Autolock Pass-through Munter

...

While that would work, I fail to see the point. Complex systems just tend to leave more room for error. Plus if you wanted to get super technical about it, The main anchor would then be the biner with the munter on it, and it looks like that is only hanging from one piece, i.e. not equalized.
I personally like to keep things simple. Use the most basic methods of belay and anchors that everyone in the party can understand. That allows for a really quick visual confirmation that all systems are go. Plus I really never have seen the NEED for autoblocks.

I am a guide and have never felt the need to add such complexity to my systems. Most of the time I set people up on a gri-gri so I can give them some quick assistance if needed. That wouldn't work so well in Ouray with the ice and the snow so that's really the only situation where I can see it being applicable and even then I might just redirect the belay off my harness. I hadn't thought of it before but I might rotate it into my bag of tricks this winter to see how I like it. I think it has limited use but might be very useful in that limited circumstance.

Real nice drawing, anyway.

I'm not sure what a "top managed TR scenario" is...but what problem are you attempting to solve?

It's a situation where you lower in and belay people from the top of a climb. Like sea cliffs and stuff. He's trying to solve the problem of it being difficult to lower people in using an autoblocking belay device such as an ATC guide.

Interesting.

Assumption is that there is an anticipated problem with just doing the simpler single rig lower or just rap and switch over to the autoblock/lock; which means you need to prepare for & switch to an uphaul while loaded.

How do you incorporate your ratchet & backside pulley for the mechanical advantaged uphaul?

Seems like you are putting more into the rig than needed; like it'd be a pain in the ass. Why not just go back to the basic sling pulley to release the autoblock for the lower?

Also, if you could learn to lower someone without bouncing them down, wouldn't the gri-gri or cinch just solve your problem completely?

So, it appears that you have added a lowering setup (munter) to a lowering setup (autoblock). Kind of like adding an atc to an atc. Are you looking for redundancy in your lowering setup? (i.e. ice on the rope could cause a slip). If not, the autoblock will lower quite nicely by itself with a little practice. And, in your setup, the "client/loweree" will have to completely unweight the rope for you to remove the munter. Not the case if you just use the autoblock.

• edit for earrly morning grammar**

My initial hit is that a gri-gri/cinch would do everything you're looking to do and better. I used to use a guide for these situations, but I've found a cinch works much better and is easier to deal with the lowering.

Is the intended use only for the initial lowering in a Top-Managed setting? The advantage to thissetup, as I see it, is that once the climber is lowered, the belayer just needs to pop the munter off and start hauling. That said, you would still need to be able to lower directly off the guide for when the climber is weighting the rope and needs to be lowered.

This just seems a little complicated unless it is to solve a very specific problem. Also, since the munter is the main point and only equalized off two points, the argument could be made that it is less safe.

Not sure what problem this is solving either but it is actually not that complicated. He wants to lower with a munter and then take it off and belay with the autolocking belay device without undoing the belay device from the anchor.

The munter is backed up just fine because a failure there would cause the rope to fall on the belay device although how you would get that mess unstuck would be a problem.

Since this requires you to stay at the anchor to undo the munter, why not just rig up a sling or shorter piece of rope to release the autolock? If you feel this is not as smooth as you want you could hook up your release sling/rope to the brake biner and pull that out instead of pivoting the belay device. That is the recommended release setup for the Trango B52.

Rick Blair wrote: The munter is backed up just fine because a failure there would cause the rope to fall on the belay device although how you would get that mess unstuck would be a problem.

There really isn't much of a load distribution here. Not that it's really needed when looking at modern bolts and just static body weight as a mass.

If you are just looking at load distribution, as opposed to try make a cleaner system for multiple applications, then everything in this rig is an attempted back-up to mistakenly try and increase a safety factor.

The end result though, if you have enough energy to create failure at the munter, the entire system fails. Not that it would happen with a solid bolt, rated equipment in good condition, and just a top-roped climber; but just pointing out the mistake of thinking that this type of supposed redundancy will actually increase your rigging safety.

Buff Johnson wrote: There really isn't much of a load distribution here.

I see your point, the whole system is pre-equalized, the left and right anchors make a 90 degree angle on the sling and why not use all three anchor points for the munter but I think we need to allow for a little artistic license when analyzing this. I can't draw that well.

Buff Johnson wrote: If you are just looking at load distribution, as opposed to try make a cleaner system for multiple applications, then everything in this rig is an attempted back-up to mistakenly try and increase a safety factor.

I still don't understand what problem he is trying to solve, I assumed he was going after a smoother lowering system, not necessarily trying to increase safety.

that's why I said:

"as opposed to try make a cleaner system for multiple applications,..."

If I'm interpreting correctly, the point of the Munter is to limit force on the belay device and prevent the auto-locking behavior so that it's possible to lower the climber. I scanned quickly so my interpretation may not be correct.

But, if it is, there may be a simpler way to go about this. My BD ATC Guide device has an attachment point for smaller diameter perlon cord. The purpose is to attach the device to the anchor with a point that opposes the force creating the auto-lock. Simply pull on that point and the device unlocks so climbers can be lowered.

A picture and description of how to do it can be found here: blackdiamondequipment.com/g….

You actually use this type of a setup for canyoneering pretty frequently for canyons with moving water. In canyoneering, this is called a "contingency anchor". It's great for lowering someone who is on rappel (single line) so they can set the length of the rope to rap off of the end of the rope into a pool of water.

This is especially good for canyons with flowing water so that you can get off rappel without getting tangled in the rope in a hydraulic. Essentially, after the first person does this, the munter is then used to hitch the rope in place and the line is set for the rest of the party to rap down. Using the Munter also adds extra safety for releasing the rope/lowering the rapper if any of the people rapping get into trouble from the moving water.

I can't say that I see this being very useful for climbing purposes, though.

buttonheadspinner wrote: Regarding redundancy - both the auto lock and munter sides are fully redundant and load shared directionally. Neither include limited extensions but they could be tied that way.

With this paragraph, if you had just stopped typing after the words "Regarding redundancy"....

Anyway, one other thing to consider is that you are sending people down on this rig time after time after time -- the loaded munter is gonna shit-can your rope's manageability; it seems to me the gri-gri/cinch solves any problem the Top Site manager would encounter better than anything I have seen.

Try releasing the "autolock/block" by pulling on the brake biner instead of levering the device. Maybe this will give you a smoother release?

This is from the Trango B52 FAQ

There's a new Cassin device coming out next season that eliminates the need for the redirects that other autoblockers require. A nice solution to the lowering problem.

In the meantime, I'd use a Cinch for this and KISS. Ropes just don't get that wet at Ouray to be a concern for TRs.

As implied above, your method will probably work. But there are certainly simpler options.

Best trick I learned from my woe-begotten days as a climbing guide, for lowering Large Persons:

Super munter.

When they hit the ground you can pop the "super" strand (if you've tied the thing correctly) and you'll be left with a regular munter hitch.

But it seems you want the added security of an auto-blocking belay device. What about a gri-gri?

"I am trying to find a system that address the issue of opening the system that occurs when common autolock belay devices are released to lower a climber. I think this gets it done with minimal swapping out or adding blocks to the system. I have experienced difficulty lowering hefty climbers (can't stand the autolock mode for this reason)."

I've experienced the less than pleasant lowering characteristics of a Guide/Reverso as well. One thing to keep in mind is that the main goal in designing the reverso/guide was to create an auto-bloc for pulling up seconds. Therefore, although lowering a few feet might be called forto get back on the rock, long, smooth lowers weren't the main purpose of these designs.

"There's a better way!"

There is a better way. It is called a gri-gri or cinch off the anchor. I don't know why you are resistant to these two options and insist on inventing a new wheel, a clunky one at that.

The only reason I can think of is that you do not want to invest in one of these devices. However, I would say that if the lowering scenario is a big enough issue for you to be creating this system and putting effort into getting it evaluated by us, then it is probably worth buying the best equipment.

I applaud your forward thinking in innovation, but your system does not offer any benefit over standard methods of doing what you want to do and creates some drawbacks in terms of ease of use and safety(mainly due to a more complicated system).

"If you try this and have any feedback, I'd welcome it."

If you insist on using this setup, it can be made cleaner by eliminating the second, offset, equalized master point. Instead, just create one equalized anchor, but tie the master point with a large loop so that the master point is about 12 inches from the knot(make sure to maintain acute angles with your anchor, you might need a longer cordalette).

Then, rig the guide through the master point and the munter through the top-shelf(clip in above the knot). That way everything is inline,and you eliminate some of the clusterF***.

Cheers,
Evan

petzl.com/us/outdoor/assure…

like the figures show, you just release the autoblock with the small pulley setup through the brake biner by sitting down in your harness. Once the autoblock is released, you lower with the munter hitch (could be another belay device too i suppose) that you setup on your harness before you released the autoblock.

The bd guide instructions say you can just lower by gently releasing the autoblock by using a sling or some cord through the release hole, maybe using a pulley for heavy climbers on steep terrain. Petzl doesn't seem to think that method gives you enough control.