RW and Zigzag

[Dilz]

Tired the zig zag and wrench set up today - it works rather nice.

[Dave J]

This is how I'm running my zig zag at the moment

 

Sent from my E6853 using Arbtalk mobile app

[TheHungrySquirrel]

Been using mine like this for a while now, real nice and smooth

[Mark Bolam]

Will is there not a risk of the RW flopping down onto onto your ZZ and pressing the 'descent immediately' button for you?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Arbtalk

[TheHungrySquirrel]

Not had that so far Mark. Sometimes have to adjust the wrench before sitting back on it. Still playing around with different sling lengths but may try my long stiff tether and a bolt or shackle

[von harrington]

I would think you have a risk when advancing as you want RW down to be smooth. Like that you can switch to double easy, mine as same set up as mr bolam

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Arbtalk

[von harrington]

Obviously once up and you check it's sitting right it be fine

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Arbtalk

[kevin bingham]

Will is there not a risk of the RW flopping down onto onto your ZZ and pressing the 'descent immediately' button for you?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Arbtalk

 

the wrench would have to weigh several pounds for that to be an issue I beleive.

[Mark Bolam]

Even if your 4" stiffy was too floppy?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Arbtalk

[Loler UK]

( I think this is probably Petzl v ISC politics more than anything ),

 

Politics Is certainly not really the reason for this. When petzel release warnings/ statements about configuration/ application it's not some marketing ploy and they also go to great ends to word them in a fastidious manor.

 

As well as it may appear to function allot of people that use this setup repeatably load the setup such that the ZZ takes 100% (/nigh on) of the load and this could have serious consequences for the device, it's longevity and safety of the user.

 

In arb most climbers are frequently exposing their systems in a 'fall arrest' scenario, as an industry we haven't really faced up to this fact yet. Many of our systems can withstand fall arrest forces and (many/ some) may even preform relatively well in this situation and (I beleive) its due to this we see very few injuries/ accidents where this 'incorrect application of equipment' is a significant factor.

 

Some of the recent additions of arb climbing gear although developed to WP and ascender/ descender standards will have been developed with this exposure in mind, some have (by chance) covered this base and some won't have at all.

 

Does anyone on here know how well the pictured systems would preform if they were subjected to these 'highly possible' scenarios? From a mechanical performance perspective I'd guess that some of these pictured config's will perform much better than others.

 

Lolering as many firms kit as I do i get to see & hear quite allot of 'anecdotal' accident reports of accidents/ near misses which may well have gone unreported and un-publicised, sometimes it's due to 'experimental' configurations like this.

 

I'm not necessarily saying don't climb on these systems just be sure you're making informed decisions and are happy to accept the potential consequences (in this instance potential irreparable equipment damage not covered by warranty or even a fall) Also consider the guys on site and how that might effect them, are they happy to whiteness and be involved in these consequences?

 

Trailing/ developing gear for/with major manufacturers you can be sure/ see that they've done serious amounts of testing before putting safet critical gear out to be field tested. Furthermore you typically have a written contract which may include insurance. The contract may also carry warnings about ensuring you are permitted to use such 'prototype' equipment within your workplace and go on to further details regarding people you work with to sign non-disclosure/ agree not to take photos etc.

 

Just be sure you're happy with the potential consequences, anyone can whap something together and witness that it 'holds/ functions'. To know what it's limits are or for how long it will function is not always know, quite often disregarded but it's probably fair to say it can never be 'known', certainly not without extensive field tests. Its true that not everything can be done in a lab/ on a test bench but IMO its best to start off with the mechanics & physics & on to labs/ test benches before handing it over for 'animal' testing by us arborists