Anchors - Bigger is Better ?

[foolishsailor]

Originally Posted by Autumns Wind

The size of anchor is just part of the holding power of any boat. The chain has just as much if not more then the anchor it self. Big anchor & no chain = no hold or very little. Small anchor & big long chain = average to good hold. Big anchor all chain = will not move or chafe

As has been said in numerous other threads the chains anchoring effect ends as soon as the wind strength reduces its cantenary effect to a straight line - usually less than 35kts.

[DumnMad]

Assuming an anchor is dug in, its holding power depends on 3 main soil properties :
Angle of internal friction.
Angle of external friction.(Quite different from internal.)
Soil density.
To a lessor extent soil cohesion.(Zero in sand and gravel)

The depth to which it can dig in will be reduced mainly by higher values of density, external friction and cohesion but with the proper angle between blade and shaft the load on the chain can overcome these to some degree.
The depths to which large surface area anchors go down are more negatively affected by these values than small area anchors of the same weight. On the other hand if bedded down to hardpan then the large surface area will increase holding power.
With all these variables(plus others not mentioned), simple 1 or 2 dimensional arguments are nonsense.
Thats why listening to the most experienced practitioners is so important.

[Slocum]

Hallo, everyone. I am a newbie, here, and I feel deeply intrigued by all these modern designs and concepts in anchors and anchoring - I feel I need learning a lot!

As for me, I accumulated some experience during my first round the world cruise, which I am happy to share.

I had three anchors, weighing forty pounds, one hundred pounds, and one hundred and eighty pounds respectively. (36' 9" Sloop).

The manual windlass used was in the shape of a winch, or crab, I think it is called.

All anchors were fishermans, at the time, and the lightest was used mainly for kedging, as when I got stranded at Castillo Chico, close to the border between Brazil and Uruguay.

The biggest was always in use, and usually held very well, even in storms in the Plate River, or during the squalls called williwaws in Patagonia, as south of Charles Island.
Only rarely I did experience problems in holding the ground, when sometimes a williwaw came with such terrific force as to carry my boat, with two anchors down, like a feather out of the cove and away into deep water.

Do you think in those circumstances I could have done better with new designs? I shall appreciate your comments and suggestions, although my sailing habits are now much different.

[Kettlewell]

Slocum, get with the program. Nobody leaves harbor anymore without a BIB new-gen anchor, an electric windlass, 300 feet of Hi-Test chain, and an anchor-alarm app on their smart phone. You can't go anywhere safely without that stuff.

[noelex 77]

Besides we would have to dig him up first

[Kettlewell]

No digging necessary--he's now part of the holding ground somewhere. Wikipedia:

Disappearance

In November 1909, Slocum set sail for the West Indies on one of his usual winter voyages. He had also expressed interest in starting his next adventure, exploring the Orinoco, Rio Negro and Amazon Rivers.[12] Slocum was never heard from again. In July 1910, his wife informed the newspapers that she believed he was lost at sea.
At the time, most who knew Slocum believed that the Spray had been run down by a steamer or struck by a whale, the Spray being too sound a craft and Slocum too experienced a mariner for any other cause to be considered likely.[citation needed]
Years later, an analysis by Howard I. Chapelle, curator of maritime history at the Smithsonian Institution and a noted expert on small sailing-craft, demonstrated that the Spray was stable under most circumstances but could easily capsize if heeled beyond a relatively shallow angle. He felt that Slocum was merely lucky that his unstable vessel had not killed him earlier.[citation needed]
Despite being an experienced mariner, Slocum never learned to swim and considered learning to swim to be useless.
In 1924, Joshua Slocum was declared legally dead.[citation needed]

[Slocum]

Sorry, folks. As it happens, social networks can connect earth and heaven, so I can learn a lot of new tricks.

And perhaps help somebody in reminding that displays and joysticks, and graphs and maths are really very very useful, but the firstline are still rocks and waves, wind and birds.

"Let go the great bow-anchors
Ah, fools were we and blind
The worst we stored with utter toil,
The best we left behind!"

[sabray]

Mr. Slocum,
Do you use chain and if so what size? Were snubbers used if you had chain?
Also seeing how your not dead are theire charges against you for fraud. How did you resolve that case in cape may? Great chance to clear your name.

[Slocum]

Sabray,
I guess I cannot be accused of fraud because I was not insured, and no claim was raised after my disappearance.

As for the Riverton affair, I must ashamedly confirm I was guilty - but only of indecent exposure. And it was mainly due to my mental confusion at the time.
Mental confusion worsened by the continuous and radical changes of the social environment: when I was in Riverton, the movement for Women's Suffrage was developing, while just a few years before my birth, the 12 years squaw Sacagawea was sold to Charbonneau and took part to the Lewis and Clark expedition into the wild West. What a change! And for the better, although I hear that even in modern western countries women still deserve more respect than what they get.

But - back to our cruising and anchors.
Captain Jones, who had acted as my interpreter at Rio de Janeiro, gave Spray an anchor, and one of the steamers gave her a cable to match it. She never dragged Jones's anchor once on the voyage, and the cable not only stood the strain on a lee shore, but when towed off Cape Horn helped break combing seas astern that threatened to board her. That anchor was 180 pounds and the cable very very heavy. I never used a chain. And never used snubbers, either.

[congo]

Gee the forum has become very uninteresting all of a sudden.

I am a bit disappointed really, all of the discussions BiB CONVEX VERSES CONCAVE, steel Quality, anchor weight over the toe, Excel a plough, copy of the Delta, the examiners as to paten Questionable, why are Bruce anchors becoming more popular, seemingly after approximately 7 years of the real world trials, customers over many forums all saying the same thing, pointing out flaws with the concave roll bar designs, absolutely no conclusion to all of this.

Well I have trawled back over all of your discussion on most of the points and have made my own conclusion, from all your interesting hard work, I am sure we have all learnt something from this.

Anyway this is my conclusion from your discussions.

Bigger is better is the overwhelming vote on your forum, not a conclusion to many.

Convex proven by your research produces more holding power than concave, conclusion.

Excel proven by Examiners not to be a copy of Delta and does not plough, conclusion.

Bruce anchors worth a second look, conclusion.

New gen anchors being removed and replaced with old school designs, Conclusion.

An anchor deigns to handle varying types of sea beds, no conclusion.

Some in denial they have made the wrong choice, conclusion.

Moderators absent since the BiB thread has lost some of its main drivers, conclusion.

Anchor Right Supporters no longer interested, Conclusion.

Independent points of view unless in grievance with some vanished, Conclusion.

So what should we be looking for in anchor design, surely of this discussion wasn’t for nothing. If you go back over the threads, this stands out like Dogs B---- as to your findings
Choose an anchor regardless of design CONCAVE –CONVEX with the strongest design, just as important the strongest in steel type, make sure the anchor is a certified design, one that works the best, the best in the widest scope of sea floor types, good tip weight is essential, a design that doesn’t clog but keeps digging deeper, a design without a roll bar, good performance in change of tide and wind.
I am sure someone or more has a conclusion from all of this discussion that has seemingly ended back at the starting point, did anybody learn anything.

Yes I can expext a barrage of something, if so then put your conclusions forward, at least I have had a go.


Regards Rex

[foolishsailor]

I didnt realize that any conclusions had been reached. From what I gather experienced sailors are sharing their views on the subject and many are bringing very interesting models and ideas forward for discussion.

Rex, when you go on about how irritated you are that people arent agreeing with you or that we Moderators are part of some anchor conspiracy no one wants to hear it.

What I do find interesting is when you discuss your obvious in depth knowdge on the subject - which i would love to see more of, especially if it was more facts and less attacks. Knowledge is always welcome, and sought out on this forum.

The fact that the forum isnt speaking about the anchor you wish them to or discussing the facts as you wish them to is how forums work, just like any other conversation out in the real world.

[congo]

Yes foolishsailor I suppose what you say make sense.

Foolish sailor wrote:
I didnt realize that any conclusions had been reached. From what I gather experienced sailors are sharing their views on the subject and many are bringing very interesting models and ideas forward for discussion.

Rex, when you go on about how irritated you are that people arent agreeing with you or that we Moderators are part of some anchor conspiracy no one wants to hear it.

What I do find interesting is when you discuss your obvious in depth knowdge on the subject - which i would love to see more of, especially if it was more facts and less attacks. Knowledge is always welcome, and sought out on this forum.

The fact that the forum isnt speaking about the anchor you wish them to or discussing the facts as you wish them to is how forums work, just like any other conversation out in the real world.

Rex Wrote:

Well my friend I was genuinley interested in an out come of all the discussions of BIB, as my second last post was branded a Rant, you now say my input interesting? well I dont know about that, discussing the anchor I would prefer to be disscussed is rediculas, if I did well we all know what would happen.

Obviously my sense of humor is warped, it was just a bit of fun and I did not intentionly want to upset yet another Moderator. I was sure good old Cotemar would have come back and said another rant, I enjoy his sense of humor.

Sorry for being negative, it is not my nature or intention to slander or upset anyone. But I still would have thought their would have been some thought of a conclusion.

I have spoken on many forums, CF has been a learning experience for me, thank you for this experience it may just make me wiser.

Regards Rex.

[foolishsailor]

Rex,

If you think CF will ever come to a conclusion about anything you havent been here long enough.

[boatman61]

[engele]

While avoiding they fight as much as possible, lets just say we have up sized our anchor and have had no drag issues since. Same design, different weight. We have however had several boats drag towards us and one thing they all had in common is that they were undersized and the owner anchored too close with an undersized anchor that gave no allowance for a reset should they need it. In my experience bigger is better. There is a reason bigger anchors have a higher holding rating. As long as your boat can bury the anchor in reverse, then it isn't too big and there is almost no downside to having it.

We love our fortress as well, and while it is light... It is bigger than the recommended size for our boat.