Converting to synthetic standing rigging, what to do about the D2s…

[GILow]

So, the standing rigging planning is stumbling along.

After some consideration I’ve decided to do as much as possible with the Colligo Marine fittings. They seem well thought out and I respect the company and the ideas.

However, they’ve left me in a bit of a bind.

I’m following the recommended stainless standing rigging formula for the boat as designed by Brion Toss. He was commissioned by a Kelly Peterson 44 owner to design a rig and came up with a well considered plan which has been shared on the KP44 web site.

The plan for Brion’s “Optimum” discontinuous rig calls for 8 mm D1s and V2/D3s and 10 mm V1s. He then suggests 7 mm for the D2s.

Most of this is easy enough to translate into synthetic rigging using the recommendations from Colligo. 11 mm for the D1s and V2/D3s and 13 mm for the V1s. The components for terminating these sizes are available from Colligo and they also recommend turnbuckles rather than distributors with lashings to get better tuning forces.

My problem is with the D2s. Simplistically I’m happy enough to use 11 mm synthetic, no worries about stretch or strength, but the way Colligo seem to work this would force me up to the same size turnbuckles I’m using at deck level and that’s a LOT of weight to have aloft.

I asked them for their suggested solution and they proposed I change over to continuous rigging instead. Because it was “safer”. Er… OK, that’s a new one.

But that’s not an option. Mainly because there would have to be some major changes made to the lower spreaders plus some extra stuffing around with the chain plates.

So what to do? Stay with 8mm stainless because at least is uses the smaller turnbuckles? Or try and cobble something home made up in synthetic? Is there a manufacturer out there that makes what I need for terminating and tensioning these smaller synthetic line sizes that I’ve missed in my searching? (I know about Bluewave but after talking to them last week I’m not entirely comfortable with their products.)

Looking for ideas.

Matt

[Benz]

Can you adapt the DUX to the smaller turnbuckle? Might be a matter of a simple toggle or custom-spliced loop. Clearly the turnbuckle is strong enough, and the only reason the DUX is upsized from wire is for creep, but the load on the system is still the same.

[GILow]

Originally Posted by Benz

Can you adapt the DUX to the smaller turnbuckle? Might be a matter of a simple toggle or custom-spliced loop. Clearly the turnbuckle is strong enough, and the only reason the DUX is upsized from wire is for creep, but the load on the system is still the same.

I’m not sure. I have not yet worked with synthetic standing rigging so I’m not sure what is possible. I’m hoping someone with experience of the components will be able to suggest something.

[s/v Jedi]

I recommend to look into sizing it for 9mm Dynex Dux instead of 11mm.

By having a turnbuckle up high you drastically shorten the length compared to continuous rigging so creep is reduced by the same factor.

Alternatively, yes, simply adapt to the smaller turnbuckle. There’s always a toggle that can do this or else you make one or have it made

Edit: but their suggestion to convert to continuous rigging is a good one, especially since you have to do more regular tuning. I would give that option more consideration… exactly how much work is required at the lower spreaders to accommodate the second shroud etc.

[Benz]

Originally Posted by GILow

I’m not sure. I have not yet worked with synthetic standing rigging so I’m not sure what is possible. I’m hoping someone with experience of the components will be able to suggest something.

Turns out I have experience with the components...
Splice the lower end to a closed thimble...Suncor makes a nice stainless one meant for wire rope that works great with DUX. With luck, the jaw of the turnbuckle will simply engage it. If not, find a toggle that will engage the turnbuckle at one end and the thimble at the other.

Some have used a covered loop in "basket" configuration to pass though the thimble, then grab the pin of the turnbuckle. This only works if there are no sharp edges on the turnbuckle jaws.

[thinwater]

Why are you using bigger turnbuckles with Dyneema? The load is the same. Dyneema is oversized for creep and UV life.

[GILow]

Originally Posted by Benz

Turns out I have experience with the components...
Splice the lower end to a closed thimble...Suncor makes a nice stainless one meant for wire rope that works great with DUX. With luck, the jaw of the turnbuckle will simply engage it. If not, find a toggle that will engage the turnbuckle at one end and the thimble at the other.

Some have used a covered loop in "basket" configuration to pass though the thimble, then grab the pin of the turnbuckle. This only works if there are no sharp edges on the turnbuckle jaws.

I like the idea of the closed thimble. Seems simple enough, but I’m not sure what is meant by the loop in basket description. Can you elaborate?

[GILow]

Originally Posted by s/v Jedi

I recommend to look into sizing it for 9mm Dynex Dux instead of 11mm.

By having a turnbuckle up high you drastically shorten the length compared to continuous rigging so creep is reduced by the same factor.

Alternatively, yes, simply adapt to the smaller turnbuckle. There’s always a toggle that can do this or else you make one or have it made

Edit: but their suggestion to convert to continuous rigging is a good one, especially since you have to do more regular tuning. I would give that option more consideration… exactly how much work is required at the lower spreaders to accommodate the second shroud etc.

The modifications to the lower spreaders would be a real challenge. Mainly due to the age of the spreaders. Otherwise, yes, I did consider it and even priced out the changes and found that the cost of the extra rope was offset by the reduction in fittings costs.

Thank you for pointing out that creep would be less of an issue, I think your approach of 9 mm with Benz’s suggestion of a closed thimble is going to be the solution I need.

Matt

[GILow]

Originally Posted by thinwater

Why are you using bigger turnbuckles with Dyneema? The load is the same. Dyneema is oversized for creep and UV life.

I don’t WANT to use bigger turnbuckles, the problem is the Colligo terminators are all sized for the bigger pins.

I was thinking I’d missed something there but the response from Colligo suggests I hadn’t.

Matt

[Lee Jerry]

Originally Posted by GILow

Thank you for pointing out that creep would be less of an issue, I think your approach of 9 mm with Benz’s suggestion of a closed thimble is going to be the solution I need.

I must be missing something - I don't see how the creep is drastically reduced.

Using some made up round numbers: if the continuous shroud is 50ft and then stick a 2ft turnbuckle in the middle (which seems rather big) to make it discontinuous, that is only a 4% reduction in the length of the shroud and thus only a 4% reduction in creep. Is that not right?

[Lee Jerry]

Originally Posted by GILow

I don’t WANT to use bigger turnbuckles, the problem is the Colligo terminators are all sized for the bigger pins.

I was thinking I’d missed something there but the response from Colligo suggests I hadn’t.

Matt

Are you referring to these fittings:


If so, I see a coupe options.
1. Ask them to make you a couple (or however many) with a smaller bottom hole (that you specify).
2. Insert a sleeve (into this fitting's hole) to make up the difference between the pin size for this fitting and the pin of the turnbuckle you want to use.

[GILow]

Originally Posted by Lee Jerry

I must be missing something - I don't see how the creep is drastically reduced.

Using some made up round numbers: if the continuous shroud is 50ft and then stick a 2ft turnbuckle in the middle (which seems rather big) to make it discontinuous, that is only a 4% reduction in the length of the shroud and thus only a 4% reduction in creep. Is that not right?

Have a look at a discontinuous rig diagram for a double spreader rig. You’ll see the D2s are only a few meters long. It’s only the D2 we are worried about here, the other stuff is all sorted with nice big 13 mm and 11 mm rope.

[GILow]

Originally Posted by Lee Jerry

Are you referring to these fittings:
Attachment 287012

If so, I see a coupe options.
1. Ask them to make you a couple (or however many) with a smaller bottom hole (that you specify).
2. Insert a sleeve (into this fitting's hole) to make up the difference between the pin size for this fitting and the pin of the turnbuckle you want to use.

Yeah, nah. Those things are NOT good. Lots of weight aloft. Plus, asking Colligo to custom build something sounds like a good way to ream a big hole in my wallet. And, given I threw the problem back to Colligo asking for suggestions, I reckon they’d have mentioned it if they thought it was a good idea.

No, I think Jedi and Benz have the right idea here.

[The Yacht Rigger]

Originally Posted by GILow

So, the standing rigging planning is stumbling along.

After some consideration I’ve decided to do as much as possible with the Colligo Marine fittings. They seem well thought out and I respect the company and the ideas.

However, they’ve left me in a bit of a bind.

I’m following the recommended stainless standing rigging formula for the boat as designed by Brion Toss. He was commissioned by a Kelly Peterson 44 owner to design a rig and came up with a well considered plan which has been shared on the KP44 web site.

The plan for Brion’s “Optimum” discontinuous rig calls for 8 mm D1s and V2/D3s and 10 mm V1s. He then suggests 7 mm for the D2s.

Most of this is easy enough to translate into synthetic rigging using the recommendations from Colligo. 11 mm for the D1s and V2/D3s and 13 mm for the V1s. The components for terminating these sizes are available from Colligo and they also recommend turnbuckles rather than distributors with lashings to get better tuning forces.

My problem is with the D2s. Simplistically I’m happy enough to use 11 mm synthetic, no worries about stretch or strength, but the way Colligo seem to work this would force me up to the same size turnbuckles I’m using at deck level and that’s a LOT of weight to have aloft.

I asked them for their suggested solution and they proposed I change over to continuous rigging instead. Because it was “safer”. Er… OK, that’s a new one.

But that’s not an option. Mainly because there would have to be some major changes made to the lower spreaders plus some extra stuffing around with the chain plates.

So what to do? Stay with 8mm stainless because at least is uses the smaller turnbuckles? Or try and cobble something home made up in synthetic? Is there a manufacturer out there that makes what I need for terminating and tensioning these smaller synthetic line sizes that I’ve missed in my searching? (I know about Bluewave but after talking to them last week I’m not entirely comfortable with their products.)

Looking for ideas.

Matt

Do you mind sharing what it is about the Blue Wave fittings you are uncomfortable about?

[Benz]

Originally Posted by GILow

I like the idea of the closed thimble. Seems simple enough, but I’m not sure what is meant by the loop in basket description. Can you elaborate?

Loops are described as used "in vertical," which means stretched out as long as they'll go (the load rating is measured thus)

"In basket," which means folded over, (which is how you'd feed it through the thimble, bringing the two ends of the loops to the turnbuckle pin).

"Boned," (though I prefer 'toggled' as being more historically accurate), in which the basketed loop is closed with a "dogbone" or toggle.

"Choked," in which you make a girth hitch or lark's head with the loop.

I'll attach a picture of a loop in basket: it's the one on the aft side of the mast, holding a low-friction-ring to the eyestrap. The other loop visible is a toggled eye-to-eye. Both are of my own construction.