I hate to do this...but

Mark-1 said:
As you will be aware one rather vile accusation was made against you. I'm sure you know the one. Was the Grant King on that web site you, or another Grant King?
Click to expand...

Let's leave the prurient curiosity out of things, eh? This forum has nearly 60,000 members and many thousands of occasional visitors. Amongst that number there are going to be many skeletons in cupboards. I, for one, would prefer to let this drop; it has no relevance to the questions about Rocna.
 
Delfin said:
Hear, Hear.
Click to expand...

Rigger Mortice said:
Let's leave the prurient curiosity out of things, eh? I, for one, would prefer to let this drop; it has no relevance to the questions about Rocna.
Click to expand...

Thanks for your opinion, but I'll ask any question I want. Grant doesn't have to answer, and he may well be grateful for the chance to clear his name.
 
Rigger Mortice said:
Let's leave the prurient curiosity out of things, eh? This forum has nearly 60,000 members and many thousands of occasional visitors. Amongst that number there are going to be many skeletons in cupboards. I, for one, would prefer to let this drop; it has no relevance to the questions about Rocna.
Click to expand...
+1
Entirely irrelevant to the thread. To pursue it is to pander to the disgraceful diversionary tactics to shut up the potential informer. It has absolutely no place here and I trust it will be ignored.

As a Rocna owner of some three years who had become slowly disillusioned by the corporate ethics of the company from revelations here, that posting was the last straw.
 
Mark-1 said:
This is irrelevant to the Quality of anchors of any design, but my curiosity has been aroused, so maybe you'll help me out.

As you will be aware one rather vile accusation was made against you. I'm sure you know the one. Was the Grant King on that web site you, or another Grant King?

Also have you posted under different usernames here? Anywhere else?
Click to expand...

As I have already stated, no problem with the truth.

Yes I was convicted in 2004 and spent 6 months away after being found guilty by a jury of the 2 charges.
It is a conviction I have to bear for the rest of my life.

Subsequent to that I have been through a 3 month investigation by Social Services, the courts, the police, and the Child Welfare service because I applied for custody of my 14 yr old daughter. This took place late last year and because of the previous conviction was intensive indeed.

All agencies involved recommended I be given sole parenting orders at the beginning of December 2010. I am still caring for her now without problem.

END OF STORY.

I have an account on Cruisers Forum with the user name "marinextreme" that I have had since January 2009 and this was used to monitor and reply on behalf of Rocna. I handed over monitoring of the sites to Bambury in early 2010.

I do not have an account on any other marine forums in any other name.

Bambury has chosen to fight in the dirt in a public forum, I will not fight in the dirt in public.

Rocna have still not informed me of the reason for my dismissal in May 2010.
They have not answered any of my correspondence or replied to my final account sent to them for outstanding invoices. I am seeking remedy through the courts for these outstanding amounts.

I will only state fact that can be backed with evidential proof which includes emails, memo's, recorded conversations and other certified documentation.

Hope that satisfies you Mark.
 
GrantKing said:
They have not answered any of my correspondence or replied to my final account sent to them for outstanding invoices. I am seeking remedy through the courts for these outstanding amounts.
Click to expand...

Good luck getting paid Grant. From what I understand, you will need to get in line behind CNC Profile Cutting Services in NZ and Linox Technology Pty in Australia.
 
Breaking anchors

Don't see what personel life has got do these discussions,thats Grants buisness.

So change it up get back to buisness.

Anchors breaking are fairly unusual in mild steel constructed anchors; it’s when you get into high tensile steels you can have a problem of snapping at the point of welds, this is normally due to incorrect method of welding , nothing to do with the quality, most higher grade steels over and above mild steel require pre heating before welding.

I have been through the whole process of getting certified for Super High Holding Power anchors, and achieved it I might add, field testing is very important as it will expose low holding power and other weaknesses such as setting, break out and the ability to reset.
No one in their right mind would try for S/H/H/Power certification unless they proved the latter first.

Proof testing, that is the big one and is what seems to be missing from RINA, welding procedure, penetration of a weld, steel strength regardless whether it be mild or high tensile steel, they all have to survive the dreaded proof test, that is the final test to show up any weakness in an anchor design.

If you are going construct an anchor out of mild steel then the thickness of mild steel has to be marginal of that of the higher grade steels to achieve similar or same strength result, there is a lot less emphasis involved with working and welding procedure’s as pre heating can be irrelevant with mild steel construction, Super Sarca is a mild steel constructed anchor, whereas the Sraca Excel is a combination of mild and Bisplate 8o grade, this is a more expensive anchor because we use higher grade steels as the design demands lighter and thinner components for its concept to work.

That is basically what is behind or determines the type of steels used in all anchor design’s Mr. C will tell you different, he spouts they have the strongest anchor because of the steel quality they choose to use, BS, they have no choice otherwise the design will never take the proof load test required and will simply not perform the same, example, can you imagine Fortress using mild steel in their design, their marketing is centered around rapid penetration, holding area, holding power, (lightweight). High grade steel is the only way to achieve such a design.

We have seen a badly bent shank circulating recently of a rickety anchor, I have suspicion as close inspection shows no telltale of extreme force being applied to that anchor, if it was high strength steel one would think to bend this shank there would have to some sort off evidence, even a mark on the fluke plate to indicate excessive force. I think if ever someone was to have a Chinese rickety anchor credibly tested my suspicion may be justified.
You May say well why don’t they go thicker if it is mild steel to make up the difference, the design will not allow it, mild steel means thicker heavier, the design would be completely unbalanced.

You know all should understand, there is not an anchor on the market that will not bend given the amount of uncalculated impacts that are applied in various situations and conditions, there is not an anchor that will hold you one hundred percent in all types of substrate and conditions, not possible, there are better ones, not just proven to work, but proven a built standard, certification is the only way to be sure you have got that guarantee, it just may save your life, compared to an uncertified copy, or any anchor for that matter, certification has its merits.

Very dangerous and upsetting if you are told a company’s anchor has full RINA certification, and it has not? Even more upsetting if the so called tested anchor is made out of inferior steel compared to what you have told, (not proven) but keep on the trail, you have been told for many years now by the Rickety camp that knock off s don’t work the same, are made out of inferior grade steels, then I would be in tears if it is proven the very company that is sprooking the benefits of genuine is in fact producing an inferior knock off of their own?

Rex.
Anchor Right Australia
 
Based on the evidence presented so far, I have a feeling that where this examination of Rocna is leading is that if you want a cheap Chinese knock off of the original, made of inferior materials, then buy a Rocna. Rocna is now, in essence, the cheap knock off of itself.

Sad, as it wasn't necessary to be competitive in the marketplace.
 
CONGO said:
Even more upsetting if the so called tested anchor is made out of inferior steel compared to what you have told, (not proven) but keep on the trail, you have been told for many years now by the Rickety camp that knock off s don’t work the same, are made out of inferior grade steels, then I would be in tears if it is proven the very company that is sprooking the benefits of genuine is in fact producing an inferior knock off of their own?

Rex.
Anchor Right Australia
Click to expand...

Which is probably why the "test" results which Ronca published a couple of days ago were of one small lump of metal, rather than one of their anchors.

It's probably why they also persist in refusing to take up the Manson challenge to put one of their anchors on a test rig.
 
CONGO said:
Anchors breaking are fairly unusual in mild steel constructed anchors; it’s when you get into high tensile steels you can have a problem of snapping at the point of welds, this is normally due to incorrect method of welding , nothing to do with the quality, most higher grade steels over and above mild steel require pre heating before welding.
Click to expand...

It's the 'High tensile steels' wording that concerns me. My specification for ASTM 514S has a minimum hardness requirement of 235 Brinell. These are 100 ksi steels, which in the units I am most familiar is a 44 ton steel (My steel-making was a long time ago). There is no way that a 44 ton steel could be called high tensile.

For comparison a mild steel with a very low carbon content would have a hardness of about 150 Brinell. An annealed (i.e not heat treated) carbon steel could easily have a hardness of 235 Brinell, although it would probably be unweldable. A 300 series stainless steel, which cannot be hardened by heat treatment, could be expected to have a hardness of 200 Brinell. For comparison a ball bearing steel with 1% carbon, 1% chromium, has a hardness of about 700 - 800 Brinell.

So let's keep a sense of proportion. We are not talking about high tensile steels here. They are a little stronger than a mild steel, barely stronger than the steel you might use for a RSJ or for your stainless steel fittings.
 
High Tensile steel

My steel making days were back in the '70s, - so my knowledge is pretty rusty (and I worked at the cusp of BSC's special steelmaking, then, technology - and look what happened to them). Anyway I could not stand the heat - and moved on.

However mild steel has a tensile strength of about 250MPa and Bisplate 80 (which is what Manson and Anchor Right use - its local, Australian), or ASTM 514a is about 800/830 Mpa (I vaguely recall 316 Stainless at about 500MPa - but am happy to be corrected). 800MPa is pretty universally available. When we buy an anchor we are not interested in the hardness of steel - we want strength, hardness might be a convenient measure, but it might also be a measure of steels without strength (frankly I do not know) - but we want strength.

Much might depend on ones definition of 'High' but my understanding is that any steel with a tensile strength higher than Bisplate 80/ASTM 514a cannot be galvanised as the heat of galvanising destroys the tensile characteristics (and I'm quite happy to be corrected on this, as well). Though I have always thought plasma spraying (with Zn) might be possible - too expensive?

So - in terms of anchor making - ASTM 514a looks like high tensile steel (compared to mild steel) - in fact' highest' tensile steel. Bisalloy - the company making Bisplate 80, claim to specialise in making High Tensile steels, check their website www.bisalloy.com.au . And I for one will not argue with them, as they, Bisalloy, are a spin off from BHP Billiton - and in terms of steelmaking they ought to know. There are higher tensile grades, but they do not relate to anchor making (cannot be galvanised).

An advantage (in anchor making) for using ASTM 514a (etc) is that the shank can be thinner than a mild steel shank (of the same strength) and the thinner shank allows the weight of the anchor to be focussed in the fluke - providing great design flexibility. So the higher 'tensile' strength of ASTM 514a is important though I think 4 times tensile strength allows reduction in thickness of only a factor 0f 2 (I am even happy to be corrected on this). Additionally the thinner fluke offer less resistance to the anchor biting into the seabed allowing the anchor to set more deeply. The disadvantage, for the anchor maker, is that it is more difficult to cut, more difficult to weld (actually not difficult, its all been sorted out, - but expensive) and ASTM 514a costs about 2 times the price of mild steel. So mild steel is a cheap raw material, cheap to process but constrains design - and guess who has to pay for the higher costs, to get the better product. Or guess who makes more money if they do not use a 800MPa steel.

Lewmar have been claiming to make their Delta from 'High Tensile' steels for decades (well 2 and a bit) and no-one has ever criticised them - and they do not even tell you what steels they use (and no-one has ever hounded them for that either.)

So maybe tensile strength of 3-4 times mild steel is not 'technically' high tensile steel - but the term (in respect to anchors) looks pretty good to me. Bisalloy use the term High Tensile (for Bisplate 80, ASTM 514a) (and presumably BHP and Bisalloy's customers are happy), Manson use it, Anchor Right use it and Lewmar use the term for a steel quality no-one knows about.

So why the fuss 'now'? As I say - seems good enough to me

But maybe my steel making days are not rusty but tarnished?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top