Anchoring Perfectionism vs Realities of Soft Mud

[chris95040]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

1. What is "good enough", where setting the anchor is concerned? This is an objective question I think since we know roughly what wind speeds equate to what engine power used for backing down.

Sort of objective, but we are ignoring the dynamics of a boat gathering momentum as it takes up slack in a gust. I guess many mechanical problems are treated this way though: solve the static problem and then include some (slightly subjective?) safety factor.

Back on tractors though, I've pulled many stumps, and when done with our pretty low power John Deere LA (neat, 1940s crank-start antique that could probably be in a museum instead of a farm) the dynamics are the key to ripping them out. Several bursts to take up the slack in the chain, letting the momentum of the tractor do the pulling (and not getting greedy so you dont end up with a tractor on top of you.).

Originally Posted by Dockhead

2. Are we screwing this up by trying to back down hard too soon, in soft bottoms? Maybe I'll do an experiment -- my hook has been lying for two days in soft mud after my latest half-assed setting job. I'll be moving later this afternoon. Instead of just pulling it up, I will try to back down on it and see if it has set itself to a higher standard than I did two days ago. Hmmmm.

Nice, I'll look forward to your report!!!

[SailFastTri]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Maybe this is the time to get the Fortress out. The Fortress doesn't actually have any problem with soft mud. Dives right in.

Like most of us, I consider the Fortress to be unsuitable for overnight anchoring, but I'm not sure that the lore this is based on is actually all that valid.

I have spent a few nights lying to my Fortress in tidal waters and had no problems. That doesn't prove anything, but maybe worth some further experiments.

Re: Sad Sight

"Large sport-fishing boat anchors at Jewell Island. Owner drops a Fortress and all chain, reportedly backs down, he and wife head off for hike on the island, wind shifts, Fortress anchor does not reset, boat winds up on on ledge, holed and then sank = total loss.. "

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Kenomac

On a more technical note, when are going to post a "selfie" with your anchor well set? This way we'll all know you're doing your homework properly. ;-)

Otherwise... you're just guessing.

Ha, ha. I haven't learned to use my diving gear yet, so no.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by SailFastTri

Re: Sad Sight

"Large sport-fishing boat anchors at Jewell Island. Owner drops a Fortress and all chain, reportedly backs down, he and wife head off for hike on the island, wind shifts, Fortress anchor does not reset, boat winds up on on ledge, holed and then sank = total loss.. "

Gak. All right, already. I'm convinced.

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by chris95040

Sort of objective, but we are ignoring the dynamics of a boat gathering momentum as it takes up slack in a gust. I guess many mechanical problems are treated this way though: solve the static problem and then include some (slightly subjective?) safety factor.

Back on tractors though, I've pulled many stumps, and when done with our pretty low power John Deere LA (neat, 1940s crank-start antique that could probably be in a museum instead of a farm) the dynamics are the key to ripping them out. Several bursts to take up the slack in the chain, letting the momentum of the tractor do the pulling (and not getting greedy so you dont end up with a tractor on top of you.).

Nice, I'll look forward to your report!!!

A boat does not move straight back.. it falls off the wind and gradually takes up the slack till taut then swings bow on again.. the only time I've had 'snatching' at anchor is in combined wind and waves.. in which case I let out more chain to resolve the problem.. if that does not work I move on to a more sheltered anchorage.
No big deal.. unless one wishes to make it so.

[ranger58sb]

Originally Posted by SailFastTri

Re: Sad Sight

"Large sport-fishing boat anchors at Jewell Island. Owner drops a Fortress and all chain, reportedly backs down, he and wife head off for hike on the island, wind shifts, Fortress anchor does not reset, boat winds up on on ledge, holed and then sank = total loss.. "

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Gak. All right, already. I'm convinced.

"Reportedly backs down" doesn't necessarily mean the anchor was actually set properly.

"drops a Fortress" doesn't necessarily mean "sets a Fortress."

Nothing here confirms that particular anchor was sized properly to the boat, no info about substrate, no info about scope, no info about wind speed or the speed of directional change...

IOW, anecdotal without useful factoids to determine whether this is anchor failure (to reset) or operator failure, or maybe a combination of both.

-Chris

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by ranger42c

. . .
IOW, anecdotal without useful factoids to determine whether this is anchor failure (to reset) or operator failure, or maybe a combination of both.

Certainly, but these are data points, and there are more and more of them.

[Fortress]

Noelex,

In Maine Sail's post, which you continuously use as disparaging evidence against our product in thread after thread:

"We had a 30' footer at the time, used 80% of full throttle reverse to set it, and a Fortress FX-16 with mud palms on. Winds did go to 40 knots and the anchor never budged an inch, in the original wind direction."

Additionally: "It was a moderate to soft upper layer bottom with thicker substrate."

We recommend for storm conditions going up 1 or 2 sizes, since as we point out: "in 42 knots loads are twice as much as in 30 knots." There is no question that for this wind speed and bottom condition, he should have had the 15 lb (7 kg) FX-23, at a minimum.


Additionally, you chose to ignore this recent post from just a few days ago in your "Photos of Anchors Setting" thread:

Originally Posted by transmitterdan

I have used an FX-37 for a long time and it has always handled changes in wind just fine. In fact, after a lot of wind there have been many times the anchor did not want to break out. If my anchor is put together right and set for the correct angle it sets and holds. It handles wind shifts as well.

Can we consider this also to be a "data point" or should all evidence that is contrary to your opinion continue to be disregarded?


Dockhead, I have presented evidence to you in the past and allow me to try once again. First up, the Sailing Foundation with pull tests in straight, 90°, and 180° directions, with a maximum pull tension of 4,000 lbs:

upload img

[chris95040]

Originally Posted by boatman61

A boat does not move straight back.. it falls off the wind and gradually takes up the slack till taut then swings bow on again.. the only time I've had 'snatching' at anchor is in combined wind and waves.. in which case I let out more chain to resolve the problem.. if that does not work I move on to a more sheltered anchorage.
No big deal.. unless one wishes to make it so.

Yeah I probably think too much about the dynamic side of it - the catenary, the snubber, etc, all help mitigate it too.

Still, sometimes the gusts are strong, the lulls are dead calm, and the boat's motion/stopping feels a little more energized than usual..

[ranger58sb]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Certainly, but these are data points, and there are more and more of them.

Don't know as I'd label them data points. Certainly useful to consider, but I'd think only in the same way you'd consider unsubstantiated rumor.

My experience, which has been very positive, probably isn't data either... especially given that I can't from memory cite depth, scope, wind speed, tidal shifts, etc. for each anchoring event.

Even many of Noelex's pictures or Steve's video (although maybe less so, since they're sorta live) don't provide what I'd consider all the supporting data needed to draw firm conclusions... and even then, firm conclusions would apply to a specific anchoring event, not necessarily a whole class of similar events.

All useful, of course, at least to a certain extent... and in the absence of science...

-Chris

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Fortress

Dockhead, I have presented evidence to you in the past and allow me to try once again. First up, the Sailing Foundation with pull tests in straight, 90°, and 180° directions, with a maximum pull tension of 4,000 lbs:

Well, I'm using my Fortress in different conditions and will continue to experiment with it. I have lain to it overnight in changing tides and have not had any problem. I think it is the best thing since sliced bread in soft mud and might start using it more for that.

However, the "data points" do indicate, in my judgement, that caution is warranted.

I don't think Noelex or actually anyone else has "disparaged" your product and I would suggest not being so sensitive. On the contrary, I think your product is probably the most universally admired ground tackle device on the market, and this is matched by a universally very high opinion of your customer service. Your anchor may or may not be good for everything, including as a main bower anchor, but even if it is not, that doesn't take anything away from its complete dominance as a kedge/stern anchor. That is a really admirable market position just by itself.

I think I've said it before -- if I were going to invest in a yacht anchor company, Fortress would be the only company I would consider.

[S/V Alchemy]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Ever since I switched to NG anchors in about 2001, I have been an uncompromising perfectionist where anchor setting is concerned. If the anchor budges an inch after several minutes of a full power back-down, then it's not set. Pull it up and do it again. This is sometimes tedious, but I haven't dragged anchor even once since, ohh, maybe 2001.

The problem is soft mud. NG anchors don't work well in soft mud -- they clog and refuse to bite, especially if you back down too fast without letting them settle in. My previous Rocna (55kg, 121 pounds) was horrible in soft mud because of this. My present Spade is better, but not dramatically much better. Only a Fortress, among the dozens of anchor types I've used in my cruising life, goes really well in soft mud.


Lately I've found myself lacking the patience to keep doing it over and over again. So on three separate occasions just in the last two weeks, I have lowered my standards and have spent the night with the anchor set only well enough to take a half-power backing down. Ugh. All three times were in very calm weather and with plenty of room so that if I did drag (God forbid), there would not have been dangerous consequences. Once in Kiel Fjord opposite the entrance to the Kiel Canal, once in Dover Harbour, and now here in the Solent in Osborne Bay. In all cases I let out a ton of scope (about 10:1 with heavy 12mm chain) and figured that the anchor wouldn't really be called upon to do anything anyway.


This is a bit like the way I used to manage my old CQR, which wouldn't hold in a full power back down no matter how well I'd set it. But I also dragged regularly with that anchor, sometimes in dangerous situations, and I really don't want to go back to those days.


What to do? I feel like I'm setting myself up for a midnight anchor dragging incident such as happened to me regularly in the '90's. But I'm really sick of spending an hour or even two coaxing the anchor down into the soft mud, letting it settle, pulling just a little, very gently, letting it settle again, etc., ad nauseum, while the crew are wondering whether cocktail hour will ever come. Bleh!

This is easy. Is there better holding within an hour's motoring? Go there and be happy.

In other words, simply factor the presence of soft mud into your itinerary. Or treat yourself to a dock. At a certain point, peace of mind trumps cost and effort.

I certainly agree that "oppositional" anchors, such as the Spade and the Fortress, give you the best shot at the widest range of conditions, but you should be wary of anchoring in porridge or stew. I believe that in such conditions, you are more or less lying to the weight of the chain as the anchor cannot resist moving against something that offers such little resistance.

[noelex 77]

Originally Posted by Fortress

Can we consider this also to be a "data point" or should all evidence that is contrary to your opinion continue to be disregarded?

This is of course what a good bower anchor should do consistently. Even infrequent reports (and the reports regarding Danforth/Fortress anchors dragging during a wind shift are not in my experience infrequent) are a cause for concern if an anchor is being recommended as a suitable primary/bower anchor.

Seeing Danforth/Fortress anchors rotating underwater can be quite concerning. On some rotations I have seen the anchor develop a very high list and lose nearly all of its grip. Most of the time it will dig in and reset, but this not reliable, and in my view other designs of anchors do much better with this aspect of anchor performance.

As to disparaging Fortress, perhaps you missed my comments such as: "the Danforth/Fortress models have exceptional holding ability in very soft substrates". I own one (two if you count the Guardian) and in the right application they are excellent performers. I have pointed this out many times.

In my view, the right application is not in a situation where the direction of pull can change. I am not alone in this observation.

To their credit Fortress acknowledge this limitation in their anchoring guide, which is included with new anchors, and this is occasionally reflected in forum posts:

Originally Posted by Fortress

That is why our late founder, who was a lifelong and very adventurous boater, always recommended setting two anchors if a tidal or wind shift was expected.

Fortress are the only anchor manufacturer (that I know of) that recommend setting of two anchors in changing wind, but for some unfathonable reason those that point out the fundamental reasons for this limitation are accused of "disparaging" the product rather than simply recognising its inherent advantages and drawbacks.

[Panope]

Originally Posted by Fortress

It is our firm contention that a properly-sized Fortress anchor, with its two sharpened and massive, precision-machined flukes is not more likely to break free from a sea bottom during wind or tidal shifts than other anchors..................

Safe anchoring,
Brian

I agree with the above.

However, after the anchor has broken free of the seabed (and ALL anchors can break free), The Fortress anchor is less likely to re-set than certain other anchors. I have confirmed this with numerous visual tests in FIRM SUBSUBSTRAITS.

But, the anchors that re-set perfectly in firm substraits may have trouble setting at all in the soupy stuff. This is where a Fortress anchor is likely a better choice.

I wish someone who lives in an area with soupy mud (like Chesapeake) would conduct simple 180 degree reversal tests with a fortress anchor against a popular NG anchor using a normal cruising boat. My guess is that neither one will be perfect but the Fortress will be better.

Steve

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by Panope

. . . I wish someone who lives in an area with soupy mud (like Chesapeake) would conduct simple 180 degree reversal tests with a fortress anchor against a popular NG anchor using a normal cruising boat. My guess is that neither one will be perfect but the Fortress will be better.. .

There are two or three places in the Solent where I anchor frequently, which have soft, soupy mud. The tide runs up to 3 or 4 knots and changes every 6 1/2 hours, so any overnight anchoring is necessarily going to involve a 180 degree change of pull.

I have anchored overnight many times with Rocna, Spade, and Fortress.

Of these three, the Fortress sets by far the best in the really soft mud. The Spade is much worse than that, and the Rocna a distant third. The Rocna was particularly prone to clogging, so the slightest mistake with backing down too fast in even slightly soft mud, and it would turn into a ball of mud with no holding power.

None of the three anchors ever dragged in my experience.

That doesn't prove anything, but it's another data point.