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.

I understand that slack between the micro trax and the 2nd would increase damage to the rope. My question revolves mostly on how much damage the rope will receive. It appears that if the device was directly above the 2nd and there was no slack, the 2nd could essentially sit down on the device without causing harm. Can anyone offer information to contradict this?

On anther note, how will this device hold a fall in traversing terrain? I imagine if the 2nd takes a big swing with any amount of slack that is NOT good! What would happen if during a traverse, the leader placed a quickdraw on the first bolt of an anchor, then the next bolt had the progress capture device? The idea being that the quickdraw provides a directional and minimizes the distance the microtrax travels to align with the fall. It, however does appear that completely eliminating travel of the microtrax would be difficult. My understanding is that the device traveling is the primary cause of sheath damage during a TR solo set up. That's why a chest harness or two slings in the "X" configuration are used.

I know, I know, I'm going to die. I'm merely looking for information about how much damage will occur in the rope, and which situations damage it the most (or least for that matter)

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.

Toothed devices can harm your rope even if you don't fall. For example, I recently learned the hard way that disengaging a mini-trax while it is slightly weighted (by the weight of the rope itself) can cause a sheath strand to catch on the one of the teeth.

That being said, I've taken short (>1 foot excluding rope stretch) and even traversing falls while TR soloing on a mini trax without sustaining any sheath damage. Obviously YMMV. If the rock is steep enough, though, the loop of rope exiting the mini-trax may be enough weight to pull up some of the slack for the 2nd because it doesn't take much weight for the mini-trax to feed automatically.

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).

I don't bother with a chest harness, and rather go off the belay loop so each fall is a small fall regardless of slack in rope, as the device moves from below to above the belay loop. Solo TR in itself has never damaged my rope. Like eli poss, I have caught sheath strands when trying to disengage the device when it's not fully unweighted - normally because I'm rushing through a changeover - I consider that my own user error more than anything, each time it's happened I've not at all cared about that level of sheath damage.

Thinking about how I'd go about simulclimbing, sheath damage from a microtrax is pretty low on my list of concerns.

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.

any type of toothed device would, IMO be not worth it.

there is a little known but possible "failure" mode with the micro trax

if the screwgate gets into the hole, if the biner is oriented a certain way the pulling through of the rope can lead to the unscrewing of the biner and potentially the opening of the gate

with "normal" use its a non issue as the trax is SUPERVISED ... however with simuling the trax is unsupervised so theres no one to fix it

even if the biner doesnt unscrew ... having the rope in this position may lead to significant drag, always a no no on simul

this can be prevented by orienting the biner so that the rope movement would screw the biner tighter ... with petzl biners it means "putting red to black". or the red part of the gate next to the black side of the microtrax as shown below

this doesnt prevent the gate from going in the hole of course

or better use use a DMM belay master to prevent it entirely ... however that brings up a whole different can of worms

also since its an unsupervised setup ... make sure there no possibility of debris getting into the microtrax (or any other device)

if you basically cant solo it ... you shouldnt be simuling it either

;)

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 now

Good 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?

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 15kn

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.

youtube.com/watch?v=oIkmYiw…

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 15kn

the "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…

It answers a lot of your questions.

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:
I like to clip the device, in this case a Kong Duck, so that the rope is also enclosed within the biner. This way, if the leader were to take a huge fall onto that piece, the rope is still clipped through a biner and not just the Duck.

Not sure how strong the various devices (Ropeman, Microtraxion, etc) are, but they're probably not designed to catch a lead fall.

Also, the Duck works well for this purpose and does not have sharp teeth. The BD oval wire biners are nice also, since they're big enough for clipping as shown here, and can rotate through the Duck.