Treetools Blog 

The 'old' TreeMOTION has a new name (the S.Light) and the 'new' 2013 TreeMOTION takes over the old moniker.

Confused? Well, that's marketing for you!

According to the handbook included with the latest TreeMOTION (now known as the TreeMOTION) there are two products covered by the Manufacturers' Information and User Instructions: the TreeMOTION and the TreeMOTION S.Light.

There are important differences between these two products - for your convenience we have listed them below.

1) Load Carrying Capacity

The total test mass for the 2013 TreeMOTION was 120kg while the (now original) S.LIght was only 100kg.

The TreeMOTION deviates from EN 358:1999 and EN 813:2008 in some constructional details (eg the width of ventrally used webbing) but otherwise passes all the static and dynamic tests for both those standards, including EN 12277.

The 120kg test load was made up of climber and equipment.

The 2013 TreeMOTION also complies with ANSI Z133.1-2012 for arboricultural operations - it does not comply with any other ANSI Standard.

2) Comfort backpad fitted

The 'Comfort' Backpad was a recent optional extra for the original TreeMOTION and has proved to be very popular indeed - see previous blog post here.

The 'Comfort' Packpad is fitted as standard on the 2013 TreeMOTION but both back pad styles are available as replacement parts.

3) Stitched tail on the bridge

Treetools is not entirely sure about this one? Cosmetic or useful?

The tail on the bridge stopper knots is stitched solid for about 50mm at each end. The stitch stiffens up the tail significantly - we assume this would stop the tail sucking back through the knot under excessive load (but don't quote us on that!).

4) Rear PPE attachment point

Apart from the red-fringed Comfort Backpad and the 'Stitched' stopper knot tails the central rear PPE attachment point is the most obvious addition to the 2013 TreeMOTION.

According to the literature the central rear 'Green' attachment ring is for PPE restraint on 'working platforms'? The document goes on to say 'The user must not reach a point where a fall is possible'.

You can attach the Work Positioning lanyard to the central anchor ring but the lanyard anchor point must be above waistline - see Pic 21 below (taken directly from the User Instruction Manual).

The central rear attachment point is rated to 15kN along with the bridge and side-D's and the bridge itself.

5) Small DMM Axis swivel for bridge attachment

The addition of a swivel at the bridge is quite common for TreeMOTION users. Up until the arrival of the small DMM Axis Swivel the Rock Exotica Orbiter was the most popular choice but the eye was prone to excessive wear from sliding up and down the rope bridge. The more robust, rope-friendly DMM Axis Swivel has proved to be a better option.

Recognizing this trend Teufelberger had TüV Austria (CE 0408) test the DMM Axis Swivel (in place of the DMM Anchor Ring) on the TreeMOTION bridge and both pieces of hardware now have company endorsement for use as a bridge attachment.

Still confused?

To keep things simple Treetools will limit stock to the 2013 TreeMOTION - the S.Light is available by special order only.

Rope splicing requires skill, dexterity and strength. It's a mix of science and craft and cannot be 'manufactured' in the true sense of the word.

Hang on you say! What about the MAX Splice from Yale Cordage? They use a 'machine' to splice their rope!

Well… yes, Yale do use a 'machine' but it's still not a case of rope in one end and eye splice out the other.

The 'machine' developed by Yale allows the company to retain the core in the eye of the splice, thereby enhancing consistency in manufacture. Without machine assistance the core would need to be removed and the bury completed by hand.

Have a look at the video below and you will appreciate how much human skill is involved in the construction of an eye splice - even with machine assistance.

The ZK2 Rope Wrench has a new set of instructions and it's official; loose or supple tethers should not be used with the device - download the instructions here.

A loose tether may become entangled in the Rope Wrench causing the device to 'lock' in a neutral position.

When load is applied in the locked, or inverted position, the Rope Wrench can be dragged down onto the friction hitch causing the knot to release its grip from the climbing line.

ISC and Singing Tree have made a concerted effort to answer all the critics by covering everything from installation to set-up, operation and maintenance of the ZK2 Rope Wrench.

Details including climbing line diameter and the length (and style) of the friction hitch are listed but, interestingly, there is no mention of the length of the stiff tether.

Surely this must be an oversight by the authors.

Since the stiff tether is sold as an optional extra, climbers new to the Rope Wrench often ask what length the tether should be (possibly with a view to constructing one for themselves?).

The ZK2 instructions do list the commercial availability of stiff tethers and Treetools can tell you the commercial 'stiffies' are approximately 300mm long.

There is still some debate in tree climbing circles about the optimal length of the stiff tethers, with some climbers preferring them slightly shorter than 300mm while others say they should be longer.

Designer/manufacturer confirmation regarding the length of the stiff tether would be the preferred option.

That niggle aside, the new ZK2 instructions should be a great step forward for this controversial SLWP device.

The first video in a series of three by Taylor Hamel - essential viewing, no explanation required.

The holy grail for a half-decent pair of chainsaw trousers, apart from chainsaw protection, is light weight, cool in summer and comfortable to wear. Another important feature is tear resistance in the outer fabric. And… all this at a reasonable price!

Not many chainsaw protective trousers on the market can tick all these boxes but it appears SIP Protection might be on to a winner with their latest Innovation II range.

SIP Protection had been telling Treetools about the new trousers for some time, but we have to be honest, it's a big ask to have all these features in one pair of trou.

So… we landed a pair of Innovation II for appraisal to see if our skepticism was justified.

Lightweight Dyneema blocking material

Essentially, light weight equals comfort.

The biggest contributor to the weight in chainsaw trousers is the choice of blocking material in the legs. That's why SIP chose Dyneema for the Innovation range.

Dyneema is extensively used in military applications (ballistic helmets, vests and inserts) because Dyneema is about 40% lighter than older technologies like aramid.

As is the case for the military, reduced weight translates immediately to comfort for aerial arborists.

The sample pair of Innovation II are definitely the lightest pair of chainsaw protective trousers Treetools has ever come across.

Technical 'PEZA' outer fabrics

SIP Protection have also come up with a couple of new fabrics for the Innovation II range.

The PEZAFLEX and PEZATEC monikers sound like wordoids but, for all that, the new PEZA fabric does seem to fit the bill.

PEZATEC is 100% Polymide while PEZAFLEX is 94% Polymide with 6% Elasthane. Both fabrics are designed to be lightweight and tear resistant to all kinds of vegetation.

The SIP marketing bumph claims PEZA tear resistance is 'not just an empty statement'.

The literature goes on to say the PEZA fabrics have survived multiple field tests by professional arborists, receiving a unanimous 'go' from everyone involved (Treetools will reserve judgment until the trousers have been worn under new Zealand conditions).

Maximized freedom of movement

Another unique feature of the Innovation II trousers is the use of stretch and non-stretch outer fabrics in the same garment.

This combination gives the trousers stretch for freedom of movement and non-stretch fabric for pure functionality.

Free movement is guaranteed with the placement of PEZAFLEX inserts on the knees, the back of the knees and on the upper back part of the trousers.

The more robust PEZATEC is stitched into key points on the trousers where resistance against wear and tear is paramount.

Competitor product is either stretch or non-stretch; very few chainsaw protective trousers offer a combination of the both fabrics.

Has SIP Protection found the holy grail?

Only time will tell. Treetools will report back once we have a few more pair of these new lightweight chainsaw trousers in the field.

SIP Innovation II chainsaw protective trousers are available in conservative grey and high visibility red, both with black detailing, priced in the mid NZ$300's.

New-to-market tree climbing equipment is getting smaller and more light weight by the day. A worrying end-game for this 'light weight' trend is a general lack of robustness in the equipment.

Some of the new 'light weight' gear simply will not stand up to the rigors of tree work.

Hand ascenders, harnesses, chest ascenders, Figure 8 descenders, climbing and ascent lines, foot ascenders, helmets, carabiners, boots  - you name it, lightness is the name of the game.

Yet, Treetools is uncertain where the market research is in the development of these new products?

Ask any aerial arborist and you'll get a unanimous vote for longevity over lightness any day of the week.

Sure, tree climbers like light weight gear, but the equipment must stand up to the demands of everyday tree work for it to be worthwhile of investment.

Perhaps the equipment designers are talking with recreational tree climbers and not working arborists - or even worse, favoring the comments of rock climbers instead?

Either way, it seems a little strange to be developing new tree climbing gear so light in weight that it will not last the distance.

The design mantra for the development of new tree climbing hardware (and software) should be light weight, and longevity!

The Petzl ZigZag debacle has proved one thing: the operating reality for tree climbing gear is a little different to other height safety disciplines - see previous 'Tree Climbing PPE Standards' blog here.

In the post ZigZag world some tree climbers claim they will only buy gear from manufacturers who know about the rigors of treework - think Treemagineers, ART etc.

Manufacturers with tree climbing advisers like Teufelberger, DMM and ART have a far greater tolerance for investment in safety features, sometimes well over-and-above accepted standards, to accommodate the operating realities of aerial arb.

If you are not sure what those operating realities might be we have listed seven 'potentials' below to help you gain some perspective.

Tree climbing gear, custom or configured, built without factoring-in operating realities like these is bound to fail in the market:

1) A single unknown and 'un-rated' anchor point

Traditional height safety proponents are horrified with the concept of a climber dangling 30-meters from the ground, on a single line, secured to, what appears to be, a 'twig'.

Tree climbers make a choice about anchor security every time they climb a tree. In most cases that choice is made while observing the chosen anchor point from one perspective, the ground, sometimes up to 40 meters away.

And, tree climbers are dealing with an organic object. Unlike a rated connection point on a building or other man-made structure tree anchors fail no matter how diligent the climber might be!

2) A spatial aspect to anchor loads and rope management

Traditional rope access has a passive load (the climber) descending and moving sideways. Ascents are short. Anchors are (in theory) predicable and the force angles applied to that anchor are almost always 2-dimensional: up, down and sideways - never through!

The 3-dimensional nature of tree climbing introduces stress to the anchor and the friction device attached to the climber.

Limbs and branches present barriers, forcing specific routes through the tree, all of which increase friction on the climbing line and subsequent stress on equipment.

3) Small 'falls' will occur in tree climbing

500 mm of slack generated in a DbRT single line is the accepted standard in tree work. In all other height safety disciplines this amount of slack is akin to a 'fall'.

And yet tree climbers are almost blazé about slack management.

Sure, you'll be picked up in a TCC for having over 500 mm of slack in your line but there is no one on the work site calling such regulation - slack management is left entirely up to the climber.

The very nature of tree climbing means slack is introduced: stepping up onto a branch, pulling too much through a Hitch Climber system, catching a twig with a resulting snap, shimmying down a spar… there are dozens of examples where slack, or small falls, occur in aerial arb - so you better be sure your gear can handle this reality.

4) Cross-loaded connectors are likely

Slack in the system, as mentioned Reality 3, allows the connector to easily cross-load.

All competent tree climbers are ever vigilant for this phenomena because they know how easy it can happen.

Attend the ITCC, where the world's elite climbers demonstrate their skills, and you'll still see plenty of cross-loaded carabiners… if this is the world's best in action, imagine how many times connectors are cross-loaded in the real-work-a-day-world.

Combine the cross-loaded connector with Reality 1, 2 and 3 and you have a problem - as Petzl have discovered with the ZigZag.

5) Individual, sometimes complex, configurations

Tree climbing is a mix-and-match affair… and you better believe it!

By and large tree climbers are not contrary for the sake of it. Trees are organic. Every work site… and every tree is different.

Historically, tree climbers have poached ideas, techniques and equipment from other disciplines and applied these concepts to tree work. It's in a tree climbers DNA to experiment with gear configurations.

The result, no 'absolute' system or configuration is employed universally in tree work.

Unknown configurations presents a real challenge for regulators and the owners of tree climbing equipment brands.

Proprietary systems can be made compatible but brand owners have no idea how their equipment might finally be configured in the field. If a product fails, the manufacturer will bare the brunt of criticism.

6) Obstructions are common

Branches, twigs, leaves etc, all part of a living tree, somehow manage to find their way into devices, knots and/or complete systems.

A failed anchor can mean a drop to the next branch with the subsequent dynamic load to the climbing system.

Gear has to be designed to handle the unpredictable environment presented in a tree.

Obstructions can also cause the climber to move outside the expected angles, stressing the anchor point, as noted in Reality 1 and 2.

7) Tree climbers work position on a single line

All tree climbing equipment should be manufactured to handle climbing (ascent, descent and work positioning) on a single line; whether in a doubled or a single leg configuration.

Most of the gear currently available does allow for such activity; the rope, harness, lanyards etc. It's the choice of friction device where challenges are presented.

Like it or not climbers today will experiment with 'SRT' work positioning when they purchase an new friction device (you can blame the Rope Wrench for this one).

Rather than fight this operating reality, manufacturers should be factoring in such usage - think Rock Exotica Unicender - the Uni can be utilized in either format.

Gear will break if variables like those above are ignored!

Inferior tree climbing equipment will quickly be identified.

Any one of the above 'operating realities' could find the weak spot in a new piece of kit but, oftentimes, all seven variables are playing together concurrently during tree climbing maneuvers.

Safety factors, accommodating these tree climbing variables, must be designed into the product before it leaves the factory.

To date, that's why tree climbing gear designed by tree climbers has proved to be the most robust.

Use of a single climbing line differentiates tree climbing from all other height safety/rope access disciplines. But, unfortunately for the tree care industry, acronyms like DbRT and SRT have muddled our brains!

Aerial arb is the only commercial rope access discipline to work position using a single rope. And, both descriptors, DbRT and SRT, use a single climbing line to complete the task.

Current nonclementure not working

Current tree climbing nonclementure is confusing the issue… and, in doing so, retarding the development of single line climbing for tree work.

Here's an example of the language not working: DbRT or 'Doubled Rope Technique' very quickly becomes 'double rope technique' in the minds of many.

Talk to any rope access guy and they will immediately think in terms of a double rope. That is, two independent ropes - one as the climbing line and one as the backup - a traditional rope access configuration.

We all know this tried-and-true 'double rope' configuration is not practical in tree work and yet the idea persists in the mind of work positioning purists (on safety grounds).

Even seasoned aerial arborists can be fooled into thinking they are climbing on a 'double rope' when using DbRT.

Two lines running overhead, back to the anchor, produce an optical illusion of a 'double rope'. It's only on second thought the climber realizes he is, in fact, on a single line, redirected back on itself via the top anchor or tie-in-point.

The Rope Wrench changed the game 

When DbRT first found its way into the aerial arb lexicon SRT (vertical ascent on a single rope á la caving) was pretty much considered an advanced climbing technique. Back then the acronym DbRT worked fine because that was the most common tree climbing configuration.

SRT (a single rope ascent technique with its origins in caving) started out as ascent only in tree work but rapidly migrated to work positioning with the advent of the Rope Wrench. Traditional caving SRT configurations do not allow for safe work positioning during ascent.

By combining the Rope Wrench with a friction hitch 'work positioning' on a single line was suddenly do-able; apparently safe and without a large investment in time or money.

Single line work positioning with the Rope Wrench has proved to be a very efficient (for some trees) and safe (field tested in multiple configurations for at least 18-months without any major incidents).

Consequently, adoption rates for single line ascent/work positioning in tree work have soared.

At this point in time there is no going back for some tree climbers, Single Line Work Positioning is here to stay, forming part of the tree climbers tools kit, right there alongside DbRT (also on a single line).

What does this mean for tree climbing?

In terms of climbing, the aerial arb industry is at a cross-roads.

There is much debate about work positioning on a single climbing line in tree work and yet that is exactly what we do - climb on a single line (as we have always done).

Sometimes the rope is doubled up and sometimes we are climbing on a single leg. Both options can be equally efficient and should form an integral part of the tree climbers tool kit.

Acrimonious acronym wars are counter-productive

If we want to advance the industry it's time to differentiate aerial arb from other forms of height safety/rope access. Let's celebrate single line climbing as a unique tree climbing technique and not play second fiddle to other forms of rope access work positioning.

Current rules, regulation and standards are largely driven by the rope access market but aerial arb has its' own set of unique requirements (subject for a future blog post).

The tree industry cannot expect to have a voice in the wider height safety market if we do not agree on a definition for our tree climbing techniques, confirm and endorse the use of a single rope as an industry standard and find a suitable description for the ascent, descent and work positioning devices we employ in our everyday work!

Spelean, the Petzl Australasian Regional Distributor, will handle the recall for the Petzl ZigZag.

The refund (or credit if you choose) will not be paid out by your local Petzl retailer. See previous blog post here.

The procedure for New Zealand ZigZag owners is as follows:

1) Download the Post Paid Return Form here.

2) Fill in each section on the form.
Don't forget to include your Proof of Purchase and bank details if you opt for a refund. You'll find the ZigZag Serial Number on the same side as the stamped CE 0082.

3) Bundle all three together: Petzl ZigZag, the Return Form and Proof of Purchase. If you use a small carton, fold the Return Form in half with the Post Paid return address portion showing and sellotape it to the outside of the box. Post to Spelean in Oamaru.

A representative from Spelean will be in touch once your ZigZag is in the system. Please don't expect things to happen overnight - all returned ZigZags will go through Petzl France so there are likely to be some delays

Petzl have done the right thing and announced a total recall of the Petzl ZigZag. See notice below.

This information is complementary to and supersedes the Safety Alert issued April 19, 2013

Summary of the facts:

On Friday, April 12, Petzl was informed of an accidental fall in a training center in Germany. This fall was related to a failure of the rope end attachment hole of the Petzl ZIGZAG mechanical Prusik. We have since been informed of another identical failure.

These failures were the result of a particular configuration of a cantilevered and off-axis loaded upper carabiner.

Petzl believes that this incorrect positioning of the connector could inadvertently occur during normal use with the potential for serious injury or death.

Continued use of the ZIGZAG poses a risk of serious injury or death.

Petzl Action:

Petzl has decided to immediately recall all ZIGZAGs.

As a measure of precaution, we ask that you:

- Immediately stop using the ZIGZAG
- Contact Petzl America After Sales and Service: zigzagrecall@petzl.com -or- (877) 807-3805 to initiate the return process
- Return the ZIGZAG to Petzl America Petzl America will pay for all shipping costs.

You can then choose from the following options:

- Credit for other Petzl products (equal to the retail price of the ZIGZAG + 30%)
- A complete refund of the purchase price

For more information about this recall:

- Consult the ZIGZAG recall FAQ (see below for link to download the original recall document and FAQ in PDF format)
- Contact Petzl America: zigzagrecall@petzl.com -or- (877) 807-3805

A new version of the ZIGZAG is currently being developed and will be available in January 2014.

We are fully aware of the inconvenience caused by this issue. Please accept our full apologies. Thank you for your continued trust.

Click here to download a PDF of the Recall Notice and FAQ concerning the ZIGZAG mechanical Prusik.

The RECALL process described above is from an American perspective. Here in New Zealand the recall process might be a little different. Treetools will post more as information comes to hand.