Approved Mechanical Devices

There's no "panic feature" for one.

The best way to look at this is to understand why the rules committee wrote 2.2.1 the way they did.

First, the how...Yes a CE rating is sufficient. It means that the device was tested to known standards and a certain level of performance was obtained under specific conditions. Therefore, follow the manufacturer's instructions for set up keep it within operating standards and use guidelines and all is good.

2.2.1 goes on to state that in the absence of a industry standard mark the user must provide information that the equipment meets industry standard....

That leads to the why... If a new piece of gear is to be used in ITCC competition there must be clear proof that the equipment meets current industry standards and a clear set of instructions for set up and inspection. Without that how are the judges and technician to know if the devise it set up properly? How are they to know how to inspect if for function pre climb?

2.2.1 is simply asking for a reasonable documentation and a clear set of instructions.. Submit some numbers guessed at or derived form unreliable sources and a shitty picture or two and you can expect refusal. Take the time and effort to simulate industry standardized testing, provide valid and repeatable numbers and a clear set of instructions and it will most likely be a win.

Tony
 
The best way to look at this is to understand why the rules committee wrote 2.2.1 the way they did.

First, the how...Yes a CE rating is sufficient. It means that the device was tested to known standards and a certain level of performance was obtained under specific conditions. Therefore, follow the manufacturer's instructions for set up keep it within operating standards and use guidelines and all is good.

2.2.1 goes on to state that in the absence of a industry standard mark the user must provide information that the equipment meets industry standard....

That leads to the why... If a new piece of gear is to be used in ITCC competition there must be clear proof that the equipment meets current industry standards and a clear set of instructions for set up and inspection. Without that how are the judges and technician to know if the devise it set up properly? How are they to know how to inspect if for function pre climb?

2.2.1 is simply asking for a reasonable documentation and a clear set of instructions.. Submit some numbers guessed at or derived form unreliable sources and a shitty picture or two and you can expect refusal. Take the time and effort to simulate industry standardized testing, provide valid and repeatable numbers and a clear set of instructions and it will most likely be a win.

Tony
Would like to hear @treebing experience with getting a new device approved for competition
 
Why is this shocking?

Tony
I had been under the impression that mechanicals had to have a "fail proof" feature like the ISC D4 or whatever the Petzl do-dad is, for example. Since then I have realized that isn't the case, but now I really have no idea. At a gear check I often have the luxury of saying, "Go ask Jason Diehl."
 
I don't believe it needs approval, as it isn't the primary life support device - the hitch is. You don't see the original Rope Wrench on the list of approved devices, either.
You missed a lot of the drama! It wasn't until the rope wrench got a ce cert was it allowed. I have no idea about the apex thingy.
 
Last edited:
I wonder if the CE cert delved into the loading of the hitch. A DRT hitch load is pretty straight forward pushing the working essence to hitch cordage properties, eyes/terminations/knots and hitch formation. Is that actually inspected? For SRT the RW splits off some load from the hitch whilst the single line support ups the hitch load - was any of this proportioning taken into account for SRT RW CE cert?

It's worth pondering even if the inside story can't be publicized.
 
The ce is a system tied with a specific hitch cord on a specific rope tied in a specific way. Once you do anything outside of that it's not ce anymore. But in the world of competition climbing there is a bit of common sense about it in that regard.
 
Was the RW CE cert still in the floppy tether days or using (semi)rigid tethers? The Carey Gibson issue was pretty early on and may have played into it.
 
The list stated Taz Lov3 – Approved (Planned updates to the ISA ITCC Rulebook will prevent any contradiction or prohibition in use of this equipment. The Taz Lov3 is approved for use at ISA TCC events as of 2 December 2021).

Does anyone know what has been updated on the latest rule book? And can anyone speculate any reason behind this statement?
 

Attachments

  • IMG_7438.jpeg
    IMG_7438.jpeg
    77.2 KB · Views: 12

New threads New posts

Kask Stihl NORTHEASTERN Arborists Wesspur TreeStuff.com Teufelberger Westminster X-Rigging Teufelberger
Back
Top Bottom