Skip to content

Home / Equipment / Cams and nuts

Protection

Cams and nuts: the standards for removable protection.

Trad climbers protect themselves with gear they place and remove: camming devices and chocks, usually called cams and nuts. This page covers the standards each is made to, what is known about their tests, the BMC's statements on lifespan, and the recall notices that have touched them.

Disclosure: this page has affiliate links. If you buy through them, we may earn a commission at no extra cost to you. As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases. How this works.

Get instruction

This page explains what standards bodies, federations and makers publish. It is not a substitute for instruction from a qualified instructor or guide, and it does not replace medical advice.

Where removable protection fits

The BMC defines trad climbing as climbing where the leader places their own protection on the way up and the second removes it while following. The standards cover two kinds of such gear: frictional anchors, which a BMC text describes as spring-loaded camming devices and other friction-based adjustable chocks, and chocks, often called nuts. Placing either is a skill taught in person; this page covers only the standards and what bodies and makers publish about the gear. The trad climbing page explains the discipline.

Cams: EN 12276 and UIAA 125

The European standard is EN 12276:2013, "Mountaineering equipment - Frictional anchors - Safety requirements and test methods", which replaced the 1998 edition. DIN and BSI catalogue listings say the 2013 revision added a passive strength requirement, a test procedure for holding force and passive strength, and pictograms for marking; we could not check those additions against the standard's text.

The UIAA's matching standard, UIAA 125 Frictional Anchors, is in its third edition (version 3.2, May 2026, effective May 2026) and is based on EN 12276:2013. UIAA 125 adds one safety requirement: where a textile attachment's strength depends on stitching, at least half of the visible stitching must contrast with the background colour.

What the test measured in 2001

A BMC chapter by Alan Huyton, from a 2001 care and maintenance booklet distributed with UIAA materials, explains that EN 12276 covers spring-loaded camming devices and other friction-based adjustable chocks. In the test, devices are held between two parallel steel plates and must withstand at least 5 kN, with the maker stating a guaranteed holding force of at least 5 kN. That text describes the 1998 edition, so the figures may not match the 2013 edition. Like every test figure on this site, they describe a laboratory set-up, not how a device will hold in rock.

A short history

The same BMC text credits Greg Lowe with developing camming devices in the early 1970s for flaring cracks in Yosemite, and Ray Jardine with the four-cam, trigger-bar design that became the basis of modern units.

Nuts: EN 12270 and UIAA 124

Chocks are covered by EN 12270:2013, "Mountaineering equipment - Chocks - Safety requirements and test methods", which superseded the 1998 edition (BSI and DIN listings). The UIAA's standard is UIAA 124 Chocks, at version 3 (2018). The European Commission's PPE guidelines (5th edition, October 2025) list chocks among Category III equipment against falls from a height. The minimum strength EN 12270 sets was not found in our research, so this page does not give one.

Lifespan statements

The 2001 BMC text says camming devices wear out first among a climber's metal gear because of their moving parts, and that with average use and no serious falls most should last 10 years. It lists signs that point to retiring a camming device: no longer operating smoothly, cracked or deformed metal parts, broken wire strands, and a worn sling or broken stitching, noting that slings can be replaced. Those are the BMC's 2001 statements, not a universal rule or an inspection method; the maker's instructions and a competent person decide whether a particular device stays in use. The gear lifespan page compares makers' statements on metal gear, which range from no time limit to one year for some parts.

What accident data says about protection

An analysis of 30 years of accident data by Eliot Caroom, published in Rock and Ice in September 2020 and republished by Climbing in February 2022, tagged several factors per incident. It found protection failures, recorded as "inadequate protection / protection pulled", topped the list in trad accidents at 49% and also led in ice. Caroom notes that his method differs from the American Alpine Club's single-cause tables, so the percentages are not directly comparable with them. The accident data page has more.

The 2016 Camalot recall

Black Diamond announced on 13 April 2016 a voluntary recall for inspection of its Camalot and Camalot Ultralight camming devices, along with Index ascenders and two via ferrata sets, and a full quality audit of its Salt Lake City factory, as the BMC reported on 20 April 2016. The US Consumer Product Safety Commission's notice for the Camalots (sizes 0.3 to 6) and Camalot Ultralights (sizes 0.4 to 4) is dated 19 May 2016. The CPSC gave the hazard as devices with unformed axle ends that can come apart and fail, and said no incidents had been reported.

The two dates differ: 13 April 2016 for Black Diamond's own announcement as the BMC reported it, and 19 May 2016 for the CPSC notice. The recalls page lists this and other notices; the maker's current notice is the authority on which units are affected.

Keep reading

Disclosure The Gear Sports Climbing is reader-supported. When you buy through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission at no extra cost to you. As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases. Our recommendations are independent.