What does "Rated" mean?

[Scratch]

I hear this term a lot in tree climbing but not so much in rock climbing and am somewhat confused by it. Stuff like "This lanyard has a rated end" or "Use a rated piece of equipment here".

Isn't all climbing equipment "rated" to a certain spec? I know I'd never use a WalMart keychain carabiner in anywhere I'd hope to hold my life, is that what they mean? It seems like I also hear that a standard non locking carabiner, let's say a DMM PerfectO is not "rated" even though it has a 25 kN strength rating on it.

Does it have to be a locking carabiner to be considered "rated" in the tree climbing world, or does it have to be double locking? Maybe triple locking?

What gives?

 

[CanadianStan]

I hear this term a lot in tree climbing but not so much in rock climbing and am somewhat confused by it. Stuff like "This lanyard has a rated end" or "Use a rated piece of equipment here".

Isn't all climbing equipment "rated" to a certain spec? I know I'd never use a WalMart keychain carabiner in anywhere I'd hope to hold my life, is that what they mean? It seems like I also hear that a standard non locking carabiner, let's say a DMM PerfectO is not "rated" even though it has a 25 kN strength rating on it.

Does it have to be a locking carabiner to be considered "rated" in the tree climbing world, or does it have to be double locking? Maybe triple locking?

What gives?

In some communities “rated” will define a piece of gear as appropriate for that specific purpose. Ie Amstel is rated for static picks, double braid is more suitable for dynamic loading. Each is “rated” for a different purpose

Another interpretation is that it’s rated according to the prevailing local / federal / contextual standard.
In the utility world, boots might be dielectrically “rated” ;
in the residential world a 23kn MBS rope is a rated personal lifeline;
in the driving world, M+S tires are rated for snow / winter conditions ;
in rock climbing, the dynamic climbing line is “rated” by the UIAA
In European tree climbing its CE “rated”

This usually implies that it’s been extensively tested and proven to consistently maintain the same characteristics that reliably suit the purpose its intended for

 

[Samsquanch]

In some communities “rated” will define a piece of gear as appropriate for that specific purpose. Ie Amstel is rated for static picks, double braid is more suitable for dynamic loading. Each is “rated” for a different purpose

Another interpretation is that it’s rated according to the prevailing local / federal / contextual standard.
In the utility world, boots might be dielectrically “rated” ;
in the residential world a 23kn MBS rope is a rated personal lifeline;
in the driving world, M+S tires are rated for snow / winter conditions ;
in rock climbing, the dynamic climbing line is “rated” by the UIAA
In European tree climbing its CE “rated”

This usually implies that it’s been extensively tested and proven to consistently maintain the same characteristics that reliably suit the purpose its intended for

This^^^, coming from an engineering background, something being "rated" means some listing company, manufacturer or some party has certified through repeatable specified testing that "this will will do this when you do this" if you're concerned about the supposed rating on a piece of gear I'd look into it further, even ask the manufacturer about it and then look into the rating party or procedures for the product to gain this rating, I'm definitely not saying just because it states rated that it's been done properly, but it's in the best interests of the company to do it properly. For instance with consumer electronics and other things like electronic power tools they're generally listed by a testing body that certifies it's compliance with certain manufacturing codes. Companies like intertech, universal laboratories etc. Have enough poorly made tools and you tend to see the same listing company's mark on them, same for good tools.

 

[ATH]

In the context the OP is asking, I think it is more than just having been tested.

I have "keychain" DMM carabiners that have a force rating on them...so in the simplest term, they are "rated.

When people use the term as he was asking, I think they mean "rated and appropriate for life support by ANSI". So the question about the non-locking PerfectO. It is "rated", but not approved for primary life support, so folks do not want that when they ask for a "rated" carabiner for their lanyard or attachment to bridge.

Same thing @CanadianStan said...just acknowledging that the term has 2 uses. What @Samsquanch said is more technically correct...the other is more lingo.

 

[Scratch]

In the context the OP is asking, I think it is more than just having been tested.

I have "keychain" DMM carabiners that have a force rating on them...so in the simplest term, they are "rated.

When people use the term as he was asking, I think they mean "rated and appropriate for life support by ANSI". So the question about the non-locking PerfectO. It is "rated", but not approved for primary life support, so folks do not want that when they ask for a "rated" carabiner for their lanyard or attachment to bridge.

Same thing @CanadianStan said...just acknowledging that the term has 2 uses. What @Samsquanch said is more technically correct...the other is more lingo.

Thanks, that was more along the line of what I was thinking. I know everything is "rated" to some specification, I was just wondering what that spec is generally considered for tree climbing. I recently read, or watched a video or something (I can't remember) where they were talking about a specific saddle. They mentioned something like "As long as it has rated D rings, I'm happy" (or something along those lines) When hearing that, I thought to myself... "Shouldn't all D rings on a saddle be rated for life support? Does this mean that some D rings are not rated for life support, but have a lower rating on them?"

I mean yeah, I could use heavy duty zip ties on a saddle, that would be "rated" for maybe 5 pounds, but I wouldn't expect them to hold for life support. I could also use non locking carabiners that would be rated for 24kN instead of D rings, and technically, I COULD easily trust my life to them (in an emergency situation) but they wouldn't be appropriate in place of D rings.

I did find this on WesSpur's site today that might answer my own question though. On their double locking carabiner page it reads:

Carabiners used to support a tree climber must be “self-closing and self-double-locking”, which means that they must require 3 distinct motions to open the gate and that the carabiner will auto-close and auto-lock when the gate is released. These three motions usually consist of pushing the carabiner sleeve up or down, twisting the sleeve, and finally, pulling the gate inward. Some carabiners replace the first step with the pressing of a button. Life support carabiners must also have a breaking strength of at least 5,000 lb.

So is the term "rated" (in the tree climbing world) actually just short for "rated for primary life support", which technically means it needs to be:
1. self closing.
2. self-double locking
3. have an MBS of 5000 lb.

Of course if we're taking about closed rings, D rings, slings, pulleys, or other gear that doesn't open up like carabiners, in order to be considered "rated", it only needs to have an MBS of 5000 lb's.

If this is true, then the ISC aluminum double action snap hook would not be considered "rated" in the tree climbing world, but their triple action snap hook would correct?

Maybe I'm getting too hung up on terminology and specifics, but it's cold outside, and I hate winter. So I have nothing better to do right now than wonder about stuff like the intricate specifics of climbing gear, and if vegetarians eat animal crackers...

 

[Jonny]

Of course if we're taking about closed rings, D rings, slings, pulleys, or other gear that doesn't open up like carabiners, in order to be considered "rated", it only needs to have an MBS of 5000 lb's.

I'm not sure about slings... I thought the magic number for rope and webbing was 5400 lbs and hardware ( carabiners, snaps) was 5000 lbs.
Anyone please correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[Tom Dunlap]

This ties in nicely with the acronym discussions going on

Linguistic shorthand or sloppy speech. Shigo admonished is to not be sloppy

As has been said in this thread ‘rated’ is short for conforming to a standard for application

Our most relevant standard her in US is the ANSI Z133.

A bit of sloppiness has creeped in too. There are different standards or ratings for snaps and carabiners. Understand the differences

 

[ATH]

First Tom...sorry, but I just can't ignore a bit of quality irony:

....

Linguistic shorthand or sloppy speech. Shigo admonished is to not be sloppy

.....

On to something more substantive:

....
....
Our most relevant standard her[e] in US is the ANSI Z133.
....

Note: this is a commercial standard (like Tom said...understand the differences). I think the OP is a recreational climber??? Even if that is the case, to me, wisdom would suggest sticking with a worthy safety standard is a good plan. I don't know of a published ANSI (or similar) standard recreational climbing. I'd still use the Z133 for recreational climbing knowing it was designed to keep tree workers and climbers alive.

 

[CanadianStan]

Thanks, that was more along the line of what I was thinking. I know everything is "rated" to some specification, I was just wondering what that spec is generally considered for tree climbing. I recently read, or watched a video or something (I can't remember) where they were talking about a specific saddle. They mentioned something like "As long as it has rated D rings, I'm happy" (or something along those lines) When hearing that, I thought to myself... "Shouldn't all D rings on a saddle be rated for life support? Does this mean that some D rings are not rated for life support, but have a lower rating on them?"

I mean yeah, I could use heavy duty zip ties on a saddle, that would be "rated" for maybe 5 pounds, but I wouldn't expect them to hold for life support. I could also use non locking carabiners that would be rated for 24kN instead of D rings, and technically, I COULD easily trust my life to them (in an emergency situation) but they wouldn't be appropriate in place of D rings.

I did find this on WesSpur's site today that might answer my own question though. On their double locking carabiner page it reads:

Carabiners used to support a tree climber must be “self-closing and self-double-locking”, which means that they must require 3 distinct motions to open the gate and that the carabiner will auto-close and auto-lock when the gate is released. These three motions usually consist of pushing the carabiner sleeve up or down, twisting the sleeve, and finally, pulling the gate inward. Some carabiners replace the first step with the pressing of a button. Life support carabiners must also have a breaking strength of at least 5,000 lb.

So is the term "rated" (in the tree climbing world) actually just short for "rated for primary life support", which technically means it needs to be:
1. self closing.
2. self-double locking
3. have an MBS of 5000 lb.

Of course if we're taking about closed rings, D rings, slings, pulleys, or other gear that doesn't open up like carabiners, in order to be considered "rated", it only needs to have an MBS of 5000 lb's.

If this is true, then the ISC aluminum double action snap hook would not be considered "rated" in the tree climbing world, but their triple action snap hook would correct?

Maybe I'm getting too hung up on terminology and specifics, but it's cold outside, and I hate winter. So I have nothing better to do right now than wonder about stuff like the intricate specifics of climbing gear, and if vegetarians eat animal crackers...

Technically yes. You will not be allowed to enter into a sanctioned tree climbing competition with a double action snap, but a triple-action snap will he admitted

 

[Tom Dunlap]

@ATH

Very funny. There are two examples of sloppy typing. Shigo never talked about keyboard proficiency. LOL

 

[Scratch]

Note: this is a commercial standard (like Tom said...understand the differences). I think the OP is a recreational climber??? Even if that is the case, to me, wisdom would suggest sticking with a worthy safety standard is a good plan. I don't know of a published ANSI (or similar) standard recreational climbing. I'd still use the Z133 for recreational climbing knowing it was designed to keep tree workers and climbers alive.

Yes, I am a recreational climber, Im just trying to find out the standards for pro climbers as I would rather adhere to those standards.

Plus since I'm new to this, I want to know the correct terminology so I don't sound as stupid. (...more stupid)