Anchor advice

SvenglishTommy

SvenglishTommy

Well-Known Member
Joined
22 Sep 2005
Messages
688
Location
Spain
sailingawayforayearandaday.blogspot.com
After reading quite a bit about anchors and anchoring, I have not really found out anything at all, except that everyone's opinion is different.

I am going to get a second anchor and would really appreciate any advice anyone has. My current anchor is a foldable thingy(about 15kg) the likes of which I've never seen before. It performs very well but is difficult to handle, especially the folding of it when caked in mud.

I want to stow this anchor out of the way and replace it with a, preferably smaller, anchor that is attached to the pushpit and runs off an ankorolina reel of webbing to free up te locker the current one ocupies.

Most of the time I am anchoring off the back at marinas or up against rocks in the Stockholm archipelago. Either that or in very sheltered anchorages. The bottom is genrally quite a stiff mud, there are no tides and most of the time it easy to find very good protection form the wind.

My main criteria is an anchor that sets reliably, as you want the anchor to set well if you're driving your boat head on into rocks. Holding power is not so much of an issue as there is rarely much wind or tide. I was thinking that a bruce would be a good choice, basically beacuse they seem to set well in the tests I've seen, and they are quite popular on the archipelago. The weight of anchor is really stumping me though. I've seen recommendations from 5kg (on the Brice website) up to 15kg. My boat is 28' long and has a displacement of 3100kg.

I'd be very interested in what people think about the type and weight of a working anchor for use in these types of conditions, and if it's worth getting an expensive branded model over a cheaper one.

My current plan is to get a 7.5kg original bruce.
 
No doubt the best thing is to ask Swedish yachtsmen about the specifics of anchoring in Sweden, because anchoring by the stern to a rock is a very different thing from the British concept of anchoring - by the bows in a relatively exposed position where there are heavy snubbing loads, with plenty of chain down to keep the anchor in place.

In the Stockholm archipelagos I definitely found that a Bruce is much better/easier to dig in than a CQR. I have both CQR and Bruce, both the same weight. The CQR usually took 2 or 3 goes to get a hold, the Bruce usually bit straight away.

You might want to consider a length ofat least 10m chain between the anchor and the ankarolina, especially as there will be plenty of rocks underwater for the ankarolina to chafe on. I haven't tried using that ankarolina, but there was a thread on it a couple of weeks or so ago. One of the suggestions was that it suffers from UV degradation because it is exposed on the pushpit, so may fail unexpectedly!

My reckoning is that more important than weight is to make sure that the anchor is well dug in. I do that by taking the anchor warp to a powerful sheet winch winch and literally winching the anchor into the ground until I can feel that the winch can barely budge the anchor.

p.s. I use 25lb Bruce and 20m of chain (+ 30m warp) for the stern anchor, but that seems to be rather over the top for that area. The good news is, I sleep well.
 
i agree. Much as i dislike Bruce i bought one while in Sweden and both times i used it it worked well with a anchorline.

Personaly i would use a danforth or britany as they lay flat or can be stowed on the swedish pushpit gizmo. I heard that the CQR wouldent hold!!! Could happen.

Odd place Sweden, rains everyday and i used a 25LBS folding fisherman anchor which got through the weed which gave very good holding.(im very happy to say)But much as the fisherman did a wonderful job, you have to be very carful not to rap the chain around the flukes!!!

If your Swedish you should think about a "mud" anchor they seem to work very well perhaps to well, i dident use one as i wasent sure i would get it up without an anchor winch!!!
 
A mud anchor is a large weight (old car tyre filled with concrete is what we always used). I think it works on a combination of weight and suction. Hardly ever gets stuck between rocks though.

Nowadays we use a CQR and have a folding grapple as a backup/Ketch
 
Re: Anchor advice ... IMHO

I dislike anchor tables and weight against size of boat ....

You can have a MOBO with high sides, small LOA and light displacement - but hell of a pull when the wind gets up. A deeper lower much bigger boat can sit to the anchor better ..

So IMHO - I always advise and go for the biggest anchor that can be handled and stowed. The small anchors that you see are really only useful IMHO in a dinghy or as lunch hooks .... if that.

As you rightly say ... there are wildly differing views about which anchor is best .. and I doubt if there will ever be agreement ... there is also the issue of chain vs rope ... as I see it if you use all chain - then holding of the anchor itself is assisteds by chain weight / catenary. If you use rope - then holding of the anchor alone is even more important as it no longer has the chain weight assisting and also the catenary is less efficient.

So go for biggest you can, try and put a reasonable length of chain on and then rope - if you want rope ...

IMHO of course ....

Oh and I live across the water in Ventspils ... we have had some real awful gales last couple of years ... last winter we lost power across the region for 36 hrs ...
 
thats a very heavy disc many sizes, but often 12inches across and from 1/2inch edge to 3inches at its center, used to be lead this is put on a shaped large square steel plate a hole driled and a shaft2 feet longbolt bolted through

We call it a muchroom anchor (not sure its the same exactly) Sweds call it mud anchor and in the cataloug its a "Tallriksankare" page 85 could look at their online site dont know if it has pics though

: www.batmagneten.se

The sink deep into the mud or sand and hold but theres a lot of weed about and i would be wary of trusting one unless i could see a clean sand or mud bottem and hope it was deep enough before the rock!!
 
FWIW, we've used a Bruce as a kedge for many years now. It's 7.5 kg and stows extremely easily by hooking the centre 'palm' over the (protected) lower rail of the pushpit on the port side. The shank hangs down over the transom rubbing strake to which it is secured by a 'quick release' bungy cord and hook.

The Bruce has about 40-45 feet of chain (in our case 8mm) spliced to 50 metres of 12mm Anchorplait. Thus we have an easy-to-handle anchor, plenty of weight for a kedge, chain for weight/wear and the facility of being able to anchor, quite literally, single-handed. Unclip shank, unhook anchor, throw clear.

The whole lot pays out over the stern on it's own via a chain pipe over the stern from the dedicated chain locker.
 
There is no "right answer"
As far as my own experience goes I find a bruce sets well in mud so long as you don't shear around a lot. (on a cat you do!) This can cause the bruce to break free, especially if it's soft mud. When it does there is absolutely no chance of re-setting it as it comes out with a big ball of mud in the flukes. CQR on the other hand does not set as easily and when it does it is likely to plough a furrow under extreme conditions. If it breaks out it will re-set though and is less likely to get fouled. In places in the Solent like Newtown Creek the mud is so often and thoroughly "ploughed" that very little will hold and here I find the bruce keeps pulling free. Not all mud is the same!
I think if you are on virgin mud though the bruce tends to bury itself farly deeply and wont come out but for general anchoring I tend not to trust them as much as a CQR. Don't buy Chinese copies of either though as they can break. Also the flat folding "meon" types are not bad in mud but can also pick up a dollop.....
Yer pays yer money and takes yer choice...... If you are staying in one locality its a good plan to see what others are using....
 
We carried out a trial with three different anchors a couple of weeks ago. The area we used was above low water so I had a look beforehand, the bottom was hard clean sand, most people would consider this ideal conditions for anchoring. Depth of water was 3 to 4 metres with another metre from water to bow roller, we let out about 30m of 8mm chain for each anchor and since there was no wind we used tickover in astern as the chain was let out and then snubbed to set the anchor, once set engine revs were increased to 2500rpm on both engines to give a good pull on the anchor. Our boat is a 42’ Cat weighing about 10 tonne with two 55hp engines and Volvo folding props.

First we tried the 15kg Delta that came with the boat, this is the recommended size for the boat for normal conditions but I think it is a bit small for piece of mind overnight. The anchor dragged over the bottom for about 40m before it dug in and set, it then held against 2500 rpm with no problems. When lifting the anchor it seemed to break out with very little effort from the windlass so I would have my doubts about how it would perform in any wind shift – it might break out and refuse to reset.

Next we tried a 140 aluminium Spade, this weighs about 15kg, the 140 refers to the blade area of 1400 sq cm. This is one size bigger than recommended. It failed to set on the first three tries dragging for 50 –60m each time despite stopping the boat and letting more chain out to give it every chance. It dug in on the fourth attempt after about 30m. It held the boat against 2500rpm and seemed to take a bit more effort from the windlass to break it out so I feel it would not break out due to a wind shift as easily as the delta. The trouble getting it to set was a major concern, I don’t want that much trouble every time I anchor.

Lastly we tried a home made Bugel / Wasi anchor (the type with a roll over bar) this normally has a flat triangular shaped blade but I had made it with a 20deg bend in the middle of the blade to fold up the sides and give a concave type shape a little bit like the spade. This anchor was the same blade area as the Spade but weighed about 30kgs. It dug in practically as soon as the tension came on the chain and it stopped the boat with a reassuringly solid thunk and a dip of the bows – much more pronounced than the other two. Getting it up was also more difficult with the windlass clearly having to work hard to break the anchor out. Incidentally this anchor cost me about £40.00 and 6 hours work to make.

Obviously not a very scientific test but close to real life I feel. Obviously the Bugel may have landed in a very fortunate spot and exactly the right way up to set immediately, I can’t say for sure because we only tried it the once (time was short). I do think it shows that you can’t beat plenty of weight for getting an anchor to set. All three held the boat without problems, not unexpectedly since the bottom was as good as it gets for holding. Of more concern was the trouble getting the Spade, and to a much lesser degree the Delta, to set in the first place. I am sure the Spade would hold anything once set because of the blade area but I prefer something that sets first time as often as possible, it just gives much more confidence.

I am sure the lightweight anchors (Ali Spade and Fortress) work well in soft bottom conditions when they can easily get a grip in the first place but so will a heavier steel anchor. Ali anchors are obviously ideal for a kedge when you might have to man handle them from a dinghy.

As I said not very scientific, but I hope it gives you a bit more information to make your decision with.
 
I think one of the major problems is ...

It is generally thought ... through no fault .... that an anchor drops and hits bottom at correct angle to set ... Second that minds eye also tends to think in terms of flat or near flat bottom .... then of course a nice catenary in rode etc.

The above are very nice - but practice and minds eye are often not same.

The Anchor may hit bottom on its "ar..e" and take a while to flip and correct - why ? Because who says the pull of rode is in correct direction - maybe its not straight to the stock.
The anchor may encounter odd rocks / stones etc. that prevent fluke / point from jabbing in and setting ... you don't need that big a stone to do it .
Boat may be snatching when you try to set ... not a good scenario.

So many things are acting on the anchor and the way / method used - that each man can actually end up with different results ...

I have used CQR, Grapnel, Fishermans for years - basically never had a problem with any of them .... I use plenty of chain and actually only a token burst astern to pull out any kinks in chain ...

As said earlier - I don't think there is any substitute for weight and a good dollop of chain ....

Scientific research and "fact" is fine ... but the Bumble Bee according to Scientists should not fly .... but it does ...
 
M. Hylas,

Sorry to interrupt, but can you explain something to me?

The renamed Rock*C -- the 8kg is for "Boat LOA < 10.5 m (32') - Displ. < 4.5 tonne".

But the Spade -- the 10kg Model 60 is for "Boat LOA < 25' - Disp. < 2 tonnes".

So the 8kg Rock*C is capable of securely anchoring boats that are longer and twice as heavy as the 10kg Spade?

According to your site, the Rock*C is a much better anchor, at least when set. Or am I missing something?

cheers

PS: llamedos et al, try this page, some good info. http://www.practical-sailor.com/boatus/anchors/4rhod4598/

(I'm curious how the Rock*C would do, and wonder why they only submit the aluminum Spade for these tests, rather than steel)
 
[ QUOTE ]


Next we tried a 140 aluminium Spade, this weighs about 15kg, the 140 refers to the blade area of 1400 sq cm. This is one size bigger than recommended. The trouble getting it to set was a major concern, I don’t want that much trouble every time I anchor.



[/ QUOTE ]

During the "Practical Sailor" anchor tests done in nearly identical conditions (hard clean sand), out of 15 anchors tested, the aluminum Spade anchor rank on the second position...

Different tests.. different results?? WHY??
 
[ QUOTE ]
can you explain something to me?

The renamed Rock*C -- the 8kg is for "Boat LOA < 10.5 m (32') - Displ. < 4.5 tonne".

But the Spade -- the 10kg Model 60 is for "Boat LOA < 25' - Disp. < 2 tonnes".

So the 8kg Rock*C is capable of securely anchoring boats that are longer and twice as heavy as the 10kg Spade?

According to your site, the Rock*C is a much better anchor, at least when set. Or am I missing something?


[/ QUOTE ]

The explanation is very simple..

With the "Rock*C" anchor, we have suppressed the lead ballast of the tip. Therefor, for the same overall weight, we have more than twice the "efficient holding area" of the blade..

- and as holding is closely related to the surface area.. twice the surface : twice the holding..

The only question is that weight is an important parameter for the initial setting process..

That's why we have moved the fixation of the shank from the back of the fluke (where it is usually) to the first half of the blade.. (the tip) and we use the weight of the shank to "ballast" the tip of the anchor.. (pattented)

Very simple an obvious.. and it works.. :-)

[ QUOTE ]
wonder why they only submit the aluminum Spade for these tests, rather than steel)

[/ QUOTE ]

This is not our choice.. but only the choice of the magazine..
 
Anchoring by the stern is very different from the situation in home waters so different solutions are likely to prove optimal. The usual method is to take bow line(s) ashore on the lee side of an island with the stern anchor merely keeping the boat off the rock. In a harbour the position of the quay means you may be lying to the stern anchor and thus at greater risk.
In the wild you are at little risk until the wind changes.
A lot of the risk reduction will come from laying the stern anchor an adequate distance from shore. I tend to find my stern ankeroline running at a much shallower angle than my Swedish neighbours - may mean I'm unduly cautious.
Anchor weight is a compromise between back injury, boat damage and holding power unless you have a dedicated windlass. You might note that British Kiel Yacht Club training boats (Najad 35 ft long) seem to use an 8kg. grapnel.
I do the same but I'm not entirely happy about it and in any case they are a pain to fold up and stow.
Both Danforth and Bruce lookalikes can be provided with special stainless fittings clipping them securely to the pushpit. These are well worth finding - try the Watski catalogue.
I use about 2 metres of chain and a 35 metre 1 tonne breaking strength Ankeroline. This has worked well but I've never had to stand up to strong winds while using it.
 
Re: I think one of the major problems is ...

Thanks for all the advice guys. I was hoping to get away with as little chain as possible. I know a lot of people here dont use any chain at all, but I was planning on 2 meters of 8mm.

I think I'll still go for the 7.5kg bruce (or maybe try the Rock*C). There seems to be a slight consensus that this wouldn't be the worst idea which I guess is the best one can hope for when asking for advice on anchors.

I saw someone with one of those mud/mushrrom anchors last summer, they had to dive in to break it out. My boat actually came with a very small one of these but I've never used it. It might make a nice lunch anchor though.

P.S. Hylas your link didn't work because you left the closing bracket before the /url
 
whilst it's always good to hear of people putting together something that works for them, as well as hearing about practical experiences, I have to admit to being rather sceptical about your 'test'. You have taken 2 of the designs that come up trumps over and over again on set/reset, rigged them on an 8 or even 9:1 effective scope and then they didn't set 'it what should have been perfect conditions'.
Sorry but there is something else at play here.
Additionally I don't think your assesment of an anchors capability with reference to how easy it is to breakout on the windlass (with a vertical pull) is relevant at all - in fact manufacturers go to great lengths to design anchors that will hold up to a given angle of pull on the stock then release when this is exceeded. Some, like the bruce design, are a little prone to loosing too much holding power for too little increase in the angle of pull (50% at 20 degrees has been quoted).
Finally, whilst you suggest 25kg v 15kg may have been a factor however I don't think it was the main one in relation to the initial set here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Other threads that may be of interest

N
Viking AnchorsI
Replies
0
Views
127
Neeves
N
Y
Quick Aries 1000 anchor windless noisy
Replies
0
Views
106
yotter
Y

Share this page

Top