Videos of Anchors Setting

[Souzag818]

Originally Posted by Panope

The 44 Spade performed perfectly in all my tests and general use. Wonderful anchor.

That said, after fairly light use my 44 pound Spade has formed some rust or corrosion on the exterior of the anchor, the interface of the lead and steel, and in the crevice between the (removable) shank and fluke. I can only imagine what is going on deep inside the hollow shank.

Also, the 33 pound Spade (acquired 2nd hand) appeared to have original galvanizing , but was found to be SHORT about 5 pounds of lead ballast (I first noticed this because the anchor would not self right on a flat surface). I have no Idea if it was the manufacturer or some other person that was responsible, but the bottom line is that the defect went unnoticed. Anchors with fully encapsulated lead or NO lead will avoid this issue all together.

There is no anchor panacea (crap, was that a generalization? )

Steve

Interesting...The only rust on mine is at the tip and that's to be expected, I think. I got it 4 years ago, and up until this summer, it's been used a lot, here in the PNW, as it is my primary anchor, and I'd rather anchor. I'll have to watch that. Friend of mine had his re-galvanized, because he has too much money, not because it needed it. It was stored on his new to him cat, and looked completely unused. Had a boat yard melt new lead into the tip, just the tip...

[SaltyMetals]

Steve, I suspect yr older Spade might have been re-galvanised at which point the lead would have melted out of the cavity. MP of Lead is 327 deg C (621 deg f) and that of zinc is higher at 420 deg C ( 787 Deg F). So if the anchor was dipped into a bath of molten Zn to regalvanise it this would have been running at a temp of about 100Deg C (160 Deg F) above the MP of Pb.

Love yr reports. Bravo !
Andrew

[Panope]

Originally Posted by Souzag818

Interesting...The only rust on mine is at the tip and that's to be expected, I think. I got it 4 years ago, and up until this summer, it's been used a lot, here in the PNW, as it is my primary anchor, and I'd rather anchor. I'll have to watch that. Friend of mine had his re-galvanized, because he has too much money, not because it needed it. It was stored on his new to him cat, and looked completely unused. Had a boat yard melt new lead into the tip, just the tip...

I may have characterized the rust(red) and corrision(white) a bit too strongly. My Spade is no where near needing re-galvanizing. It's just that it is showing signs much early than other anchors that I have used.

Steve

[Panope]

Originally Posted by SaltyMetals

Steve, I suspect yr older Spade might have been re-galvanised at which point the lead would have melted out of the cavity. MP of Lead is 327 deg C (621 deg f) and that of zinc is higher at 420 deg C ( 787 Deg F). So if the anchor was dipped into a bath of molten Zn to regalvanise it this would have been running at a temp of about 100Deg C (160 Deg F) above the MP of Pb.

Love yr reports. Bravo !
Andrew

Thanks, Andrew

I understand the requirement to re-ballast the anchor after re-galvanizing.

Two clues lead me to believe that the galvanizing may have been original: The yellow paint (on the fluke) looked exactly like the factory paint on my other Spade, and there were 3 locations with sticker residue. Definitely inconclusive. We will never know for sure.

Steve

[Adelie]

Originally Posted by SaltyMetals

Steve, I suspect yr older Spade might have been re-galvanised at which point the lead would have melted out of the cavity. MP of Lead is 327 deg C (621 deg f) and that of zinc is higher at 420 deg C ( 787 Deg F). So if the anchor was dipped into a bath of molten Zn to regalvanise it this would have been running at a temp of about 100Deg C (160 Deg F) above the MP of Pb.

Love yr reports. Bravo !
Andrew

If I had a Spade I was going to regalvanize I would have some 1/8” or 1/16” plate welded over the lead before re-galvanizing.

The lead is contained, never to be lost and the new playing gets galvanized too.

[wsmurdoch]

I'm not sure that a galvanizer would be happy with that. In my experience they do not like closed hollows. They have a reasonable fear of closed areas rupturing when heated from room temperatures to the temperature of the galvanizing kettle. (Air expands and water turns into 5,000 psi steam.) They regularly drill into suspected voids to keep pressure from building. You will get two holes; one high and one low, or maybe one big one. I suspect that the "proper" way to handle the lead is to melt it out prior to re-galvanizing and re-fill the tip after the anchor has been galvanized.

Here is the hole that AZZ drilled in my Delta.

[Uncle Bob]

Originally Posted by wsmurdoch

I'm not sure that a galvanizer would be happy with that. In my experience they do not like closed hollows. They have a reasonable fear of closed areas rupturing when heated from room temperatures to the temperature of the galvanizing kettle. (Air expands and water turns into 4,000 psi steam.) They regularly drill into suspected voids to keep pressure from building. You will get two holes; one high and one low, or maybe one big one. I suspect that the "proper" way to handle the lead is to melt it out prior to re-galvanizing and re-fill the tip after the anchor has been galvanized.

Exactly. Have had some galvanising work done and they are not shy, using an oxy torch to create a hole where they believe necessary.

[thinwater]

Originally Posted by Uncle Bob

Exactly. Have had some galvanizing work done and they are not shy, using an oxy torch to create a hole where they believe necessary.

An explosion in a bath of molten metal is not a small thing.

[thinwater]

Panope:


Have you ever tested otherwise identical anchors of alloy and steel? Excel or Spade, for example? I find little data.


It seems pretty clear that once the anchor is pulling hard, weight can matter much; typically the rode tension is 50 times the weight of the anchor. I can see a difference in the inicial bite, but once rode tension is 5-10 times anchor weight, I can't see it. There could be some effect due to thicker metal; alloy anchors are typically made of ~ 20% thicker material to compensate for slightly lower strength of aluminum vs. steel.


Thoughts? Obviously Fortress makes it work... but not in all bottoms.

[Panope]

Thinwater,

I have tested Excel #5 in both aluminum and galvanized steel versions. External dimensions identical except shank thickness greater for the aluminum version.

The galvanized version performed perfectly in all my tests, while the aluminum version could not quite cope with my 3.5 knot, 180 degree reset test. Otherwise, the aluminum version performed same as steel (perfect). The thicker aluminum shank appeared to not have any affect as the anchor dove completely out of sight during high pull tests.

As you suggested, once the anchor begins to engage the seabed, the weight as little or no effect.

Here are links to my aluminum Excel tests.

https://youtu.be/LyMnIwcMDBM

https://youtu.be/WQeznHmxB9s

Here is the steel version test:

https://youtu.be/0_NjTRAJ0FU

[malbert73]

Originally Posted by DDM

It's too bad there isn't much data online about the Ultra, besides some mud sticking to it more easily than to a galvanized spade. I'm leaning towards a stainless steel anchor, either spade or ultra, well because pretty Mobo with all other stuff in stainless too, and because they both promise to "rotate somewhat under the soil" when 180degree reversing versus completely needing to reset. At least that's also what I sort of see in the videos, albeit very cloudy?
(I'm not that worried about galvanic oxidation)

Sure if money is not an issue you can buy stainless. What ultra promises (shuffling around rather than breaking out) is very well proven in Mantus in Noelex’s thread. Spade also does it, as does rocna, Manson, etc.

So chances are a Mantus, spade, ultra, or excel will all give excellent performance. Now it’s up to you to decide what you like best.

[rslifkin]

Originally Posted by thinwater

Panope:


Have you ever tested otherwise identical anchors of alloy and steel? Excel or Spade, for example? I find little data.


It seems pretty clear that once the anchor is pulling hard, weight can matter much; typically the rode tension is 50 times the weight of the anchor. I can see a difference in the inicial bite, but once rode tension is 5-10 times anchor weight, I can't see it. There could be some effect due to thicker metal; alloy anchors are typically made of ~ 20% thicker material to compensate for slightly lower strength of aluminum vs. steel.


Thoughts? Obviously Fortress makes it work... but not in all bottoms.

In the Fortress case, I think the Danforth design is less reliant on weight than many others. So going to a lighter material doesn't hurt.

[eheffa]

Originally Posted by Panope

I may have characterized the rust(red) and corrision(white) a bit too strongly. My Spade is no where near needing re-galvanizing. It's just that it is showing signs much early than other anchors that I have used.

Steve

Hi Steve,

We have had a SPADE S120 (25 Kg) Galvanized Steel anchor for 4 years now and it performs flawlessly - much better than the Rocna 25 Kg that it replaced.

The down side though, is that it rusts much more readily than our Rocna. Re-galvanizing here in BC is apparently an issue as at least one galvanizer will not touch it with the lead in the tip. I tried an experiment in prepping the surface and painting the anchor with POR-15 paint but after ~ 15 sets, the paint is showing easy abrasion and the rusting is back with enthusiasm.

This really is a cosmetic issue but it bugs me.

I'm considering changing out to a #6 Excel and selling the SPADE to someone who is much more sensible and doesn't mind a little rust on their anchor...

Alternatively, SPADE has offered a Stainless Steel version of the anchor to me at a modest discount but I'm not sure that SS is a good choice in an anchor due to possibility of crevice corrosion etc.

I note in your assessment of the Excel that you state that it doesn't set as readily as the Mantus or the SPADE. How significant is this do you think? I really appreciate how the SPADE will dig in where you drop it. Narrow fjords up the Coast where one has to drop the anchor in a rapidly shoaling estuary demands that the anchor sets where you drop it as there is little tolerance for being deeper or more shallow.

Thanks for any thought or opinions you can share.

-evan

[Panope]

Originally Posted by eheffa

............I note in your assessment of the Excel that you state that it doesn't set as readily as the Mantus or the SPADE. How significant is this do you think? ........

The 45lb. Mantus and 45lb. Spade both set and reset in about 1 anchor length in my tests. The 47lb. Excel would often need 2 (or a bit more) anchor lengths. All three dug in beautifully 100% percent of the time, so I think we can conclude the difference is immaterial - in these seabeds.

Note: the only other anchor (that I have tested) that had a 100% set and reset record was the 47lb Super Sarca anchor.

Steve

[eheffa]

Originally Posted by Panope

The 45lb. Mantus and 45lb. Spade both set and reset in about 1 anchor length in my tests. The 47lb. Excel would often need 2 (or a bit more) anchor lengths. All three dug in beautifully 100% percent of the time, so I think we can conclude the difference is immaterial - in these seabeds.

Note: the only other anchor (that I have tested) that had a 100% set and reset record was the 47lb Super Sarca anchor.

Steve

Thanks Steve,

That is reassuring.

I would like to keep my SPADE if I could find a way to re-galvanize it; but it's good to know that the Excel would be a decent replacement.

-evan