Over on Sp.com there has been a discussion about a Omega Cam which broke.

Here is a picture I stole from the site:

Being a metallurgist the minute I learned that OP used castings I said I would never use them. Castings just don't have the ductility and strength of forgings or other more refined manufacturing methods, even machining from bar stock. You are going to need more strength since there are so many joints which means more side to side play which implies added joint stress that the joints can't handle becuse they were cast. To be honest I love the idea and have thought about borrowing one and manufactureing something similar for myself, I have made my own nuts and hexes in the past. But what I can't belive is that the military uses these, I thought they always went for highest quality, of couse they may be basing quality on price in this circumstance, waisting our money more...

Edit: Actually they call it Metal Injection Molding which is a powder met part (not straight powder met but a version of it) which would also have significantly less strength.

Andrew,

Are you aware of any other cams made with this same method?

Thanks

John

Actually I have yet to find one that uses powder met (If that is what they mean by Injection Molding) And I stick with Trango and Black Diamond, my Trango's were pressed and machined some are extruded which is ok but not great and I did a microstructure analysis of BD's and they are definatly not PM or cast, 100% etruded and machined, really nice grainstructure on them. Pretty much all nuts, hexes and cam lobes have been extruded. I belive that Metolious cams are made by machining and probably extrusion but they could be something else, I don't know anything about them, powder met just doesn't work that great for aluminum and a lot of cam lobes are aluminum so it is safe to say they are not PM, and I for sure hope non are ever cast. The part that failed was stainless steel which would be an ok part for PM but I can defantly tell by the part shape it would be very hard to forge, other cam lobe designs can be easily pressed/forged and machined or even extruded which isn't as good as forged and could be the same or less than machined.

Let me know though if there is something I missed on a gear company and I will defanitly make sure I don't buy it without first inspecting it,(you mentioned other companies using tis process?) I know that none of my gear is PM or cast except my BD guide belay device might be cast, but it is just a friction applying device. But then I know nothing about wildcountry or DMM.

I am not sure what it is exactly that you are afraid of, care to expound?

Equipment, regardless of how it was made, needs to meet strict standards. Then, the equipment only needs to perform within the parameters of rock climbing. Even Mal backs up Omega. So I guess I don't see what your point is.

are they on recall?

no they reacalled some due to bad pins and failures though, and I talked to a proffessor about the strength of this to confirm and yes these parts made of this method are less. No OP probably gets away with this because the standards and ratings are not placing the part under a stress to fail them. There are different ways to clasify strength as it somewhat of a genaric term. these parts probably don't have much ductility which is what I would want over just flat out breaking. Did I mention metal injection molding is a very expensive proccess? In my opinion they should do a little redesign so they can use forgings. Now I will admit I am not an expert in this area, I have had class on it but my experiance is in extractive met. Now these are probably still safe to use under normal circumstances, I wouldn't dare place them anywhere the lobes would go under tension ( anything but straight downward force, non plaralel cracks, or slightly sidewase cracks...) Notice that by looking at the part you don't see any evidence of a major fall. but again I won't buy them just because I don't think it to be a safe manufacturing proccess to trust your life to, trango max cams maybe? Less joints on them at least not sure how well they work.

Andrew,

Who uses Link Cams in the military? As for the military always going with top notch equipment, not always so. Most stuff is bought from the lowest bidder.

I just made the asumption that since they made a "tactical" version that no one else would want to pay the extra for a color that would be easy to loose...

Arguments against casting are misleading, given that the forging process itself typically encompasses the casting of the metals into ingots at the foundry and then the metal ingots are mechanically worked into their final shape. If there are differences and reliabiltiy issues between the two processes they certainly have not been explained well enough in the comments above.

The differance is that a 1000 pound ingot that was cast is then shaped into many many many 1 oz forgings, you no longer have a casting. When metal undergoes the deformation that happens durring forging (hot or cold working) the grain microstructure changes, now none of this is visible to the naked eye. In hot working (working above the recrystalization temp) the grains align themselfs better from the cast structure and produce a very fine grain size with a fibrous structure and anisotropic behavior... strain hardening and recrystallization is specific to forgings these changes in structure result in an increase in ductility and toughness over the cast state, forging yeilds a much higher strength to weight ratio, forged aluminium is about 30 per cent stronger than cast aluminium, you have to understand what happens to the metal to understand the diferances between forged, cast, powder met, and extruded parts. There are other ways to increase strength as well don' thonk that fargings are the only way to get good parts... good parts can be made lots of ways I just don't think these should be powder met. Any more insight I can give keep posting

While I agree that the forging process can produce materials/products with exceptional properties, I think that it is misleading to tell the readers that casting and powder metallurgy processes/products are inferior to forged products.

Investment casting (which most gear companies use in their products) is the preferred process to manufacture highly complex shapes for high reliability applications. The next flight you take on a commercial aircraft will be riding on investment cast blades in the gas turbine engine as well as many of the parts in the airframe. Similarly, some of the best metal alloys available are produced via a powder metallurgy route.

The metal injection molding process (as mentioned) is a relatively new process (about 20 years old in commercial production) and is now widely used in many high reliability applications ranging from automotive turbochargers to medical instruments. It does differ from "conventional" press and sinter powder metallurgy in that it achieves very high density in the final materials. The result is materials that achieve properties that are close to and sometimes exceed wrought properties.

Taken in context, I am sure that Omega has done their homework on the technology used to manufacture their products and has tested them in accordance with CE specifications. Unfortunately they cannot dictate how we as climbers use (place) the product in the field which may stress a part in an unintended manner that can produce a failure, no matter how good the material may be.

Thanks for the fascinating discussion, folks. The more I hear about metallurgy, the more interesting and complicated it sounds. Given how much time I spend around "performance metals", it seems like something I should know a bit about. Can anyone recommend a good book on the subject aimed at the scientifically literate but non-engineering crowd (i.e., people not afraid of math, but for whom stress-strain graphs are not intuitive)?

Fellas,

I posted a thread about these cams in March 2006 on the Big Walls Forum:

http://www.bigwalls.com/forum2/index.php?topic=25.0

Over the course of less than two years, the yellow cam was returned to OP first for a broken trigger wire and then for a fracture on one of the lobes, and the red cam was also returned due to a fracture on one of the lobes.

These cams were used for both aid and free climbing but didn't see any more abuse than anything else on the rack. I think they're a great idea but evidently they don't stand up to the abuse of day to day climbing like other cams do.

Giza -- thanks for posting the prior failures.

On the OP site they say and show this:

"During the course of the inspection, we subsequently discovered three units which have a small fissure in the steel linkage of the cam lobes.

Avery,

I too think that OP has responded really well to these problems by actively communicating with the climbing community. I'm really impressed with how they have handled these issues.

Regarding the small fissure in the steel linkage, this was not the issue that we had. On both cams it was an outer lobe that had a visible micro-fracture upon inspection. I think these issues are independent of each other. To be clear, the micro-fractures on both the red and gold cams were observed before any failure of the unit, and they were subsequently sent to OP to be repaired or replaced.

Hmmm... a 'variety' of unintended fracture issues + manufacturing issues for just one product, over time.

Scary.

Hey man,

My intention isn't to have a pissing match with you. That should be reserved for other climbing websites, not Mountain Project.

You've obviously been climbing much longer than my 10 years and have had much more experience in the realm of climbing and gear than I have.

You're right about one thing - when I look at a Link Cam I see a piece of gear that I can use to protect a crack - just like a Camalot, Metolius cam, or DMM cam. To me it isn't a specialty piece reserved for a unique set of conditions - it's a piece of gear with the range of three regular cams that I can use when I'm gripped and need quick pro. The number of moving parts makes me a bit suspect about their durability due to so many opportunities for mechanical failure. However, I wouldn't have expected the lobes to fracture on me - and certainly not on two different units.

So again, from my experience these cams just don't work for me.

Hopefully I haven't rubbed you the wrong way Healyje - I'm not here to be an asshole.

hmmmm, i don't really see how crack jumaring would cause that much difference in lateral force on the lobes in terms of stem rotation versus being in an anchor, or particularly in a unit that is being fallen on. i agree with you healyje, that when you look at the unit it does give one a feeling of concern over durability. however, i also agree with giza that it is pretty silly that the cams are THAT fragile.