|
|
|
|
lena_chita
Moderator
Apr 2, 2013, 8:10 PM
Post #26 of 66
(16682 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 27, 2006
Posts: 6087
|
jt512 wrote: lena_chita wrote: jt512 wrote: lena_chita wrote: But then I go back to that specific route, that specific move... and I can see only couple possibilities that do not involve placing a permadraw there, or screw-gate draws: -- hang a trad draw on that bolt, instead of a regular sewn dogbone, because it would be less likely that nudging the rope-end biner (unavoidable in the move I do) will dislodge the bolt-side biner -- don't climb that route again You don't think that flipping the top biner over would have been effective? Maybe it would have. But playing around after the fact, my partner was able to get the biner stuck on that bolt/rock, regardless of how it was flipped and which way the gate was facing. I don't know why I didn't think to mention this before, since I do it pretty often, is to place two draws on the bolt with their gates opposed.
Is there a reason you prefer to do that, instead of using a locking biner on the bolt?
It would depend on the bolt hangers, I guess. In some cases it seems that having two biners clipped into the same hanger makes one of the biner sort of "stand up", because there isn't quite enough room.
But still, regardless of whether you are using two draws, or locking biner, it is not something that you would do on every bolt of every route. It is just not feasible. Would be reasonable in spots where you anticipate trouble or on routes that you are working, and/or have an a priori knowledge that there is a bad spot.
|
|
|
|
|
shotwell
Apr 2, 2013, 9:53 PM
Post #27 of 66
(16662 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 6, 2009
Posts: 366
|
jt512 wrote: lena_chita wrote: jt512 wrote: lena_chita wrote: But then I go back to that specific route, that specific move... and I can see only couple possibilities that do not involve placing a permadraw there, or screw-gate draws: -- hang a trad draw on that bolt, instead of a regular sewn dogbone, because it would be less likely that nudging the rope-end biner (unavoidable in the move I do) will dislodge the bolt-side biner -- don't climb that route again You don't think that flipping the top biner over would have been effective? Maybe it would have. But playing around after the fact, my partner was able to get the biner stuck on that bolt/rock, regardless of how it was flipped and which way the gate was facing. I don't know why I didn't think to mention this before, since I do it pretty often, is to place two draws on the bolt with their gates opposed.
Do you tend to do this in ground fall territory only? If not, what is your criteria for doubling up? Just curious as I'm sure I could learn something here.
(This post was edited by shotwell on Apr 2, 2013, 9:54 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Apr 2, 2013, 10:57 PM
Post #28 of 66
(16639 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
lena_chita wrote: jt512 wrote: lena_chita wrote: jt512 wrote: lena_chita wrote: But then I go back to that specific route, that specific move... and I can see only couple possibilities that do not involve placing a permadraw there, or screw-gate draws: -- hang a trad draw on that bolt, instead of a regular sewn dogbone, because it would be less likely that nudging the rope-end biner (unavoidable in the move I do) will dislodge the bolt-side biner -- don't climb that route again You don't think that flipping the top biner over would have been effective? Maybe it would have. But playing around after the fact, my partner was able to get the biner stuck on that bolt/rock, regardless of how it was flipped and which way the gate was facing. I don't know why I didn't think to mention this before, since I do it pretty often, is to place two draws on the bolt with their gates opposed. Is there a reason you prefer to do that, instead of using a locking biner on the bolt?
Not really. It's mainly that I don't routinely carry a locker-equipped draw on my harness, but I almost always have an extra regular draw or two.
In reply to: It would depend on the bolt hangers, I guess. In some cases it seems that having two biners clipped into the same hanger makes one of the biner sort of "stand up", because there isn't quite enough room.
Yeah, when the hanger doesn't permit the top biners to lay fairly flat against each other, I don't do this.
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
budman
Apr 2, 2013, 11:03 PM
Post #29 of 66
(16634 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 170
|
Actually saw this on Sim's facebook. You must know him or met him as he has been there for sometime. First I would be looking at the gate and is it deformed or sticky in any way or possibly was open due to contact with the rock. Open gate not so strong (all you geeks can throw in your 2 cents as to the values i just live in the real world). Broke just about where it should if the gate was open. Bad binner only analysis will possibly show. Glad your o.k. Tell that fool Sim to get his ass back to the desert as it's tower season.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Apr 2, 2013, 11:05 PM
Post #30 of 66
(16634 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
shotwell wrote: jt512 wrote: lena_chita wrote: jt512 wrote: lena_chita wrote: But then I go back to that specific route, that specific move... and I can see only couple possibilities that do not involve placing a permadraw there, or screw-gate draws: -- hang a trad draw on that bolt, instead of a regular sewn dogbone, because it would be less likely that nudging the rope-end biner (unavoidable in the move I do) will dislodge the bolt-side biner -- don't climb that route again You don't think that flipping the top biner over would have been effective? Maybe it would have. But playing around after the fact, my partner was able to get the biner stuck on that bolt/rock, regardless of how it was flipped and which way the gate was facing. I don't know why I didn't think to mention this before, since I do it pretty often, is to place two draws on the bolt with their gates opposed. Do you tend to do this in ground fall territory only? If not, what is your criteria for doubling up? Just curious as I'm sure I could learn something here.
No deep insights, I'm afraid. I'll double the draw on a critical bolt, such as when the failure of a carabiner would result in a long fall to the ground, and I'm unsure whether I'm going to pull off the moves before the next bolt. I'll also double a draw when, no matter how I orient the draw, it looks like a rock feature could open the gate of either the top or bottom biner.
|
|
|
|
|
lena_chita
Moderator
Apr 3, 2013, 12:15 PM
Post #31 of 66
(16573 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 27, 2006
Posts: 6087
|
redlude97 wrote: Do you generally keep your biners on your draws opposed? I generally clip the bolt end biner in the opposite orientation as IME it has less of a chance to interact with the bolt. In this case you said it got lodged against a rock but is it possible it wouldn't have interacted with the rock in the same way facing the other direction, or as JT512 suggested, flipping the biner?
No, I have my draws with the gates facing in the same direction. But my partner, who hung the draws, has them set up facing opposite. Also, I usually clip the bolt with the carabiner spine to the bolt, because I do believe that it is somewhat less likely to become unclipped in the fall that way.
At the time when I was climbing the route on first go, before the breaking biner, I was not particularly concerned about the orientation of the biner on the bolt. The rope-end biner was positioned in a way I liked it to be, because the bolt below that one is slightly to the right, and the bolt above it is straight up.
After the fact, assuming that our re-creation of how the biner broke is correct, it looks like hanging the draw with both gates on top and bottom facing left would have been better, because even if the draw got stuck in the other scenario, the same forces would have been pushing the gate closed, instead of pulling it open.
However, that this is over-analyzing that may not really give that much insight for the future... Mercy being a very popular classic route, I am sure that there have been draws hung on that bolt with gates opposed, and gates facing the same, and with the biners on the bolt side going in either direction, many many times, with people falling on them all the time, with no ill effects.
A biner broke-- once. In this particular orientation. Now this orientation is suspect. But you don't really know that many thousands of falls later this wouldn't happen again, with a different orientation.
I know people have very strong opinions on why the gates on the draws should be facing same direction, or opposed, and I have come on the same-direction side. BUT, not strongly. I do not believe that same-orientation is fundamentally safer, or the opposite-orientation is fundamentally better. I have seen scenarios where one looks better, or the other looks better, because there are many possible combinations of hanger orientation, rock features, and direction of travel.
In a situation where the bolt hanger is oriented the same way as in the first picture, with all the bolts being slightly to the left of where you are climbing, for example, it is a no-brainer that hanging draws with gates facing in the same direction on top and bottom, and having them all face left would be optimal. But routes are rarely so accommodating.
|
|
|
|
|
redlude97
Apr 3, 2013, 5:16 PM
Post #32 of 66
(16513 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2008
Posts: 990
|
didn't mean to imply that was the cause. I'm with you on that the orientation of the bolt end biner isn't THAT important. Generally I give priority to rope end and the bolt end goes whichever direction corresponds with the rope end, and if I feel there is a possible interaction and I have a chance to flip it then I do. 99% of the time that is ok, and I think the only real takeaway from this incident is to never forget that shit happens and sport climbing isn't always as safe as many of us seem to think it is.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Apr 3, 2013, 5:21 PM
Post #33 of 66
(16507 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
lena_chita wrote: I have my draws with the gates facing in the same direction. But my partner, who hung the draws, has them set up facing opposite. Also, I usually clip the bolt with the carabiner spine to the bolt, because I do believe that it is somewhat less likely to become unclipped in the fall that way.
I've been arguing the following for more than a decade, but until now never had a data point. (Now I have one data point, so I must have been right all along!)
Draws should be set up with both biners facing the same direction (ie, in the cis orientation), and placed so that the gates face away from the direction the route takes above the bolt. It is virtually impossible for the gate of a non-wire-gate biner to get caught on the bolt head/nut; this can only happen to wire gates. Therefore, don't put wire-gate biners on the bolt ends of your draws, and disregard whether the gate of the top biner is facing the bolt or not. If a feature of the rock interferes with the gate of the bolt-end biner, flip it over.
These rules work for almost every placement. For the exceptions, place two draws, oriented opposite to each other, on the bolt, or use a draw equipped with a locking biner.
The reason to prefer the cis orientation is that if the climb goes to one side or the other above the bolt, you want the rope to run over the spine of the bottom biner, rather than the gate, to minimize the chance of the rope unclipping; and, if the rope (or you) pulls the draw up as you climb past it, and rotates the top biner, you would prefer the spine of the biner, rather than the gate, to be pulled into the bolt hanger to minimize the chance of the draw unclipping. You can only satisfy both criteria if your draws are set up in the cis orientation.
|
|
|
|
|
lena_chita
Moderator
Apr 4, 2013, 5:20 PM
Post #34 of 66
(16412 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 27, 2006
Posts: 6087
|
jt512 wrote: lena_chita wrote: I have my draws with the gates facing in the same direction. But my partner, who hung the draws, has them set up facing opposite. Also, I usually clip the bolt with the carabiner spine to the bolt, because I do believe that it is somewhat less likely to become unclipped in the fall that way. I've been arguing the following for more than a decade, but until now never had a data point. (Now I have one data point, so I must have been right all along!) Draws should be set up with both biners facing the same direction (ie, in the cis orientation), and placed so that the gates face away from the direction the route takes above the bolt. It is virtually impossible for the gate of a non-wire-gate biner to get caught on the bolt head/nut; this can only happen to wire gates. Therefore, don't put wire-gate biners on the bolt ends of your draws, and disregard whether the gate of the top biner is facing the bolt or not. If a feature of the rock interferes with the gate of the bolt-end biner, flip it over. These rules work for almost every placement. For the exceptions, place two draws, oriented opposite to each other, on the bolt, or use a draw equipped with a locking biner. The reason to prefer the cis orientation is that if the climb goes to one side or the other above the bolt, you want the rope to run over the spine of the bottom biner, rather than the gate, to minimize the chance of the rope unclipping; and, if the rope (or you) pulls the draw up as you climb past it, and rotates the top biner, you would prefer the spine of the biner, rather than the gate, to be pulled into the bolt hanger to minimize the chance of the draw unclipping. You can only satisfy both criteria if your draws are set up in the cis orientation.
Good argument for cis-orientation draws, jay. I think I am now more strongly in favor of cis-draws. it remains to be seen if I can convince my friend to change her practice.
|
|
|
|
|
xtrmecat
Apr 4, 2013, 7:36 PM
Post #35 of 66
(16372 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 1, 2004
Posts: 548
|
This incident had enough potential to change the habits of the partner I climb with most.
To add context, C. climbs several letter grades harder than I, so when we are climbing together we most likely find ourselves on routes into his free solo grades. He protects many climbs with the first two bolts clipped, and when appropriate, (lack of ledge or ground fall potential, crux sections) he skips the next and clips roughly every other or third bolt there after.
Last night he was approaching groundfall distance very high up a route, and should his top biner broke, would have difinitely been an auger in situation. I casually mentioned this thread and analysis and in his humorous way dismissed it as in he is really immortal, and he just humors me with pro to keep me from freaking.
I did however notice, the thought put into the next routes he led, and a change of habit on his part. This failure served a purpose beyond even what I thought it would.
Well done.
Burly Bob
Now back to draw gate orientation!
|
|
|
|
|
shockabuku
Apr 5, 2013, 12:06 AM
Post #36 of 66
(16322 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 20, 2006
Posts: 4868
|
If you mentioned it previously I missed it; I understand what "cis" means but why do you use that ?word?
|
|
|
|
|
redlude97
Apr 5, 2013, 12:07 AM
Post #37 of 66
(16319 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2008
Posts: 990
|
fucking chemistry geeks 
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Apr 5, 2013, 12:46 AM
Post #38 of 66
(16305 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
shockabuku wrote: If you mentioned it previously I missed it; I understand what " cis" means but why do you use that ?word?
For the same reason they use it in chemistry and gender studies: it's succinct and unambiguous.
|
|
|
|
|
majid_sabet
Apr 5, 2013, 5:49 PM
Post #39 of 66
(16206 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 8390
|
important part of any report should include
Name of product
in this case petzl
model /type ?
Rating ?
Age ,years in service ?
type of usage (sport/trade) ?
A good picture of another one next to broken one
|
|
|
|
|
shotwell
Apr 5, 2013, 6:51 PM
Post #40 of 66
(16178 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 6, 2009
Posts: 366
|
majid_sabet wrote: important part of any report should include Name of product in this case petzl model /type ? Rating ? Age ,years in service ? type of usage (sport/trade) ? A good picture of another one next to broken one
All those questions are easily answered except the age and years in service, though Lena said they were several years old and lightly used. The Spirits are the most popular draws on the market and Mercy the Huff pops up as a sport route on the very first google search. This was a great report because it provided the details that an actual sport climber would care about.
|
|
|
|
|
jktinst
May 31, 2013, 3:02 PM
Post #41 of 66
(15720 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 29, 2010
Posts: 89
|
Broken, cross-loaded biners are front and centre these days between this thread and that other one following soon after
http://ttp:/...orum_view_collapsed;
Since my first reading of this thread, I’ve been thinking on and off that there ought to be a fairly straightforward tech fix for this problem. Product developers have found different ways to prevent cross-loading of belay biners and I can’t see why some of these solutions could not find their way into regular biners to be used on the pro/bolt-side of QDs. Obviously not the big plastic clip solution of the DMM Belay Master but an additional wire gate inside the biner, like the Metolius Gatekeeper, would be fine with me. Sure, the biner would be a little bit larger, heavier, more expensive and less versatile than a regular biner but I would be keen to spring for and carry 4 or 5 of these to use on the first 2-3 pros/bolts where a cross-loaded broken, biner could mean decking (or a bad FF2) and to intersperse at increasing intervals higher up the pitch, as a just-in-case.
Then I remembered about the DMM Mamba captive-sling biner and was surprised that it didn’t get mentioned anywhere in these threads. It certainly eliminates the risk of cross-loading. DMM does not even provide a cross-loading rating for it. With its notched nose, its trans configuration when sold as a 2-Mamba QD and the fact that you need to send it in to have the captive sling professionally replaced every few years, it would not necessarily be my first choice compared to a notchless or hooded wire gate biner with an additional sling-capture wire gate. Unfortunately those don’t exist just yet. Does anyone know if (and where) one may buy units comprised of a single straight-gate Mamba with its sling (to clip the pro/bolt) to which one could fit a String and a notchless bent gate or other non-Mamba biner to complete the QD ?
|
|
|
|
|
Syd
Jun 3, 2013, 1:01 PM
Post #42 of 66
(15603 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 25, 2012
Posts: 300
|
It's hard to tell exactly from the photo but that logo is "Conformité Européenne" is it ?
On zooming, it looks like more the Chinese "CE" with no space between the C and the E, but impossible to be sure. It does look different to biners with the European logo.
http://www.climbing.co.za/2013/05/lab-test-of-carabiners-used-at-belay-stations/
|
|
|
|
|
amarius
Jun 3, 2013, 4:24 PM
Post #43 of 66
(15546 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 23, 2012
Posts: 122
|
The OP mentions that QD was Petzl, she even writes that owner contacted Petzl regarding the failure.
|
|
|
|
|
lena_chita
Moderator
Jun 3, 2013, 5:11 PM
Post #44 of 66
(15526 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 27, 2006
Posts: 6087
|
Yes, it was a PETZL draw.
And in response to jktinst, this was NOT cross-loading. This type of breakage is consistent with a hooked-nose mode of failure, NOT cross-loading. I believe there was a link earlier in this thread to different modes of failure.
here it is again:
http://www.blackdiamondequipment.com/...osehooked-carabiners
|
|
|
|
|
Syd
Jun 3, 2013, 11:20 PM
Post #45 of 66
(15454 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 25, 2012
Posts: 300
|
Yes it was Petzl but is the logo "CE" or "C E" , as described in this link http://www.climbing.co.za/2013/05/lab-test-of-carabiners-used-at-belay-stations/
From your photo it looks like "CE", which is very surprising if it's Petzl.
|
|
|
|
|
redlude97
Jun 3, 2013, 11:30 PM
Post #46 of 66
(15446 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2008
Posts: 990
|
Syd wrote: Yes it was Petzl but is the logo "CE" or "C E" , as described in this link http://www.climbing.co.za/2013/05/lab-test-of-carabiners-used-at-belay-stations/ From your photo it looks like "CE", which is very surprising if it's Petzl.
|
|
|
|
|
jktinst
Jun 4, 2013, 1:12 AM
Post #47 of 66
(15418 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 29, 2010
Posts: 89
|
My apologies. Various things had me confused in your original posts and I ended up lumping the whole thing with other cross-load breaks without thinking. I read the thread as it developed over the 4-5 days and the things that threw me off were:
- The hooked-nosed break on a notchless, correctly closed, solid-gate biner (later explained)
- The second "breaking sequence" photo suggesting a jam between hanger and bolt head followed by your reply that the jam was in fact between the hanger and the rock.
- The initial post explaining that on that draw, it was possible to reproduce the hanger-to-rock jam from just about any clip configuration, up/down, right/left (subsequent posts stated more unequivocally that you actually went back to this specific bolt with your partner and that she was able, with some fiddling, to reproduce this kind of jam).
I should have re-read the thread all the way through before posting. It certainly is clearer that way. I still can’t picture that hanger-to-rock jam looking at the photo of the intact draw in situ but take your word that it can (and most likely did) happen.
Clearly, no amount of cross-loading prevention would have helped in this case. Thanks for setting me straight.
|
|
|
|
|
Syd
Jun 4, 2013, 1:44 AM
Post #48 of 66
(15408 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 25, 2012
Posts: 300
|
redlude97 wrote: Syd wrote: Yes it was Petzl but is the logo "CE" or "C E" , as described in this link http://www.climbing.co.za/2013/05/lab-test-of-carabiners-used-at-belay-stations/ From your photo it looks like "CE", which is very surprising if it's Petzl. Its a biner, there is only so much room. The CE mark is the exact same one on all spirits
Have you read the link ?
There are two quite distinctly different trademarks that look almost identical. There are no shortcuts to the way trademarks are displayed.
It is possible that Petzl has its biners made in China, like many other manufacturers, if they have the "CE" rather than "C E" logo. I don't know ... the first step is to confirm the marking on the biner.
|
|
|
|
|
majid_sabet
Jun 4, 2013, 2:07 AM
Post #49 of 66
(15400 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 8390
|
one solution is to use different type of bolt that does not allow biner to get cut between hanger and head of bolt.
I am sure they are 3/8 and 10mm with proper grade for climbing use.
|
|
|
|
|
redlude97
Jun 4, 2013, 3:36 AM
Post #50 of 66
(15385 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2008
Posts: 990
|
Syd wrote: redlude97 wrote: Syd wrote: Yes it was Petzl but is the logo "CE" or "C E" , as described in this link http://www.climbing.co.za/2013/05/lab-test-of-carabiners-used-at-belay-stations/ From your photo it looks like "CE", which is very surprising if it's Petzl. Its a biner, there is only so much room. The CE mark is the exact same one on all spirits Have you read the link ? There are two quite distinctly different trademarks that look almost identical. There are no shortcuts to the way trademarks are displayed. It is possible that Petzl has its biners made in China, like many other manufacturers, if they have the "CE" rather than "C E" logo. I don't know ... the first step is to confirm the marking on the biner.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
