Reusing rigging wire

[chamac]

Does anyone re-use their old rigging wire when renewing their rigging? I thought if I got a load of extra long Stalok or Norseman fittings I could renew my rigging using the old wire. Does the wire suffer from metal fatigue or age weakening? I never heard of rigging wire breaking along the wire, its usually at the swaging that it fails. It would mean I could do the job myself bit by bit. Maybe its a false economy, any ideas?

 

[clyst]

"re-use their old rigging wire when renewing their rigging? " Eh ?? a contradiction of terms me thinks .

 

[bilbobaggins]

One way to save a bit of spondula is to shorten all the existing rigging wires by about 6", remaking them up onto your existing Noreseman-type terminal fittings.

Of course, you need to shorten the mast by about 6" as well, but that's quick and easy with a Black and Decker sabre saw, and you reduce the stresses and strains on the boat at the same time. And you save yourself time and effort by not needing to shake out that first reef for, say, three or four years - until you need to tie in the second reef for the same reason, of course.....

/forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

 

[Csail]

''suffer from metal fatigue ''
Why else would people change the rigging?

While on the subject of changing things, my engine has had it so shall i just change the mounts and re fit the knackered engine!!!??? /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

 

[alan006]

If I was you I'd check with your insurance company if they were happy with this. I'm not a yachty but I think some insurance companies stipulate that rigging has a finite life span and you have to fully renew at the appropriate intervals.

 

[bigwow]

We reuse ours as tig welding rods
/forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

 

[rhumlady]

If you want to do it then Stalok longshaft fittings would be better than taking a saw to the mast. I think most insurers just follow the crowd but then it is them who would have to pay out if the rig failed.

 

[chamac]

[ QUOTE ]
If you want to do it then Stalok longshaft fittings would be better than taking a saw to the mast. I think most insurers just follow the crowd but then it is them who would have to pay out if the rig failed.

[/ QUOTE ]

So you are saying Stalok are no use? I am sure Stalok would disagree. I have one longshaft Stalok in my rigging now. Does this mean that insurance is void if you use Staloks?

 

[srp]

Can't believe that no-one has spotted the obvious solution - you just fit U-bolts that have extra long legs. For goodness sake wake up you lot. /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

 

[Csail]

Yeah but the key wording in original post was 'renewing rigging' so surely that means renewing the wires???

 

[savageseadog]

Sorry, but you have to be joking. Do you want to enjoy your sailing? or worry about your mast crashing down when the weather turns bad? Do you want an early meeting with Davy Jones? Do you want a payout from your insurance company when it all goes wrong. If one of your crew was injured, do you want to be sued and be declared bankrupt? I wouldn't share your crackpot ideas with your insurance company if you want some cover next year.

 

[VicMallows]

Lots of derogatory answers so far, but noone has come up with any form of explanation as to WHY the wire itself should be degraded. And lets assume you chop say a foot off each end to avoid the main damage caused by flexing. I know this would preclude using the wire in it's original place, but maybe it'll be long enough to use elsewhere.

Theories Please?

Vic

 

[Slowtack]

When you examine the re-rigging cost the wire is usually the cheapest part. The terminals and botlescrews are far more expensive and must also be replaced in the view of most insurers as far as I'm aware.

 

[roly_voya]

OK - If you cyclicly load stainless steel at more than about 10% of its elastic limit it will harden and go brittle. Once it has lost its flexibility it will start to crack. This is useually seen first as the odd wire strand going where it exits a swaged fitting. Sometimes the firsat sign is when a stay parts and the rig falls down. This process is almost impossible to measure or see until they system fails catasrophically. It is therefore policy not just with boats but also with any engeneering use to schedue replacement of S/S components acording to age. How long it lasts depends on the number of flex cycle and the loading so a light rig that is highly loaded (ie race boat tall mast sailed hard) needs replacing sooner than a heavy cruising rig. The main problem areas as you have rightly guessed are where the fittings attach, particularly with swaged ends because there is an abrupt change in flexibility which raisess stress levels. The rest of the rig INCLUDING rigging screws, tangs and any links will also degade unless engeneered to the point where they never exeed 10% loading. The root cause of all of this is that stress and vibration causes changes to the crystaline structure of the metel making it courser, that why if you look at a fractured nmetal surfice closely it looks rough and grainy.

 

[savageseadog]

My understatnding was that Sta-Loks were reuseable. They're made of bronze, what's the situation with them?

 

[cliff]

[ QUOTE ]
The root cause of all of this is that stress and vibration causes changes to the crystaline structure of the metel making it courser, that why if you look at a fractured nmetal surfice closely it looks rough and grainy.

[/ QUOTE ]My understanding of the mechanics of fatigue failure is somewhat different. /forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif Guess I've been getting it wrong for all these years. /forums/images/graemlins/blush.gif
As you are obviously an expert on fatigue failures, fracture mechanics and the effects of stress and vibration on the "crystaline" (crystalline) structure of "metels" (metals) would you be so good as to explain some fractures can be quite smooth (as in 1200grit smooth) and others can be quite rough (as in 40grit rough) even though the failure occurred in the same material?

What are your views on using Nitrogen bearing 316 (316N) for standing rigging? do you think this would be beneficial overall or would the effects of Martensitic reversion still have to be considered when determining stress levels / cycles to failure?
--------------------

"Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity"
sailroom <span style="color:red">The place to auction your previously loved boatie bits</span>

 

[rhumlady]

"So you are saying Stalok are no use? I am sure Stalok would disagree. I have one longshaft Stalok in my rigging now. Does this mean that insurance is void if you use Staloks?"

I certainly wasn't saying that Stalok are no good. I would prefare them at both ends of all my rigging to swage terminals. I have used longstays as when I bought Rhumlady, all the rigging screws were knackered and had to be replaced. as the standing rigging was only a few years old I decided to cut them off and use Longstays. The body of the rigging screws are not stainless to avoisd galling I believe but I can't remember the actual metal type.
The comment about Insurance companies was just my feeling that they follow the heard in situations like this as once one has refused to pay out over an issue than the rest see this as a getout clause.

 

[jimbaerselman]

You're a bit un-observent there Cliff - missed 'crystaline'!

 

[cliff]

/forums/images/graemlins/blush.gif /forums/images/graemlins/blush.gif /forums/images/graemlins/blush.gif Write out 100 times "I must use the spell checker more often" /forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif
--------------------

"Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity"
sailroom <span style="color:red">The place to auction your previously loved boatie bits</span>

 

[cliff]

Oi, I never said there was anything wrong with Sta-Lok™ /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif
--------------------

"Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity"
sailroom <span style="color:red">The place to auction your previously loved boatie bits</span>