Jump to content

micah dash is


RuMR

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 15
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

from supertopo:

"I've been around the metal fabricating world in one capacity or another for beter than 35 years now. ASME has had well developed procedures for all aspects of welding and brazing for a hell of a lot longer than that.

 

If I buy a non presurized chemical storage tank, that if it fails will only result in a major hassle but no posible loss of life. That tank will have about an inch of paper submitted before the approval for fabrication that documents all the:

 

Structural calculations,

Seismic loading calculations

Documentation of the quality of the materials and fasteners supplied,

The exact welding procedures to be used,

Proof of certification of the welders that do the procedures.

Documentation of test procedures

Results of sample and final tests.

Witnessing by a third party of final tests.

etc.

 

All of this by independent and licenced pros or at a minimum the signature of someone asuming legal responsibility for the accuracy of the statements.

 

There's no need for "lilly Guilding" and frankly a lot of those requirements are imposed only to guarantee an income stream for those with the power to mandate regulations that benefit themselves.

 

Still, climbing equipment should at least be built to common ASME standards!

 

BD, Metolious, DMM, and others seem to adhere internaly to a parallel sytem of standards. And, when their products do fail, it is almost always due to stressing beyond design limits, and they still seem take the failures seriously.

 

CHH from all acounts and the general apperance of their product has an ad hoc approach to quality control. If you can't afford the kind of quality control program that is industry standard, maybe you should be making a widget that no one is hanging their a$$ out on.

 

That's why I've never owned any."

can't agree more. hope this last incident is trully last one and a hefty lawsuite will put them out of business once and for all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

That was last time Jmace. These 2 Aliens which fell apart are both POST RECALL. ie, they were supposed to be correctly made and tensile tested before leaving the factory.

 

From the site:

 

"The window of the recall was 11-04 to 12-05, thus any Alien cams date coded during this period should be tested, dimpled or not. "

 

One was a Yellow, one was a purple. BOTH WERE RECENTLY MFG. AND WERE SUPPOSE TO BE TENSILE TESTED UNDER THE NEW QC PROTOCALL YET FELL APART ANYWAY they have dates later than the recall dates.

 

The purple has a tensile test of 3500 lbs, how do you suppose that it missed the testing?

 

Damn this shit is getting old. How long till some poor bastard looses his life cause of these MF slackhounds?

 

?? AlienFail1.jpg

 

 

AlienFail2.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I heard (cimbers' grapevine) that the cables themselves are tensile-tested, but not the head, the braze, or the fully assembled piece. Basically they test the strength of the cable sections which they receive and don't manufacture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I saw that as well Blake.

 

As part of the new QC measures which they instituted, they most assuredly said that they would tensile test each unit before it leaves the factory. The cables never have had an issue, it was manufacturing of the cams at the CCH plant and poor QC that was the issue all along. Perhaps they really are only testing the cables, they do show that process on the site, and not the testing of the units. BUT, I remember them saying they would tensile test, and mark each unit as such, before it left the factory. It looks like the Purple unit was not stamped "tensile tested".

 

From the CCH website:

 

"It has been recently reported to CCH that the main cable broke on an Alien. We were e-mailed photos

 

of the cam, however it isn't possible to make any conclusions from a photograph. We have asked the individual to forward the cam to a certified metallurgist for analysis, as of today April 27th, 2007 it has

 

not yet been received by the lab. We will post the results as soon as we receive them from the metallurgist.

 

.......................

 

Its been over a month since the Souders Crack incident. No report has been issued from a metallurgist

 

that we are aware of. Only analysis of the piece by a lab can begin to answer all the questions

 

and speculation that exist, we hope a report will be issued soon."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...