UKC

Moderator Comment - Thread now frozen. Initial post was hasty. Please read some of the lower posts to get the full picture, especially the last post. Title of the thread changed to avoid searches picking it up.

I've just been checking out the new Fixe Alien Lites whilst doing a bit of research, and have noticed what I think may be a serious safety issue with them. I haven't got one, so can't confirm whether or not this is correct, but felt it is serious enough an issue to raise, perhaps one of you who has could help confirm?

Basically on their website they state that the new crimped ferrule is aluminium rather than copper and that the wire they use is stainless steel. Those of you who are familiar with bi metallic corrosion will know that naked aluminium on naked steel (i,e. Uncoated and un anodised) is a serious mismatch of material. Even if the ferrule were anodised, which i seriously doubt, the anodising would be compromised during the crimping process. Currently any of these units will be absolutely fine as they have literally just come out, however if I'm correct they are a ticking timebomb. Those of you who have them need to raise this issue with the supplier immediately. There is a reason why the old units had a heavy copper ferrule, why BD x4s have a stainless crimp, and why nut wires are galvanised rather than stainless, allowing for an aluminium crimp to be used.

I don't want to have a long drawn out slanging match, but felt it was really important to raise this ASAP. I will also contact the manufacturer.

Cheers,

Mike

In reply to beardy mike:

and if they turn round and say that they have addressed/avoided the point that you raise by doing x, what are you going to do then?

In reply to nniff:
Well then they've addressed it. I'm only going by what they state on their website. Like I say, this is a potentially serious problem and the product is at a point in its lifecycle where its only just been released, so if it is a problem it can be rectified easily. If they have rectified it, then great, but the only way they could have done that unless they are doing something pretty unconventional which I don't know about, is by changing back to a copper or stainless ferrule.

In reply to beardy mike:

So you want people to write to a manufacturer about a problem that you think might happen at some unknown point in the future? good plan chief.

In reply to higherclimbingwales: No, if it is as I suspect, its not a case of might, it WILL happen. And IF I am correct about the materials they are using, they need to recall them now before people have them at the bottom of their sacks, getting wet, getting salty as it is only a matter of time before they start to see failures. As i say, I have absolutely no axe to grind here, I am trying to raise peoples attention to something which they need to be aware of. As I say, i've emailed Alpkit, who I have no doubt will raise it with Fixe.

In reply to nniff:

Why does he need to do anything?

It is a perfectly reasonable point to raise.

In reply to nniff: plus if they've done something about it I will be overjoyed to eat humble pie and this thread can be removed immediately. I am concerned about peoples longterm safety here. This is what I do for a living and I spend quite a number of my waking hours looking at cams.

In reply to beardy mike:

You're talking about galvanic corrosion?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galvanic_corrosion

In reply to Timmd: yes.

In reply to beardy mike:

what exactly is your job? what qualifies you to pass comment on the long-term safety of equipment that I assume to be designed and manufactured by people who know what they are doing?

In reply to beardy mike:

Their contact details are here.

http://www.fixehardware.com/shop/contact-us

In reply to higherclimbingwales:

A few climbing companies have issued recalls in the past. It's a scientifically valid concern he has, but possibly there's a protective element between the two metals.

Hopefully all is dandy.

In reply to higherclimbingwales: I design cams. Does that qualify me?

In reply to beardy mike:

Surely the reply from the manufacturer will read something like: we recommend users store their equipment in a cool clean and dry location to avoid corrosion problems.

I'm sure I've got nuts with aluminium swages on stainless wire that are at least 15 years old and show no signs of corrosion.

In reply to beardy mike:

Nice one.

That's him told.

In reply to gethin_allen:

I guess it depends on a third element causing a reaction between the two metals?

In reply to gethin_allen: you will generally find that the wires on nuts are made from galvanised steel rope rather than stainless steel rope. I.e. It doesn't suffer the same galvanic corrosion. Hence why the crimped ferrules on nuts are aluminium. The galvanised rope is marginally stronger weight for weight aswell and the ability to use an aluminium crimp makes for much lighter nuts as copper is nearly four times the weight per volume. You generally have to use a stainless rope on a microcam like an Alien as the silver soldered termination will not work with a galvanised rope as the solder effectively doesn't create a good bond. Also if the nuts are anodised, this will massively inhibit the corrosion.

In reply to beardy mike:

Of course it does but it's usually a good idea to qualify your statements on safety with that information.

In reply to beardy mike:

Don't worry, the lobes will fall off anyway before there's time for any corrosion to occur:

http://mountainproject.com/v/malfunction---fixe-alien/109605895
http://www.supertopo.com/climbers-forum/2366805/fixe-alien-warranty

In reply to higherclimbingwales: Umm... i did... "This is what I do for a living and I spend quite a number of my waking hours looking at cams." A few posts in. Can we quit with the slanging match now? I'm not posting this because i'm some sort of up myself self appointed matron of safety, I'm posting it because I have genuine concerns for peoples safety a couple of years down the line. And to be honest, if they haven't mitigated the problem, then quite honestly, I'm doing them a favour flagging it up now. If I were into shoeing fixe for shits and giggles, I'd have waited a couple of years and then raised it. Trust me, recalls in the climbing industry are bad for everybody.

In reply to AlanLittle: damn... Thats some scary stuff right there... However, the new ones have a different method for attaching the cams, and they are riveted using a domed profile which traps a washer in place. I saw them at the Friedrichafen outdoor show, I just didn't spot the crimp!

In reply to beardy mike: here you go guys and girls, this is from Talurit, a swage producing company which at least one cam manufacturer uses to supply expertise. Specifically see the bit with reference to copper swages for stainless rope. http://www.talurit.com/webbplats/products/copper_ferrule_english_76.asp

In reply to beardy mike:
I am a pipeline engineer and agree with Mike. It's a pity because this version of Alien I predict are the best small cam available. I was looking forward to getting the 4 smallest. I will wait and see what Fixe say to this.

In reply to beardy mike:


I think being open about genuine issues and issuing timely recalls - as well as being the right thing to do anyway - can actually enhance a company's reputation. Compare and contrast Totem's early recall because they decided anodised lobe faces weren't good in marginal limestone placements, with CCH's complete denial about quality control issues up to and including Aliens falling apart in peoples' hands.

In reply to AlanLittle:
I couldn't agree more, but it's a very difficult situation when it happens, with different opinions, a desire to avoid losing custom because of the loss of confidence, and many other factors. At the end of the day the most important thing is that if there is a real problem concerning safety, that it is dealt with as comprehensively as possible. At the end of the day the product is brand new so IF there is a problem it can be done quickly and easily with a minimum of cost. I genuinely hope that in a weeks time I'll be apologising for causing a storm in a teacup and getting the thread pulled.

In reply to beardy mike:


That's exactly what you have done. Whether you're right or wrong, raise it with the manufacturer directly and privately and give them a chance to respond before you go bleating in public. Moral high ground is very slippery and steep-sided: the internet has a nasty long-term memory and, if you're incorrect in your assertion, you appear to have libelled them. They might take a dim view of that, given the cost of product development, certification, marketing, etc.

For what it's worth, I have no idea whether you have a sound technical point or not. However, your delivery leaves much to be desired.

In reply to nniff: fair enough, I can't really argue your points. I am only trying to raise an issue which is in my opinion important for people to know, which is based upon solid experience of designing the same type of product, and getting into the fine detail associated with that. As I have repeatedly said I sincerely hope I am wrong and will apogise profusely if that's the case. It doesn't help when I've got people basically trolling me and asking what the hell would I know. If Fixe respond to me I will do my best to help them if they want me to, or to withdraw all the comments I've made unreservedly. I started the thread asking for confirmation of the materials used from somebody who has some so that I could self censor, but I've not had that yet. I won't comment again until I have that confirmation either way. Sorry if I've caused people strife.

In reply to beardy mike:

There was nothing wrong in your method either.

Libel, jeez. There will be other reasons why not, but these hold:

...It is not libel if it is substantially true.

...If the defendant reasonably believes that publishing is in the public interest...

...If it was honestly held to be true based on facts know at the time...

In reply to nniff:


Nonsense.

In reply to beardy mike:

Really interesting thread Mike, thanks. Whether your concern is correct or mistaken, it's good to raise these questions in order to see how manufacturers respond and to keep them on their toes.

As an aside, it's a bit of a shame that your thread should also act as a magnet for gobshites but also interesting that you knew this would happen. Past experience or intuition?

I'm a bit disappointed by some of the replies in this thread.

Galvanic corrosion is an important design consideration. One would have to identify the alloys used, and any mitigating measures. It may well be that the designer never thought about sea cliff use. Or, it may be they did and judged the rate of corrosion to be so slow as to not be a problem.

Mike might be barking up the wrong tree, or he might not be. I think its a good question to ask. If you have a problem with it, address the chemistry of the problem - not Mike's qualifications, or that he asked it in a public forum.

Public discussions can lead us all to learn something new. If Fixe finds it damaging to their company, they might want to publish more about their design decisions. And if this thread impacts their sales in some negative or positive way, so what? I'm here to talk about climbing gear, not boost some companies cam sales.


On a related note, my favorite piece of alien failure satire:
http://www.mountainproject.com/v/106565200

In reply to higherclimbingwales:

Um, you owe Mike an apology.

In reply to beardy mike:
Quite a reasonable observation Mike. Although my rack is somewhat retro, (Moac, stoppers, Hexes and mk1 Friends etc,etc) I've seen a lot of damage to Ali castings on motorbikes where people have blinged up their bikes with stainless fasteners. Galvanic rot sets in very quickly if they ride in winter on salted roads.
When I built a kit aircraft, very precise specs were given over materials to be used for crimping the flying wires, and I had to show the paperwork to the PFA Inspector.

In reply to beardy mike:

Any updates so far?

In reply to Timmd:

According to that site, aluminium has an anodic index around -0.9V (this is the middle of 3 types listed), and plain carbon steel -0.85V. It also states that a 0.15V difference is adequate for the outdoor environment.

That does not sound like a "serious mismatch of material" ... as there are at least some flavours of these two materials which are galvanically compatible.

In reply to beardy mike:


Yes, probably - though you could be a mech eng doing the force calculations, geometry design, etc - ie someone else might do the materials bit.

It also means you are conflicted, assuming you design cams professionally rather than as a hobby. Arguably something you should have disclosed at the outset rather than halfway down the thread where it is easily missed by a casual reader ...

In reply to Siderunner: it will be most likely 302 or 304 stainless steel, which are the most commonly available grades of stainless steel wire rope. Not carbon steel, as carbon steel would need to be galvanised to inhibit rust and you can use alu ferrules with it, as previously stated. Its specifically stainless and alu ferrules which is the cause for concern. Sorry for not stating my qualifications at the outset, and as I am an independent consultant working for various companies, none of this benefits me. I have no set in stone affiliation with any one company.

As for updates, none bar Alpkit have refered it on to Fixe. It has been a bank holiday, so not surprising.

In reply to nniff: You're an idiot. He hasn't libelled them by raising a valid safety concern - what rubbish. However, me calling you an idiot might be, although with the evidence you've presented so far I doubt there's a court in the land that would convict me. Raising it here is the right thing to do as anyone with one of these things is now aware of a potential safety issue. Sure, the manufacturers could respond privately, but with the lack of response posted on here in the last 5 days they clearly haven't. He did the right thing by posting it.

In reply to Siderunner: http://www.corrosionist.com/galvanic_corrosion_chart.htm

Note stainless 302 and 304 at between 0 and -0.1 and aluminium's between -0.75 and -1.

In reply to beardy mike:
Both fair comments, thanks for taking the time. I will be interested to hear the response from Fixe - if they ever give one.

In reply to needvert:



This ^^

In reply to beardy mike:

Given that aluminium krabs in a sea cliff environment rot on their own, an aluminium ferrule in a galvanic environment will become a big white fluffy mess of oxide in very short order if left damp, doubly so in a sea cliff environment. Given that the head of a jammed friend in a crack 80feet above the high water mark turned to oxide mush in a matter of months over here, I don't hold out much hope for the Fixe aliens in the bottom of someone's rucsac.

In reply to beardy mike:

The information on the page I saw says the wire is 'steel'.

In reply to DubyaJamesDubya:

http://www.fixehardware.com/shop/sale-items/alien-lite-cams-set-of-5/

please click on the slightly ironically entitled heading technical info/safety sheet.

In reply to beardy mike:

I guess you have to be careful to avoid extended exposure to sea water but that would apply in any case.
I note they use stainless gates on wire gate karabiners which were first used in marine applications... to reduce corrosion!

In reply to DubyaJamesDubya: Stainless gates on an anodised aluminium yes. There is a massive difference. Crimps are not anodised for the very simple reason that it's pointless - a crimp is crushed into place under a ton of force or so - any anodising would be utterly compromised and useless, as would any membrane you inserted to seperate the metals. Quite apart from which a wiregate is a totally different situation - the hole is what, 6mm deep? And the tolerances are pretty slack? Moisture drying out in that case is a relatively simple thing to occur. Moisture that's been drawn into a crimped joint, where the metals are effectively an interference fit, where the wound wire works like a capillary tube and where you have no chance of inspecting or rapidly drying the joint out is another story... and funnily enough the wire crimping industry agrees.

What I don't quite get about all these comments is that I ask for a confirmation from someone out there who owns one, and what I get is:

questions as to how qualified I am - Masters degree in engineering, 15 years experience as a mechanical design engineer, 2 years in the outdoor industry, designing specifically these products...
questions as to whether I've got the right materials - when I asked for confirmation of in my first post because I don't own any, and was going by the manufacturers claims, which was clearly indicated.
Questions as to whether I'm trying to do Fixe over - why would I want to do that? And besides, Alien is owned by a company which earns I am utterly certain, far far more money out of bolts, and ropes, than it will ever earn out of a single, highly specialised product with a limited market.
Questions over whether I'm libeling anybody - no, I'm not. I'm using information provided by the manufacturer and knowledge accrued over the aforementioned 15 years. I.e. I have seen something I've spotted and am asking for someone to disprove it because I don't want it to be true.

You lot can either believe me or not, not really sure it matters that much whether you do or you don't. I know having spoken to others in the industry about it that they share my concerns - they simply hadn't seen it. But they ARE affiliated to companies, and so as someone who is about as neutral as one can get in a situation like this, I thought I'd bring it up, hoping I would get an intelligent conversation about it, rather than people telling me I've done bad, that I'm an idiot, or that I don't know what I'm talking about. Once again, my concern is for the long term safety of the product, anything else that goes with it doesn't really bother me that much. If Fixe agree with me then great fantastic, problem solved. If they don't that is their prerogative - I won't be buying any. But if they don't agree with me (and others) then people should also know that there is a long term risk involved with using them. Whether that risk is borne out is another question. But it's like designing a car where the steering wheel is made out of cheese. It'll be fine for a while until a magic mouse finds out and starts eating it from the inside out. If you're lucky, the mouse wont ever find it, but if you're not, then one day, you're driving a long and it comes off in your hands and you die.

In reply to beardy mike:

All was going well until this statement.


How much of the weight of the nut is the crimp responsible for?

whether it's copper or aluminium, there's not going to be a lot of difference in the overall weight is there?

The rest is valid though, I've seen massive damage to galvanised equipment by using stainless bolts etc, But these have been outside.

Galvanic corrosion does need some water to make it an issue, I'm not sure my nuts have been wet enough for long enough to ever make this an issue.

In reply to krikoman:

OK. As an example, the crimp at the top of a well known brand of cams is 10mm diameter, 20mm long. The hole through the middle ends up at approx 5mm. So if you make a tube of that shape (which yes is fairly approximate, I know) copper comes in at 10g, whilst aluminium comes in at 3g. When small cams weigh 90g, thats 7% of it's weight. Yes it's small, but it's not negligible, and what with you lot going one about how light your rack is, companies will rightly exploit any method they can to be lighter than the others.

In reply to beardy mike:


But most of those combinations look to result in a similar potential of ~0.3V to the SS-Al combo you're concerned about if not a little worse? I'm probably missing something or relying on bad data. Edit: Fair enough, Wiki has some radically different figures to those in your link.

jk

In reply to jkarran:

Take a look at the chart in this on page 7

http://www.clufix.com/de/images2/plaquette_revetements_en.pdf#page=7

It lists stainless to copper as protected, but stainless to aluminium as highly unprotected.
It doesn't list the difference galvanising makes, by carbon steel to Alu is well protected.
Stainless on stainless is obviously inert
stainless on carbon steel is unprotected (hence bolts and hangers needing to be matched.

In reply to beardy mike:

Good old UKC. Someone tries to point out a potential problem, seems qualified to do this, works in the industry and some people just decide to slate the chap.
In a small community of climbers, this is disappointing.

In reply to higherclimbingwales:

So you want people to write to a manufacturer about a problem that you think might happen at some unknown point in the future? good plan chief.


What exactly would be the matter with this then? People don't know everything and sometimes it takes an external inward look to spot potential problems. I'd do the same thing as it could potentially help fellow climbers.

In reply to beardy mike:


There's the problem right there: truth and experience in a UKC OP. You're destined to be burnt at the stake!

In reply to beardy mike:

Cheers, the wikipedia data appears to be (at best) incomplete. Thinking back I've heard of problems with Al rivets in SS skins.
jk

In reply to jkarran:
Eh? Looking at this table http://www.corrosionist.com/galvanic_corrosion_chart.htm , assuming stainless means 304 and picking roughly the middle of each block, I get no more than 0.3V for the other combos:

Old aliens: Copper on stainless (I think?) -0.35 on -0.1 is 0.25V
BD X4: Stainless on stainless, negligible voltage
Nuts: Aluminium on galvanised steel is more complicated, as Aluminium, mild steel and zinc are all present, but even then the largest difference is mild steel (-0.65) to Zinc (-1) at 0.35V. If the zinc was structural that might not be ideal but it isn't. Al to mild steel can be 0.1V to 0.3V depending on grades.

Whereas what mike is concerned they may have done on the new aliens:
Aluminium on stainless is -0.9 on -0.1 is 0.8V

I originally assumed it was a marketing department cockup and the "stainless steel" wire was actually galvanised. They are both corrosion resistant and shiny after all. But I see it is written on the technical info thing as 7x19 stainless. It would seem odd that someone would know what 7x19 was but not the difference between stainless and galvanised.

If it is as Mike is concerned it might be, i.e. Al crimp on SS wire, with no special measures to limit corrosion, then I (as a physicist/material scientist) would think they'll be fine in a dry arid environment, but might have a short working life on sea cliffs. Given that the photos look like the crimp is anodised, any corrosion will occur inside, where it would be difficult to spot. So I'm not going to buy any unless Fixe release some info about the design that puts my concerns at rest. Whilst in Mike's position I might have contacted fixe and given them a couple of weeks to respond before posting on here, I don't think he's wrong to bring attention to this.

Edit: it took me way too long to write that as I got distracted half way though, and I see it's no longer really relevant. I'll leave it up anyway in case it helps clarify things...

In reply to Jack B:

As I've said, Wikipedia's data for 'stainless' ("12% chromium type corrosion-resistant steels -0.6" seems to be the closest fit for 300 series) is, as I was initially suspicious of, misleading. I simply asked a question seeking some clarification and hoping to learn something which I did.

jk

In reply to krikoman:




If you don't know the the answer why make such a sweeping negative statement rather than either finding out (what the weight difference might be) elsewhere to allow you to add an informed opinion, or ask the guy, who has now repeatedly shown he knows what he's talking about, what this is likely to result in?

>Galvanic corrosion does need some water to make it an issue, I'm not sure my nuts have been wet enough for long enough to ever make this an issue.

Again he's already explained how short term water exposure to the unit in general can cause long term exposure for the joint. I'm too lazy to wash me gear every time I go climbing (partly because then I know by bag's ready to pick up and go when the opportunity arises - and I wouldn't wash my bag even if I did), and regularly get splashed by waves on a belay/approach to a sea cliff, caught in the rain or accidentally plonk my bag in a puddle.

In reply to beardy mike:
Seems a valid point that you are making. Perhaps some sort of resin 'filler' (low viscosity enough to be wicked up the wire) applied after crimping is the answer.
I think 90% of response you have got are supportive or valid questions, cross checking/confirming your logic. No need to feel 'too victimised'.

In reply to beardy mike:


And that's conservative. My smallest cams - X4 0.2, C3 0 and 1 - are around 55 to 60g. You're up to a Dragon 1 before you reach 90g.

In reply to AlanLittle:

Well not quite as microcams use smaller cable and consequently a smaller diameter ferrule. But you get the idea...

In reply to beardy mike:


Well put.

In reply to Denni:


It says something about the people doing the slating, perhaps.

It doesn't cost anything to just sit back and see what happens.

In reply to Timmd:

I think 'slating' is overstating things. It may well be OK for Mike to raise the issue here (I would have discretely asked the manufacturer first and then raised it with the BMC if they didnt reply to my satisfaction....I'd also have asked UKC direct before posting here). Yet we have a manufactured product being questioned publicly, so checking the OPs qualifications to do this is pretty pertinent and Mike's offence taken at this in the circumstances is rather odd.

In reply to Offwidth:
Yeah, you're right. I should have known better than to post rather than approaching the manufacturer first. However, as previously stated i posted in the hope that someone has one and could either confirm that it has an Aluminium ferrule or not. I haven't taken offence, its just rather tiresome to always have the same result here. I specifically asked for this not to degenerate into a long slanging match, stating that I was not 100% certain what the materials used were, as I could only take the manufacturers website at face value. But sometimes marketing material is incorrect, certainly wouldn't be the first or the last time. I have no problem going through my logic and explaining my thinking, but people questioning my motives and qualification? It all a bit daft.

In reply to beardy mike:
I'd say expecting anything but questioning of motives and experience in such a post is naive. The internet is what it is and for all the sins sometimes visible on this site its way better than say comments on most news sites.

Having listened to what you say I share your concerns (with my own material science background) but Fixe may well have worked a solution.

I always used and liked Aliens (despite their reputation) as they worked well where other gear did not but like any micro-pro I don't expect always be stopped if I fall on it (even though I always have been impressed with their holding power and robustness to shock loads in my falls and in general handling so far... way more so than say the numerous pulled, bent and blown microwires and my zeros that couldn't even cope with being bashed about on my rack ).

In reply to beardy mike:

So, I've had word back from Alpkit. Fixe have addressed this problem which is a relief. I'm not sure how, and have asked whether they would be prepared to comment.

For my part, I've also been doing some work on it to resolve whether this is a problem or not. Talking to swaging specialists, there is some information I was not aware of, namely that galvanic corrosion and the rate it attacks the parent metals is somewhat governed by the ratio of the volumes of metal involved. Providing that the volume of aluminium is high enough in comparison to the stainless, whilst not ideal, the rate of corrosion is sufficiently low so as to most likely exceed the expected lifetime of these products. It does not remove the risk, especially if they are used extensively in a salty environment. So a watching brief should be maintained, to ensure that no obvious corrosion is present.

So once again, I am sorry for the strife caused, and I must apologise to Fixe and Alpkit for raising this in a forum which got out of hand. In this case it seems they have done their homework and I've learned something new. I will leave it up to the mods as to whether they pull the thread so that none of the information can be misconstrued by the general public or whether they want me to edit the original post. I should never have expected this thread to not go downhill, so lesson learnt there!