Epsilon Anchors infos

[thinwater]

^^^ I made this effort with ABYC. The truthful answer was that the details of the basis for H-40, Table 1 has been lost to the sands of time, when the men who did the research passed on. The tables remain valid in the sense that boats designed based on them have had acceptable service. The best understanding is that the working load limits are the maximum they observed anchored at long fetch in relatively shallow water but in non-breaking conditions, chain with no snubber. I did such testing and got values that suggested this might be right. It is intended to be worst case for the conditions, something any sane sailor would try hard to avoid. You anchored in an open rodestead, too close to shore, and a front passed with you trapped.

The windspeed (ABYC) is the maximum (gust) measured at 33 feet. However, the spikes are mostly related to the optimum synchronization of wave sets and the catenary coming out of the chain, so the extent to which this is influenced by gusts is less than certain (it is not a wind-load-only number--that would be much easier to measure).

So far as I know, there is no generally accepted way to estimate rode tension for recreational yachts. Too many variables. I recorded rode tensions over a range of about 400%, at one location, on one day, just by changing the rode type.

 

[Neeves]

Yes, I still have a problem with the logic .
My 12 ton boat with its 75 hp engine .
Let's say it takes 38 hp to bury my 20 kg Delta.
Then using its full power to bury my 33kg Manson .
Which of these anchors would I be more comfortable with in a 30 kt plus blow.?

See post 121, Read Morgan's Cloud recommendation on Rocna and Supreme, check Panope's resetting tests on Concave roll bar anchors and read this: Anchor Resetting Tests | Practical Sailor. Rea the dragging thread.

No anchor is perfect they are all a compromise - if you use the wrong anchor in the wrong seabed - make sure you have set your anchor alarm. When you provide the evidence that suggests people dragged using a modern anchor of the recommended size - post it. There are many who are considering buying a new anchor, your research can be added to their own.

I have scrolled through the internet and I have yet to find any evidence that suggests people with modern anchors of the recommended size have a higher propensity to drag than those with big anchors - you both have obviously found different - show us the data.

If you have no data - you have followed advice that has no technical basis - and to my mind - show gullibility.

Most anchors drag because they are not well set, think CQR, Delta or Bruce or have picked up some form of contaminant, towel, oyster shell, old beer can. You cannot legislate for bad luck. You cannot cater for stupidity, too short a scope, no (or inadequate) snubber, wrong anchor in that specific seabed, forgot to listen to the forecast.

Where is the data that proves the anchor makers and Classification Societies have it so wrong - and has caused you to buy an anchor bigger than recommended.

So prove me wrong.

Jonathan

And to think that upto the last few posts, the last 15 or so, there was no rancour in this anchor thread. A day, or so, is a long time in an anchor thread

 

[Neeves]

Yes, I still have a problem with the logic .
My 12 ton boat with its 75 hp engine .
Let's say it takes 38 hp to bury my 20 kg Delta.
Then using its full power to bury my 33kg Manson .
Which of these anchors would I be more comfortable with in a 30 kt plus blow.?

This post is a bit like saying:

I bought an original Suzuki Jimny which I still own in almost perfect condition now I have a top of the range new Land Cruiser

Which of these is better driving up a motorway or even in Knightsbridge.

I find it difficult to understand the logic of trying to compare a 20kg Delta with a 33lg Manson (I assume Supreme).

In fact I cannot even work out why the question was asked - Maybe people have nothing better to do than ask rhetorical questions.

Jonathan

 

[Bouba]

Viking new design anchor.
Last year we have asked for your help finding a way to enable the use of an anchor with a roll bar in vessels that cannot accommodate a roll bar, a task that might sound very difficult at the time.
Since we at Viking thinks that a roll bar anchor performs better while resetting and because there are many boats with pulpits, bowsprits in many shapes and forms as well as many catamarans that cannot use rollbar anchor, we have decided to invest the time and the efforts to try and create a way that all, or most vessels will be able to use an anchor with a roll bar.
Keeping the same basic dimensions, angles, and size, using the same HT steel, we have managed to create a groundbreaking design that overcomes the problem.
We are pleased to inform you that our new design anchor was filed for IP registration and finished all the initial tests, with great success, and we are overwhelmed by the results.
At this stage, we have already selected 5 very happy boat owners that until now could not use our first very successful and only anchor design due to their boat bow structure, and soon they will get our new design anchor with the right size to fit their boats and start Betta tests.
We are very happy and proud.View attachment 114911

Mounting the roll bar upside down is a stroke of genius !
The trend seems to be going against roll bars. And some experts are claiming that the roll bar causes the anchor to fail. So I would be grateful if you could expand on your reasoning for sticking with the roll bar

 

[NormanS]

Come on. A roll bar is required only because otherwise those anchors requiring them would otherwise lie n their sides. A roll bar is merely the equivalent of the stock on a fisherman or Danforth type anchor. Trying to extol other benefits of the roll bar is just hypocrisy.

 

[Mr Cassandra]

Depend on who the "experts" are, we do believe in roll bars, a roll bar will assist better in resetting, a roll bar will eliminate the unnecessary additional weight at the anchor's toe, and having that enable the toe to be thinner to penetrate better in hard and weedy soil.
A roll bar acts as an additional friction part adding holding power.
And last but not least, the roll bar is also helping the complete anchor structure making it stronger.

Jonathan will be along soon , he will tell us all we need to know

 

[dankilb]

Viking new design anchor.
Last year we have asked for your help finding a way to enable the use of an anchor with a roll bar in vessels that cannot accommodate a roll bar, a task that might sound very difficult at the time.
Since we at Viking thinks that a roll bar anchor performs better while resetting and because there are many boats with pulpits, bowsprits in many shapes and forms as well as many catamarans that cannot use rollbar anchor, we have decided to invest the time and the efforts to try and create a way that all, or most vessels will be able to use an anchor with a roll bar.
Keeping the same basic dimensions, angles, and size, using the same HT steel, we have managed to create a groundbreaking design that overcomes the problem.
We are pleased to inform you that our new design anchor was filed for IP registration and finished all the initial tests, with great success, and we are overwhelmed by the results.
At this stage, we have already selected 5 very happy boat owners that until now could not use our first very successful and only anchor design due to their boat bow structure, and soon they will get our new design anchor with the right size to fit their boats and start Betta tests.
We are very happy and proud.View attachment 114911

Excellent -thanks for sharing. Fascinating to see the CAD alongside the prototype. Best of luck with the beta testing. The more the merrier, in terms of new designs, as it can only help the options available, competition, innovation, etc. Keep up the good work!

 

[Neeves]

Come on. A roll bar is required only because otherwise those anchors requiring them would otherwise lie n their sides. A roll bar is merely the equivalent of the stock on a fisherman or Danforth type anchor. Trying to extol other benefits of the roll bar is just hypocrisy.

Rubbish.

Its marketing and has worked long before Peter Smith introduced his copy of Spade. Many have become besotted with a roll bar - which indicates spruiking works. Its taken 16 years and people are at last beginning to under stand that:

Currently and after all these decades

Anchors are still a compromise.

Arguably design has not changed much since the CQR and Danforth, there are improvements (largely new materials, HT steels, and universal use of welding). But the two themes are ballasted anchors (as per CQR, Delta and now Excel) and fluke anchors (as per Danforth, Fortress and Mantus). The big development came from one man , Peter Bruce - who stepped outside the box with his design in the 70s and his idea of the roll bar (adopted by Bugel). and Delta's self righting shank (+ballast), adopted by Spade and again Excel. This is not to say anchor makers have not screwed it up, who recalls the Hydro-bubble, who even heard of The Scoop and there are still the blind leading the blind over Mantus. Don't ignore the contrast between Peter Smiths's effectively copying Spade, but because his ballast is not focussed - needs a roll bar and the fact that Spade has always languished

Get the promotion right (accidental or not), bendy shanks, threads on forum (or YouTube) - you can sell anything.

We are very easily persuaded.

We are due a step forward - the ideas and concepts are all there (maybe masquerading as an oil rig anchor) - but there has not been all that much new for almost 100 years Mantus is a badly designed but welded up and tweaked Danforth and an Excel a development of a CQR - throw in the self righting shank and the roll bar and you have todays's basis of the anchor industry.

Harsh - maybe - but think, since the 1930s CQR and Danforth, how aircraft design has changed, cars have changed, yachts have changed - but we still argue about something as simple as an anchor.

Who is to say that in 15 years time, with a decent amount of YouTube influencers - the next best thing will not be the 'Z shank.

Don't get me wrong - I'm all for people sticking their neck out - that's what Peter Bruce did - and he has recently retired from one of the largest oil rig anchor makers in the world - and all credit to him.

Don't knock the innovators.

So Izi, all power to you - don't lose the drive. I am sure when Peter Bruce introduced his design - people laughed their socks off.

Take care, stay safe

Jonathan

 

[NormanS]

Rubbish.

Its marketing and has worked long before Peter Smith introduced his copy of Spade. Many have become besotted with a roll bar - which indicates spruiking works. Its taken 16 years and people are at last beginning to under stand that:

Currently and after all these decades

Anchors are still a compromise.

Arguably design has not changed much since the CQR and Danforth, there are improvements (largely new materials, HT steels, and universal use of welding). But the two themes are ballasted anchors (as per CQR, Delta and now Excel) and fluke anchors (as per Danforth, Fortress and Mantus). The big development came from one man , Peter Bruce - who stepped outside the box with his design in the 70s and his idea of the roll bar (adopted by Bugel). and Delta's self righting shank (+ballast), adopted by Spade and again Excel. This is not to say anchor makers have not screwed it up, who recalls the Hydro-bubble, who even heard of The Scoop and there are still the blind leading the blind over Mantus. Don't ignore the contrast between Peter Smiths's effectively copying Spade, but because his ballast is not focussed - needs a roll bar and the fact that Spade has always languished

Get the promotion right (accidental or not), bendy shanks, threads on forum (or YouTube) - you can sell anything.

We are very easily persuaded.

We are due a step forward - the ideas and concepts are all there (maybe masquerading as an oil rig anchor) - but there has not been all that much new for almost 100 years Mantus is a badly designed but welded up and tweaked Danforth and an Excel a development of a CQR - throw in the self righting shank and the roll bar and you have todays's basis of the anchor industry.

Harsh - maybe - but think, since the 1930s CQR and Danforth, how aircraft design has changed, cars have changed, yachts have changed - but we still argue about something as simple as an anchor.

Who is to say that in 15 years time, with a decent amount of YouTube influencers - the next best thing will not be the 'Z shank.

Don't get me wrong - I'm all for people sticking their neck out - that's what Peter Bruce did - and he has recently retired from one of the largest oil rig anchor makers in the world - and all credit to him.

Don't knock the innovators.

So Izi, all power to you - don't lose the drive. I am sure when Peter Bruce introduced his design - people laughed their socks off.

Take care, stay safe

Jonathan

I'm not sure why you say "Rubbish", and then go on at some length pretty much agreeing with me.

 

[Mr Cassandra]

Alain Poiraud, designed of Spade used to post on this forum, driven off by journalists and competition that knew better.

 

[Neeves]

I'm not sure why you say "Rubbish", and then go on at some length pretty much agreeing with me.

It was your use of the word hypocrisy - that was rubbish. I did not think he was being hypocritical.

 

[Neeves]

Alain Poiraud, designed of Spade used to post on this forum, driven off by journalists and competition that knew better.

The competition arguably did not know better but were promoting a design - of course they would be critical. It was upto the market place to decide who was right. It is interesting that his retirement from the fray and the rise and rise of the competition suggests his actions were wrong - if you cannot stand the heat, don't design anchors.

Possibly you can list the journalists who knew better. I for one have never recommended a Rocna and use a Spade and have had no issues in mentioning the content of my anchor quiver. As a journalist I investigated, years ago, the issue of fluke clogging and damned Rocna and Supreme. Please define. The issue of fluke clogging has been known now for years and has been reported repeatedly - the market place has been besotted by roll bars - the market place made its decision - but now appears to be having second thoughts. It maybe the journalists were insufficiently forceful - but you can take a horse to water ........

As a journalist I investigated the deficiency of Mantus. My comments were published and taken on board by an anchor maker (he said so on a forum). He significantly improved the performance of his design. The market place and many experts took not a blind bit of notice and still praise Mantus.

Its not necessarily only journalists nor competition that know better - the acid test is how does the market place react.

There is nowt as queer as folk.

Jonathan