Accident Report and Analysis after a 30ft trad fall including a broken wire and two ripped pieces.
|
dlm wrote: Oh yeah, you are correct. |
|
It does not appear that you planned ahead while climbing. That is you placed a piece and moved on without thinking ahead. One should place a piece, and then assess what is ahead. Sometimes that might mean doubling up on gear (if placing small gear, definitely double up), taking a bit of a longer rest, moving up to check things out then come back down, or simply realize that ya gotta suck it up. Ultimately the cause of the incident was not trusting inadequately placed gear. But inadequate gear, inexperience, exceeding abilities. Good luck with the recovery. BTW How many places are you posting this incident?? |
|
Sweet mother of Yer Gonna Die ! Spraying about ripping 3 pieces of gear then asking others to follow along and watch? We have reached peak proj. |
|
Marc H wrote: Uh... Emil is a physicist. |
|
You guys are talking about the wrong shit. Hey OP, you caught this on yer GoPro right? Let's see the footage. |
|
I enjoyed the recent discussion on the Runout: climbers on instagram should be encouraged to read what they’ve written out loud to a group of peers before posting. #sprayon #yourgonnadie |
|
If you want a non-physics heuristic for judging how strong gear might need to be to be, check the open-gate/crossload rating of your carabiners, usually in the 7 to 9 kN range. This rating used to be a minimum of 6 kN, but climbers persisted in breaking carabiners in these configurations. When the minimum open-gate/crossloading rating was raised to 7 kN, the number of such incidents was reduced remarkably, though there are still incidents where higher loads are generated during climber arrest. The ratings of the Peenuts are in the 4 to 5 kN range; as noted above, such a rating doesn't include the loss of strength that happens when the wires are loaded over rock edges/nubbins; thus the strength of the chocks is well below the forces generated during a run-of-the-mill fall arrest. For a detailed analysis of how strong your climbing gear needs to be: http://web.mit.edu/sp255/www/reference_vault/McMillan_how_strong.pdf Summarized as: "Even if used correctly, and with a dynamic belay in use, it cannot be relied upon to withstand typical forces generated in a fall. Wherever possible, it should be backed up with a device of similar strength, in such a way as to share the load." |
|
greg miller wrote: If that doesn't attract the likes perhaps this will: |
|
I’m gonna pour some gasoline on this whole thing.
I have no problem with R rated routes. I’ve done many. It’s a good challenge when you’re feeling totally confident at a certain level. Same with PG13. All good fun when you have a plan for it. But a PG13 or R route with 4 friggen bolts, forcing an arbitrary low-pro section, well below the “3 bomber pieces between the leader and hospital” level. Give me a damn break. This entire route sounds like a bullshit ego trip from a first ascensionist. Someone should go chop the whole thing or bolt it. |
|
However, if the spray pic Burchy posted above is of the OP on the route in question, it’s possible that he’s just really really bad at all things trad and should just stop. |
|
Adam Burch wrote: If it worked in the 1700’s, why not now? Am I missing something about that crack? Nothing micro about it. Would take any number of full size strong pro. Tell me that’s just a pic of him being “rad” and not actually the route he meatbombed. |
|
Trying to reconcile some conflicting internal opinions. On the one hand, social media content or presentational material, call it what you will, is easy to bag on, and sometimes freakin hilarious. Even more when said social media content feels inaccurate, not authentic, cringey, or like someone is co opting something they don’t know much about, positioning themselves as an authority figure on a subject, etc. That seemed to be entirely the case with the dude that was setting off pink smoke canisters in mammoth. Forget his name. the one yolo free soloing with a harness on, that had shiny new draws clipped to it, with the ground cropped out of the photos. Some of the most hilarious MP posts I’ve ever seen were people ripping on him. There may be some shades of that here, in terms of some social media messaging that may feel cringey to some. That said, obviously Kyle climbs a bit more, and has quite a bit more climbing experience, than the pink smoke canister Canadian bodybuilder dude. He acknowledged that he got in over his head, seems to be trying to learn the lessons, and he’s mega stoked to heal up and get back to climbing. I think those are things a lot of us can relate to as climbers. Maybe this is just a case where because of social media, it’s easy to read some of these posts as lacking self awareness or humility? I do know when I saw Adam’s first social media sleuthing post I lol’d. Maybe in the current landscape, with this type of content, we should be aware of the don’t hate the player, hate the game saying. When people are presenting an online version of themselves, some kind of hustle, for whatever end goal, it is what it is, and cut them some slack. Maybe not. I don’t know. I do know that no matter how much or how little I improve at rock climbing, I somewhat regularly can still feel like a poser. maybe thats another factor that makes these narrative pieces compelling to me. Or something that may make me more inclined to have some empathy for a person that got in over their head and had a bad day. If Kyle B was a few hundred pitches less experienced, wanting to argue, and on a bunch of pain meds, we might have ourselves a Kyle Walker situation. This is clearly a different Kyle scenario. So i guess I’m going to wish Kyle a speedy recovery, and appreciate his stoke to get back on the horse, but will also laugh at the older social media posts. also this: |
|
Video or it didn't happen |
|
I was surprised at blowing a 5kn piece but I suppose if it's been badly cleaned, that could bring it down substantially and with a heavier climber it makes sense. I certainly wouldn't trust 5kn for much more than a slump and would be 'on my best behaviour' above it. I'd also be looking for more immediately and considering a downclimb. Knowing that rock and placements in new climbing areas is also suspicious, I'd want big pieces to compensate for granite weathering in cracks (see link below). |
|
It really shouldn't be much of a surprise that all three pieces blew. My best guess from the description is that the spacing of the pro was something like this, going in order from the belay up:
The OP says he took a 30' fall and ended up 15' below his belayer, i.e., it was basically a factor-2 fall from the point of view of the bolt at the bottom of the climb. This wikipedia article has an analysis of the dynamic forces in a fall, neglecting friction. It derives a formula that is implemented in this calculator. As pointed out by Martin le Roux, this equation actually gives the maximum tension in the rope, and the force on the top piece (ignoring friction) is roughly double that, so I edited this post to include that factor of 2. Putting in 91 kg for the weight (based on the OP's estimate that body weight plus gear was at least 200 lb), here's what I get for the fall factor and force on each piece (from the top down, in the order that they failed).
These are just estimates, and they don't take into account friction, possible dynamic belaying, the fact that he probably dissipated some kinetic energy each time a piece popped, rock quality, wires running over rock edges, or quality of placements. But basically every piece he placed was being used Kyle, best wishes for a speedy and complete recovery. |
|
Marc H wrote: If your belayer applies zero tension to the rope, then the force on the piece of gear you are hanging on will also be zero. Guess what happens then. Zip!! A simple explanation would be in order for a roped climber to hang on gear, the belayer needs to hang on the gear as well. Hence, nearly double the weight of the climber. |
|
Ben Crowell wrote: You may want to rethink the factor 2 fall. 1. The bolt was certainly above the belayer making a factor 2 impossible. 2. The climber hit the ground well before the bolt caught him as he was bouncing down the hill. |
|
Greg D wrote: That was an irrelevant aside that had nothing to do with the analysis. The point of the analysis is the second table, which lists separate fall factors and forces for each piece. The bolt is the pro that *didn't* fail. |
|
Ben Crowell wrote: Your conclusion makes sense, but there are a couple of problems with your analysis. 1. The Wexler equation (the one quoted in the Wikipedia article) is a model of the impact force on the rope. The peak load on the top piece is roughly double this. 2. More seriously, the Wexler equation is a highly simplified model with limited real-world applicability. This has been discussed many times over the years in these forums and elsewhere by the likes of Richard Goldstone and Jim Titt. See for example https://www.mountainproject.com/forum/topic/111950094/lead-climbing-fall-impact-force-and-fall-factor. Here are some quotes from Jim Titt:
|
|
I don't use DMM nuts, so I wasn't able to easily visualize the size of the gear we were talking about. Based on the force ratings, it looks like these nuts were similar to something around a BD #2-3: For small cams, I use Metolius TCUs. The size that has the same 8 kN rating as the OP's cam is the Metolius #1 (blue): None of these are pieces that I would want to take a lead fall on with any significant fall factor. If you go down one size, you're in the range where the manufacturer tells you they're only for aid climbing and body-weight placements. |