Petzl Basic Modification

[hank moon]

Could you post another picture of the modified/unmodified ascendors from a different angle? I'm having trouble seeing exactly what you did.

The photo below was posted to give hunter (and anyone else who is interested) a general idea of what Scott is saying w/respect to modifying the thumb catch - it is not a recommendation to do so.

<Preach> Anyone choosing to modify PPE w/o specific instructions or guidelines from the manufacturer does so at his/her own risk. Remember always that caving is an inherently dangerous activity. Risk can be reduced, but never eliminated. Be careful out there...please. </preach>

[bonniecrystal]

http://www.expeditioncave.com/srt/petzl/failure/

Bonnie,

I read the formal response from Petzl America dated May 2, 2004. It doesn't appear as though there is any relevant information in the response. It talks of Redundancy (use multiple ascenders), Interference (keep the ascenders from touching anything), Ease of Use (designed to be operated easily), and Perspective (seems to not say much beyond what was coverd in other sections of letter).

This issue is a real concern. If anyone has experience with the older versions of these ascenders coming off rope as easily as the newer ones, I would like to hear about it. Watching my friends son have two of his Petzl ascenders fail three times each while climbing out of a pit was enough to scare me. Has Petzl done any formal evaluations of the failures to determine possible design improvements? As an ISO 9001 registered organization, Petzl has an obligation to formally review something like this. Has anyone asked for the results?

It has been 2 years since I formally reported this to Petzl headquarters in France. I have never received any reply from Petzl in France. I only received the replies you see on the website, they were from Petzl USA (Hank Moon).

Sorry to say, but nothing I've seen or heard has led me to believe that Petzl headquarters has acknowledged that they have a giant product liability problem with their flawed ascender design. Shame, shame, shame. Climbers, cavers, rope rescue, and construction workers use this ascender every day.

I've been an expert witness, providing expert testimony in court, for a number of lawsuits. From this experience, I can tell you that if someone falls and gets badly hurt or dies using one of this model of Petzl ascenders, the expert witnesses for the plaintiffs will dig into this history of a documented product safety design flaw and provide it to the court as evidence. They will clearly show that Petzl continued to manufacture and sell a product without recall or warnings after they knew it to be unsafe or less safe than other products similar to it. Slam dunk big big $$ settlement in favor of the plaintiff.

Let's look at this in perspective: Generally speaking, this is Petzl's business problem, not ours as cavers. However, if there is a grotto sponsored event that uses or loans Petzl Ascension Ascender equipment to a caver or as part of an event, and someone gets hurt using it, there may be liability. But Petzl is the one with most of the ultimate liability, and they are the ones with the "deep pockets" so it is more likely that the lawyers will go after them.

In the mean time, it is up to us, the users of vertical gear, to spread the word and tell our caving and climbing and rescue friends about the risk so they don't die or get hurt. Tell them to return the ascender and get one that doesn't have such an obvious failure mode. Tell them to get an ascender that doesn't fall of the rope when you slide it against rock or clothing or slings. If the climbing or caving store won't give them and refund, print out the website report and take it to them, or call Petzl directly for a return. Above all, if you have one in your pack, don't become a victim due to your own laziness or through thinking you can avoid the problem through careful use.
http://www.expeditioncave.com/srt/petzl/failure/

Bonnie Crystal

[NZcaver]

http://www.expeditioncave.com/srt/petzl/failure/

That's a very interesting report. I'm happy to say all my Ascensions are the old type, with the metal catch. I've tried a plastic-catch one, but it didn't really seem like an improvement to me. I'm content to stick with metal. Funny thing though - I have both types of the Croll, and I much prefer the plastic catch on that. Go figure.

Anyway - it's certainly not my intent to downplay this serious "protruding catch" issue, but I did notice a small detail in the report which seemed to become a big contributing factor.

The novice climber "Mike" is noted as being right-handed, and yet is using a left-handed Ascension. In the photo at the bottom of the cliff, the ascender is attached to the rope and held in his left hand. As the climb progressed however, he changed over placing his right hand into the handle - a natural tendency. Therefore the ascender was turned around with the cam facing away from him, preventing his being able to visually check it while climbing. Of course when he later rested with it against the sloping rock face, the safety catch was in direct contact with the rock.
He starts to slide it up the rock - and surprise! It unclips.

Suggestion for the future - if the guy is right-handed, start him out with a right-handed ascender. Of course the safety catch could still hang up on something and cause a problem, but he's a little less likely to have it ride on the rock if he's gripping the left ascender with his left hand (or a right ascender with his right hand).

Glad to hear no-one was injured.

[NZcaver]

Following up on my previous post, I've been doing some closer reading of Petzl's instructions and warnings. Here's what I found:

Specific Information (Ascension)
http://en.petzl.com/ProduitsServices/B1 ... 502-F1.pdf

Precautions
Guard against anything that could accidentally open or
block the action of the cam or the safety catch (webbing,
clothing, pebbles, twigs...).

Petzl General Information
http://en.petzl.com/ProduitsServices/IN ... 0000-B.pdf

Avoid impacts, or rubbing against
abrasive surfaces or sharp edges.
It is up to the user to foresee situations
requiring rescue in case of difficulties
encountered while using this product.

- During use, it is important to regularly
monitor the condition of the product and of
its connections to the other elements of the
system.

Responsibility
PETZL is not responsible for the
consequences, direct, indirect or accidental, or
any other type of damage befalling or resulting
from the use of its products.

You personally assume all risks and
responsibilities for all damage, injury or death
which may occur during or following incorrect
use of our products in any manner whatsoever.
If you are not able, or not in a position to
assume this responsibility or to take this risk,
do not use this equipment.

I'm not sure where all the comments of "massive liability issue" and "shame on Petzl" (blah, blah) are coming from - they seem to lay things out pretty well. I can see how a protruding easy-to-open catch, though irritating to some cavers, could be a blessing to climbers/mountaineers/rope access technicians/rescue workers etc - especially if they're wearing bulky gloves. My suggestion is that Petzl simply modify a paragraph in their instructions for the Ascension and Basic. Something like this:

Precautions
Guard against anything that could accidentally open or
block the action of the cam or the safety catch (webbing,
cord, clothing, pebbles, twigs...). Be aware the safety
catch protrudes out from the body of the ascender,
so you should avoid sliding it against any object
or surface while in use.

And as for this comment...

...don't become a victim due to your own laziness or through thinking you can avoid the problem through careful use...

...the first part is right - but the second is complete BS (in my humble opinion). Get your training from a competent instructor, learn all the functions and limitations of your equipment, and practice, practice, practice. And if the catch bothers you, either find an old Ascension or modify the new one as Hank unofficially suggested.

[Edited to add emphasis]

[caverd]

In response to the most recent post by NZcaver, liability is a tricky issue.

Petzl ascenders were designed and manufactured to be used as a tool for ascending rope. If there is a failure of the ascender leading to injury or death that can be unquestionably traced to either a faulty design or a manufacturing defect (especially since these particular issues have not been a known problem since the change from the metal to plastic thumb piece), the court system will find Petzl liable. The written disclaimer won't be worth the paper it's written on.

Users have a reasonable expectation that the ascenders will function as described in the product literature. As I have posted previously, I personally witnessed both a Petzl Croll and Basic come off a single rope during an ascent three times each. Climbing system was a standard double bungie rope walker. The only thing that could have rubbed against the plastic piece to cause it to open would have been the blue jeans the climber was wearing. Previous designs have not had this problem. This in itself presents a serious potential liability issue.

[RescueMan]

If there is a failure of the ascender leading to injury or death that can be unquestionably traced to either a faulty design or a manufacturing defect...the court system will find Petzl liable. The written disclaimer won't be worth the paper it's written on.

First, I'll disagree with the latter statement. While no one can sign away their right to sue for damages due to gross negligence, disclaimers, general liability releases, and assumption of risk forms DO have legal standing.

But I believe that a court (jury) could find a manufacturer liable for a well-designed product without defects if the manufacturer failed to consider all the likely uses (within its design parameters).

For instance, I believe that the death in MN from debris getting caught inside a GriGri and severing the rope could reasonably have been anticipated by Petzl.

http://www.esssar.org/Publications/documents/Public_Report.pdf
http://www.esssar.org/Publications/docu ... pendix.pdf

3 CONCLUSIONS
3.5 FINAL CONCLUSIONS
…At some point a foreign object was likely introduced into the Grigri… the debris was likely introduced during normal climbing activities… the object in question was probably no more than a centimeter in diameter with one or more small, very sharp edges… After less than 7 feet of rope traveled through the Grigri, the debris became trapped and a sharp edge began to tear the rope's sheath… At several points along this sheath damage the rope's core was exposed… Nearly immediately the rope parted.

3.4 UNRESOLVED QUESTIONS
…the investigators are unable to definitively determine how the core was ultimately severed once the sheath was damaged and the core bundles exposed.

4.1 RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CLIMBING COMMUNITY
4.1.4 Use of the Pezl Grigri
Due to the facts that a) foreign objects can become introduced into the Grigri unbeknown to the belayer, b) this debris can cause damage to the rope, and c) the Grigri is very hard to handle when oriented horizontally, the investigators recommend that Petzl consider cautionary statements in its literature regarding poor handling characteristics and inability to clear debris when the device is used at or near a horizontal orientation.

[Scott McCrea]

If there is a failure of the ascender leading to injury or death that can be unquestionably traced to either a faulty design or a manufacturing defect

Or improper use.

Users have a reasonable expectation that the ascenders will function as described in the product literature. As I have posted previously, I personally witnessed both a Petzl Croll and Basic come off a single rope during an ascent three times each. Climbing system was a standard double bungie rope walker. The only thing that could have rubbed against the plastic piece to cause it to open would have been the blue jeans the climber was wearing. Previous designs have not had this problem. This in itself presents a serious potential liability issue.

Does the Petzl literature describe how to use their products with a ropewalker? (I can't remember, maybe it does )

Is there such a thing as a standard ropewalker?

In your example, it sounds like the jeans are the problem, not the ascender.

My Basic came off the rope several times. It came off because of the orientation of the ascender and the way I was using it. The ascender is fine. I used it wrong. I fixed it. Hasn't happened since.

Bottom line is, the ascenders are safe and reliable. The user has a resposibility to use it in such a way. Personal responsibility is a beautiful thing.

[Scott McCrea]

...the death in MN from debris getting caught inside a GriGri and severing the rope could reasonably have been anticipated by Petzl.

Is that an acceptable way to rig and use a GriGri? (I dunno, I've never used one.)

Did Petzl have to pay damages or just change the literature?

Did they take legal action against the little rock too? That's who is really to blame. Little rocks should also come with warning literature.

[potholer]

In the case of an Expedition hand ascender used back-to-front when pressed against rock, though the *likelihood* of coming off the rope might vary between catch designs, I'm not sure any designs I recall would be immune enough to make me happy trying. I imagine my first (~1983) model with the interchangeable-pin catch would have been quite capable of opening if moved upwards while forced against a rock face.
I know my old Croll with a thin-bar-and-pin catch design was quite capable of unintentional opening when fouled with the footloop knot below my hand ascender when pseudo-ropewalking with a modified Frog rig. (One of the penalties of that climbing rig was that jammers could be gently unloaded whilst interfering material was moving around in the vicinity of the safety catch.)

However, personally, I'm not sure that the likelihood of a hand jammer detaching from the rope in a rock-fouling situation really should be a high design priority.
Using right-handed Expeditions, I climb while potentially varying my grip such that either hand (or both) are on the ascender, with my left hand on the top, and my right hand on the handle *or* on the top, without any need to turn the ascender to face away from me. Were I forced to use a left-handed Expedition, I'd still keep it facing me, and use one or both hands on it as necessary.

There may be an argument for an extra warning not to use the descender facing away from the user where the rope is rigged so as to force the ascender against a rock-face, but I'd guess that if someone started writing one, it'd probably end up suggesting that a user just doesn't do the former at all, rather than not doing the former in the latter situation.

[caverd]

RescueMan, your point is well taken. Scott, personal responsibility is an extremely important concept that many in society seem to overlook (i.e. McDonalds made me fat so I'm suing).

We as cavers choose to participate in an activity that is potentially dangerous. The gear we purchase from manufacturers such as Petzl should funtion as described in their literature. That is a reasonable expectation and a concept that is legal precident. One may argue that the literature may show a frog system and the failures happened while using a rope walker. The critical use requirements in either system are the same; keeping the ascenders loaded in the proper fashion. If there are failures resulting from design issues (including not taking into account all expected use scenarios like cave ascention systems.....remember, Petzl ascenders were designed and created specifically for caving, adaptations to other uses came about later) or manufacturing defects, the manufacturer will be held to some level of accountability. Failures resulting from misuse are at the risk of the user. I'm glad that Scott was able to find a way to modify his ascender(s) to prevent the issue, but the modification is made at the users risk (as previously made clear by both Scott and Hank Moon) and voids any responsibility by the manufacturer.

If we are to assume that an article of clothing (normal blue jeans, nothing loose or protruding) has the potential to render an ascender dangerous, then maybe we should question the design change made. I am not aware of any such failures with previous designs of the Petzl ascenders. I would love to hear from others if they have experienced such failures, as I may be mistaken in my expectation. Rubbing against something more solid such as rock, other hardware or even a boot I can understand just might cause a problem.

The "standard, double bungie rope walker system" I previously mentioned is that as designed, manufactured and sold by One Rope 1 (in my opinion, a very nice system).

Anyone going to either Speleofest or SERA? I'd love to meet and discuss in person over some beer's (or whatever).

[fuzzy-hair-man]

Does the Petzl literature describe how to use their products with a ropewalker? (I can't remember, maybe it does )

The closest thing I know of is the technical notice for the Pantin:

http://en.petzl.com/ProduitsServices/B02%20PANTIN%20B02500.pdf

This is a pseudo ropewalker - frog rig and suggests use with a croll and an ascension. The croll does not have the protruding catch and the ascension if used correctly as discussed above, should have the cam facing the user where it won't foul.

Perhaps the floating ascenders could use a croll ascender rather than the basic as the catch on the croll does not protrude

Also the pantin is not considered a PPE personal protection equipment so can't be counted on.

[NZcaver]

If there is a failure of the ascender leading to injury or death that can be unquestionably traced to either a faulty design or a manufacturing defect

Or improper use.

Does the Petzl literature describe how to use their products with a ropewalker? (I can't remember, maybe it does )

Technically speaking, no. Just with the Pantin.

Is there such a thing as a standard ropewalker?

Not really. Each commercially made version may be standard (although different from other makes) - but then there are numerous personal variations/modifications.

In your example, it sounds like the jeans are the problem, not the ascender.

My Basic came off the rope several times. It came off because of the orientation of the ascender and the way I was using it. The ascender is fine. I used it wrong. I fixed it. Hasn't happened since.

Good call.

Bottom line is, the ascenders are safe and reliable. The user has a resposibility to use it in such a way. Personal responsibility is a beautiful thing.

Amen

[NZcaver]

...For instance, I believe that the death in MN from debris getting caught inside a GriGri and severing the rope could reasonably have been anticipated by Petzl...

Very interesting!

I just had a thought (slightly off-topic). What if that same little sharp rock gets itself jammed up into the space between the bollards on a Stop descender?

Another potential rope slicer?

[potholer]

I'm not sure where in a Stop/Bobbin something *could* get jammed, and if used as a descender, the right hand should clean the rope (which would be the main route for debris to get dragged into the descender).

I suppose if a Stop was used for belaying while lying flat on the ground in an area of debris, stuff could get dragged in, but I'd have thought that was a potential problem with any kind of device rope passes through that is at all enclosed, rather than a krab-and-belay-plate arrangement, which doesn't really have much 'inside' to it. Even so, excluding long hair, baler twine, barbed wire, etc I'd imagine anything small enough not to jam a Stop solid would tend to get pulled straight through.

Possibly a particularly badly-shaped piece might get stuck between the plates below the lower cam, but would probably have to have entered the Stop at that point, rather than having been dragged through the bobbins by the rope.

[hunter]

Hey Hank,
Kind of delayed but thanks for the photo posts, that gives me a good idea of what was done. At this point I have used my ascendors with a frog in all sorts of tight and manky situations and I have never had one slip so I'm not going to worry about it. Good info in case the situation pops up though.

Ropeman, that is a pretty interesting article on the gri-gri, especially since I've been using one for a years! I've never seen a gri-gri used in quite that way, can anyone (Hank?) say for sure if that is an approved way to use the gri-gri? Although the stop doesn't have quite the area for trapping debris it does seem possible that something similar could occur. My right hand certainly cleans the rope some but I've gone down plenty of ropes that were dirty enough to build a pile of mud on the device.

Hunter

P.S. It's not usually used caving but perhaps a gri-gri thread would be in order starting with RM's post...