Do we need another anchor design?

N

Neeves

Well-Known Member
Joined
20 Nov 2011
Messages
14,060
Location
Sydney, Australia.
Visit site
This is a rather long thread on Cruisers Forum:

http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/f118/anchor-diy-200740.html

I found it interesting for a number of reasons - one being the vitriol of some of the responses. A characteristic missing, fortunately, on YBW threads

The original design by Bonaparte was introduced as a 'home build', Bonaparte does not appear to want to profit from his efforts.

The concept was adopted by Viking anchors who produced a prototype which has gone through some modification and has generated another thread on CF

http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/f118/viking-anchor-now-where-have-i-seen-this-before-218097.html

Viking enjoyed some of the same vitriol though this appears to be tempered slightly.

To me the anchor seems a vast improvement on Mantus.

Unusual to have an anchor out of Israel and made in the Ukraine.

Jonathan
 
Last edited:
It's healthy to have a new anchor design, either original or improvement of a current design; its evolution. I agree that weight is of secondary importance, geometry together with material strength being the primary factor for an anchor. I would like to see an anchor that is as light as a feather with high strength and robust enough for all anchoring conditions and yachts. We are getting there slowly.
 
In your first link the tester drags three anchors along a shallow creek. Bottom seems to be slightly muddy sand. The Rocna and Mantus never set whereas his does. In that bottom under 3 - 5 metres of water my Rocna would set in its own length and I have many photos that prove it. This suggests to me that the test is flawed.

His anchor looks good, cheap to make and available to anyone who wants to. A good effort.

The thread is interesting in highlighting the difference between those who think they know about patents and those who do know.
 
“In that bottom under 3 - 5 metres of water my Rocna would set in its own length ”

Yes mine too. We’ve been anchoring in wild Scotland for the past month and have been impressed with with its ability to set through thick kelp too.
 
vyv_cox said:
In your first link the tester drags three anchors along a shallow creek. Bottom seems to be slightly muddy sand. The Rocna and Mantus never set whereas his does. In that bottom under 3 - 5 metres of water my Rocna would set in its own length and I have many photos that prove it. This suggests to me that the test is flawed.

This highlights an interesting point. Some anchors excel in soup mud (Fortress), but folks say "anchor somewhere else." Others excel in hard sand (Mantus, Northill), but folks say "anchor somewhere else." My local sailing area includes areas in both categories, where Rocna and Manson struggle, and sometimes that is just where I want to anchor. The bottom is always a huge variable. Should an anchor focus on one type of bottom, at the possible expense of others? I don't think there is one answer to the question, though we would all like a general purpose anchor. I'm happy to see people try stuff. Something is learned every time. But as you point out, you need to keep your filters active.

His anchor looks good, cheap to make and available to anyone who wants to. A good effort.

The thread is interesting in highlighting the difference between those who think they know about patents and those who do know.

Yeah, that's pretty funny. For the most part, you can only patent that which is truly innovative and not likely to be something a person "skilled in the art" would develop in the normal course of investigation. There is also a difference between having a patents and having a patent which is truly defendable (there are many weak patents). Since most anchors are only evolution based on prior art, the most you can patent are very specific design elements. This discourages exact copies of clever details, but not mutations. And then there is the matter of international law.

Patents are meant to encourage progress, which requires a balance between protecting true innovation without stifling evolution.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Neeves said:
This is a rather long thread on Cruisers Forum:

http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/f118/anchor-diy-200740.html

I found it interesting for a number of reasons - one being the vitriol of some of the responses. A characteristic missing, fortunately, on YBW threads

The original design by Bonaparte was introduced as a 'home build', Bonaparte does not appear to want to profit from his efforts.

The concept was adopted by Viking anchors who produced a prototype which has gone through some modification and has generated another thread on CF

http://www.cruisersforum.com/forums/f118/viking-anchor-now-where-have-i-seen-this-before-218097.html

Viking enjoyed some of the same vitriol though this appears to be tempered slightly.

To me the anchor seems a vast improvement on Mantus.

Unusual to have an anchor out of Israel and made in the Ukraine.

Jonathan
Click to expand...

Are any of these new anchors secure enough
 
It's got holes in it.

I have been thinking of a new anchor recently so have been reviewing the evidence. One of the flaws in the Rocna and Manson models, uncovered by the excellent SVPanope videos, is failure in his 3knot reset tests. There have also been anecdotal stories of similar anchors failing to bite when disturbed.

There seemed to be a marked improvement when holes were introduced to a Manson:

https://youtu.be/HvrzP65h5SE


Now it may be that resetting a bedded anchor at 3kts is an unrealistic test. Or maybe the poor performance is easily remedied by simply pulling up the anchor and cleaning it off. However it does seem that holes or slots may be the future.
Great news "new and improved" anchors.
 
Last edited:
I do think the 3 knot reversal is unrealistic. His video has led to withdrawal of the Rocna as one of Morgans Cloud recommendations, but I have photos and real world experience showing the Rocna survives reversal perfectly well.
 
vyv_cox said:
I do think the 3 knot reversal is unrealistic. His video has led to withdrawal of the Rocna as one of Morgans Cloud recommendations, but I have photos and real world experience showing the Rocna survives reversal perfectly well.
Click to expand...

I think that is an interesting question.

We are thinking in terms of a rapid reversal due to wind or tide. What is more likely, I think, is breaking out an anchor due to energetic yawing (I've done that, both in testing and very early in my sailing career--the latter left a vivid memory). If that is the case, 3 knots may not be unrealistic.

Recently, I was testing riding sails and had intentionally unbalanced the boat to increase yawing past the typical 60 degrees to 100 degrees. I've seen many yaw that badly. Although well-set, my NG anchor (not naming-names at this time) popped out and didn't even slow the boat a bit. I was going over 3 knots and had gone hundreds of meters before I just raised anchor and returned to the original spot. There was very little resistance on the rode. The bottom was excellent firm sand, but perhaps not the best material for high speed re-set. But the point is the anchor failed in a realistic scenario. Yes, it was loaded with bottom material when it came up, even after all of that dragging.

I'm not sayin' I have an answer, other than avoiding yawing. Excessive yawing has always scared me to death. I consider it one of the most serious threats to anchor security, right behind stupidly short scope (as defined by the circumstances) and a terrible bottom.
 
"I'm not sayin' I have an answer, other than avoiding yawing."

How to minimise yawing? Bucket(s) over the stern tied to staern quarters? Riding sail on the backstay?

Any ideas would be welcome.
 
Robih said:
"I'm not sayin' I have an answer, other than avoiding yawing."

How to minimise yawing? Bucket(s) over the stern tied to staern quarters? Riding sail on the backstay?

Any ideas would be welcome.
Click to expand...

I suggest searching the forum.
* not a bucket. That can actually make it worse by upsetting the balance.
* bridle
* hammer lock mooring
* riding sail, but V-shaped is better than backstay
* kellet if rope rode
* lift rudder, if applicable
* chain rode in light to moderate conditions
* remove dinghy from bow
* remove reacher from furler
 
Robih said:
"I'm not sayin' I have an answer, other than avoiding yawing."

How to minimise yawing? Bucket(s) over the stern tied to staern quarters? Riding sail on the backstay?

Any ideas would be welcome.
Click to expand...

Second anchor in a V. We have used this technique countless times, usually don't bother in winds less than 30 knots but have found it highly successful up to 50 knots. I shot a video two years ago showing yawing reduced from more than 100 degrees to just over 40.
 
vyv_cox said:
I do think the 3 knot reversal is unrealistic. His video has led to withdrawal of the Rocna as one of Morgans Cloud recommendations, but I have photos and real world experience showing the Rocna survives reversal perfectly well.
Click to expand...

My understanding is that Morgan Cloud withdrew support for Rocna (and I think by a association, Supreme) because there were reports of Rocna, more than one, dragging and not re-setting. I believe the anchors did not reset because the fluke was full of mud (or seabed). The removal of support recommendation pre-dates the Panope video by months, maybe years

I did some tests, at considerable personal effort, and found that if you applied a change of tension direction of 180 degrees (think of a thunderstorm cell passing overhead) then concave fluke anchors would not reset if the fluke was filled with mud - until such time the anchor self cleaned by being pulled over the seabed - say by an errant yacht.

I do not subscribe to Morgans Cloud - but others here do - some of whom can be quite vocal - they can confirm the details (hopefully) of the background to MG's removal of support.

https://www.practical-sailor.com/issues/37_26/features/Anchor-Resetting-Tests_10981-1.html

Jonathan
 
vyv_cox said:
I am not sure that either of them have addressed shank strength, problematic for several commercial makers.
Click to expand...

Now that is a diplomatic way of putting it :)

I'm not sure that Boanaprte addressed the issue, at all.

Viking are suggesting they are using a 700 MPa steel, which is not far from the original Bis80 and from the images they seem to have a decent amount of steel in the shank. Because their source is an alloy steel, rather than a Q&T steel (or that's my understanding of the steel quality quoted) they do not risk degrading the steel when welding (the flange that bolts under the soles) nor when galvanising. From tests I have conducted on Q&T steels that have been galvanised strengths can be reduced by upto 20%. But diffident Q&T steels will behave differently - depends on the tempering temperature.

Jonathan
 
vyv_cox said:
Second anchor in a V. We have used this technique countless times, usually don't bother in winds less than 30 knots but have found it highly successful up to 50 knots. I shot a video two years ago showing yawing reduced from more than 100 degrees to just over 40.
Click to expand...

+1

Anchoring in a 'v' - very successful. We tend to deploy if the forecast suggests winds - in the anchorage - are likely exceed 25 knots. Not because it is necessary - but its easier too deploy the second anchor before gusts are in excess of 30 knots.

Its about caution - not necessity.

If we are on passage and its only an overnight stop - we might not bother - but if we are going to be pinned down for a couple of days - its more comfortable in a 'stationary' yacht than one that is veering around.

Jonathan
 
Jonathan/Vyv,

How do you deploy the second anchor? Carried out and dropped from the dinghy or from the bow of the boat?
 
One facet of the 2 threads I did find interesting was the very open criticism of Napoleon for 'apparently' copying Mantus.

More recently Lewmar have introduced a Fortress lookalike, cover up the names and from photos you cannot tell the difference, and not a murmur on any CF thread. The Lewmar aluminium alloy fluke anchor is for sale from Defender, in the US, and from a chandler near you or, presumably, will be soon. From the release from Lewmar they might have changed the way to alter the shank/fluke angle (from 30 to 45 degrees) - but it looks similar and follows the same product codes.

Jonathan
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top