong
|
|
|
|
|
elvislegs
Jul 14, 2004, 10:21 PM
Post #15 of 31
(4322 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 24, 2002
Posts: 3148
|
anecdotally, i have taken a few good sized (ten to twelve footers), though relatively low fall factor, falls onto some of the smallest cams i own, with no damage. they definately hold more than body weight, and I would rather fall on one of them than on even a 'good' ice screw.
however it is pretty easy to create forces that exceed the ratings of small gear. So take the war stories with that grain of salt.
if you are really scared about a big fall onto a small cam, equalize a couple, or put a screamer on it, to ease your mind.
i only have a dollar so i'll be needing $0.98 in change.
|
|
|
|
|
sspssp
Jul 14, 2004, 10:25 PM
Post #16 of 31
(4322 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 2, 2003
Posts: 1731
|
In reply to: Avoid High Fall Factors (Force) Situations - One reason Deans whipper wasn't that bad was he was WAY OUT on his rope.
Or use a screamer.
|
|
|
|
|
scubasnyder
Jul 14, 2004, 10:35 PM
Post #17 of 31
(4322 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 3, 2003
Posts: 1639
|
I fell on the smallest black diamond cam.
|
|
|
|
|
elvislegs
Jul 14, 2004, 10:35 PM
Post #18 of 31
(4322 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 24, 2002
Posts: 3148
|
In reply to: In reply to: Avoid High Fall Factors (Force) Situations - One reason Deans whipper wasn't that bad was he was WAY OUT on his rope. Or use a screamer.
a dynamic belay can go a long way as well.
going on a hunch that Deano's belayer has had enough practice to give him a pretty soft catch. heh.
|
|
|
|
|
tradmanclimbs
Jul 14, 2004, 11:12 PM
Post #19 of 31
(4322 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 24, 2003
Posts: 2599
|
The placement with micro cams is crucial. If its placed perfectly in good rock it's pretty good. If the rock sucks or the placement is at all compromised it is total mank. I've ripped em and I've bounced on them. They certainly ain't big fat bolts. A good ice screw in solid ice is definatly pretty freaking strong(to whomever made that analogy) But you Don't fall on ice 8^)
|
|
|
|
|
elvislegs
Jul 16, 2004, 2:45 PM
Post #20 of 31
(4322 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 24, 2002
Posts: 3148
|
In reply to: A good ice screw in solid ice is definatly pretty freaking strong
right, but "good ice screw" and "solid ice" are pretty subjective terms, and pretty rare around here
In reply to: But you Don't fall on ice 8^)
that's what i was saying.
|
|
|
|
|
jimdavis
Jul 17, 2004, 6:29 AM
Post #21 of 31
(4322 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 1, 2003
Posts: 1935
|
I'd trust a #1 Metolius for a lead fall IF i had those lobes sitting pretty in a little pocket/ constriction. But something about micro-flaring placements sketches me out.
I usually back off or Aid the rest if it worries me too much though.
I know..... :oops:
Jim
|
|
|
|
|
ldsclimber
Jul 17, 2004, 7:48 AM
Post #22 of 31
(4322 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 27, 2002
Posts: 90
|
I was climbing at Paridise Forks and took a 15' er on to a blindly place Blue Wild County Zero. I was so thankful for parellel cracks it let me have a little more faith in the piece.
|
|
|
|
|
fallenfreesoloist
Jul 21, 2004, 9:49 PM
Post #23 of 31
(4322 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 10, 2004
Posts: 48
|
the smallest microcamalot holds 6kn.
|
|
|
|
|
tedc
Jul 21, 2004, 10:04 PM
Post #24 of 31
(4322 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 5, 2003
Posts: 756
|
In reply to: the smallest microcamalot holds 6kn.
Don't bet your life on it.
|
|
|
|
|
elvislegs
Jul 21, 2004, 10:04 PM
Post #25 of 31
(4322 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 24, 2002
Posts: 3148
|
In reply to: the smallest microcamalot holds 6kn.
...right then.
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
