Believe me, I get it. That's what is so scary about this.

I don't think the groove was actually that bad. I think the only problem was the sharpness of the groove. Worn biners are usually stronger than new ones.

I think everyone undestood that a worn biner may break at a lower force.

I think for many people it is new infromation that a worn biner may cut a rope. That may be rare, but significantly increases the risk of a worn biner (since in many situations, biner is not the single point of failure anyway, while the rope always is).

New data --> new decisionmaking input for future climbing.

What's the big controversy for you here, besides the usual sport-vs-trad "West Side Story"-style nonsense?

The Red River Gorge climbing community does its best to maintain and replace legitimate fixed anchors. That costs money folks. The work at Muir Valley was made possible, in part, by a very generous donation of ClimbTech PermaDraw sets from Hoosier Heights Gym in Bloomington Indiana. Some pictures of other worn gear that has been maintained / replaced @ RRG can be seen at - http://teamsuckclimbing.com/photos.php. The Team Suck site also maintains a page to report bad bolts - http://teamsuckclimbing.com/bolts.php - and to make donations to their bolt rplacement fund - http://teamsuckclimbing.com/donate.php.

It's so you don't have to put them up or take them down. Also, you can bail off the route safely and without sacrificing any gear.

Jay

There is the Bail-Slow option and now the new Red River Rapid Bail.

Never stand in the way of a sport climber's rationalization socalclimber. Its like standing in front of a herd of cows saying, 'no more mooing, ladies!'

DMT

Worn biners are usually stronger than new ones.

Huh?????

What leads you to believe this? Seriously, what? Do you have any data, or anything to support this?

In all my years (22, the last 16 at nukes) of performing inspections of materials, and doing failure analysis, I have never, ever heard this... Worn = Less material = Less strength.

At least one basis for the statement that worn biners are stronger is here, based on unofficial testing.

The linked BD article applies only to coldshuts. The failure mode for an ungrooved cold shut is such that as the tension in the rope increases, the rope slides toward the unanchored end of the shut, applying additional leverage, which causes the shut to bend and open, allowing the rope to slide yet farther toward the end, causing the shut to open farther, etc.

The groove in a worn shut traps the rope and doesn't allow the rope to slide, and hence, doesn't allow the additional leverage and bending.

The failure mode of a closed carabiner is different and a groove most likely serves only to lessen the ultimate breaking strength of the carabiner.

True. However, I suspect that some of us extrapolated from the results to carabiners, especially since they, too, are frequently used at anchors.

The failure mode of a closed carabiner is different and a groove most likely serves only to lessen the ultimate breaking strength of the carabiner.

Of course, BD presents limited data on a single model of carabiner, so we should be careful about drawing hasty conclusions from it or generalizing it to other models of carabiner.

Jay

Ah of course so we should continue to saw through our fixed biners (because people will steal our convenience draws the bastards!), everything is A OK!

DMT

At least one basis for the statement that worn biners are stronger is here, based on unofficial testing. However, here is unofficial testing that is specific to this type of accident.

That is misleading, as the groove serves to keep the rope at the biner's/shut's strongest point, even though it has been weakened.

The biner/shut is NOT stronger, as less metal equals less strength for two pieces of identical design. Period.


Example:

Would you rap off of a bush/tree that was 1" in diameter, strongly rooted, with a small groove worn into it at the base that was opposite the direction of force, if the load (rope) was just a few inches above the base/groove? Hell no!

BUT, if the rope was in the groove, keeping it at the base, it would likely still be hella strong.


Point... The base of the tree/bush is akin to the strongest point in the biner, and even though there is a groove, it is still string enough, BUT NOT AS STRONG as if there were no groove IF the load were applied outside that groove, it would be WEAKER. And where would the biner fail? At the weakest point, where significant metal loss has weakened it (I.e., the groove)

That is misleading, as the groove serves to keep the rope at the biner's/shut's strongest point, even though it has been weakened.

The biner/shut is NOT stronger, as less metal equals less strength for two pieces of identical design. Period.


Example:

Would you rap off of a bush/tree that was 1" in diameter, strongly rooted, with a small groove worn into it at the base that was opposite the direction of force, if the load (rope) was just a few inches above the base/groove? Hell no!

BUT, if the rope was in the groove, keeping it at the base, it would likely still be hella strong.


Point... The base of the tree/bush is akin to the strongest point in the biner, and even though there is a groove, it is still string enough (if the load is applied in the right place), BUT NOT AS STRONG as if there were no groove IF the load were applied outside that groove, it would be WEAKER. And where would the biner fail? At the weakest point, where significant metal loss has weakened it (I.e., the groove)