Auto Belay for Lead Climbing

I am part of a mechanical engineering senior design team, and for our project we are designing an auto belay for lead climbing. We would really appreciate feedback from lead climbers. If you have the time, please complete this quick two minute survey to give us input on our auto belay device. Thank you so much for your help! If you have any questions about the project, feel free to ask me here!

https://goo.gl/forms/Zd4aKtscTAmq6hUh2

Chances are for a bunch of your questions you might better off to build the techniques to measure pull lengths, speed and other statistics than asking people. I can tell you that I would make bad guesses at the distances I pull or speeds on average for example. Seems like you've identified  some the key areas to look at and may be missing others that may help determine if the the climber is moving, clipping, falling, down climbing, etc. 

Sounds like a fun physics and engineering problem. Best wishes. 

It's gonna yank ya back when you do that super sweet dyno brahhhhh

Your auto-lead-belay device ideally would belay as well as the best human belayer. Anything less wouldn't be worth it.

I took your survey. A few questions and concerns come to mind.

Do you understand the difference between an auto-belay such as the ones commonly found in gyms (Perfect Descent, Trublue, etc.), a Silent Partner, a Soloist, and other devices? In theory, if an auto-belay was wound with dynamic climbing rope rather than the webbing with which they come standard, and anchored to the ground facing up, this would work for lead climbing. Limitations would be that it would need to be redesigned to accommodate rope rather than webbing, length of rope it can accommodate, and of course the weight and size of the device.

The fact that your proposed auto-lead-belay device seemingly would lower me to the ground after each fall would be hugely frustrating. This could also be unsafe in some circumstances (rope length, possible jagged edges).

Is your team sufficiently knowledgeable in climbing and products already on the market that they can handle this? Self-belaying is an advanced concept, even for most climbers.

Thanks Adam, we will definitely plan on gathering some measurements as well. Right now, we are especially interested in determining what aspects of the design are most important to potential users of the product. 

Thank you so much for your feedback!

The question about "How important is it that you not deck when using the device" was just in there for laughs, right?

Auroco Epic

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=78qYFDZ52oY

if you guys are ever looking for subjects to test your designs I would be willing to take part

Bill Shubert wrote:

The question about "How important is it that you not deck when using the device" was just in there for laughs, right?

No, probably not. Very few things are assumed in an engineering design project. If a criteria is important, then it needs to be measured and assessed.

That's a fundamental design requirement, not a measurable criteria. 'Decking' is not an acceptable outcome of any autobelay design, whether for lead or toprope

Alexander Blum wrote:

That's a fundamental design requirement, not a measurable criteria. 'Decking' is not an acceptable outcome of any autobelay design, whether for lead or toprope

'Not decking'- Would be a design criteria carried forward from the very begining of the project. It would be analyzed during the FMEA and various modes assigned a RPN.

' Not decking' sounds like a no brainer to us but not everyone climbs. The OP is heading down the right track by gathering population data to support the importance of this design criteria later on in the process. That way when Larry from purchasing (who has never been higher than the second rung of a 6 foot ladder) tries to sub in some cut rate chromoly from his buddy Wang who hooks him up with those nice Thai strippers, the OP has sufficient data to tell Larry to get bent.

amarius wrote:

Auroco Epic

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=78qYFDZ52oY

I´ve fondled one which raises a couple of issues that haven´t been adressed in the survey.

Weight:- the EPIC comes in at 9kg without the mounting bracket.

Fixed or not:- i want the device on me, not on the ground.

Price:- Affordable is relative to wealth for sure but $7604,46 plus tax and shipping without fixing bracket might just be a bit much for the average dirtbag. You could BUY a belayer for that price!

So I did the survey and while I think this is a cool idea from a practicality standpoint it seems like you're trying to fix something that isn't broken. I can't think of  a single climber that I know that would trust something like this over a human being. And if they were in a situation they would likely opt for a TR style autobelay over this. 

Just my two-cents

Doesn't seem that hard to make all you need is an auto belay at the base that is always pulling in slowly. And a trigger so if rope gets pulled out fast it locks up than reverses and slowly lets out at a constant speed. They have these things called seat belts that basically do this.

The real big problem with this type of thing is the same problem with current auto belays. If I am working on a hard top rope or sport route and I come off the wall I want my belayer to hold me in place so I can retry the section without reclimbing the entire route.

And you can also use a current auto-belay to lead climb as well by climbing and clipping the rope as you go, sure you lose some of the mental training but this is a gym still practice for climbing as you climb.

ClimbingOn wrote:

I took your survey. A few questions and concerns come to mind.

Do you understand the difference between an auto-belay such as the ones commonly found in gyms (Perfect Descent, Trublue, etc.), a Silent Partner, a Soloist, and other devices? In theory, if an auto-belay was wound with dynamic climbing rope rather than the webbing with which they come standard, and anchored to the ground facing up, this would work for lead climbing. Limitations would be that it would need to be redesigned to accommodate -rope rather than webbing, length of rope it can accommodate, and of course the weight and size of the device..

-Would the static webbing provide a dynamic catch? Is it possible to adjust the ramps to change the engagement? Or would dynamic material be better? Would this possibly prevent the peak load necessary to engage the braking of the autobelay? When it does engage, would the dynamic rope bounce and let the autobelay disengage?

-Gyms would have to specifically have anchors built at each station for the device. Either on the Ground or at the base of the climb on the wall.

-Using an existing device (as you stated) wouldn't work, they have a big locking 'biner to attach to the harness. You could lead once, and get lowered to the ground, but after detaching from harness the autobelay would retract, leaving the locking 'binder at the anchor (or last bolt to clip)

-Solution to this would be to make someone tie in (Easy to do) but what stops the proposed device from retracting ALL of the rope/webbing? Leaving it coiled inside the device (assuming the proposed device uses similar technology to existing auto belays)

Hey Rachel

I know I'm years behind, but are you able to contact me about your findings? I'm looking to do a similar project!

Thanks