Jeanneau Sun Odyssey 45.1 & 45.2 serious rudder issue

[little_roundtop]

Apologies if this info is well known (it wasn't to me) but this is intended as a "heads-up" to all owners of older Jeanneau Sun Odyssey 45.1's and 45.2's - and possibly other older Jeanneau yachts fitted with a spade rudder.

I have a 1995 SO45.1 and a friend in the same marina has a 2002 SO45.2. We have both recently had to drop our rudders and we both found a similar serious problem with the top bearing.

The top rudder bearing sits in a metal frame. This has been cunningly deigned to trap and hold water right next to the bearing, where of course it happily rusts away the bearing carrier and the frame itself.

Once my (very rusty) bearing frame had been removed we hit it several times with a small hammer, large bits of rust flew off with each stroke until there was very little metal left holding the top bearing in place. A failure of this bearing frame would be catastrophic I think.

It's very difficult to properly inspect this frame, it's tucked right underneath the emergency tiller housing. To check yours you should remove the emergency tiller cover and shine a torch onto the top bearing and the frame in the space immediately below, if you see any signs of rust I would suggest you remove the rudder and the top bearing frame and inspect it properly as soon as you can.

Seeing the same problem on two similar boats and seeing how easily the bearing frame traps water leads us to think this is a design flaw. We've both had a new bearing frame made locally, the new one has a slope on the part that supports the top bearing so that any water runs off.

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/25934908/IMG_0228.JPG
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/25934908/IMG_0232.JPG

PS. I've also posted this on the Jeanneau owners forum

 

[fireball]

Eek - that's not good!

 

[wotayottie]

Seeing the same problem on two similar boats and seeing how easily the bearing frame traps water leads us to think this is a design flaw.

Is it?

Yes its a serious issue and credit to you for warning others, but I guess that if you buy a cheaply built boat you should expect some corners to have been cut. Like not using bronze for the bearing carrier.

 

[Talulah]

Doesn't look good. Would be nice if you could upload a photo of the replacement.
I suspect others would appreciate an idea of cost as well.
I can almost hear shouts from the parapet that any loss of vessel due to a failure of this carrier would not be paid as it is a 'latent' defect.
To find this on a 1995 boat is not quite so bad. 17 years old. It's already outlasted the design life of the vessel. (Actually I don't know what the design life is but could speculate.)

 

[little_roundtop]

Doesn't look good. Would be nice if you could upload a photo of the replacement.
I suspect others would appreciate an idea of cost as well.
I can almost hear shouts from the parapet that any loss of vessel due to a failure of this carrier would not be paid as it is a 'latent' defect.
To find this on a 1995 boat is not quite so bad. 17 years old. It's already outlasted the design life of the vessel. (Actually I don't know what the design life is but could speculate.)

I'm expecting the replacement frame tomorrow and I will upload some photos. I'm having new bearings made and some work done on the rudder as well so the total price is quite high, but I'll find out the individual cost of the new frame and post that as well.

As far as design life is concerned I'm with Gene Kranz, the mission controller for Apollo 13 who, when the Grumman rep was pleading that "the lunar module was never designed to do that", said "I don't care what it was designed to do I only care what it can do".

 

[Sailfree]

Is it?

Yes its a serious issue and credit to you for warning others, but I guess that if you buy a cheaply built boat you should expect some corners to have been cut. Like not using bronze for the bearing carrier.

This is a design fault that is unfortunate but I doubt if it could be directly attributable to being a "cheap " boat.

I expect many expensive boats have faults where things could have been done better and possibly more than some mass produced boats due to the much lower build numbers

 

[fireball]

Is it?

Yes its a serious issue and credit to you for warning others, but I guess that if you buy a cheaply built boat you should expect some corners to have been cut.

Eh?

Waddaloadacrap ... !!

Ok - you may not expect "top grade" parts/materials or finishing detail to be as good - but you don't expect a significant structural part to be designed for failure ...

 

[Talulah]

Eh?

Waddaloadacrap ... !!

Ok - you may not expect "top grade" parts/materials or finishing detail to be as good - but you don't expect a significant structural part to be designed for failure ...

You can't expect all significant/structural parts to last for ever.
Whilst not designed for failure they are designed to last for at least a specific length of time. Anything after that is a bonus. Quite often engineers use MTTF. Mean time to failure.

 

[little_roundtop]

You can't expect all significant/structural parts to last for ever.
Whilst not designed for failure they are designed to last for at least a specific length of time. Anything after that is a bonus. Quite often engineers use MTTF. Mean time to failure.

I completely agree. My reason for suggesting that it's a design flaw is that it I think it should have been obvious that making the bearing carrier with flat mountings would allow any water to remain in-situ and thus cause rust. The top bearing is directly below the emergency tiller cover which is probably how the water has got in.

This kind of thing is the price of owning an old and "cheaply-built" boat and I understand that. But I still think a child could have anticipated that the design used would be prone to water retention and rusting.

That said, I'm not particularly interested in the merits or otherwise of the original design, nor whether it's past it's designed life. I am simply interested in letting the owners of similar yachts (and there are many) know that there is a potential problem that they may not have known about.

 

[vyv_cox]

It seems to me that the main cause of the problem is not the water-retaining design but the fact that it seems to have been made from galvanised carbon steel. Jeanneau's materials selection has been somewhat suspect in other areas too. There is an example on my website: the prop shaft on one boat was made of 400 series stainless steel which has considerably less corrosion resistance than 300. That is the second example that I have come across.
http://coxengineering.sharepoint.com/Pages/Crevice.aspx

 

[lenseman]

From an engineering standpoint, it looks like the corrosion started and remained next to the bearing.

Notwithstanding the platform collecting water, could it be that when the unit was fabricated the galvanising was completed before the bearing housing was welded between the two 'C' section arms. The fact that the corrosion forms an arc along the top of the two arms is indicative of poor anti-corrosion finish in the area that was subjected to heat?

When fabrication includes welding then any anti-corrosion must be applied after the welding is completed. This would include galvanising and or painting the weld prior to final installation.

The expression "you must always paint a weld" is drummed into you in 'The Andrew'.

 

[Spyro]

To find this on a 1995 boat is not quite so bad. 17 years old. It's already outlasted the design life of the vessel. (Actually I don't know what the design life is but could speculate.)

Better to keep one's mouth shut and appear to be an idiot than open it and remove all doubt.

Plenty of Old Jeanneau boats around much older than that.

 

[lustyd]

Was it still working when you removed it?
Have you asked what the life expectancy of the component is?

It does look bad but on the 1995 boat you'd be coming up for the second set of standing rigging and sails so I don't see why a bearing wouldn't need replacing too. I'm not an engineer but perhaps they chose the metal based on suitability for a bearing surface rather than rust resistance? Maybe a better rust resistant metal would have worn to the point of failure much quicker?

Just playing devils advocate, I realise this is the sort of thing that you probably wouldn't normally check or replace but then until recently none of us knew to check seacocks either!

 

[vyv_cox]

I'm not an engineer but perhaps they chose the metal based on suitability for a bearing surface rather than rust resistance? Maybe a better rust resistant metal would have worn to the point of failure much quicker?

Just playing devils advocate, I realise this is the sort of thing that you probably wouldn't normally check or replace but then until recently none of us knew to check seacocks either!

The bearing is the white plastic cylinder in the middle. The composition of the housing plays no part in the suitability of the bearing. Your boat almost certainly will have some plastic bearings in stainless housings. They are pretty much universal.

I suspect the selection is based solely on cost.

 

[Talulah]

Better to keep one's mouth shut and appear to be an idiot than open it and remove all doubt.

Plenty of Old Jeanneau boats around much older than that.

I know you have an old Jeanneau and there are plenty of them around. You may feel offended that I've implicitly suggested they are built to a price. The reality is that in every walk of life modern productions techniques and design analysis has enabled much better forecasting of failures v cost. It's the old saying "They don't build them like they used to."
Resorting to personal insults frankly reflects on the poster more than the recipient. Perhaps a balanced discussion would be better.

 

[Neil_Y]

Isn't this part of an annual inspection or survey? as lensman and vyv have said, maybe poor anti rust treatment has been the reason for the ammount of corossion but I've seen worse in other difficult to access areas of yachts.

Very useful for you to highlite this for other owners or potential owners though.

Key inspection areas must include all parts of the rudder system, at least once a year. Don't press fit the bearing as this can trap seawater and start corossion pockets, use a bearing that can be bedded on an epoxy or other sealant. If water can get to the shaft it will probably work its way to the bearing. 17 years is pretty good for a part that hasn't had any maintenance. I've seen mast base plates looking far worse on more expensive boats.

 

[lustyd]

The bearing is the white plastic cylinder in the middle. The composition of the housing plays no part in the suitability of the bearing. Your boat almost certainly will have some plastic bearings in stainless housings. They are pretty much universal.

I suspect the selection is based solely on cost.

Lol I think you may be overestimating the complexity of my yacht! Metal rod in metal hole with a plank of wood attached

You're right though, if there's no engineering reason for the metal choice it must be cost. It always amazes me given how much we know about materials these days that the designer/engineer doesn't choose something appropriate.

 

[doug748]

It's just a mild steel fabrication, most modern boats, of different classes, and all cars are held together with them. No problem, all boats need to be looked after, despite our earnest hopes and wishes they all fall apart in the end.
I agree with lenseman, I think someone has put some heat into that assembly after the zinc treatment.
Good for the OP for bringing this into the open for other owners. This sort of helpful posting is not encouraged by vacuous comments about the boat or it's purchase price.

 

[Heckler]

It's just a mild steel fabrication, most modern boats, of different classes, and all cars are held together with them. No problem, all boats need to be looked after, despite our earnest hopes and wishes they all fall apart in the end.
I agree with lenseman, I think someone has put some heat into that assembly after the zinc treatment.
Good for the OP for bringing this into the open for other owners. This sort of helpful posting is not encouraged by vacuous comments about the boat or it's purchase price.

+1
stu

 

[Spyro]

I know you have an old Jeanneau and there are plenty of them around. You may feel offended that I've implicitly suggested they are built to a price. The reality is that in every walk of life modern productions techniques and design analysis has enabled much better forecasting of failures v cost. It's the old saying "They don't build them like they used to."
Resorting to personal insults frankly reflects on the poster more than the recipient. Perhaps a balanced discussion would be better.

No offense taken at all with the suggestion they are built to a price. Your comment about them being past their design life at 17 years was just ridiculous. Maybe you forgot the smiley