Was this a Factor 2 fall that ripped a leg loop?

This is why before quickdraws we would turn the gate after clipping so we would not get caught by the nose of the carabiner & the rope would not go over the gate and open it.

kevin deweese wrote: I wish people (climbers and hikers) understood this when they do the cables on half dome. I hear all the time, "I'm going to wear a harness and clip into the cables so if I fall I'll be 'safe'" not realizing with the cable posts being ~10' apart and a 2' connection between your harness and the cables, a fall from a higher post to the lower post would be a factor 6 fall. 

Not.

​https://www.ropelab.com.au/fall-factor/​​​

Those quickdraws, they will grab anything :)

Here is what happens when ankle gets hooked on carabiner - Leader Fall – Ankle Snagged By Carabiner

Billcoe wrote:

Not.

https://www.ropelab.com.au/fall-factor/

ummm,. im pretty sure Richard's article proves his point...

Colton Lawson wrote:

Take a look at the second strand of the leg loop that survived. If that thin piece of material rips, then there is no more leg loop. I'd say this is structural damage to the harness.

If the structural part (the load-bearing leg loop) isn't damaged, it isn't "structural damage". (But I'd still consider her lucky and go shopping for a new harness.)

Chris Little wrote:  I hope you notified the manufacturer about this. I'm no expert, but that looks like a design flaw.

LOL!

Moving on, no structural damage in the photo, as the triangle is not a structural piece.  Still will not be as comfortable, time for a new harness.  I agree with the people up-thread who said this was a factor 5 or 6 fall, although this is a strange situation to try to calculate the FF.  Hope her back/ everything else is ok!  

Chris Hill wrote:

Isn't that still better than falling to the ground?

I feel like I shouldn't even need to answer this ridiculous question, but I will. Yes it's better than falling to the ground but your question avoids (I suspect on purpose) the actual question, which is, "should a climber utilize an inappropriate system when other options are available?" In this case, utilizing a $20 screamer or two can absorb some of the force of the fall (instead of the climber's body) so using a system without that shock absorber is inappropriate whether or not it keeps you off the ground. 

Or to put your question another way that shows its ridiculousness, "Isn't using a static rope for leading instead of a dynamic rope better than falling to the ground?"

And don't forget that most people are going to be using a daisy or a sling which doesn't have any elasticity in the case of arresting a fall. "But what about nylon, which stretches, instead of dyneema?" First of all, one can assume that many people on Half Dome Cables are not going to be well versed in climbing gear and thus are more likely to buy dyneema because "it's stronger and lighter" is all they will see. Second of all, the force absorbing elasticity in 1'- 2' of nylon is pretty much nil. 

All that being said, the reality is that in a fall you're most likely going to hit one of the best shock absorbers there is, other tourists. Kinda like bouldering, the best shock absorbers are made of meat. ;P
 

Julian H wrote:
Is this vertical terrain? Bouncing down a slab will absorb a lot of the energy. 

Sections of the cables are steeper than others but overall it's slab (with some sections at 50 degrees). But it is polished to a smooth finish slab. If you've ever tried to slide down the slab on your butt, there's no a lot of friction up there and, in the sections where one would fall,  you gain speed rather quickly, both inside and outside the cables.
So yes, there will be some absorption from sliding down the slab and I don't have the technical knowledge to calculate that friction, but when looking at a factor 6 fall, you could lose 2/3rds of the fall force from slab friction and still be looking at a factor 2. (I'll admit that I actually don't know if the fall force is linear or otherwise so i could be wrong about that last part)

.

Billcoe wrote:
Not.
https://www.ropelab.com.au/fall-factor/

Reading Comprehension is important.
From your linked article.
"Fall Factor = Distance fallen ÷ Rope in service"  aka: FF6 = 12' / 2'
and

"This final situation is unusual but sees the lanyard clipped to a vertical cable.  Now the operator can fall 3m on their 1m lanyard which gives FF3.  This would be a very dangerous fall." 

Applied to the Half Dome situation:
This final situation... sees the lanyard clipped to a vertical cable. Now the operator can fall 12' on their 2' lanyard which gives FF6. This would be a very dangerous fall.

Fun reading: mountainproject.com/forum/t…

kevin deweese wrote:

Applied to the Half Dome situation:

This final situation... sees the lanyard clipped to a vertical cable. Now the operator can fall 12' on their 2' lanyard which gives FF6. This would be a very dangerous fall.

The HD cables are on a slab - not a "vertical cable". Try to FF6 on the cable route and you hit the slab before your tether comes tight. Keep sliding down and you're adding lots of friction to your "fall" = no way you're going to get FF6 or anywhere close. 

DAMN, That could have gone way worse. Glad she is ok. Regardless of the FF, time for a new harness. Happy Xmas in May. 

That's what sucks about a fall caused by slipping feet on vertical and less than vertical. You get no separation from the wall and you scrape your body against it. I got a stiff petzl draw on a sport route clipped to my belay loop one time while making moves.

shredward wrote:
Moving on, no structural damage in the photo, as the triangle is not a structural piece.  Still will not be as comfortable, time for a new harness.  I agree with the people up-thread who said this was a factor 5 or 6 fall, although this is a strange situation to try to calculate the FF.  Hope her back/ everything else is ok!  

I've never considered how a FF could be higher than 2, but this is an interesting example!

I don't get the OP - why does it matter?

Mike wrote:

This is not accurate. For a FF2 the climber falls twice the distance of the length of what is arresting the fall. (Rope, Sling, or Leg Loop)

I guess if you want to be pedantic about it, then sure...by virtue of the fact that she was caught by the leg loop you could call this a FF2+. Didn’t see that the rope wasn’t in the picture, although it theoretically was until her harness was caught so this is kind of a weird scenario, as she wasn’t attached to the arresting piece at the time of the fall.

Matt N wrote: The HD cables are on a slab - not a "vertical cable". Try to FF6 on the cable route and you hit the slab before your tether comes tight. Keep sliding down and you're adding lots of friction to your "fall" = no way you're going to get FF6 or anywhere close. 

Little late to the game sir. Already discussed and I already conceded the point in the very post you quoted. 

Ted Pinson wrote:

I guess if you want to be pedantic about it, then sure...by virtue of the fact that she was caught by the leg loop you could call this a FF2+. Didn’t see that the rope wasn’t in the picture, although it theoretically was until her harness was caught so this is kind of a weird scenario, as she wasn’t attached to the arresting piece at the time of the fall.

If you didn't see the rope wasn't involved you didn't read as far as the OP. That's kinda the point of this entire post. I call that being accurate by the way not pedantic since that implies that there is little gained by my specificity. The rope was not at any point "theoretically" or otherwise involved in arresting the fall.

Matt N wrote: The HD cables are on a slab - not a "vertical cable". Try to FF6 on the cable route and you hit the slab before your tether comes tight. Keep sliding down and you're adding lots of friction to your "fall" = no way you're going to get FF6 or anywhere close. 

You are making the the usual mistake of assuming that FF correlates to force.  FF is just a ratio.  You can still have a high FF but most of the force is absorbed by friction - not material absorption.  You can not ignore friction.

kevin deweese wrote: I wish people (climbers and hikers) understood this when they do the cables on half dome. I hear all the time, "I'm going to wear a harness and clip into the cables so if I fall I'll be 'safe'" not realizing with the cable posts being ~10' apart and a 2' connection between your harness and the cables, a fall from a higher post to the lower post would be a factor 6 fall. 

without rehashing the physics argument why it's not a real FF6, I'm just curious, Kevin, if you or anyone else has heard of a tourist or climber falling while clipped into the cables and getting hurt from the impact of the catch?

Eric Engberg wrote:

You are making the the usual mistake of assuming that FF correlates to force.  FF is just a ratio.  You can still have a high FF but most of the force is absorbed by friction - not material absorption.  You can not ignore friction.

Can we modify it to "Slip Factor" - "SF", then? If you're on a 45 degree slope, its a slip, not a fall. 

There are no whips or even nae naes on 5.easy slab.

amarius wrote: Those quickdraws, they will grab anything :)

Here is what happens when ankle gets hooked on carabiner - Leader Fall – Ankle Snagged By Carabiner

Gag me. That is nasty.

Buck Rio wrote:

That "thin piece of material"  is 1" webbing doubled over. Rated to about 4,000 pounds. She was not in any danger of it failing with just her body weight unless it snagged a sharp edge.

This 

As usual, the over-hyping of a nothing. A non rated part of the harness broke. A peice of elastic.