Petzl Coeur Pulse vs Climbtech RB Anchors

Hypothetical: A SAR team is building an anchor at the top of a cliff in preparation to pick off an injured climber. In my mind discreetly drilled holes and removable anchors would be much faster, more efficient and potentially stronger in many scenarios than using whatever natural protection maybe at hand.
Assuming all things are equal (Solid rock, correct placement) would the Pulse or RB or another removable anchor be better for that scenario?
With my limited knowledge and not having used removable anchors before I would lean toward the RBs as they seem to require less precision to place and would not necessary be compromised if the direction of the load shifted.  
Any thoughts on the suitability of either (or other options) for a SAR application.  

No SAR specific info here, and I have not used the Pulse.  I do use ClimbTech RBs often though.

The RBs are bomber and require minimal hole to function well.  One downfall is that they often get stuck and require an additional step to remove.  You need a narrow punch to disengage the cam when they do get stuck.  I have had one get completely stuck and I think this was due to the hole being too shallow and the RB bottoming out, therefore rendering the use of the punch pretty ineffective.  

What is the reasoning for them being removable? Where mountain rescue teams in our region need secure anchors, fixed pins and bolts are standard. Petzl states the CP is only good for single person applications (so not rescue loads), so using it off-label so-to speak needs to be carefully examined and justified. 

Exploring the concept for my personal curiosity, I had a conversation with the local SAR Tech Rope team leader and it piqued my curiosity (they currently only use natural or removable protection IE slinging rocks and trees and cams and nuts).
Removable anchors would limit impact, require less gear for installation (i.e. No hammer) and are not consumable. Whether those pros outweigh the cons is a valid question. The main con that I see is reduced strength but that is easily mitigated by redundancy.

The very shallow embedment depth of an RB requires decent rock immediately beneath the surface i.e you can't place them where there's a soft crust despite the presence of competent rock at depth - the issue is that the RB can jam if you place them deeper. The wires can be damaged by a hammer when tapping the RB to disengage the jamming action (or you carry a punch but something to drop) so this requires care but in general they are great for new routing. I personally don't like rigging primary anchors solely from RBs in the general bolt hole size range i.e ½ inch due to the shallow embedment depth and I primarily use them in limestone. An example of where I'd use the Petzl CP instead. Granite of course would be different.

The Petzl CP are considerably easier to place and remove - they never jam in the way hole depth renders RBs prone to extraction problems but the smaller diameter still requires a full depth hole whereas RBs don't, so something to consider if needing lots of redirects or rebelays when fixing line. The large locking knob is something to keep an eye on for karabiner jamming - not much space there - whereas RBs don't really have that multi directional issue. For new routing on steep rock, the absence of a wire extension allows rigging to be pinned closer into the wall or to gain more reach when drilling on steep rock. Far stronger in a range of rock types.

Neither are rated for SAR and an equivalent matched strength RB to the Petzl CP requires a ¾ inch hole / 19mm versus 12mm.

Thanks Francis. Very good info. That is exactly what I was looking for. I couldn't find anywhere where they had been compared side by side and you brought up some considerations that I had not thought of or seen in my research. I have been considering getting some for my personal use developing routes and the embedment depth would be a big part of my decision.
Thanks again Francis. 

Our Rescue team uses 12mm Fixe triplex bolts, that can be removed if needed. I don't think we would trust RB's with rescue loads, maybe as part of an overall anchor of several different components. Having said that I use climb-tech RB's all the time with route development and they work great.

I recently did some testing on Triplex bolt, and found it slid from hole in tension at 3900 lbf. Not exactly stellar results for a 1/2" (12mm) installation. In fact no better than hardware store ITW/Redhead sleeve anchors that are $1.38. Concrete was well consolidated ~3000 psi, drilled with brand new 12mm bit, and bolt was set with a torque wrench to Fixe USA stated spec. Anyone else done testing on these? I have been asking Fixe Spain for test results for nearly a year with no response other than "we'll get that to you"

M Hanna wrote: I recently did some testing on Triplex bolt, and found it slid from hole in tension at 3900 lbf. Not exactly stellar results for a 1/2" (12mm) installation. In fact no better than hardware store ITW/Redhead sleeve anchors that are $1.38. Concrete was well consolidated ~3000 psi, drilled with brand new 12mm bit, and bolt was set with a torque wrench to Fixe USA stated spec. Anyone else done testing on these? I have been asking Fixe Spain for test results for nearly a year with no response other than "we'll get that to you"

No-one in Europe seems to have bothered to test them, not exactly a popular item over here!

M Hanna wrote: I recently did some testing on Triplex bolt, and found it slid from hole in tension at 3900 lbf. Not exactly stellar results for a 1/2" (12mm) installation. In fact no better than hardware store ITW/Redhead sleeve anchors that are $1.38. Concrete was well consolidated ~3000 psi, drilled with brand new 12mm bit, and bolt was set with a torque wrench to Fixe USA stated spec. Anyone else done testing on these? I have been asking Fixe Spain for test results for nearly a year with no response other than "we'll get that to you"

Did you test with a 12mm hanger under the flange or with a 10mm hanger on top of the flange. It would be interesting to see the difference in strength.

On topic, the only advantage RB's have over the Pulse is bit availability. I haven't had a chance to use the Pulse yet but I really like the design.

The test was done with hanger behind the flange. Back on topic, I have a few Pulse and also really like the design

I have the 8mm pulse and love it!  Perfect for route development (temp anchor, aiding up, etc) . Easy in, easy out, reusable.  15kn.  Leaves a MUCH less visible hole than an RB hole and is easy to use.   5/16” bit is the proper size for it.   Barrabes carries it.

The aluminum hanger does get nicked easily and can leave sharp burrs.  Had to file mine a couple of times.

Highlander wrote: Our Rescue team uses 12mm Fixe triplex bolts, that can be removed if needed. I don't think we would trust RB's with rescue loads, maybe as part of an overall anchor of several different components. Having said that I use climb-tech RB's all the time with route development and they work great.

Theyre used in rope access and rigging often in the US:

video here:  https://www.facebook.com/trask.bradbury/videos/vb.593638132/10154304180883133/?type=3

Credit Master Point Rope Access.

Unlikely in Europe at smaller diameters because a 12mm RB won't conform to EN795 and thus not ideal for IRATA compliance where individual anchor strength is ideally 15kN or higher. Considering there are 12mm products (Petzl CP) that are rated higher than 15kN an RB won't feature.

2 RB's could be rigged equally per rope (working and safety) to meet IRATA standards i.e when individual strength is sub 15kN but greater than 10-12kN (so a ½ inch just passes) but then you're using 4 items whereas 2 Petzl CP's suffice and Euros would be using a standard drill bit size.

This is n't considering rescue loading however.

https://irata.org/uploads/documents/International_Code_of_Practice_%28ICOP%29_-_English_TC-102ENG.pdf

Part 2, Page 53 of 68