Biner gate opened during climb

B

Bart_

Carpal tunnel level member
Location
GTA
The other day I was transferring from my main SRT TIP on a big maple stem, an angled stem the wrong way, to another stem going the opposite angle outward but still fairly vertical. The second stem was quite featureless so I had a long lanyard tossed up through a higher crotch DRT on my lower rings, SRT line on my bridge. To get up on the stem was a 180 spin from between to around/on the stem. After that I glanced down and saw one system's rope had spun, pushed and opened the other systems biner and the CSI evidence was the rope now inside the still open biner. Can't remember who opened who.

Has this happened to you? Is it worth the extra hardware for running a swivel? I recall guys running twin bridges but I could see that clashing in my maneuver. I manage to get a hitch cord, two-legged style wrench tether and tending loop all onto one DMM biner which goes on my bridge and I like how compact that is. I guess a bridge installed swivel would be shortest but it's still one more piece of hardware flopping around. Thoughts?
 
There is "I thought" and there "is". Doesn't matter what you thought. Matters what "is" the fact of the matter. You must pay attention to connectors. They are not magic. Ropes moving over safeties happens, and can usually be prevented.

If I'm on my steel-core flipline with a single-safety snap, and I'm re-crotching my climbing line, I'm very, very watchful, and keep weight on the flip-line/ snap-hook. Often I'm pulling rope on my right side, which is my snap-side.

Thinking it though, from writing it down, maybe I'll start to manage my rope on the left.
 
Never happened to me, I always keep a very close eye on my biners. It has happened to a colleague of mine, not sure what the exact situation was, I know it was the carabiner on his lory that had opened and was partially out of the connection hole. He now runs ball locks exclusively.
 
Has happened to me also and I am very watchful so caught it whilst partially tensioned with no chance of slip outs etc

Always thought of going bridge mount swivel but always worried about smacking myself in gonads moving around jobsite wearing harness, or whilst disconnecting from line. Is that scenario a valid concern?
 
Like @southsoundtree said, nothing we use is magic. Our lives are at stake, and although what we do can be very fulfilling and fun, you have to be looking over your shoulder at all times.
Grommets, captive eyes, and stoppers on connectors could be viewed as another form of “lock,” keeping the load positioned in the best geometry in the eventual case of a gate opening.
Any time you aren’t sure about how something happened, it should give you the creeps. Don’t let the game play you.
 
Swivels are wonderful. The nexus seems to be the ticket.
I ruined a dmm swivel by running it on my bridge directly for about 8 months (I say ruined. It is right at 10% wear on both sides now.) The nexus runs on a ring, so you don't saw it in half with your bridge.
 
In the days of screw gate biners and single locking flip line snaps the question would be how often has this happened to you. Always check your gears connections.

Upgrade of equipment sounds in order too. Glad you caught it.
 
Some things that help with this...

If you envision the vertical forces applied to the gate (this is what the crossing rope will apply to the gate that performs the first action required to open it) you will notice that with two climb lines, the forces are upward, as the two lines twist to cross each other. So, orient your 'biners according to whether they are "push up to open" or "pull down to open" in such a manner as the upward forces are opposite of what will move the gate housing (the part you push/pull and turn). This might not be the most convenient as far as hooking into your system, but if you'll be on two lines during the climb, it's safer.

The horizontal forces that actually turn the gate housing are not predictable, since you don't know which way you will be turning and twisting the two lines. So, it makes sense to concentrate on not allowing the first action (push or pull housing) to happen.

Retrievable canopy anchors is all I use these days, and some time back I started incorporating swivels into them. For DdRT anchors, I use the OmniBlock pulleys. For SRT anchors, I incorporate a regular swivel. Between the swivel on the multicender and the one at the TIP, it's much easier to avoid most of the issues with getting lines twisted. It feels a little strange at first, but you quickly get used to it. Makes it much easier to get any twist out of a line/system because you can simply use your leg to stop spinning, and turn the rope to remove the twist. It's easier for YOU to spin, because you're not fighting the rope's desire to stay in a not-twisted state. Your movements on the rope, and the wind, can get you spinning a little when suspended in open space, but I find this less annoying than the spinning induced by rope twist.

Of course, a ROOK pulley on the bridge works the very best for keeping two lines from crossing, but I find that heavy chunk of metal dangling near the 'nads more than a little bit annoying and sometimes painful. I tried it for awhile, didn't like it. They're just too heavy.
 
Last edited:
Hello 'Bart',
I seems that no one has asked you exactly what type/design carabiner (connector) you were using when the gate became unlocked....
One assumes that is was some type of 'locking' carabiner?
But, what is not clear is the design of the locking mechanism.
For example, was it a dual action twist-lock , triple action twist-lock, screw-gate style, magnetic-lock, snap-hook style or some other exotic locking mechanism?
Also, twist-lock style carabiners vary in the direction that the sleeve/barrel is pushed/pulled. Some designs are pushed up while others are pulled down (eg Rock Exotica designs employ a pull down rather than push up which in my view is ergonomically efficient/easier to operate). This up or down motion can be a key factor in a particular failure mode.
It seems that your carabiner/connector did not have a captive eye or a swiveling captive eye... (based on your description).
Just trying to get a proper understanding of the failure mode which led to the unlocking incident.
I have an interest from a safety/risk management point-of-view.
Thanks in advance...
 
2 bridges goes a long ways... 2 different lengths, one short, one long. Keeps hardware well separated unless you have 2 of the same tie in points (and even then, less interference that a single bridge), less hardware to hit yourself with (swivel or bridge ring are optional since you have the space to directly clip in with 2 systems); more comfortable on your hips when utilizing 2 tie ins (less spreading of the bridge keeps loads balanced); different lengths allow for easy placement of your hitch for different uses. Also would have more than likely not been an issue with your 180 maneuver, they tangle far less than you would imagine.

As for the biner opening, you can get quad locking if it makes you feel more secure, they require a series of rotations and pushes that are opposites of each other reducing the chance of random openings
 
Thanks for the thoughts. Might be a bit tight fitting another longer bridge on the Petzl Sequoia rings, but do-able. Long lanyard has AM'D's; the end one has a transplanted Grillon plastic stay-put cover I stole from an old one, the SRT biner is DMM green grey ultra O set to gate away from my body and push down to open. I have used the same exact rig for years no problem. The ultra O stays put by having so much stuff tight on it. Downside to a swivel, it's out of the way to have the lanyard hitch off to the side as I do now, having the hitch on center might be in the way? The whole lanyard hangs out of the way to the side too as done now when not in use. All of the event took place with both systems always under tension as I was sort of V supported between the stems but very near the second stem.

Is there an ultra-O like quad biner? Maybe I made an assumption of it's standard practice that all life support carabiners are push twist flip whatever that's called. No I didn't use silly equipment.

In short I know how it happened in that a rope crossed a gate and executed an open command successfully. I'm just working on lessening the odds of a repeat. Thanks again.
 
Reach said:
I looked at that at Gap Arborist the other day and thought it was something until Ray showed me how it can be opened with only motion, making it actually less secure than a regular double locking carabiner...
Click to expand...
Can you elaborate on that? I don't doubt it can be opened with rope running over it or something, but even easier than a standard double action? Seems impossible to me.
But you could look at ball locks, I personally don't really like them, but they are pretty secure.
 
climbstihl said:
Can you elaborate on that? I don't doubt it can be opened with rope running over it or something, but even easier than a standard double action? Seems impossible to me.
But you could look at ball locks, I personally don't really like them, but they are pretty secure.
Click to expand...
It’s easier to explain if you’ve had your hands on one, but the basic idea of the design is a sleeve-within-a-sleeve. The outside sleeve rotates one direction first, then grabs the inside sleeve and you rotate it the other direction to unlock the biner. It is possible, and really not that difficult, to grab or insert something into the inner sleeve, and rotate it. If you can do that, in only one motion, you can unlock the biner.
 
I've seen how it works in videos before. My understanding is that it's basically a regular push up, twist and open biner, except you have another sleeve on the outside, making it a twist counterclockwise, push up, twist clockwise and open. If you were to circumvent the outer sleeve, you would still be left with a standard push up and twist action.

A separate consideration is how likely that is. It might open easier under a specific circumstance, but is harder to open during more common situations.
It's kind of like comparing a standard trilock with the skylotec double o tri. The skylotec opens by pushing the sleeve up, then twisting it either way. It still takes the same motions to open as a standard lock, but in practice it should be twice as likely to open inadvertently, because the sleeve rotates either way.
 
Got my hopes up with the DMM then dashed them just as quickly. However I appreciate the thoughts and conversation. The wide contact swivel caught my attention bit. Less contact stress and perhaps the same movable, but has friction, move along the bridge action. A pulley on a bridge might flop you around like a fish. I'll have to see if someone local has a real unit I can look at. Toronto guys know that "local" can mean heading north of town to a barn. Yup. By the way, I still use the Petzl web bridge. The worst wear I've seen is a bit of frayed edges where carabiners pinch it at the rings. I feel good about webbing doing a tight bend vs a fat rope doing a tight bend, internal fibre-ally speaking. The contact area is three layers thick, it's not just a loop runner. Anyway, the's an aside issue.

I may have to give more consideration to climbing style and crossing up lines as no equipment is completely fool proof. Do a second thought on every body spin (?) or use a swivel.. hmmm.. but bridge centre congestion... happy nads ... yeah I read that part

Do you guys do a lot of body orientation changes on double systems, whether TRT, V rig, M rig line/lanyard, two SRT etc or do you restrict or preplan configuration and motion combinations as you maneuver? I know sometimes I realize I'm considering those factors explicitly, but definitely not all the time. Just like lanyard management isn't all the time, just as needed it comes to the forefront.
 
I plan manoeuvres so don’t cross or pinch and okay with slowing down to do so.

I have still been using web bridge and worked fine until recently and even then wasn’t dangerous except When hooked a carabiner into only one of bridges three webs and realised it had separated and didn’t load it.

Was 35ft up so decided to back up hitch by adding carabiner to rings as a precaution. Inspected prior to climb and by time ascended 35ft had partially unzipped. Good thing with webbing is any damage is external. Rope would be harder to identify damage.

2AF3747D-F261-4437-801B-0DB0BB88B1DF.jpeg
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom