Metolius PAS 22 manufacturing fault (Update - not as bad as it first looks)

good PAS, good.

bad PAS, bad...don't buy a bad PAS

I used to use one of these until I saw results of a test showing serious damage to one inflicted by a 20kn fall, 500lb LESS than what is rated to. Now I use a home made daisy made from a big loop of 1" tubular webbing tied with a water knot and two overhands for different lengths. It is rated to more than the PAS and is also slightly dynamic if for some reason I have to unweight it while cleaning and end up falling on it. Taking even a 1 ft fall on a PAS can inflict serious damage to it.

I used to use one of these until I saw results of a test showing serious damage to one inflicted by a 20kn fall, 500lb LESS than what is rated to. Now I use a home made daisy made from a big loop of 1" tubular webbing tied with a water knot and two overhands for different lengths. It is rated to more than the PAS and is also slightly dynamic if for some reason I have to unweight it while cleaning and end up falling on it. Taking even a 1 ft fall on a PAS can inflict serious damage to it.

Actually just heard back from Metolius, and they had a pretty good response, and I learned something rather surprising about the manufacturing process.

Apparently there is 2 sets of stitching in each loop - the first is the same color as the sling material and is pretty strong (~12Kn apparently) and the bar tacks are a second set of stitching that adds even more strength. This is what the guy at metolius had to say:

I don’t want to make excuses, because this was obviously a big mistake on our part, but just so you know, the loops do also have a straight stitch that goes through them, which is still very strong – it fails around 12 kN. Here’s what our owner, Doug, says about it:

“The production is a two step process; first the straight stitching, then the black pattern stitch. The straight stitching alone is actually quite strong and it would never fail in a normal climbing situation. Although the missed pattern stitch looks really bad, it is actually not nearly as bad as it looks.

We will, of course try to never let it happen again.”

Either way, just looking at it scared the crap out of me, but it is good to know the manufacturing process has redundancy built in. Just looking at it I would have thought this would fail at body weight...

Nice to know they are taking it seriously and that it isn't as bad as it looks (but still not great, and they acknowledge that and are investigating)

philip riley wrote:Actually just heard back from Metolius, and they had a pretty good response, and I learned something rather surprising about the manufacturing process. Apparently there is 2 sets of stitching in each loop - the first is the same color as the sling material and is pretty strong (~12Kn apparently) and the bar tacks are a second set of stitching that adds even more strength. This is what the guy at metolius had to say: I don’t want to make excuses, because this was obviously a big mistake on our part, but just so you know, the loops do also have a straight stitch that goes through them, which is still very strong – it fails around 12 kN. Here’s what our owner, Doug, says about it: “The production is a two step process; first the straight stitching, then the black pattern stitch. The straight stitching alone is actually quite strong and it would never fail in a normal climbing situation. Although the missed pattern stitch looks really bad, it is actually not nearly as bad as it looks. We will, of course try to never let it happen again.” Either way, just looking at it scared the crap out of me, but it is good to know the manufacturing process has redundancy built in. Just looking at it I would have thought this would fail at body weight... Nice to know they are taking it seriously and that it isn't as bad as it looks (but still not great, and they acknowledge that and are investigating)

So if 12 KN will never "fail" in a climbin situation according to em ... What am i paying that extra $$$$ for ?

One of the selling points is the "full strength" of the PASes (any manufacturer)

A 22 kn 120 cm nylon sling with a few overhand knots is rated to 12 kn+ anyways and costs 5 dollahs ... The poor mans PAS

Which incidentaly is what i tell newer climber to get for a "PAS"

;)

eli poss wrote:I used to use one of these until I saw results of a test showing serious damage to one inflicted by a 20kn fall, 500lb LESS than what is rated to. Now I use a home made daisy made from a big loop of 1" tubular webbing tied with a water knot and two overhands for different lengths. It is rated to more than the PAS and is also slightly dynamic if for some reason I have to unweight it while cleaning and end up falling on it. Taking even a 1 ft fall on a PAS can inflict serious damage to it.

You should check this out eli:
dmmclimbing.com/knowledge/h…

I know it is a different brand and just on plain sewn slings, but I have seen a bunch of tests on this sort of thing before, and the general conclusions are:
- ANY fall on a sling (nylon or dyneema/spectra) is going to be epic given the short distances involved and the ease of creating a fall factor 1 or greater fall.
- Adding knots to the system significantly reduces ultimate strength

The user rule should be never create slack in a system where you are relying on a sling (which a PAS is just a series of slings really) as your connection to an anchor - if you need to move above an anchor do it on belay using the dynamic properties of the rope! I think of these sorts of things as simply user error - especially on multi-pitch the safest thing to use to anchor is the rope if you might be moving around a bit.

bearbreeder wrote: So if 12 KN will never "fail" in a climbin situation according to em ... What am i paying that extra $$$$ for ? One of the selling points is the "full strength" of the PASes (any manufacturer) A 22 kn 120 cm nylon sling with a few overhand knots is rated to 12 kn+ anyways and costs 5 dollahs ... The poor mans PAS Which incidentaly is what i tell newer climber to get for a "PAS" ;)

I don't think that was the point of their response - they acknowledge this is a mistake and should never have left the factory and are taking it very seriously - their point was that if used per instructions for anchoring, this wasn't a 'break at body weight holy crap' problem. Still a problem, but not a potentially lethal one as I first thought. Yes, you could just use a knotted sling.

From memory the original PAS was 'only' 18KN and they upped the strength to get them CE / UIAA certified. I mean, you could use them for other things - for example you could use a PAS to connect/equalize a 2 bolt belay anchor where the strength of the sling is still well in excess of the bolt strength.

Anyway, besides the point - regardless of if you don't think a PAS is useful, this isn't apparently as bad as it looks.

Philip, good on you to point this out to REI and Metolius instead of letting it go. Last night I almost hit a pedestrian driving home because she was walking in the bikelane dressed in all dark, non-reflective clothing. After narrowing missing her I decided to turn around and I told her to not walk in the bikelane in the dark with no lights. I saw her move closer to grass and with the flashlight app in her phone turned on when I drove past her again. It was so close and it would have been tragic for the both of us.

eli poss wrote:I used to use one of these until I saw results of a test showing serious damage to one inflicted by a 20kn fall, 500lb LESS than what is rated to. Now I use a home made daisy made from a big loop of 1" tubular webbing tied with a water knot and two overhands for different lengths. It is rated to more than the PAS and is also slightly dynamic if for some reason I have to unweight it while cleaning and end up falling on it. Taking even a 1 ft fall on a PAS can inflict serious damage to it.

There seems to be a lot of confusion floating around about this one. Most of the info here is true, but a few things are missing which matters a little. First, the human body is weaker than a PAS, you will break your back before your PAS, even if it's missing half its stitching.

Second, the human body itself is fairly stretchy, and will add significantly more stretch to the whole system than either the nylon or the dyneema itself. Using the body this way is very uncomfortable, and not particularly healthy at higher forces. I would roughly guess that a 1 foot fall on a static-ish anchor would give you bruises on your hip, and possibly a sore back. A 3 foot fall would cause a minor injury, and I wouldn't want to make guesses about a larger fall. Beyond this, you might end up sustaining injuries that are incompatible with life. This, of course, will depend on the victim's back strength, and the exact nature of the fall.

A dyneema PAS will actually stretch a little from the links tightening, in the same way that adding knots to a sling will make it a little more dynamic. It's still probably less than a knotted nylon sling, and far, far less than the human body can take.

I've found that the Purcell Prussik is the way to go.
- Cheap, you make it yourself from cord
- You always have cord on your harness for emergencies/bailing
- Easy to adjust the length (without unclipping!)
- The prussik will slip a bit when suddenly loaded, so it's dynamic
- You won't get flamed by MPers for using a daisy-style PAS
http://climber.co.nz/81/feature/purcell-prussik

if CCH made a PAS and this happened people would be screaming for vengeance....

slim wrote:if CCH made a PAS and this happened people would be screaming for vengeance....

CCH doesnt exist anymore (RIP).

.

slim wrote:if CCH made a PAS and this happened people would be screaming for vengeance....

This quality control failing is extremely serious and quite unacceptable. As long as Metolius takes appropriate action on this then I'm not sure what else you want.

CCH ignored and denied very serious quality control issues. That was their problem.

there's no mentioning the PAS without enduring PASHATE.

philip riley wrote:Actually just heard back from Metolius, and they had a pretty good response, and I learned something rather surprising about the manufacturing process. Apparently there is 2 sets of stitching in each loop - the first is the same color as the sling material and is pretty strong (~12Kn apparently) and the bar tacks are a second set of stitching that adds even more strength. This is what the guy at metolius had to say: I don’t want to make excuses, because this was obviously a big mistake on our part, but just so you know, the loops do also have a straight stitch that goes through them, which is still very strong – it fails around 12 kN. Here’s what our owner, Doug, says about it: “The production is a two step process; first the straight stitching, then the black pattern stitch. The straight stitching alone is actually quite strong and it would never fail in a normal climbing situation. Although the missed pattern stitch looks really bad, it is actually not nearly as bad as it looks. We will, of course try to never let it happen again.” Either way, just looking at it scared the crap out of me, but it is good to know the manufacturing process has redundancy built in. Just looking at it I would have thought this would fail at body weight... Nice to know they are taking it seriously and that it isn't as bad as it looks (but still not great, and they acknowledge that and are investigating)

This technique is not uncommon. One of the main purposes of the straight stitching is to hold the loop together as a single unit because it is actually made of two webbing passes. If they only sewed the bartacks in place, the two passes of webbing sewn into a loop could separate which, while not immediately dangerous, could be kind of annoying. Pretty much every company that uses two loops of webbing to create the belay loop on a harness does it this way. However, the straight stitching is there mostly for vanity, and it is not really designed to hold the loops together.

20 kN wrote: This technique is not uncommon. One of the main purposes of the straight stitching is to hold the loop together as a single unit because it is actually made of two webbing passes. If they only sewed the bartacks in place, the two passes of webbing sewn into a loop could separate which, while not immediately dangerous, could be kind of annoying. Pretty much every company that uses two loops of webbing to create the belay loop on a harness does it this way. However, the straight stitching is there mostly for vanity, and it is not really designed to hold the loops together.

Don't think this is accurate. Edelrid doesn't look to use any sort of traditional bar tack on their belay loops and I know they don't Bar Tack on their belay sling main loop (see picture of mine) 22kN rated. The need for bar tacks could vary based on number of loop layers etc etc (Edelrid loop is 3 loops with 4 layers at the joint) but from my limited conversations with reps over the years, the "full circle parallel stitching" certainly does add strength and is not just vanity based. I'd be curious as to the design choices of bar-tack vs parallel stitch.

philip riley wrote: You should check this out eli: dmmclimbing.com/knowledge/h…

I don't care if you anchor in with a rope, sling, or PAS but i think it is important for the people who are constantly bringing up this study / video to realize how hard it would be to FF2 on your sling/PAS without doing something completely stupid. Just think about it calmly for a minute.

Xam wrote: I don't care if you anchor in with a rope, sling, or PAS but i think it is important for the people who are constantly bringing up this study / video to realize how hard it would be to FF2 on your sling/PAS without doing something completely stupid. Just think about it calmly for a minute.

-Multi pitch climb belay.
-Leader builds masterpoint to belay up second, attaches themself via sling to masterpoint (or worse, to one of the bolts/strong piece in the belay)
-Second reaches anchor but the belay stance only fits one person
-Leader moves above the anchor to another stance that is not directly above the belay stance so the second can clip to anchor and take up the belay stance at the anchor
-Leader doesn't concentrate on their stance because they're busy retrieving gear from the second
-Leader slips during this process and falls double the length of their tie-in sling. Likely close to FF2 because one would also assume in this scenario that the leader may have adjusted the length of their tie-in to be relatively snug because that intuitively "feels safer."

-Setting up a TR anchor
-Leader walks up to edge of cliff where there are bolts set at the lip.
-Leader clips into bolts with sling to be safe while setting up anchor.
-During the process of setting up anchor, leader is distracted or surprised (let's say a racoon jumps out of their pack having just devoured all of their jerky)
-Leader slips in their surprise and falls off the edge and falls double the length of their tie-in sling. Likely close to FF2 because one would also assume in this scenario that the leader may have adjusted the length of their tie-in to be relatively snug because that intuitively "feels safer."

- - -

Obviously, this scenario is not meant to be what someone should do at an anchor and so it's easy to point out the myriad of different ways that the scenario should have played out to be safer.

The point is not whether this is smart to have happen, but whether this is something that could easily happen without anything in the scenario being labeled "something completely stupid."

I've seen this sort of thing happen all the time and have done it myself many times thinking it'll be fine even with full knowledge of what can happen because I'm thinking, "I won't fall, or slip, or lose concentration" or any of the other bedtime stories we tell ourselves when we're trying to justify our personal level of risk management.

The problem is that it isn't immediately intuitive for the average person to understand the ability to have a very high static fall at a multipitch or setting up a TR anchor. Most people will think, "it's a short fall and short falls are better than long falls." I'd be very impressed if one could argue effectively that ALL leaders make a point to study the difference between fall length vs fall force when factoring length of your connection to the anchor.

kevin...those scenarios are certainly valid. My point is the following: to FF2 on a 2.5' of sling, you would have to achieve free fall immediately and maintain it over 5'. This is pretty hard to do without leaping off of whatever stance you are on, sucking up your legs and arms into your body and specifically avoiding contact with anything. My point is the shortness of the tether in these situations makes this very unlikely without going out of your way to make it happen.

All they are saying in those tests is to not be stupid and take falls on static tethers by using them inappropriately.

This is tread drift...I will let my post stand as is cause it is not serving the OP.

kevin deweese wrote: During the process of setting up anchor, leader is distracted or surprised (let's say a racoon jumps out of their pack having just devoured all of their jerky)

New life goal - somehow convince a racoon that it is in its best interest to hide in my climbing partners pack... I laughed out loud, this is the best mental image I have had all week!

but more seriously - I completely agree - people radically underestimate how easy it is to create a nasty static fall at anchor. I see it all the time when new leaders at the gym are learning how to clean an anchor - they take a step up to get some slack in the system while setting their rap - on an overhanging clean it is super easy to get over FF1 just by pulling up on the chains to get some space to check your rap - I am sure we have all done it without even thinking at some stage when we were new... FF2 would be unlikely unless you were being careless, but FF1 is probably not that hard to do and would hurt like hell.

I mean, we are still way off topic, and I agree with Xam that the point is simply that if you are moving around at a belay you need to be cognizant of how you would load a system if you fell and don't do stupid things - the real problem is that so many people have demonstrated an infinite capacity for stupidity...