Another lost keel.

[RunAgroundHard]

Sad to hear about a fatility, can’t be easy for anyone involved.

I am involved in critical inspection activities. NDT examination has significant quality issues that can only be managed through training and competency verification. Most of the processes are well understood but application can be questionable. I am now receiving phased array ultrasonic testing reports. The operators certificate pack includes medical and eye testing results to be be able to read and interpret the visual data, for example. The calibration of the probs requires customized coupons that represent what is being measured, not a standard test coupon. Usually, other methods of NDT are also required such as Dye Penetrant and x Ray. The point is NDT is not easy on complex shapes and it can get expensive. In my case, we just bin components that are likely good, every 5 service years and replace, it’s a lower cost, and the consequence of failure would likely end my employers business.

I doubt the leisure industry acts anything like this or has access to the skills at a price consumers are prepared to pay.

 

[Neeves]

How to introduce anchors into the thread.

I was known to Bisalloy, a manufacturer of HT steels, because of work I did on anchors with Vyv. They supported work I was doing on anchors and my other marine fittings by supply of samples of steel and access to some of their research. Bisalloy supplied steel for Wild Oates keel(s) and Bisalloy asked my help to clarify some errors made at a lecture. Modifications to Wild Oates' keels were designed locally.

I got sucked superficially into modern performance keel construction.

I also happen to have met Jon Sayer and know some he has sailed with.

Prompted by the recent incident I find that now 2 of Jon's yachts have had keel failures.

I have an interest in the topic and as the incident is local I did a search - I leave the interpretation of the links to anyone who reads them. The Kraken article I included because it gave an historic list of failures.

Simplistically there seem to be 2 modes of failure, one is that of the keel itself and second the failure of the structure supporting the keel - both might be caused by a collision but might also be caused by poor design of the keel and supporting structure and/or alteration of the keel (which was the cause of a keel failure in Australia some years ago with 2 lives lost).

There is very little detail currently on the Runaway incident, whales might be a cause (there are a lot transitting the east coast currently, they are everywhere (plague proportions, definitely a hazard to navigation), as yachts transitting the coast follow the same tracks as the whales - both make use of or avoid the East Australia Current which moves warm water from the tropics as far south as Tasmania and flows at upto 5 knots 24/7. We are meant to keep a safe distance from whales - but nobody has told the whales. 'Our' whales are not aggressive, they seem to be inquisitive, they are BIG, come alarmingly close and appear to have an occasional nap (on or at the surface). As you pass them, sleeping, they look like a big sheet of black rubber. We have had them swim under Josepheline - which raises heartbeat to unhealthy levels.

Before any report is issued interviews from the 2 survivors might shed some light as might detailed photographs of the point of failure.

Jonathan

 

[Neeves]

Queensland Maritime and Queensland Police have initiated an enquiry into the death of 1 man due to the loss of Runaway's keel. I spoke with QM - they are not releasing any details of the incident until the enquiry is complete.

Detail might seep out as it will be difficult to hide the hull of Runaway (which I assume they will recover) and the father and son who were rescued by QP will presumably recount their experience long before a formal report is available.

Jonathan

 

[flaming]

Queensland Maritime and Queensland Police have initiated an enquiry into the death of 1 man due to the loss of Runaway's keel. I spoke with QM - they are not releasing any details of the incident until the enquiry is complete.

Detail might seep out as it will be difficult to hide the hull of Runaway (which I assume they will recover) and the father and son who were rescued by QP will presumably recount their experience long before a formal report is available.

Jonathan

Post on SA says

The yacht has been recovered, keel has not
There has been no grounding or collision with the recent owner. There was no whale strike
There has been two AS keel and rudder inspections in the last 18 months
The keel bolts and hull are completely intact
The fabricated steel fin has failed

Further details will be available after the release of coroner's report

 

[RunAgroundHard]

Post on SA says

The yacht has been recovered, keel has not
…
The keel bolts and hull are completely intact
The fabricated steel fin has failed
…

Does the SA comments make it clear if the keel has pulled out the bolts, or the keel has separated from the flange that buts against the slot in the hull, or sheared internally leaving a part of the keel with bolts still attached to hull?

 

[flaming]

Does the SA comments make it clear if the keel has pulled out the bolts, or the keel has separated from the flange that buts against the slot in the hull, or sheared internally leaving a part of the keel with bolts still attached to hull?

That's the whole post. No further info.

 

[Neeves]

I'm not used to SA b ut there might be more than one thread

Yacht loses its Keel

Jonathan

edit

and also

One Dead in Yacht Capsizing Near Great Barrier Reef

Further edit

RUNAWAY - Melbourne Osaka Cup

 

[Neeves]

I'm not used to SA b ut there might be more than one thread

Yacht loses its Keel

Jonathan

edit

and also

One Dead in Yacht Capsizing Near Great Barrier Reef

Further edit

RUNAWAY - Melbourne Osaka Cup

If the keel has been inspected twice in the last 18 months and the integrity of the keel has since failed then questions might be raised over the inspection procedures - which might be pertinent NOW to owners of similar keels rather than after the Coroner's report is issued. I think the keel testing protocols and certification were mentioned recently on YBW.

There is insufficient information currently - whether the weld of fin to flange has failed or the fin itself has failed. I don't quite understand why the actual point of failure, the weld or the fin, which should be obvious, is not being openly discussed - or at least in the public domain.

Jonathan

 

[Chiara’s slave]

That's the whole post. No further info.

The pictures, and sailing anarchy, seem to say the blade has failed at the flange joint. The photo isn’t that clear though.

 

[B27]

If the blade structure has failed, due to fatigue or not being strong enough, then no inspection procedure will prevent that.

I would have thought that in the 21st century, welding could be a fairly exact science. The design of metal structures is a very exact science.
What's a lot less exact is the loads which occur when a boat is operating on the ocean?
It's pretty trivial to understand the loads on a keel and its components due to the boat heeling over.
But there are huge dynamic loads due to waving around a big mass on the end of a long stick.

Personally I think people will always break stuff racing.
Perhaps we should be asking whether the keel falling off should so often result in fatalities?

 

[Chiara’s slave]

Maybeva look at multihull capsize procedures would help, if theres a serious possibility of a keel failing. The AC cats took that to a whole new level after the capsize where we lost Andrew Simpson.

 

[Neeves]

If the blade structure has failed, due to fatigue or not being strong enough, then no inspection procedure will prevent that.

I would have thought that in the 21st century, welding could be a fairly exact science. The design of metal structures is a very exact science.


Personally I think people will always break stuff racing.
Perhaps we should be asking whether the keel falling off should so often result in fatalities?

The initial reports are that the bolts that held the keel are intact. If the weld of the flange failed or the fin failed (for whatever reasons) then the flange is still attached. The photos are poor but I'd have expected more damage to the hull if the flange had ripped through it.

I assume the fin is made from a machined piece of Quench and Tempered steel plate. Bisalloy who make Q&T steel plate, test every plate (so the characteristics of each plate are known). They and other manufacturers of Q&T steels (eg SSAB) also provide specific instructions on how to weld. Welding of Q&T plate is common, Viking's anchors are welded and all the steel is Q&T, Anchor Right and Manson weld the fluke to the Q&T shank. Rocna welded their original fabricated fluke to the Q&T shank. Q&T steel is used in submarine hulls - they are all welded etc

Welders, the specific individuals, commonly need to be Lloyds approved (or other Classification Society) if you want Classification Society certification. I don't know the position with keels - and commonly being 'one off' do they enjoy test protocols? Anchors meeting Classification Society approvals are Proof Tested, which checks the integrity of the weld.

My understanding of Runaway is that it was not coded, not certified by a Classification Society. The keel had been 'examined' twice - but I don't know what 'examined' means.

There are many 'spindly' keels on racing yachts, many of the yachts are used in very taxing conditions, very few of the keels fail - it is possible to get it right.

Jonathan

 

[flaming]

The initial reports are that the bolts that held the keel are intact. If the weld of the flange failed or the fin failed (for whatever reasons) then the flange is still attached. The photos are poor but I'd have expected more damage to the hull if the flange had ripped through it.

I assume the fin is made from a machined piece of Quench and Tempered steel plate. Bisalloy who make Q&T steel plate, test every plate (so the characteristics of each plate are known). They and other manufacturers of Q&T steels (eg SSAB) also provide specific instructions on how to weld. Welding of Q&T plate is common, Viking's anchors are welded and all the steel is Q&T, Anchor Right and Manson weld the fluke to the Q&T shank. Rocna welded their original fabricated fluke to the Q&T shank. Q&T steel is used in submarine hulls - they are all welded etc

Welders, the specific individuals, commonly need to be Lloyds approved (or other Classification Society) if you want Classification Society certification. I don't know the position with keels - and commonly being 'one off' do they enjoy test protocols? Anchors meeting Classification Society approvals are Proof Tested, which checks the integrity of the weld.

My understanding of Runaway is that it was not coded, not certified by a Classification Society. The keel had been 'examined' twice - but I don't know what 'examined' means.

There are many 'spindly' keels on racing yachts, many of the yachts are used in very taxing conditions, very few of the keels fail - it is possible to get it right.

Jonathan

The "examination" is the ORC inspection. As ever, it's best to go direct to the text of the rules that the boat had to meet in order to enter the races it was doing, and indeed was on its way to start.

3.02.2 Effective 1 January 2022: Structural Inspection - Consult the owner’s manual for any instructions for keel bolt checking and re-tightening. The following inspection to be conducted by a qualified person externally with the boat out of the water. Check that there are no visible stress cracks particularly around the keel, hull/keel attachment, hull appendages and other stress points, inside the hull, backing plates, bolting arrangements and keel floors. (See Appendix L -Model Keel and Rudder Inspection Procedure)

Mo 0,1,2,3 3.02.3 Effective 1 January 2022: Evidence of a structural inspection in accordance with 3.02.2 within 24 months before the start of the race or after a grounding whichever is the later

Mo0,1,2,3 3.02.4 Effective 1 January 2022: Inspection after Grounding – an appropriately qualified person shall conduct an internal and external inspection after each unintentional grounding

Appendix L says

APPENDIX LModel Keel and Rudder Inspection ProcedureThe model form is not the only means of meeting the needs of OSR 3.02.3 Evidence ofPeriodic Structural Inspection, Organizing Authorities may develop on-line forms.Structural Inspection of a boat shall be completed by a qualified personboth internally (may be in the water) and externally (out of the water). Thepurpose of this inspection is to identify and report to the Owner thecondition of the keel and keel structure observed during this inspection. It isthe responsibility of the Owner to undertake any repairs.Consult the Owners’ Manual for the specific boat, steering system and typeof keel (e.g. fin, lifting, swinging, full length). Inspect in detail any high-loadareas: keel attachment, keel floor, steering systems, rudder(s). Pay specialattention to prior repairs, especially following groundings.Internal Inspection: Check backing plates, bolting arrangements, sumparea and keel floors for any signs of cracking, weakening, or de-laminatedtabbing. Lead or lead alloy keels may require tightening of bolts to ISOstandards due to lead creeping. Inspect keel bolt nuts for corrosion. Checkbolt holes for “ovaling.” Visually inspect for possible de-bonding of thesupporting structure.External Inspection: Check there are no signs of stress cracks (not gelcoatcracks) around the keel attachments to hull, or movement or openingaround the keel/hull interface which may allow water ingress andconsequent keel bolt crevice corrosion. If in doubt, sand back bottompaint/gel coat to identify depth of crack. Check keel tip deflection to insureimmediate return and no internal concomitant movement in the keel floor.Visually check high stress regions, particularly around the forward and afthull attachment areas of the keel, for signs of paint or gelcoat cracking orlarge, deep blisters, which can indicate separation and structuralweakness.Rudder/Steering system: Check bearing area for any damage/stresscracks; check rudder shaft and blade integrity, especially at any shaft joinsand at upper connections to hull/deck. Undertake a tip deflection test toidentify any excessive movement. If applicable, check rudder straps andgudgeons for corrosion or cracking.Lifting and swing keels: In addition to above, check there are no significantstress cracks in structure around pins supporting the keel. Check forextensive corrosion on pins, cylinders and supporting metal structure.

Sorry about the formatting, copy paste isn't great. Link to the original is here.
https://www.sailing.org/tools/documents/WSOffshoreSpecialRegulations20222023v2-[27823].pdf

As you can see it is much more concerned with the keel/hull join than it is the structural integrity of the keel itself.

 

[Neeves]

The "examination" is the ORC inspection. As ever, it's best to go direct to the text of the rules that the boat had to meet in order to enter the races it was doing, and indeed was on its way to start.



Appendix L says


Sorry about the formatting, copy paste isn't great. Link to the original is here.
https://www.sailing.org/tools/documents/WSOffshoreSpecialRegulations20222023v2-[27823].pdf

As you can see it is much more concerned with the keel/hull join than it is the structural integrity of the keel itself.

The copying was fine - thanks

The trouble is that though there have been failures in the past of the structure holding the complete keel there have been enough failures of the keel itself, with loss of life, to necessitate concerns about keel integrity. The keel failures of which I am aware have been due to modification or repair of the keel

I'm completely ignorant about test procedures but had assumed there were techniques to test welds, other than destructive testing and a visual look.

Jonathan

 

[Jonesy570]

Looking at the shape of the hull it’s not a new boat. It’ll be interesting to see just what the enquiry outcome is. Doesn’t appear to have ripped of a la Cheeky Rafeki which was all down to old fibre glass and delamination. This really looks like the keel snapped which implies a major grounding at some time. I can’t remember that happening before. (Now wait to ge flamed!)
Let’s wait.
Maybe I’ll just get my coat.

Metal fatigue! No grounding.. It just sheared off! ex Racing boats are only designed for x amount cycles in y conditions. The physics is done.. the stresses are all worked out. There is about 20 years of research! Just no one takes any notice in the yachting world. The offshore racing rules in WS and AS put the onus on the owner! The visual checks every 2 years are a joke, and the point of sale inspections are near criminal! For allowing a sale to go ahead without US or dye testing the metal in a keel after so many nautical miles sailed or removing that keel totally to see inside any covered over paint jobs! of the ex racing boats..
the design is aimed at achieving maximum speed to win.. the minimum idesign requirements were accepted in the Jon Sayer design of its day…
the “open ended” Edness of who can inspect a keel, who can repair a keel, who is qualified and who is not is a joke..there is no set rule.. it’s largely left up to the insurance and legal professions to expose yachting gung ho.! Just cruel really.. on so many levels, it’s all wrong…there are so many more stories out there that don’t make the headlines… they are headlines just sitting waiting to happen! And more lives to be lost sadly.
GO ON go for it.. have a go at me for speaking my mind. I dare you…

 

[Jonesy570]

The copying was fine - thanks

The trouble is that though there have been failures in the past of the structure holding the complete keel there have been enough failures of the keel itself, with loss of life, to necessitate concerns about keel integrity. The keel failures of which I am aware have been due to modification or repair of the keel

I'm completely ignorant about test procedures but had assumed there were techniques to test welds, other than destructive testing and a visual look.

Jonathan

Looks like an after thought appendix L page 58. Last thing n the rules!

 

[Jonesy570]

Looks like an after thought appendix L page 58. Last thing n the rules!

https://www.sailing.org/tools/documents/OC4aiiWorkingPartiesKeelImprovements-[27597].pdf

 

[Jonesy570]

The "examination" is the ORC inspection. As ever, it's best to go direct to the text of the rules that the boat had to meet in order to enter the races it was doing, and indeed was on its way to start.



Appendix L says


Sorry about the formatting, copy paste isn't great. Link to the original is here.
https://www.sailing.org/tools/documents/WSOffshoreSpecialRegulations20222023v2-[27823].pdf

As you can see it is much more concerned with the keel/hull join than it is the structural integrity of the keel itself.

The "examination" is the ORC inspection. As ever, it's best to go direct to the text of the rules that the boat had to meet in order to enter the races it was doing, and indeed was on its way to start.



Appendix L says


Sorry about the formatting, copy paste isn't great. Link to the original is here.
https://www.sailing.org/tools/documents/WSOffshoreSpecialRegulations20222023v2-[27823].pdf

As you can see it is much more concerned with the keel/hull join than it is the structural integrity of the keel itself.

https://www.sailing.org/tools/documents/OC4aiiWorkingPartiesKeelImprovements-[27597].pdf

No, it's depressingly common.

Since the 80s there have been over 75 reported total keel failures, and now 29 deaths as a result.

And yes, I am exactly talking about race boats, and the regulations that were brought in following the Cheeky Rafiki (and other) incident and how they seem to have failed to prevent this one. This being, of course, the race boat forum... If you sail a fairly conservative cruiser, sure not much of a worry. But not everyone does.

and that reported number is at 119. But possibly only 1/3 of all incidents that really happen. As who is going to knowingly honestly report? All groundings, all fine line cracks in the keel coatings, who even knows what they are looking for? Honestly? It would cost them money to haul out, have a certified engineer check, maybe take off the keel and check all bolt conditions. And that still does not address metal fatigue! You can’t see that well. You have no idea who did the weld. There are no rules around who can inspect , who is certified, who can repair. The technology is invented. The dye or UltraSound tests exist. Just no one pushes enough to change the status quo in yachtie land. To mandate change. The ISO2215-9 is due for change in 2025.. the last change was 2012. For over 20 years research as been done on metal fatigue, but no rules have changed around design, inspection, qualifications of inspectors or repairs,or at point of sale obligations especially on ex racing boats. It’s time for change.

 

[Jonesy570]

https://www.sailing.org/tools/documents/OC4aiiWorkingPartiesKeelImprovements-[27597].pdf

and that reported number is at 119. But possibly only 1/3 of all incidents that really happen. As who is going to knowingly honestly report? All groundings, all fine line cracks in the keel coatings, who even knows what they are looking for? Honestly? It would cost them money to haul out, have a certified engineer check, maybe take off the keel and check all bolt conditions. And that still does not address metal fatigue! You can’t see that well. You have no idea who did the weld. There are no rules around who can inspect , who is certified, who can repair. The technology is invented. The dye or UltraSound tests exist. Just no one pushes enough to change the status quo in yachtie land. To mandate change. The ISO2215-9 is due for change in 2025.. the last change was 2012. For over 20 years research as been done on metal fatigue, but no rules have changed around design, inspection, qualifications of inspectors or repairs,or at point of sale obligations especially on ex racing boats. It’s time for change.

 

[Jonesy570]

Sad to hear about a fatility, can’t be easy for anyone involved.

I am involved in critical inspection activities. NDT examination has significant quality issues that can only be managed through training and competency verification. Most of the processes are well understood but application can be questionable. I am now receiving phased array ultrasonic testing reports. The operators certificate pack includes medical and eye testing results to be be able to read and interpret the visual data, for example. The calibration of the probs requires customized coupons that represent what is being measured, not a standard test coupon. Usually, other methods of NDT are also required such as Dye Penetrant and x Ray. The point is NDT is not easy on complex shapes and it can get expensive. In my case, we just bin components that are likely good, every 5 service years and replace, it’s a lower cost, and the consequence of failure would likely end my employers business.

I doubt the leisure industry acts anything like this or has access to the skills at a price consumers are prepared to pay.

NDT = non destructive testing? Can I ask what industry you are in and what qualifications are needed? Interested to know?