|
Syd
Jun 4, 2013, 6:08 AM
Post #51 of 66
(8886 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 25, 2012
Posts: 300
|
Petzl from China:
http://www.karstworlds.com/2011/02/attention-petzl-warns-for-fake-chinese.html
|
|
|
|
|
lena_chita
Moderator
Jun 4, 2013, 10:57 AM
Post #52 of 66
(8865 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 27, 2006
Posts: 6087
|
Syd wrote: Petzl from China: http://www.karstworlds.com/2011/02/attention-petzl-warns-for-fake-chinese.html
None of the fake Petzl items in your link are spirits. It is possible that the fake versions exist, but in this case-- very unlikely.
I cannot tell you right now where the gear was purchased from, but knowing my friend, I am very sure it was from a reputable source here in the states.
Besides, don't you think that when PETZL people got the photos, and then the biner, they wouldn't tell right away if this was the fake one?
At the moment there is no need for a defective 'biner explanation. The 'biner was loaded in a way it was not meant to be loaded. It doesn't have much strength when loaded in this way, so it broke.
|
|
|
|
|
Syd
Jun 4, 2013, 12:40 PM
Post #53 of 66
(8846 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 25, 2012
Posts: 300
|
lena_chita wrote: Syd wrote: Petzl from China: http://www.karstworlds.com/2011/02/attention-petzl-warns-for-fake-chinese.html None of the fake Petzl items in your link are spirits. It is possible that the fake versions exist, but in this case-- very unlikely. I cannot tell you right now where the gear was purchased from, but knowing my friend, I am very sure it was from a reputable source here in the states. Besides, don't you think that when PETZL people got the photos, and then the biner, they wouldn't tell right away if this was the fake one? At the moment there is no need for a defective 'biner explanation. The 'biner was loaded in a way it was not meant to be loaded. It doesn't have much strength when loaded in this way, so it broke.
Lena, Once again, one simple question ... IS IT "CE" or "C E" !!! ???
|
|
|
|
|
redlude97
Jun 4, 2013, 2:45 PM
Post #54 of 66
(8829 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2008
Posts: 990
|
Syd wrote: lena_chita wrote: Syd wrote: Petzl from China: http://www.karstworlds.com/2011/02/attention-petzl-warns-for-fake-chinese.html None of the fake Petzl items in your link are spirits. It is possible that the fake versions exist, but in this case-- very unlikely. I cannot tell you right now where the gear was purchased from, but knowing my friend, I am very sure it was from a reputable source here in the states. Besides, don't you think that when PETZL people got the photos, and then the biner, they wouldn't tell right away if this was the fake one? At the moment there is no need for a defective 'biner explanation. The 'biner was loaded in a way it was not meant to be loaded. It doesn't have much strength when loaded in this way, so it broke. Lena, Once again, one simple question ... IS IT "CE" or "C E" !!! ???
|
|
|
|
|
JimTitt
Jun 4, 2013, 3:31 PM
Post #55 of 66
(8817 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 7, 2008
Posts: 1002
|
Syd wrote: lena_chita wrote: Syd wrote: Petzl from China: http://www.karstworlds.com/2011/02/attention-petzl-warns-for-fake-chinese.html None of the fake Petzl items in your link are spirits. It is possible that the fake versions exist, but in this case-- very unlikely. I cannot tell you right now where the gear was purchased from, but knowing my friend, I am very sure it was from a reputable source here in the states. Besides, don't you think that when PETZL people got the photos, and then the biner, they wouldn't tell right away if this was the fake one? At the moment there is no need for a defective 'biner explanation. The 'biner was loaded in a way it was not meant to be loaded. It doesn't have much strength when loaded in this way, so it broke. Lena, Once again, one simple question ... IS IT "CE" or "C E" !!! ???
I wouldn´t get too wound up over the issue, the marks on plenty of other products don´t conform to the logo requirements from the EU either. And since forging either a conforming on non-conforming mark is equally as easy.....
|
|
|
|
|
lena_chita
Moderator
Jun 4, 2013, 7:38 PM
Post #56 of 66
(8778 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 27, 2006
Posts: 6087
|
Syd wrote: lena_chita wrote: Syd wrote: Petzl from China: http://www.karstworlds.com/2011/02/attention-petzl-warns-for-fake-chinese.html None of the fake Petzl items in your link are spirits. It is possible that the fake versions exist, but in this case-- very unlikely. I cannot tell you right now where the gear was purchased from, but knowing my friend, I am very sure it was from a reputable source here in the states. Besides, don't you think that when PETZL people got the photos, and then the biner, they wouldn't tell right away if this was the fake one? At the moment there is no need for a defective 'biner explanation. The 'biner was loaded in a way it was not meant to be loaded. It doesn't have much strength when loaded in this way, so it broke. Lena, Once again, one simple question ... IS IT "CE" or "C E" !!! ???
Syd, I do not have the 'biner anymore, so I can look at the same photo as you see.
BUT...
PETZL is not calling this biner counterfeit, there haven't been counterfeit spirits reported, as far as I know, and the gear was bought from a reputable source.
So, while your concern is theoretically valid, it is probably misplaced in this case.
|
|
|
|
|
Syd
Jun 4, 2013, 11:50 PM
Post #57 of 66
(8738 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 25, 2012
Posts: 300
|
Thanks Lena. If you zoom in on your photo to look at the CE logo, you can see it is quite different to others that are CE certified such as:
http://static.shop033.com/resources/4E/5966/resized/38/15016504_200x200.jpg
CE certification is compulsory certification to enter the European Union.
http://www.anodizings.com/about-us/certifications/
I assume that either:
a) Petzl made an error in their marking or
b) If it is not counterfeit, Petzl had the biner made in China and the label really is "China Export". If it was made in China, quality could be suspect.
... anyone's guess ...
|
|
|
|
|
gosharks
Jun 5, 2013, 12:36 AM
Post #58 of 66
(8735 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 7, 2004
Posts: 268
|
Syd wrote: Thanks Lena. If you zoom in on your photo to look at the CE logo, you can see it is quite different to others that are CE certified such as: http://static.shop033.com/resources/4E/5966/resized/38/15016504_200x200.jpg CE certification is compulsory certification to enter the European Union. http://www.anodizings.com/about-us/certifications/ I assume that either: a) Petzl made an error in their marking or b) If it is not counterfeit, Petzl had the biner made in China and the label really is "China Export". If it was made in China, quality could be suspect. ... anyone's guess ...
|
|
|
|
|
JimTitt
Jun 5, 2013, 6:02 AM
Post #59 of 66
(8694 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 7, 2008
Posts: 1002
|
Like I said, there are plentyof products out there where the CE symbol is not as proscribed, the current directive dates from 2008 and before the rules were different, some countries also used the EG mark (the German language equivelent) but this was fairly rare. My Salewa karabiners are also non-conforming.
The EU think the "China Export" smbol is an urban myth, particularly prevalent in Italy for some reason and investigated the matter a few years ago.
Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission:-
The Commission is aware that there exists the misconception attributing CE marking the meaning ‘Chinese export’. The Commission is not aware of the existence of a ‘China export mark’ but considers that the mark the Honourable Member refers to constitute the CE marking as foreseen in the European legislation without, however, respecting the dimensions and proportions prescribed therein.
The Commission is aware that CE marking, like any other mark, is misused, e.g. CE marking is affixed to products which do not fulfil the requirements and conditions for its affixing or it is affixed to products for which the affixing is not foreseen. There are also cases where, whilst the product is in compliance with the applicable requirements the CE marking itself does not respect the formal requirements, namely the form of the CE marking or the dimensions and proportions prescribed in the legislation......
(This post was edited by JimTitt on Jun 5, 2013, 8:18 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
ClimbClimb
Jun 15, 2013, 1:35 AM
Post #60 of 66
(8511 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 5, 2009
Posts: 389
|
jt512 wrote: No deep insights, I'm afraid. I'll double the draw on a critical bolt, such as when the failure of a carabiner would result in a long fall to the ground, and I'm unsure whether I'm going to pull off the moves before the next bolt. I'll also double a draw when, no matter how I orient the draw, it looks like a rock feature could open the gate of either the top or bottom biner.
Happy to hear you say that. I do that sometimes, and get funny looks -- in part because I don't have very good explanations. Possible I do it when it's unnecessary, but at least it's nice I'm not alone.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Jun 15, 2013, 2:14 AM
Post #61 of 66
(8506 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
ClimbClimb wrote: jt512 wrote: No deep insights, I'm afraid. I'll double the draw on a critical bolt, such as when the failure of a carabiner would result in a long fall to the ground, and I'm unsure whether I'm going to pull off the moves before the next bolt. I'll also double a draw when, no matter how I orient the draw, it looks like a rock feature could open the gate of either the top or bottom biner. Happy to hear you say that. I do that sometimes, and get funny looks -- in part because I don't have very good explanations. Possible I do it when it's unnecessary, but at least it's nice I'm not alone.
I get some funny looks, too, or someone will ask me why I'm doing it. It strikes me as completely bizarre that climbers will blindly trust a single non-locking biner in a critical situation to the point that they are completely dumbfounded when they see someone doubling one up.
|
|
|
|
|
dindolino32
Jul 7, 2013, 12:21 AM
Post #62 of 66
(8311 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 3, 2008
Posts: 155
|
I read somewhere to not have the gates facing opposite directions. Couldn't find it, but I think this may have enabled the biner to be loaded closer to the nose due to the obtuse angle compared to the long axis of the biner. With a fall, the steel bolt could bite into the softer aluminum biner. This would allow the biner to be loaded on the nose. I believe that seems more likely than the "twisting/kicked" theory.
Either way, I always have my draws facing the same direction.
Glad you are alright though! Must have been scary!
|
|
|
|
|
distantThunder
Jul 23, 2013, 2:20 AM
Post #63 of 66
(8119 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 4, 2012
Posts: 43
|
yo.
first - very glad that you are unhurt and able to tell your story here.
next - I'm an "old fart". I did a LOT of climbing many years ago. Nowadays I just climb easier routes and totally for fun. I'm also an engineer by profession ... analysis of stress & strain, fractures, and material behavior is what I do for a living. but I'm not here to give you, or Petzl, a hard time.
looking quickly at how you matched up the failure - looks like you are on the right track.
a). How did the gate on the biner pop open? Pretty clearly - that's not a good thing. I guess somehow the rope must have snagged it open. That's very uncommon. but if it does happen and the biner flips (like you showed), then definitely the strength is much lower than normal ratings.
b) Besides your story, there's another incident in a recent Rock and Ice where two biners failed. The failure location is very similar to yours. But those climbers had used an "extended draw" technique where the webbing was looped multiple times on the biner. You didn't do that.
c) In the old days - I honestly cannot think of any time that I heard of a biner breaking in the way that you showed. it just flat out NEVER happened. really. in those days the biners tended to be more rounded and a little narrower than today. and I'm guessing the metal alloy was more ductile as well. who knows - maybe the springs that held the gates were also stiffer. but for whatever reason we just never saw incidents like the one you experienced. this tells me that something needs to be investigated and changed - the modern carabiners are moving towards designs that make them more vulnerable to failure. it is possible that because sport climbing was very young (or nonexistent) when I was a young guy that the biners were loaded differently ... maybe. but we still saw no biner failures like that during lead falls.
two things were almost complete certainties in the good old days - your biners would never break and neither would your 11 mm rope (so long as it didn't go over a sharp edge). The times they are a changin' - I guess. :-)
talk to me if you want.
and let us know what Petzl says.
good luck,
dT
[distantThunder]
(This post was edited by distantThunder on Jul 23, 2013, 2:37 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
bigjonnyc
Jul 23, 2013, 5:51 PM
Post #64 of 66
(8046 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 17, 2004
Posts: 369
|
distantThunder wrote: ...many years ago.... c) In the old days - I honestly cannot think of any time that I heard of a biner breaking in the way that you showed. it just flat out NEVER happened.
Many years ago there were way fewer climbers, and way fewer huge sport climbing destinations such as the Red. As such there were less bolts for people to fall on. I also imagine the mentality back then was much more along the lines of avoiding falls at all costs, unlike today where we fall over and over working routes at or above our ability. Lastly, I'm sure similar failures occurred back then, though you may have forgotten the internet didn't exist at the time, making it much less likely that you'd have heard about it. Just my $0.02.
|
|
|
|
|
robdotcalm
Jul 23, 2013, 8:01 PM
Post #65 of 66
(8024 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 31, 2002
Posts: 1027
|
Yes, things did happen in the old days but with fewer climbers and no internet, there was less communication. The only time you heard about something was when it happened to a well-known climber.
Incidents from the past: Some 30 + years ago, a friend of mine took an ordinary fall onto an oval carabiner. It broke. In 1984, I was leading on a new 11 mm rope, which had never taken a fall or been rappelled on. I climbed a crack system which led to a 15 foot slab traverse into a chimney. When I got to the chimney, the rope didn’t pull easily so I tugged it. About 10 feet from my tie-in, it was cut half way through! The rope was sent back to the manufacturer. After thoroughly examining the rope, they could find nothing wrong with it (and gave me a new rope).
Rob.calm
P.S. A year later, I reclimbed the route (Switch Cracks in Lumpy Ridge) and could find nothing on it that would cut a rope. Two summers ago, I climbed the route again and saw a razor sharp quartzite crystal sticking out of the rock near the traverse. That might have been the cause of the cut.
|
|
|
|
|
distantThunder
Jul 24, 2013, 3:39 AM
Post #66 of 66
(7982 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 4, 2012
Posts: 43
|
rob and bigjonny - yeah. you make a good point. in the old days I got a lot of my information thru the grapevine. it was common for climbers at that time to pass on descriptions of mishaps and gear problems by word of mouth. so I really only heard about stuff that happened on the West Coast, and primarily in California. I don't recall any stories about broken biners back then - but by no means did I hear everything.
lena - I realized I said one thing wrong to you. I don't think the rope was directly responsible for flipping open the gate of the top biner. that seems very unlikely when i think about it. i think it's more likely that there was some sort of "dynamic event" where the quick draw was turned around, so the lower biner was raised upwards (also flipping the top biner). The problem is that our understanding of these fast-motion incidents is poor - it would take careful research to capture them on video. i'm not sure that anyone has gone that deeply into the subject.
i do hope that companies like Petzl will continue to work on these sorts of concerns. since there are now (at least) 3 broken biners out there (not sure they are all Petzl biners), it points to a need to improve carabiner designs some more. hopefully the company will not be scared by legal implications - esp. since no-one has been hurt in the most recent incidents. it's better to work constructively, do more research, and come up with a better biner design.
BTW, I checked back in Rock & Ice. The other broken biners came from Mammut. So this is not a specific issue tied to one company's production of hardware. It looks more like a question of how they are used, and maybe how much repetitive loading biners get in sport climbing. The incident with the Mammut biners happened on the Leaning Tower in Yosemite. Two biners broke in a row, causing the leader to plunge 50-60 feet if I remember right - but he was alright. Just surprised and shaken up. The broken biners in that situation were attached to the webbing using multiple loops (extended draw). Biner manufacturers need to do some extra research, I'd say :-)
cheers,
dT
(This post was edited by distantThunder on Jul 24, 2013, 2:04 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
