Busted Grivel Ice Tool Hammers...happen to anyone else?

Hammers in the new 'Vario' lineup, on North Machines...one was the big hammer, one the mini.  A bit of climbing at home then 2 routes in Alaska this spring and both are toast.  They didn't see an unreasonable amount of pins, but definitely some.  Not near as much as previous tools I've had who's hammers are still intact.  The little hammer just kind of chipped away, while the big hammer totally snapped at the connection point.

Curious is anyone else has had this issue.  I've had zero luck getting anyone at Givel US or Liberty Mountain to reply to emails...

By the looks of the tools overall you have beat the shit out of the rock. I feel sorry for the rock and your tools. They deserve better. Not a warranty issue but a user issue.

I find this failure somewhat troubling.  It looks like a problem with the design or manufacturing process, fractures like that make me concerned that the material is too hard (not ductile enough), or heat affected from the welding process.  

The whole point of a hammer is to hit stuff, so blaming you for this failure because you used them to hit stuff seems weird; I suppose I wouldn't expect anything less from cranky old Allen though.  The hammers on your tools should be acceptable to use for hammering, bringing a 3rd hammer up a big Alaskan route isn't really a reasonable option.

I would be curious to know if this has happened to anyone else.  I have only had my North Machines for a little while and haven't pounded too many pins or pickets with them yet, so mine haven't had any issues but also haven't really been tested.  I would not be psyched if the hammers broke off on a committing route because I used them to hit stuff.

Kyle Tarry wrote:

On the common moderate-to-hard "trade routes" (Cassin, Ham and Eggs, Harvard Route, Slovak, 11,300, etc.), I don't think carrying a 3rd hammer tool is common practice. 

No one carries a 3rd hammer on these routes as pins are not needed, except for perhaps on the Slovak.

Thanks to those...with the helpful comments at least!  To Kyle...yes I fear this hammer design is junk, heads up.  Grivel's metalwork is awesome and the way these connect is very slick, but the T-shape stem is not very strong.  Mostly disappointed I've gotten zero response from Grivel USA or Liberty.

I've hammered way more iron than these tools ever saw with past Nomic, Sum'Tec, Cassin X-Alp, and new BD reactors...all have more solid hammer designs and all have been fine. These Grivel's died quick.  Yes pounding pins with curved/offset tools is awkward (Nomic & Reactor a lot more so than North Machine) but I mean c'mon it gets done all the time.  And yes a 3rd tool is awesome when it makes sense to bring.  Feels great on the couch though.

And ya they look like crap because I kept using them after hammers broke...which depending on the tool included the second half of the Bibler-Klewin and all of the Denali Diamond.  I don't have a pitch-count for you but with even occasional pin use...ouch.

But really, has anyone had success contacting Grivel with a call to Italy? 

Awhile back I didn’t have any luck contacting grivel through any avenues (email, liberty mt, etc. ) but after posting on here someone from grivel commented and gave me contact info. Let me see if I can dig it up 

I think there’s a heavy weight hammer and an minimalist hammer for the new pick design. I still have old picks laying around so idk which one you have but perhaps you could try the beefier version if you have the light.

JustinF @ libertymountain.com

Nick Mwrote:

And ya they look like crap because I kept using them after hammers broke...which depending on the tool included the second half of the Bibler-Klewin and all of the Denali Diamond.  I don't have a pitch-count for you but with even occasional pin use...ouch.

Nick, maybe next time you break a hammer on the Denali Diamond you can call up the Mountain Project experts and ask them what you should do, since they are going to have such "helpful" advice for you when you get home.   

Let us know if you hear anything from Grivel or Liberty.  I'm glad to be aware of the issue and may start brainstorming some improvement for my personal tools.  I'll post up if I can come up with anything.

Thanks Jake!  Just emailed your Liberty contact, will see what we get.

Kyle, yes definitely need the 1-800-MP hotline up there.

And A V, no, old generation hammers won't work, totally different interface.  I wish.

you can get the older design picks and put the old style hammers on there. 

I also bring a real hammer when I'm going to be placing pitons. 

Bonus: I like the way my tools swing better without the hammers. 

Realize this is somewhat old now, but I had a relatively new grivel carabiner that had metal flake come off randomly. They reached out to me via MP, and I ended up shipping it to Italy. They emailed me that they received it but never followed up / replaced it. Happy to share their email if you want

t.farrellwrote:

Realize this is somewhat old now, but I had a relatively new grivel carabiner that had metal flake come off randomly. They reached out to me via MP, and I ended up shipping it to Italy. They emailed me that they received it but never followed up / replaced it. Happy to share their email if you want

Sorry to hear that you did not get a follow-up communication from Grivel or the UIAA about the suspected carabiner defect. Subsequent to my initial reporting, the UIAA did not notify me with results of an investigation.   mountainproject.com/forum/t…

Kyle Tarrywrote:

Let us know if you hear anything from Grivel or Liberty.  I'm glad to be aware of the issue and may start brainstorming some improvement for my personal tools.  I'll post up if I can come up with anything.

FYI, worked a bit on a better hammer design for these tools.  I submitted them for a quote through a web-based CNC machining service, and the prices were outrageous, at ~$195 each (for quantity 4).  There might be a lower cost procurement option, but for now I'm not pursuing this further, sadly.  I knew this wouldn't be cheap but I was a bit let down by that cost.  If someone has a machine shop and wants to make a few of these, that would be pretty cool...

Another option that might be viable would be to have the Grivel hammers heat-treated, under the assumption that there is a hardness/toughness issue due to the welding (which seems likely, given Nick's photos of where his hammers failed).  However, that's a bit of a can of worms too, since you'd need to figure out the material they are made from and then design an appropriate heat treatment regimen for them, and find a shop to do it for you.  All surmountable issues, but definitely some effort.  I could help with this if enough people want to go down that road, but I'm not going to bother just for myself.

All this talk about a 3rd hammer is a complete tangent of little value, in my opinion.  The hammers bolted to the back of your tools need to work and not break in the field, full stop.  I've successfully hammered hundreds of pins using Matrix Techs and North Machines, and Nick clearly has too, so I'm pretty unmotivated to buy a separate hammer (and apparently also a pair of Dark Machines, which are required to hit the weight numbers on the previous page, which I don't want to use on an alpine route anyway) and carry it on every single route where I bring pins.  I just want a hammer on my ice tool that I can trust.

I would suggest making the hammer sit flush against the head, like the Petzl Marteu / Mini Marteau.  It may also bring the machining cost down, as there would be less material to be removed by milling.

Karl Henizewrote:

IMO, if you are going to design a hammer for Grivel tools, I would suggest making the hammer sit flush against the head, like the Petzl Mini Martau.  It may also bring the machining cost down, as there would be less material to be removed by milling.

the cost of milling is sadly less the amount of processes executed and more the set-up time, it's for this reason milling is economical at scale but extremely expensive for one off pieces.

If you can find somewhere that does metal 3D printing and have it made with the right process it could be economical as the main costs (i think) from 3D printing is time and materials. Small piece means both are minimised.

I imagine laser sintering would be the way to go but I don't know enough about 3D printing metal to say for sure.

Karl Henizewrote:

I would suggest making the hammer sit flush against the head, like the Petzl Marteu / Mini Marteau.  It may also bring the machining cost down, as there would be less material to be removed by milling.

The hammer is nearly flush with the back of the head on the current design.  Being fully flush prevents a generous radius between the head and the attachment point, so a little bit of space there may be very valuable.  Changing this slightly will have very little impact on cost.

that guy named seb wrote:

If you can find somewhere that does metal 3D printing and have it made with the right process it could be economical as the main costs (i think) from 3D printing is time and materials. Small piece means both are minimised.

The physical properties of metal 3D printing are worse for a component exposed to impact such as this.

I imagine laser sintering would be the way to go but I don't know enough about 3D printing metal to say for sure.

Laser sintered is more expensive per part than machining.

Kyle Tarrywrote:

The hammer is nearly flush with the back of the head on the current design.  Being fully flush prevents a generous radius between the head and the attachment point, so a little bit of space there may be very valuable.  Changing this slightly will have very little impact on cost.

The physical properties of metal 3D printing are far worse for a component exposed to impact such as this.

Laser sintered is more expensive per part than machining, and the properties would be far worse.

Making the hammer flush with the back of the head prevents bending and the resulting tensile stresses that cause cracks to propagate.  

The main reason why the recent Grivel and Cassin hammers have been breaking is because they can bend (because there is no support from the head).  There is large stress concentration at the fillet, but that wouldn’t matter if the hammer was supported by the head, like the Mini-Marteau.  If you want to extend the hammer away from the head, the welded design of the Petzl Gully would work, without the need for expensive milling.  

Even if you designed the “perfect” hammer for North Machines, it would still be worse for placing pitons than strippable ice tools without a curved handle (Quark, Sum’Tec, Akila, Viper, Venom, etc.).   

I own North Machines, Quarks, and a Gully.  If I know I am going to be using my ice tools for hammering pitons, I always choose Quarks (with the trigrest stripped) or the Gully, over the North Machines.  

Karl Henizewrote:

Making the hammer flush with the back of the head prevents bending and the resulting tensile stresses that cause cracks to propagate.  

You'd need to do a tolerance study of the head of the ice axe, the mounting hole size and location, the vario blades, and the hammers, to see how assemblies at various points in the allowable tolerance range will fit together.  It's very unlikely that an assembly with this many parts can be guaranteed to always fit together with the hammer and the back of the head flush.  The back of the head is also drafted and has a variety of complex geometry, which makes matching that with the hammer for load sharing even harder.

The main reason why the recent Grivel and Cassin hammers have been breaking is because they can bend (because there is no support from the head).

The older Grivel hammers (Matrix Tech, previous generation of North Machine) don't have breakage problems and they don't have "support from the head" either, which makes this conclusion doubtful.  The current failures are much more likely due to the design and manufacturing of the current hammers, which have large cantilevered wings with an obvious bending stress concentration right at a heat-affected weld zone.

Also, I don't think that the Petzl mini hammers do have perfect reliable contact with the back of the head.  The Cold Thistle mini hammers certainly don't, and they don't break off like the Grivel hammers.

https://www.mountainproject.com/forum/topic/107900974/nomic-set-upadze-hammer

Even if you designed the “perfect” hammer for North Machines, it would still be worse for placing pitons than strippable ice tools without a curved handle (Quark, Sum’Tec, Akila, Viper, Venom, etc.).   

I own North Machines, Quarks, and a Gully.  If I know I am going to be using my ice tools for hammering pitons, I always choose Quarks (with the trigrest stripped) or the Gully over the North Machines.  

Simply designing a more robust hammer would make this problem go away; I don't want or need to buy a completely different set of tools because of this one minor issue.  I only own one set of tools, and I don't have the disposable income nor the inclination to buy a second set just so I can pick a special tool based on how many pitons I'll have to hammer.

The cost of 2 custom hammers is likely going to be comparable to the cost of 2 new ice tools and significantly more than the cost of a single wall hammer.