Hello!
Thank you once again for your insights in behaviors and preferences related to trad climbing and associated equipment. Your experiences have significantly informed the direction that this project has taken.
At this stage, I have been working on and testing physical prototypes for both camming devices and carabiners, and I wanted to share.
For the camming device, the focus has been on simplifying the manufacturing process to bring down the cost per unit.
I am currently considering a design which features a hard stem whose soft attachment point is situated above the trigger, as opposed to the soft attachment being placed at the very bottom. The solid construction is able to be waterjet cut and pinned, removing the need for CNC milling and welding/brazing. This increases the rate at which pieces can be manufactured and units can be assembled.
The sling attachment point allows the soft attachment to act somewhat like the stem of a chock and move freely without causing the stem of the cam to shift. This also allows the soft attachment to bend at least 90° for placement in horizontal cracks, placing no lever stress on the stem. As a result, dyneema static rope has been used instead of webbing, as static rope tested more durable over edges.
Thank you once again for your insights in behaviors and preferences related to trad climbing and associated equipment. Your experiences have significantly informed the direction that this project has taken.
At this stage, I have been working on and testing physical prototypes for both camming devices and carabiners, and I wanted to share.
For the camming device, the focus has been on simplifying the manufacturing process to bring down the cost per unit.
I am currently considering a design which features a hard stem whose soft attachment point is situated above the trigger, as opposed to the soft attachment being placed at the very bottom. The solid construction is able to be waterjet cut and pinned, removing the need for CNC milling and welding/brazing. This increases the rate at which pieces can be manufactured and units can be assembled.
The sling attachment point allows the soft attachment to act somewhat like the stem of a chock and move freely without causing the stem of the cam to shift. This also allows the soft attachment to bend at least 90° for placement in horizontal cracks, placing no lever stress on the stem. As a result, dyneema static rope has been used instead of webbing, as static rope tested more durable over edges.
Additionally, the soft attachment is doubled and acts as an extendable sling, intending to reduce the need for as many duplicate quickdraws.
This current concept as shown uses 1.218 in³ of material. In solid 6061-T6 aluminum this is around 1.9 oz, which is 0.4 oz lighter than the size 3 Metolius Ultralight Master Cam (0.74"-1.04" range, the same as this current prototype). The current design can also be optimized to further reduce weight per unit. |
For the carabiner, the focus has been on developing a means of preventing potential for cross-loading without the need for any additional hardware. I am currently considering a design which features an internal "fin" that makes it very difficult for rope and/or slings opposite each other to sit perpendicular to the frame except in the proper vertical orientation. The gifs below show 15 lbs of force being dropped 2 inches attached to the 9.9mm blue rope.
In testing hooded wiregates vs. solid gate keylocks, I found that the additional mass on the hood of the wiregates plus the use of steel on the wiregates versus aluminum on the keylocks made the overall weight around the same as a keylock which has a much narrower nose (± 0.05oz).
The frame is currently sized halfway between the standard regular 4" and the standard small 3.25". For future consideration, the largest differences between a hooded wiregate and a keylock construction are that the keylock has a narrower nose and would be cheaper to manufacture. Keylocks average around $10-11 MSRP and hooded wiregates average $13-15.
If you have an opinion, is this difference in cost to the user significant enough to sway whether you purchase a hooded wiregate or a keylock carabiner?
If you have any questions, concerns, or opinions related to these prototypes and/or your experience/preferences interacting with trad equipment, I would once again appreciate anything that you are willing to share.
Climb on!
Michael Orlow
University of Oregon SPD
The frame is currently sized halfway between the standard regular 4" and the standard small 3.25". For future consideration, the largest differences between a hooded wiregate and a keylock construction are that the keylock has a narrower nose and would be cheaper to manufacture. Keylocks average around $10-11 MSRP and hooded wiregates average $13-15.
If you have an opinion, is this difference in cost to the user significant enough to sway whether you purchase a hooded wiregate or a keylock carabiner?
If you have any questions, concerns, or opinions related to these prototypes and/or your experience/preferences interacting with trad equipment, I would once again appreciate anything that you are willing to share.
Climb on!
Michael Orlow
University of Oregon SPD