Why not make a "soft catch" mode for Grigris for potential factor 2 falls?

I was just thinking about this.
A factor two falls puts a much higher shock on the climber and the anchor system than a factor one fall. But a "soft" catch, such as was required before modern climbing ropes were invented, would reduce these forces to something safer. A soft catch is tricky to practice, however, which is why in the pre-modern-rope era there was the saying, "the leader must not fall." But, what if there was a device like a Grigri that had a "soft catch" mode that would gradually (but obviously very quickly) slow the fall, thus reducing peak forces on the anchor to something safe? Ideally this mode could be quickly shut off by flicking a switch in the device after pro is placed above the anchor.

Any thoughts on this?

1/10
Soft catches are overrated in the outdoors unless you are climbing some bad ass overhang route.

Gumby King wrote: 1/10
Soft catches are overrate in the outdoors unless you are climbing some bad ass overhang route.

Is this a troll comment?  

Yeah, people much prefer getting slammed into the wall!  WTF!!!!!  Note to self and everyone else, don't let Gumby King belay you.

Artem V wrote:

Right, because we all know that in less than overhanging terrain the best policy is to spike your climber into next week

Next week doesn't help much, but if someone could spike me into next year, that would be great. I think I have had enough of 2020.

Dave K wrote: To get the precision required to do a soft catch correctly in different circumstances you need a computer. Our brains are that computer. I think that building a purely mechanical device that could perform a soft catch and was also simple and reliable enough to use for everyday belaying would be very challenging. Plus it would probably do the wrong thing most of the time.

Even with our brains computing the forces there isn’t much you can do to soften a FF2 fall when using a Grigri. The OP had the idea that the soft catch feature could be turned off. You are only in  FF2 territory until the first clip is made, then shift into normal belay mode.  I agree it would be a challenge to make the device but the concept is interesting. 

Better to just install autobelays on all outdoor routes and slowly lower everyone when they fall. 

thats what the rope is for. you can also modify your belay geometry to eliminate factor 2 fall

Who is taking factor 2 falls routinely? Who is even taking factor 1 falls routinely? Most lead falls are like factor 0.5 or less, unless you've done something really, really wrong. What you're talking about could only happen in those first few feet between leaving an anchor and placing your first piece on a multipitch. And that's only if the multipitch is actually steep and vertical. The follower should be connected to the anchor with their rope, which will help to absorb the shock. 

I think the answer is similar to the answer to the question “Why aren’t Yates Screamer dogbones more popular?”

The market doesn’t demand a supply.

As a moot/academic discussion, though, I’d be curious to hear your design constraints/requirements/ideas you would suggest for the device, though...

What kind of impact/force reduction is already offered by an ATC, pilot, megajul, gri-gri, cinch, revo, whatever...

Have you considered the impact-reduction provided by dynamic rope stretch in a factor 2 fall? How does that compare to the potential reduction of maximum force you’d be looking to achieve via the device?

Eric Carlos wrote:

Is this a troll comment?  

Yeah, people much prefer getting slammed into the wall!  WTF!!!!!  Note to self and everyone else, don't let Gumby King belay you.

Dear RRG climbers...  The RRG is basically a gym.

Artem V wrote:

Climber falls, and the belayer, a sadist, sits back into their harness as hard they possibly can - just as the climber's weight comes onto the rope.

I'll make this easy for you, Artem. In a less than OVERHANGING fall gravity, not the sadistic belayer, is what "slams" you into the wall. !/  instead of /! where the climber is !. Best bet in any less than overhanging fall is to put the brakes on it ASAP. 

In an overhanging situation where you're run out a bit it's the pendulum of you swinging back into the wall that "spikes" you and where a "soft catch" can be helpful. 

Sounds complex, I'm trying to think of what sort of mechanism could give you a reliable soft catch.  Hmm....  I guess you could have a mechanism that releases the GriGri a little, just like the lever does, when the device is pulled away from the belayer using a spring or something. If the spring is set so it takes, say, a few kN to pull it there you go.  Maybe it could even be a thing you put on a regular GriGri rather than a new device.

Though, I feel like most of the chill trad routes I do have a place to get a bomber "Jesus piece" in coming off the belay, so it's not hard to minimize the chance of a factor two fall.  How many routes out there have belays where you can't really avoid being in a factor two situation?

Andrew Rice wrote:

I'll make this easy for you, Artem. In a less than OVERHANGING fall gravity, not the sadistic belayer, is what "slams" you into the wall. !/  instead of /! where the climber is !. Best bet in any less than overhanging fall is to put the brakes on it ASAP.

In an overhanging situation where you're run out a bit it's the pendulum of you swinging back into the wall that "spikes" you and where a "soft catch" can be helpful. 

I'm seconding this because the original quote has 12 misinformed likes and counting.  Besides that, the "soft catch" proposal for Grigris isn't about spiking the faller, it is about reducing the maximum impact load to the gear and team.  That happens because some fall energy is dissipated by friction when the rope is allowed to run under tension.  

Spiking is a result of penduluming into the wall on a very short fall on overhanging ground.  Lengthening the fall puts the overhanging wall further away and allows the leader to hit with reduced impact as their pendulum crosses the vertical and starts ascending.  On less than vertical ground, the pendulum never crosses the vertical (obviously) so there is no impact reduction, and meanwhile adding length to the fall risks smacking the falling leader into features or ledges.

There are some rare times in trad climbing when it is important to let some rope run.  One such situation involves moves above an overhang with nearby protection.  A leader fall, if stopped too abruptly, can smack the leader's head into the wall just above the lip, the belay should be dropping the leader into space below the overhang so that the leader's head is beneath the lip when they swing in.  Someone usiing an belay plate can let some rope run under tension (we're talking maybe 1/4 second of slip).  The only solution with autolocking devices is to have the necessary slack out in front of the device to begin with.

Artem V wrote:

A good belayer can give you a soft catch by moving with the pull of the rope and will decrease the force on the climber as they fall. 

A bad belayer will sit back and mess you up by increasing the speed of the swing you take into the wall. It blows my mind how many people don't understand what a soft catch is and how to give one.

You can absolutely spike somebody on a vertical wall - since you fall out and then back in. A hard catch will swing you into the wall violently, while a soft catch will absorb most of the speed of a fall before you touch the wall. 

"Right, because we all know that in less than overhanging terrain the best policy is to spike your climber into next week"

Now, I suppose you're correct that 90 degrees is 1 degree LESS THAN OVERHANGING. So, yeah, for all those exactly VERTICAL climbs with no obstacles sticking out of the face you are correct. In most of the real world of climbing, though, "less than overhanging" means "less than vertical."

Don't go soft-catching anyone on slab. Or blocky alpine terrain. Or a 5.9 Royal Robbins classic like The Open Book. You'll break your climber's legs or worse. 

Artem V wrote:

Most of the ledge falls I've seen are belayers giving their climbers hard catches and swinging them straight into a ledge that they would have otherwise fallen past. 

Note above, "ledge they would have otherwise fallen past."

More slack does not equal a soft catch - it's all about the belayer giving a small jump when the rope comes tight.

Note above, "small jump." 

Please de-conflict these two points, Artem. How does a nice little hop (which I agree is a great sport climbing soft catch) let me "fall past" a ledge on, let's say, the 3rd Pillar of Dana?

How about a Munter?

Artem,

This youtube video demonstrates your point pretty well.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_0GGsBgPic4

Even when the climbers tie-in is only .5 m from the vertical point of the pendulum the speed at impact was substantially lower using a soft catch. It also appeared to be lower well before the vertical point of the pendulum, although they don't put numbers on the screen for that.

Soft Catches are stupid, just don't keep people too tight or too loose. They'll be fine.

Alexander Blum wrote: Artem,

This youtube video demonstrates your point pretty well.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_0GGsBgPic4

Even when the climbers tie-in is only .5 m from the vertical point of the pendulum the speed at impact was substantially lower using a soft catch. It also appeared to be lower well before the vertical point of the pendulum, although they don't put numbers on the screen for that.

I think you missed a crucial point. The discussion here has been about "less than overhanging" climbs. Nobody has disputed that a soft catch on overhanging climbs is a nice feature and can keep a climber from swinging back into the wall/rock.

Alexander Blum wrote: Artem,

This youtube video demonstrates your point pretty well.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_0GGsBgPic4

Even when the climbers tie-in is only .5 m from the vertical point of the pendulum the speed at impact was substantially lower using a soft catch. It also appeared to be lower well before the vertical point of the pendulum, although they don't put numbers on the screen for that.

This video also doesn't represent the technique in a soft catch, because the belayer is static, they are just adding slack to the system.  That is not how a soft catch works.

Edit: In later tests, they do a better representation, but only slightly.

No, I didn't miss that point. I looked up the video because I essentially agree with you from a physics perspective, but it doesn't align with my personal experience. The portion of the video where the climber is 0.5 m from the pendulum point models a vertical, not overhanging, route pretty well (IMO).  My ass is often 1.5 feet from the wall when climbing, and if I fall doing something dynamic I would imagine it could end up out even farther than that. The video concludes - through mathematical analysis and empirical modeling - that climber speed as they impact the wall is lower with a soft catch in that situation. The data shown when demonstrating this convinced me that the same would be true on a slightly slabby route.