Loler UK

the puley is strong enogh but the bushes (even the better ones in the newer ISC pulleys) tend to wear out if you use them as a regular anchor pulley, this is not what they are designed for but if you're happy going through them they can perfectly safe for this purpose if used correctly Most agree that placing a karabiner at your anchor can become dangerous, the biner can become danged or rub open on a stem especially if it is out of view, the newer ISC HMS's and the lukes are designed to stop the pulley rotating round avoiding cross loading butvthis can also become an issue with some biners (the isc larger spines were actually designed with this in mind way before the DMM rhino) personally id say that an art link or cocoon is a cheaper option o the long run and a bit safer, the dmm pintos hold up pretty well too, but for me, for a frequently used friction saver its art all the way!

Petzl pantin is the most popular, i was 17st (im now fatter and lighter) and gave it plenty of use 5 days a week, never had any problems, takes a knack to ensure it doesn't involuntarily pop out but i never found this an issue, in fact i like being able to kick it out on purpose at the end of ascents the new camp is supposed be be super nice to use but who knows how long they will last with a big climber, id stick with the T&T petzl until more people have been about on the camp

Trespass: the unjustifiable interference with land which is in the immediate and exclusive possession of another in reality this is typically understood by the courts to mean that IF: you have intention to steal or damage, you steal or damage, you posses a firearm, you don't leave once asked by the 'possessor' or their agent then you are committing trespass. so if you don't damage the tree AT ALL and no-one asks you to leave you're not trespassing there are implications if you're causing danger to others but it should be possible to eliminate this IMO People that wild camp allot tend to advise that the key is to be as low impact as possible, quietly climbing in a tucked away place in neutral color clothes etc is less likely to draw unwanted attention than laughing & shouting to each other climbing a prominent tree in hi-vis clothes, all that said its preferable to get permission from the owner and i typically find this very easy to ascertain.

thanks guys, i'm going to try and put useful bits like this up now & again, to use arbtalk to help inform people again

The mk3 should be available very soon........ Its interesting that you climbed on a mk1 for so long with no crack then one appeared so quick on the mk2, i don't think for one moment that the rubber would increase the force on the link significantly enough to crack it sooner, you're probably just unlucky or lucky in the case of the mk1:blushing: Petzl statement: "• A cracked link presents no additional immediate risk to the user. However, as with any personal protective equipment (PPE), the presence of such a crack requires immediate retirement of the device." for what it costs (nothing) id get it changed asap your first port of call should be teh retailer you bought it from, if this is not possible then send it with a covering letter to: Lyon Equipment Customer Services Units 3 – 7 Tebay Business Park Old Tebay Penrith Cumbria CA10 3SS

I know they updated their web page again on Monday but as mine arrived today i thought id post it here! http://178.237.111.13/files/all/all/communication-zigzag/ZIGZAG-information-031114-EN.pdf new ZZ's have had: • Adjustment of the riveting parameters for the link assembly to eliminate residual tensile stress in the link. • Adjustment of heat treatment parameters for the link to reduce rigidity of the material. • Reinforcement of the small cross section of the affected links. Regardless of weather we have a new ZZ an old ZZ or a hitch/ LJ/ SJ whatever! we should NEVER negate our duties to inspect our gear and to have it examined, climb safe guys, M PS i can feel a rec climb coming on this afternoon!

A couple of weeks ago i examined a zigzag that had the crack similar to the others, it was in such an early stage that it cant be seen by most with the naked eye (i have super eyes) I do use a loupe when examining kit but unless i'm checking known wear/ stress points i tend to only be using it for the thinner friction cords. The ZZ was nearly 7 months old and this was its 1st examination, i have examined older zigzags that have seen much more use, have higher wear on the links but still without the crack the crack was sooooo small that i struggled to take a pic on my BB Q10 which showed the crack at all, 27 attempts later (using the loupe between the phone & the ZZ) i got one. Lyon were spot on a replacement was sent out strait away and i think that their handling of the whole issue has been top notch, keeping everyone well informed throughout the process letting people know that the ZZ will be developed further etc and probably helping to draw peoples attention to the known defect encouraging them to actually DO their daily checks, weekly log's, loler examinations and to pay extra attention to the top link. Even when the new ones arrive don't forget to do your inspections whether your on a hitch ZZ, LJ whatever, climb safe, M I've attached 2 photos from the damaged one, now you see it, now you dont!!???

mine grips on aeris fine, we often put the sj on aeris at the shows with no complaints, runs really smooth, i have at least 6 clients running the sj on aeris too, stumped............... have you used the sj on 13mm rope? even if you used it a bit it might have worn a wider profile in the cam, still i would've thought it'd grip

good point Melodeon! ive seen allot of arbs ruin braided ropes loading them twisted! always run twists off the end of your line before rigging, if joining then install a swivel! standard practice offshore but little known in arb

depending on the application industrial climbers do, but many of our harnesses are also fall arrest (eg tree motion) in fact our harnesses generally cause less injury in a FA situation. climbers with a 2nd back up line may choose to use a dorsal attachment point for their buddy, asap, catch, rocker, whatever to keep their pelvic/ chest mounted descender/ ascenders from becoming tangled. The asap obv' has the advantage that it follows you up AND down freeing up your second hand, the asap is also designed to be used on inclines and will still grab even if you clutch hold of it in a fall unlike other devices climbing with a passive backup such as an asap is perfectly achievable using either a dorsal or a pelvic attachment so long as (in the case of dorsal) an asap lanyard is added. It can prove inconvenient, it is easy to forget that you cant spin around in the same ways we might be able to as the lanyard/ lines can get twisted, it is also necessary to thread the backup line when you drop through crotches where as you can get away not doing so on most normal arb systems. Like kevin i actually find it easier to use 2 positioning devices on lines as opposed to a backup device even if they are anchored close together. When they are positioned apart it gives great stability but on some trees with lots of branches you can spend allot of time re-routing the line but in some trees its a real boon when you dial in! On a recent rigging job i did for the BBC we used 3 srt lines at once to triangulate our position on a tentsile hammok. We had to have major negotiations to convince the beeb H&S man to allow a presenter to climb on a doubled rope without a backup line, we eliminated the risk of panic descent by having intermittent marlin spikes in the tail end of the line (like TCI train) and it was a strait up & strait down with no cutting/ sharps etc. If i started loosing the fight i would have used the ISC alf which can turn a double roped system into 2 points of attachment! if you cut one leg of your line the alf (previously;y functioning as an anchor pulley) grabs hold of the rope, it doesn't matter which one you cut/ release it grabs in both directions in the presence of significant inertia. all that isn't commercial tree work though so a bit of a tangent and maybe not a practical option in the work place a 2nd line is achievable but is more practical in some trees and not in others but is certainly a very valuable practice to be well versed & practiced in so that you can deploy it when it is adventitious/ required a guy had a go with our asap at the arb show after enthusiastically telling us he was going to invent a passive fall arrest device that follows you up AND down, patent it & become rich(he looked pretty disappointing when i picked up an asap and said you" mean like this") once he'd got over the disappointment he found it quite workable

there has been some research into the effect of detergent, dirt and conditioner on ropes both published and in house by manufac's, All bar one (an in house one) that i have read conclude that detergents should not be used to wash ropes even if they found little strength/ performance loss as it is easily avoided and detergents chemical content vary and change all the time. Conditioner can have a beneficial effect but not if you use too much so maybe best avoided, washing was found in most cases to maintain the strength & performance of ropes providing mild synthetic cleaning products were used (such as nikwax) dirt can decrease the strength of a rope especially dynamic strength, it also leads to increased wear rates, especially when using friction hitches the way we do in arb marc what research is this? i assumed you meant the 364/2001 which investigated bird droppings & rust contamination but, unless my memory betrays me, it did not research dirt on ropes? some people go through ropes real quick, either by damaging them with saws etc or through wear; my clients that wear ropes quickly often use no cambium/friction savers, work in the rain and don't wash their ropes, the correlation is stark in my opinion. I've taken some drty failed sections of the most popular 16s ropes without defects other than fraying caused by abrasion, these ropes were all in service for less than 2 years and when drop tested all had suffered significant dynamic strength loss, that said id kept these extreeme examples of rapid wear to one side because they were the fastest 2% that i examine.

please ENSURE threads are clean AND DE-GREASED if using a thread-locker 241 is typically my weapon of choice for such items as its lower viscosity works on even the finest of threads, its also a slightly lower break away torque which can help allot if you come to take it off again, the break away torque is still plenty sufficient so no worries there, i've come across items that can no longer be disassembled with their bolt heads chewing up/ shearing due to people using too strong a thread-locker, also it doesn't get thinner when shaken ensuring better consistency IMO. assuming that you have an early sequoia: Petzl recommend that the torque be set to 3Nm i've known experienced technicians re-building engines to set torques within 0.4nm with a fixed wrench by hand/ feel but its always best to use an actual torque wrench, taking that into account then a light locker such as 222/ 221(purple) might be best as they have break strengths closer to the 3nm. For the new sequoias petzl instruct a 2Nm setting and have a rubber ring to prevent vibration opening so the instructions for that version do not recommend any thread-locker be applied (unlike the instructions for the old style) hope that helps xxx

hi andy sorry, only just saw your thread reply, pm sent, does sound strange burring rapidly, not seen any doing that before so maybe you use an unusual combo/ have some different practices in the tree, not due to go to pembrokshire any time soon but i do practice cliff diving at abberiddy some times so will let you know when im next coming to dive, or maybe you will be in glos/ bristol some time, taking the missus shopping maybe?

step 1: rinse washer detergent draw with very hot water to remove any detergent residue step 2: put EMPTY washer on a hot/ hot rinse cycle to wash detergent away step 3 : tie 2 ends of rope together and flake loose rope directly into machine srep 3 : place nickwax tech wash or other rope specific cleaner (eg beal) in draw step 4 : programe long cool (max 40) wash step 5 : if desired add rope water-proofer (eg nikwax rope proof) to draw and re-wash following proofer instructions step 6 : untangle rope and allow to air dry in cool atmosphere out of direct sunlight enjoy clean (lighter in the rain if proofed) rope! PS do not machine wash flip lines, this can lead to accelerated internal corrosion and accelerated flex cycling of where the wire exits the crimp/ crimps that can be hard to detect until.........pop!

Hadley is your man, goes by old snake on here i believe, based sheffield or there abouts, what do you want it made out of, 16S?

guess work? :laugh1:i didn't mean 'might mean' as in i don't know! i meant that 14201034-b is standard talk! i meant because its manufac' specific, one manufacture it might just be a none date related pin but another it IS a date specific code, i said obv' because it IS obvious to ME, that is what i'm paid to know, but its not obvious to most end users, perhaps it was to you? it should be obvious with what i've said, join the dots........... someone? PS they don't teach you this on the loler course but they do teach you to teach your self! doing lolers isn't about passing the nptc its about going out of your way to ensure you have the PTKE to examine as wider range of kit as possible.

allot of serial/ batch numbers include EXACTLY the date of manufacture you just need to know what you're looking for (14201034-b might mean item 34 laser'd by machine B on the 20th of july 2014.....obviously:confused1:), but that doesn't let you know the DoP obv' ropes complient with EN1891 have to have the YoM on their internal indent ribbon, i should probably stop before is end some1 to sleep?

I must hasten to warn that without being there and seeing the cord in person i cant really comment on your Specific circumstance but by all means PM me and if i'm in passing i might be able to give you some more conclusive advice free of charge. That said here's some comment you might find useful: providing that climbing equipment is supplied to you with the relevant Certificate of Conformity it will not require a Thorough Examination under loler for either 6 months from first use or 12 months from purchase which ever comes sooner. Most climbing equipment in arb is not supplied with a CoC so should be thoroughly examined before first use but lets just set that aside for now Tracability, purchase date, proof of conformity, user instructions are all things that might help an examiner to make his/ decision during TE but are NOT necessarily Essential. All equipment must be clearly marked and individually identifiable. What you have described does sound very odd, most examiners will mark the equipment for you at no extra cost, i certainly do and just because someone has wrote their own markings/ dates on their gear doesn't mean id change my decision from fail to pass! Knots / cutting your own cord have nothing to do with it assuming you've tied your knots correctly? I very rarely find not being presented with any of the information above an issue when examining peoples kits and i cant think of many occasions in the last 9 years when it's meant i've failed some equipment, but occasionally someone presents some random cord with which i'm not familiar and i get them to fish out some papers or fail/ defer my decision on the cord. (I have had to untie incorrect knots which is rather worrying!) A visible serial number, a CE mark, PoP, CoC's etc make up a VERY small part of the picture for me. Some examiners may have very limited knowledge of the wide range of equipment that is available and in use by arborists and its relative wear rates so have to rely on PoP Coc's etc much more heavily. I recently re-examined a kit that a retailer had examined. The examiner had failed ALLOT of equipment that i found fit for purpose, 2 weeks had elapsed between the examinations and the kit had not been used or modified in any way during that time. Cynicists would say they failed it to sell more gear but i believe it was more due to the fact that the examiner didn't have the knowledge to confidently identify equipment or estimate with any certainty its/age/ rate of wear so clung on to those clean tangible bits of paper. It was ironic that they failed a factory spliced rope that they'd sold them as it wasn't a CE sticker'd splice!!! (these factory splices are VERY easy to identify with or without the associated sticker! like i said at the top i cant comment on your circumstance without seeing the cord in question, it may be that i'd find your cord not FFP either BUT!! i certainly wouldn't change my mind because YOU'D put a mark on it

Lockjack is the most versatile tool, it is the only one that attaches mid-line but takes a bit more mastering, it does not self tend so well as sj & ZZ. ZZ & SJ are very similar, ZZ is less finikity but some people worry about it 'breaking' i do not so in summary LJ if you've got the ability and patience to master it, ZZ if not, or if you're worried about it breaking go SJ WITH the dyneema quick link obv'

a £2000 fine plus 750 costs is getting away pretty lightly IMO, hope the climber fully recovers, perhaps if the council in question weren't so intent on screwing the price down so low occurrences like this would be less likely? AA approved contractors have raised concerns numerous times regarding the low tenders, poor work and substandard H&S on site of Coles, the sad thing is that it doesn't appear to have changed things one bit!

I did (surprisingly enough) not many changes that apply much to arb, a good body of work though lots of good extra clarifications for people that find these things hard to grasp. It was good to clarify that people maintain equipment can TE the equipment subject to risk assessment, i did feel they could have gone further into who is considered impartial to TE further for example re-affirming that the end users are not considered independent, it should be obvious i know but you'd be surprised how some people think!

Hi I've examined quite a few, not had any that weren't fit for purpose yet, without seeing yours i cant really comment. Removing sharp burrs with stone, file or paper is standard practice and I do it all the time, often on very minor chips/ burrs on pulleys, karabiners etc just need a tickle to ensure they wont damage any cordage. That said i would not recommend anyone without the practical knowledge and experience takes a file to their kit unless under the supervision/ instruction of someone that does. Generally speaking damage of more than 10% would generate a fail however it depends on the item, its design & the location of the damage, a certain size chip in one place on a karabiner will weaken it far more than one in another, an even smaller chip on a mechanical device my render it dangerous due to its ability to impair its function. Have Lyon seen a picture of the device? If you send it to them I'm sure that they would gladly look over it for you free of charge. The best thing you can do after that would be to encourage your examiner to open a dialogue with Lyon, he/she might still refuse to pass the item fit for purpose in which case maybe Lyon can do that for you or alternatively you can find someone else to examine your kit that doesn't agree that this defect is significant. Hope that helps, Mike