Anchors

[john_morris_uk]

The problem with the internet and Google is that you can find almost anything that will appear on your screen in black and white and claims to be true. Proper research isn’t ‘looking things up on the www’.

 

[Tranona]

Proper research isn’t ‘looking things up on the www’.

How true. The www came in when I was at the peak of my academic career and remember having to revamp sections of our research methods course to place it in the correct context. For those with an enquiring mind it opened up a whole new avenue for asking questions rather than providing answers.

 

[vyv_cox]

Once again you are not reading my posts, look in Google and you will find plenty of alternative opinions that dispute the claim about it damaging the steel.

Alas you did not work in a Chinese steel works, as they do not do anything like the processes your employer did and produce some real bad cast iron. Where did I say Iron comes from cupola furnaces, you are replying without even reading one sentence of my posts.

The 4 Types of Cast Iron | OneMonroe (monroeengineering.com)

I'm sure my Herreshoff copy was made from the cheapest version, and not finished apart from one single dip into a Zinc tank, (I think it's supposed to be 3 dips).
Now try reading this study: specManual_08_Final_01.indd (steel.org.au)

Last part from the above site:
NOTE A subsequent comprehensive test program was undertaken by Industrial Galvanizers in partnership with OneSteel to evaluate the effect of hot dip galvanizing on 500N Grade reinforcing bar in 2007. The results of these tests are reported in Section XX of the Specifi ers Manual, and support the fi ndings of the testing detailed above, in that hot dip galvanizing does not affect the mechanical properties of standard grades of steel

There are a lot of other results to articles saying galvanising has no or very little effect, just look at Googles first page. It seems to depend on the type of steel involved, so the jury is out on the effect because I did not find very cheap steel or cast Iron listed.

This is my bad copy of a Herreshoff from Fleabay, I complained about the finish and sent pics of the rusty chain, so they sent me a partial refund of 30 quid !!
Galvanized Fishermans anchor | eBay

The wonderfull drop dead gorgeous bronze CQR is made in England, BUT is still classed as an original genuine CQR. Don Street would have loved both anchors, although I do need to finish the Herreshoff copy.

I'm afraid that learning metallurgy by looking it up on the Internet is pretty much the same as diagnosing illness by the same method. What does your article on types of cast iron have to do with anything?

What is your evidence about the quality of Chinese steel? I am told by UK importers of Chinese chain that it is the best in the world. They don't agree with you based on thorough, and reported, testing

 

[TNLI]

oil rigs anchor in serious currents therefore… more drivel. More nonsense.
What’s a ‘kit built’ Fortress anchor? More made up disinformation. The ones the USCG use are standard off the shelf ones.


You didn’t really read that article did you…
The author put the second anchor out to try and stop his boat swinging over rubble before it took the ground. He was amazed/surprised it held.
Here’s an interesting quote from the article:
“Elsewhere, at least one of the yachts that dragged in deep water had her CQR on about 100 metres of chain but that did her no good.’

Kellets or chums or anchor angels used to be thought of as really helpful. I used to believe it myself. In fact they’re useless (worse perhaps as they take up storage space and add weight to your boat for no purpose. ) Anchor rodes that have been dived on in heavy weather have been shown to have no useful catenary. The chum makes no difference as far as catenary or snatching in a gale.
The same research applies to heavy chain vs light chain. For small craft it makes no difference regarding catenary or snatching in storm conditions. (We’re not talking about ships here as their anchoring systems work in very different ways). So your statement about the book not changing regarding heavy chain is also false. What was once thought to be obvious and common sense about chain rodes simply isn’t true.

The serious cruising boats I see and know use a NG anchor (NOT a CQR!) and only deploy two anchors if a storm is forecast. It’s what I do.

And if you’re interested we use a Spade on 100 metres of chain with a Kong stainless (shock horror) swivel and our second anchor is a large Fortress on a chain/rope rode of about 60 metres, but we’ve another 100 metres or more of nylon line to add to either ride if necessary.

Some folks only put out a second anchor when needed, he should have put it out earlier than he did. The CQR drag occured because of a failure to use a second anchor, no idea about the holding, as the CQR is real bad in cobblestones or rocks. Also we do not know if it was a genuine CQR, Steve of SV Penope fame did test a copy of a CQR and it did not work anything like as well as the real thing. There are more copies of the CQR around than genuine ones, even Force 4 are making a copy.

The serious crusing boats in the UK nearly all use a Delta, in the very problematic North West coast of the USA they use the genuine CQR, steel Danforth and Luke copy of the Herreshoff, (I've got all 3).

Kellets do work, but they must be positioned correctly, for snatch reduction, half way between boat and anchor, for holding power, near the anchor as the YM chap did for one of his anchors. I used to chum for tuna many moons ago, so I use the term kellet.

One mistake boater make is to think that only a real storm will cause their pride and joy to drag, apart from the debris on the tip or fluke risk, many squall lines or even funnel clouds can ruin your whole day at anchor, as can an unforecast maountain valley wind. Even a WAZ can take you by suprise at anchor, so I always take a forecast with a pinch of salt unless I can read the actual forecasters comments about how accurate he thinks the forecast will be and look at the display of the different models used to predict the future of a developing low. You can do that if the area is covered by the NWS, as there is a tab from the homepage for the USA and Carib. area forecasts. There are about 6 different computer models used for tropical storms, and it's a real good idea to look at the simple diagram to see if you are at risk,

 

[TNLI]

I'm afraid that learning metallurgy by looking it up on the Internet is pretty much the same as diagnosing illness by the same method. What does your article on types of cast iron have to do with anything?

What is your evidence about the quality of Chinese steel? I am told by UK importers of Chinese chain that it is the best in the world. They don't agree with you based on thorough, and reported, testing

Mine Gott, you don't think that there is a very slight chance that you might possibly have been told a story by either the Chinese exporter or the UK importer. They sell stuff outside China that would cause real trouble if sold inside China.

The Mystery Chain from China - Practical Sailor (practical-sailor.com)

Very surprised that thin galvanising can sometimes be good, and theredoes seem to be one unknown company making good chain. Alas the rest was a tad on the poor side. In short it's tough to know what you get, so another reason for 2 anchors !!

Looking into High Test Myth - Practical Sailor (practical-sailor.com)

 

[Tranona]

The serious crusing boats in the UK nearly all use a Delta, in the very problematic North West coast of the USA they use the genuine CQR, steel Danforth and Luke copy of the Herreshoff, (I've got all 3).

Kellets do work, but they must be positioned correctly, for snatch reduction, half way between boat and anchor, for holding power, near the anchor as the YM chap did for one of his anchors. I used to chum for tuna many moons ago, so I use the term kellet.

The first statement is nonsense. While the Delta is common in the UK because it is widely available and supplied as original equipment on many new boats you have provided no data to first define what you mean by "serious cruising boats" nor quantify what you mean by "nearly all". The anchors you mention for NW USA are popular there for the same reason - they are widely available unlike anchors seen in Europe where a much wider range of types is available. People buy what they can from what there is for sale in a particular location.

As jm told you proper scientific tests have shown that kellets do not have any measurable impact on anchor holding power. They only change the shape of the catenary to reflect the concentration of weight at the point of location. They have no impact on the point at which catenary disappears which is a function of the load placed on the chain, not its size or weight.

 

[vyv_cox]

Mine Gott, you don't think that there is a very slight chance that you might possibly have been told a story by either the Chinese exporter or the UK importer. They sell stuff outside China that would cause real trouble if sold inside China.

The Mystery Chain from China - Practical Sailor (practical-sailor.com)

Very surprised that thin galvanising can sometimes be good, and theredoes seem to be one unknown company making good chain. Alas the rest was a tad on the poor side. In short it's tough to know what you get, so another reason for 2 anchors !!

Looking into High Test Myth - Practical Sailor (practical-sailor.com)

Fortunately I know it to be true that good Chinese chain can be excellent because I have tested it myself. 13 grade 30 chains destructively tested, all but one achieved grade 40 strength. Results here Chain

As previously you use old information that predates much of the improvements that have been made.

I think if you buy anything from an unknown source you risk getting some rubbish. The answer is obvious - do the research.

 

[john_morris_uk]

Mine Gott, you don't think that there is a very slight chance that you might possibly have been told a story by either the Chinese exporter or the UK importer. They sell stuff outside China that would cause real trouble if sold inside China.

The Mystery Chain from China - Practical Sailor (practical-sailor.com)

Very surprised that thin galvanising can sometimes be good, and theredoes seem to be one unknown company making good chain. Alas the rest was a tad on the poor side. In short it's tough to know what you get, so another reason for 2 anchors !!

Looking into High Test Myth - Practical Sailor (practical-sailor.com)

Interesting that one of your sources directly contradicts one of your earlier assertions that galvanising doesn’t alter strength

“All G70 chain is quench-and-tempered chain. Its strength is imparted by heat treatment. Unfortunately, the heat of galvanizing, about 860 degrees, degrades that strength. The published ultimate tensile strength (UTS) for galvanized G70 chain is about 15- to 20-percent lower than the UTS for ungalvanized G70 chain.”

When you’re in a hole stop digging. You’re completely out of your depth discussing anchors and anchoring. Pleas stop publishing misinformation on YBW.

 

[Dellquay13]

I’ve got a friend, with time on his hands due to a debilitating illness, and it transpires one of his pastimes is to go on tin foil hat forums and goad the posters. I think he has learned quite a bit about their conspiracies along the way, certainly enough to find their levers to pull. I bet they find him infuriating, and probably metaphorically rip him limb from limb, but he won’t let anything lie because he’s after their rise, it’s his sport.
Just saying…

 

[SaltIre]

Mine Gott, you don't think that there is a very slight chance that you might possibly have been told a story by either the Chinese exporter or the UK importer. They sell stuff outside China that would cause real trouble if sold inside China.

The Mystery Chain from China - Practical Sailor (practical-sailor.com)

Very surprised that thin galvanising can sometimes be good, and theredoes seem to be one unknown company making good chain. Alas the rest was a tad on the poor side. In short it's tough to know what you get, so another reason for 2 anchors !!

Looking into High Test Myth - Practical Sailor (practical-sailor.com)

Do you have any links to up to date articles that support your theories? The ones you've posted are to articles published nearly ten years ago...

 

[TNLI]

Interesting that one of your sources directly contradicts one of your earlier assertions that galvanising doesn’t alter strength

“All G70 chain is quench-and-tempered chain. Its strength is imparted by heat treatment. Unfortunately, the heat of galvanizing, about 860 degrees, degrades that strength. The published ultimate tensile strength (UTS) for galvanized G70 chain is about 15- to 20-percent lower than the UTS for ungalvanized G70 chain.”

When you’re in a hole stop digging. You’re completely out of your depth discussing anchors and anchoring. Pleas stop publishing misinformation on YBW.

They might write G70 but in reality you don't know what exactly you are getting unless it's from Lewmar or Lofrans etc. I don't have an opinion either way about galvanising, as it depend on the quality of sttel and the way it is galvanised. Sometimes it does reduce the stength and sometimes it does not.

I'm just publishing links that explain that the results are very variable and practical sailor has confirmed that with their tests. So in many cases when you buy chain through a chandlery or online as many do, you don't really know what you are getting and it's very hard to figure out even the names of the company that made the chain.

Why do you have such a problem with the links I publish, and comments based on those links. Even when someone decides the links are not upto date, they are forgetting that the situation in terms of the quality of various anchor related products has gone down not up in most but not all cases.

Try writing to Practical sailor to tell them they are publishing rubbish, then write to Steve of SV Penope fame to tell him he is talking rubbish and the 2 most popular anchor the CQR, (Alas quite a few are not genuine), and the Delta are no good. The manufacturers like Oyster and the good folks at the RNLI would also like to know why their anchor tests and use involves more bad anchors.

In my opinion the worst scams and con tricks have started in the last 10 years or so. That's why I like the more mature older anchor tests results. Also if you read practical sailor or Steve's videos, they do correct themselves when they make a mistake.

Most of the folks posting here buy one type of anchor and then claim it's by far the best. I prefer a nice selection, rather than just one type. That way I can anchor in any type of holding and even anchor using a short 2 to 1 rope rode in 50m.

 

[TNLI]

Fortunately I know it to be true that good Chinese chain can be excellent because I have tested it myself. 13 grade 30 chains destructively tested, all but one achieved grade 40 strength. Results here Chain

As previously you use old information that predates much of the improvements that have been made.

I think if you buy anything from an unknown source you risk getting some rubbish. The answer is obvious - do the research.

Where can you buy that chain in the UK ??

We should all DYOR, as even if a marine part passed a test last year, that does not mean the manfacturer will not decide to cut costs and use a different steel or a different coating. Oddly enough if they are going to do something silly, they often do it as soon as they have passed all the inspections required and established a good reputation. Rocna did that with the steel they used.

I can't think of any improvements the Chinese have made with anchors or related gear in recent times, apart from better labels, web sites, and false marks stamped or etched into their products. They have also got customers to accept that unbranded parts are normal. I posted a picture of a Chinese company selling a stainless CQR, that had no marks and no info on who made it. That makes it impossible to know what it is made of.

Your web site is a good one, the 3 pictures of the bad chain are worse than I've seen, the broken links look like another reason for 2 anchors.

Finally someone said something about kellets, (Chums),
I don't use them, but they do help an anchor function in terms of reducing snatch load in particular, BUT, only if it's a rope rode. Waste of time for chain, unless you use a real big one that acts as a tandem anchor. In the end it makes more sense to use a bigger anchor.

 

[boomerangben]

……..
As jm told you proper scientific tests have shown that kellets do not have any measurable impact on anchor holding power. They only change the shape of the catenary to reflect the concentration of weight at the point of location. They have no impact on the point at which catenary disappears which is a function of the load placed on the chain, not its size or weight.

I’m intrigued by this paragraph. What do you mean when you say “they have no impact on the point at which the catenary disappears……”? The shape of the catenary is defined as you say by the load placed on the chain, but the vertical component of the load is equal to the weight of suspended rode, plus suspended kellet (and any soil load if the rode touches down at a non zero angle). So the weight of chain and kellet very much defines the shape of the catenary.

I haven’t used a kellet, but consider them an item that is included in mooring systems (not short term anchor systems) to modify a catenary for whatever reason (perhaps at crossovers of mooring lines or survival load cases). That implies engineering calculations specific to a scenario. So I agree kellets aren’t really a leisure sailors solution.

 

[vyv_cox]

Where can you buy that chain in the UK ??

We should all DYOR, as even if a marine part passed a test last year, that does not mean the manfacturer will not decide to cut costs and use a different steel or a different coating. Oddly enough if they are going to do something silly, they often do it as soon as they have passed all the inspections required and established a good reputation. Rocna did that with the steel they used.

I can't think of any improvements the Chinese have made with anchors or related gear in recent times, apart from better labels, web sites, and false marks stamped or etched into their products. They have also got customers to accept that unbranded parts are normal. I posted a picture of a Chinese company selling a stainless CQR, that had no marks and no info on who made it. That makes it impossible to know what it is made of.

Once again you post your incorrect guesses as facts. Every one of those chains was bought in different chandleries in UK, half in North Wales and others on line. The big importers such as Bainbridge and William Hackett test what they buy and batch test regularly.

The machines most of these were made on are German and were run by German technicians. One of my contacts in an importing company visited and was shown around the lines. He was most impressed.

You are wrong about Rocna too. Rocna told the Chinese to use what they did, knowing it was sub standard. I still have copies of the email correspondence proving it.

 

[boomerangben]

Where can you buy that chain in the UK ??

We should all DYOR, as even if a marine part passed a test last year, that does not mean the manfacturer will not decide to cut costs and use a different steel or a different coating. Oddly enough if they are going to do something silly, they often do it as soon as they have passed all the inspections required and established a good reputation. Rocna did that with the steel they used.

I can't think of any improvements the Chinese have made with anchors or related gear in recent times, apart from better labels, web sites, and false marks stamped or etched into their products. They have also got customers to accept that unbranded parts are normal. I posted a picture of a Chinese company selling a stainless CQR, that had no marks and no info on who made it. That makes it impossible to know what it is made of.

Your web site is a good one, the 3 pictures of the bad chain are worse than I've seen, the broken links look like another reason for 2 anchors.

Finally someone said something about kellets, (Chums),
I don't use them, but they do help an anchor function in terms of reducing snatch load in particular, BUT, only if it's a rope rode. Waste of time for chain, unless you use a real big one that acts as a tandem anchor. In the end it makes more sense to use a bigger anchor.

You didn’t read that article on kellets, did you?

 

[Tranona]

I’m intrigued by this paragraph. What do you mean when you say “they have no impact on the point at which the catenary disappears……”? The shape of the catenary is defined as you say by the load placed on the chain, but the vertical component of the load is equal to the weight of suspended rode, plus suspended kellet (and any soil load if the rode touches down at a non zero angle). So the weight of chain and kellet very much defines the shape of the catenary.

I haven’t used a kellet, but consider them an item that is included in mooring systems (not short term anchor systems) to modify a catenary for whatever reason (perhaps at crossovers of mooring lines or survival load cases). That implies engineering calculations specific to a scenario. So I agree kellets aren’t really a leisure sailors solution.

What I was trying to say is that once the chain is straight the kellet is irrelevant. It would be difficult to determine if there is a difference in load applied by the boat is significantly different with a kellet as that depends on the weight of the kellet as a proportion of the total weight of chain and kellet together with the position of the kellet on the chain.

 

[TNLI]

You didn’t read that article on kellets, did you?

Which article about kellets for rope rodes, as the others are about kellets for chain, which does not work ?? Lots of different articles and opinions.

Practical sailor again: Assessing the Anchor Kellet - Practical Sailor (practical-sailor.com)

Kellets On the Rode - Practical Sailor (practical-sailor.com)

That last article and the cost of the kellet have me convinced that if I need to anchor in a defined area with a short scope it's better to just use 2 anchors set 180n degrees apart and led to the bow, or to buy a bigger short scope anchor. A Spade or Bruce will work with 3 to 1 chain, but the real star I'm sorry to say is the Herreshoff, as it will work with a 2 to 1 rope rode. If the holding is rocks or coral, a grapnel will work and cost less than a heavy bronze kellet. They are interesting but not really worth the trouble of buying a big one, or making one. I suppose if you only use rope rodes and a 10 to 1 scope there is a case for attaching a real heavy one, like a big bag of bricks, but what you are doing in effect is making a mooring.

Last post of the day concerns using a mushroom anchor as a kellet. Force 4 stock them for use with a rubber duck, but I suppose a bigger one could be used as a kellet.
The Magic Mushroom (Anchor) - Good Old Boat

 

[boomerangben]

Interesting.

Among thoughts it's provoked in me are -

If you are making your own 'boomerang', then why not design this to provide the transition between a larger (e.g. 8mm) chain more easily connected to the anchor, and the smaller (e.g. 6mm) chain connected to the boat. The amount by which the thicker chain hinders deep setting of the anchor shank is perhaps little different from that resulting from the additional lumpy shackle required to connect a thinner chain to the anchor.

Alternatively, perhaps there is some way of connecting the boomerang to the anchor by wire (spliced to hard thimbles?), burying more easily and avoiding lumpen shackles. Because of wear and potential vulnerability to damage, this would be a regularly inspected/replaced component, not expected to last as long as chain or anchor.

Using shackles (especially a single one) to provide the articulation between anchor's orientation and the chain's seems less than ideal. Apart from some more sophisticated sort of universal joint. I wonder whether there is some (potential) sort of specialised, spine-like chain between anchor and boomerang, or anchor and standard chain, with limited articulation at each pair of links. My inclination is to think that this would distribute and divide the 'turning' stresses evenly between the links in that section of chain, but it's late and I'm too tired to be able to think it through to confirm or reject that supposition.

Just on the last paragraph…..it is my understanding that the shackle that fits to an anchor should be a bow shackle, with the inside of the bow bearing on the anchor shank and the pin through the last chain link. If the anchor and shackle are of compatible size, the bow shackle should allow accommodation of varying out of plane rode angles, as well of course in plane loads…

 

[boomerangben]

What I was trying to say is that once the chain is straight the kellet is irrelevant. It would be difficult to determine if there is a difference in load applied by the boat is significantly different with a kellet as that depends on the weight of the kellet as a proportion of the total weight of chain and kellet together with the position of the kellet on the chain.

Thank you for that. Makes sense

 

[LittleSister]

Just on the last paragraph…..it is my understanding that the shackle that fits to an anchor should be a bow shackle, with the inside of the bow bearing on the anchor shank and the pin through the last chain link. If the anchor and shackle are of compatible size, the bow shackle should allow accommodation of varying out of plane rode angles, as well of course in plane loads…

Yes, it's my understanding that's the best typical arrangement, but, for the reasons Neeves explains earlier, it is impossible (or perhaps just almost?) to find a suitably strong and certified bow shackle that will fit both the anchor and a 6mm chain.

I've also seen (and used!) less than ideal arrangements of shackles, the result of either ignorance or the difficulty (especially pre-internet) of finding the correct sized and shaped shackles.