Preventing Corrosion in a Rope-Chain Splice

Stemar

Well-Known Member
Joined
12 Sep 2001
Messages
25,589
Location
Home - Southampton, Boat - Gosport
Visit site
After about 10years, I've just had to replace my rope chain splice, losing the best part of a foot of rope and chain. It was too rusty and stiff to go down the hawse pipe and I was concerned about the strength.

I've washed it with fresh water a couple of times a year, but is there anything else I can do, or should I just be glad it lasted as long as it has?
 
I had a similar problem on the new-to-me boat a couple of years back, the corrosion was so bad it had actually broken one of the links. My preferred solution was to use a back splice in the octoplait line - this also has the benefit of going through the rope/chain gypsy much more reliably.
 
I have never seen strength tests on the various ways of splicing rope to chain including a back splice and an elongated splice. I can see where the strength of a rope eye splice comes from due to the rope lay tightening on the splicing but I have some reservations about rope to anchor splicing?
 
I have never seen strength tests on the various ways of splicing rope to chain including a back splice and an elongated splice. I can see where the strength of a rope eye splice comes from due to the rope lay tightening on the splicing but I have some reservations about rope to anchor splicing?

All I can say is, my last rope to chain splice never gave me any problems apart from the rope keeping the chain in the splice damp with sea water. I did wonder about using an eye splice, but a hard eye wouldn't fit down the hawse pipe and I wasn't sure how long a soft eye would last, though I expect it would see me out.
 
I have never seen strength tests on the various ways of splicing rope to chain including a back splice and an elongated splice. I can see where the strength of a rope eye splice comes from due to the rope lay tightening on the splicing but I have some reservations about rope to anchor splicing?

I have (I've done the testing). You don't need to have reservations. There is no rope-to-chain chafe, because the rope does not move against the chain. There are the same number of strands passing through the eye either way (3). A thimble is not needed because when the rope is unlayed, the effective diameter of the rope is reduced to the diameter of the strand. A shackle is eliminated as a failure point, as is the thimble (they can come loose).
 
That is interesting. I have always felt the back splice's to chain weakness was the single strands bending through 180 degrees and with a small radius that must be much less than the breaking strain of the rope. The long splice does not have that particular weakness but I wonder about how much friction there is with the strands being woven into the chain links but without overlaid strands locking the splice solid?
 
Interestingly, what you call a long splice (AKA bucket splice in the US, because it can bring up a bucket of mud) is virtually unknown in the US.

The other splice that is gaining popularity, for how smooth it goes over a vertical windlass, is a splice sharing far more in common with the traditional long splice. The irony splice:

Irony%u00252BSplice%u00252Bcropped.jpg

It dates back to connecting hemp to low-grade chain. The irony is that nylon and high grade chain are well served by the same splice. Popularized by Brian Toss in the "Complete Rigger's Apprentice."
 
Top