Using a progress capture device for simul climbing protection
|
I have consulted the google quite a bit, but haven't found everything that I want to know. I'm specifically interested in using a Micro Trax, Kong Duck, or Ropeman to protect a 2nd falling while simul climbing. I know that a toothed device will damage the rope in the event of a fall. I'm just wondering to what extent, and how this can be minimized. |
|
the use of a mini-trax is more the protect the leader if the 2nd falls. If a fall by either climber is remotely likely, you probably shouldn't simul or at least give a belay at the crux. |
|
Jeff, not sure if you have seen my book during your searching, but in it I mention that if you think slack build up might be a problem the second can keep a grigri on the rope clipped to her harness to remove this slack. |
|
Haven't done any simulclimbing so can't offer much input there, but sheath damage from toothed devices is something I have an opinion on as I've done a bit amount of solo TR (with petzl basic, microtrax). |
|
David Coley wrote:Jeff, not sure if you have seen my book during your searching, but in it I mention that if you think slack build up might be a problem the second can keep a grigri on the rope clipped to her harness to remove this slack.David, I have paged through some of your content. I agree with the follower using a grigri in most circumstances while simulclimbing. This allows the follower to climb at a faster pace than the leader, without building up too much extra slack. I don't see the screamer doing much on the microtrax. The fall of the 2nd would never occur with much force, so long as there is minimal slack. Many people TR solo with a microtrax. I'm comfortable with the technique, however, using it as simulclimbing protection is a different application. I'm wondering how different it actually is. Being placed on a bolt or bomber piece above the climber, instead of on the climber's belay loop with the rope fixed above. It seems to offer similar protection, just in a different orientation. Another interesting question that I've been pondering is... why does common knowledge say that you must place another piece directly after the mircrotrax? It appears the breaking load is 15kn, or 7.5 on either side of the pulley. This seems like it would hold a fall no problem, it would just be a larger fall because the pulley is efficient and the rope may travel through the device. I'm definitely not planning on falling on it, but maybe lowering for a tension traverse, with a backup of course. As for increased risk by using the device in this way, I'm trying to figure out how much the risk is increased, and what type of failures may occur. I think that the psychological protection added by a microtrax would be the greatest benefit. This system appears to be at least marginally safer for the leader than short fixing with a giant PDL out. If speed is a high priority. |
|
JeffL wrote: I'm trying to figure out how much the risk is increased, and what type of failures may occur.and that is the big question. I've used it on 100s of pitches. never fallen. We just don't have the data. |
|
I have used a tube/plate pre rigged into the rope many times. That way it's ready to go right away. You can whip in a ton of slack pretty quickly. |
|
there is a little known but possible "failure" mode with the micro trax |
|
Just to add that Petzl say, and I can confirm from experience, that one should only use a trax with an oval carabiner. If you use a belay master of other D shaped on the tax it can be twisted and damaged if it loaded when sited on the corner of the D. |
|
David Coley wrote:Just to add that Petzl say, and I can confirm from experience, that one should only use a trax with an oval carabiner. If you use a belay master of other D shaped on the tax it can be twisted and damaged if it loaded when sited on the corner of the D.their literature actually says oval or pear shaped now ... heres a bit of additional data about using the micro trax as a "belay device" for seconds ... basically what one is doing simuling it shows the importance of not having much slack in the system especially as one approached the anchor and on traverses, which i believe the OP asked about basically its a "might catch me better than nutting" system, rather than something that should be depended upon to hangdog or take all the time ive got some impact numberes on using the tibloc somewhere ... need to dig that up ;) |
|
David Coley wrote:Just to add that Petzl say, and I can confirm from experience, that one should only use a trax with an oval carabiner. If you use a belay master of other D shaped on the tax it can be twisted and damaged if it loaded when sited on the corner of the D.Agreed on not using a D, but the belay master is an HMS biner so this isn't really an issue. bearbreeder wrote: their literature actually says oval or pear shaped nowGood to see Petzl updated their guidelines on this...I mostly use pears with the micro-trax and have never found crossloading to be any worse than ovals, which are not exactly a panacea for this problem. |
|
bearbreeder wrote: it shows the importance of not having much slack in the system especially as one approached the anchor and on traverses, which i believe the OP asked about basically its a "might catch me better than nutting" system, rather than something that should be depended upon to hangdog or take all the time ive got some impact numberes on using the tibloc somewhere ... need to dig that up ;)Exactly, the 'better than nothing' is what I'm interested in. My understanding is the device should be placed well above the 'crux' if you can call it that. Much like how tr solo set up has increased fall factors nearing the anchor. |
|
JeffL wrote: Exactly, the 'better than nothing' is what I'm interested in. My understanding is the device should be placed well above the 'crux' if you can call it that. Much like how tr solo set up has increased fall factors nearing the anchor.Alot of folks simul on climbs with bolted anchors, in which case they generally dont choose the points for the microtrax, the climb does With gear anchors remember that it should take a good upward pull, which for a quick anchor means one upward cam and one downwards, but built too big an anchor and you might as well climb it normally as you dont save as much time Remember that there will be little to no extension on the trax so there may be a lot of upward/outwars pull on it If the trax does get jammed, its all upward pull And in that case the leader needs to downclimb with a big loop of slack to the last good piece if they cant plug in a piece And the second needs up climb to the trax with a big loop of slack too Theyre basically soloing at that point ;) |
|
I found bearbreeder's last post a bit confusing but full of good points. I thought I'd add that if the second finds themselves with an unwanted amount of slack and looking at a tough move, the leader can pull slack through the micro, assuming the second is unable to tend it with a grigri. This does beg the question of why the leader wouldn't just throw the second on belay, but perhaps the leader is just at a good stance on easier terrain, rather than at a bomber point of protection. |
|
This all makes sense,what would jam the device other than a stick or some foreign object? Is the device just locking up on its own a legitimate concern? |
|
To protect myself from a fall by the second while simul climbing I have used a trango cinch. More than once I've had my second "test" the system and I've found it to perform well in this capacity. However, I will say it does add quite a bit of rope drag. Also I recall an old Timmy Oneil speed climbing video clip where they were using a tibloc for this purpose. Just some ideas. |
|
Steve House and Vince Anderson used Tiblocs for protecting the second on the Rupal face, fwiw. That's not a blanket endorsement of the practice, of course, but these are two highly informed guides. |
|
JeffL wrote:This all makes sense,what would jam the device other than a stick or some foreign object? Is the device just locking up on its own a legitimate concern? As for what the pulley can withstand, I see no issue in applying body weight as in a tension traverse, but what about a leader fall directly onto the micro trax? Not ideal, and can be prevented or even eliminated by placing another piece immediately afterwards. That said, Petzl's literature that comes with the micro trax appears to indicate that the pulley is rated to 15knthe "failure" method i posted MAY make it quite hard to pull the rope through the device depending on the rope diameter and the biner ... give it a try on yr setup and see if this is the case remember since the biner will be clipped to the bolt with no extension its much more possible for the biner to be "locked" in funny positions also a very twisted/kinked rope could be harder to pull through ... so make sure there are no kinks before heading up the pulley is only rated by petzl to 5 KN, the 15 KN is the breaking strength of the entire device with larger impacts may be possible for the device to be damaged and no longer usable ... which is why petzl doesnt recommend the "device hit the knot" backup method for TR soloing for these devices i think its pretty important what both partners should know what to do if something happens ... at least talk it through - leader/second falls - rope gets jammed/damaged - sections harder than expected for leader/second - device fails to hold or get damaged - no more gear (didnt bring enough or just blank) basically just assume one is soloing, just make sure one is NOT simul soloing roped up ;) heres a bit more info on tiblocs .... |
|
There is an awesome, easy-to-read article all about simul climbing here: vdiff.co.uk/#!simul-climbin… |
|
VDiff wrote:There is an awesome, easy-to-read article all about simul climbing here: vdiff.co.uk/#!simul-climbin… It answers a lot of your questions.Vdiff, under the equalizing gear section on your site it says to never use a sliding x to equalize gear at a belay, only in lead. Could you explain why? |
|
I didn't see this thread the first time around, but I'll just add this: |