Well Done Rocna

[noelex 77]

Originally Posted by micah719

Sounds like to get the best peace of mind is to DIY. Differential hardening for hard cutting edges yet tough flukes and shank. Just a funny shaped sword...and galvanised.

Thanks BriaF...will look online, as I don't subscribe and the local library doesn't hold it. I guess running a file across the steel would be the easiest test of hardness. Say, I wonder if Bisalloy would be a good anchor steel...it work hardens in a heartbeat.

There has been a lot of discussion in the forums on testing the steel of the shank. Basically you hit it with a centre punch and note the impression depth.

There was a also a test of a new Rocna in one of the British sailing magazines. I have not read it (no english newsagents where I sail), but it showed the steel was not what was expected, but was equivalent to the original spec.

[evm1024]

Originally Posted by JonJo

Mate

Its good to know you got your replacement anchor from Ocean Solutions and all credit to them. You are particularly lucky as yours is RINA approved or that is how I read their website:

www.oceansolutions.com.au

Its a pleasure to hear of a company that stands by its customers and provides a full and honest service.

One of the places that the whole sordid story unfolded was over at YBM. Search on Rocna and RINA.

So many false claims for RINA approved.

Just look for threads that have a lot of posts such as this one with over 60,000 replies.

I hate to do this...but - Yachting and Boating World Forums

regards

[Cheechako]

I suspect the whole steel controversy we over done. After all, almost all steel comes from Korea anymore , even as used in 50 story skyscrapers.... If cast, the quality of the casting is whole 'nother thing....

[JonJo]

I do not think Chinese Rocnas are, or were ever, made from Korean steel. The original Rocna, ex NZ, was made from Australian steel, at least for the all important shank.

I suspect the Korean steel makers are looking over their shoulders wondering how long they will last - in view of competition from China.

[JonJo]

For those members who find the topic a bit of a yawn - you are reading it voluntarily.

Originally Posted by Pyxis156

As another data point, I had a similar experience with Rocna... bought my 25kg in 2010 and in 2011 noticed a slight (and I mean slight) bend in the shank of my anchor after 4 days of 180 degrees tide swings in 4-6 knots of current. I contacted Rocna and within two days received instructions to return the anchor to the local supplier and I received a new replacement when I dropped off the old one. Was a clean and easy process and they definitely stood behind their product.

Steve

It would be my understanding that when anchored in an area subject to tide what might normally happen is at the chage of tide the yacht re-orientates itself, gently, and as the tide flow increases, gently, the anchor would either pull out or swivel round. The anchor will make these manouvres 'slowly'. In the event the anchor did not swivel or pull out and was oreintated 'backwards' the load would be along the length of the shank. In the scenarios I describe and envisage I can see no reason for any anchor to bend. If the anchor is aligned at 90 degrees - it is possible (it would bend) but it is unlikely it would bend prior to swivelling or pulling out. The fact your anchor bent suggests to me it was built from some pretty ropey steel.

You were wise to chage it, and lucky.

For information on tides there was a recent article in YM and this one in Afloat

http://www.afloat.com.au/afloat-magazine/2012/july-2012/Weather_-_Torres_Tides_not_Strait_-_the_Rule_of_Twelfths





This is what Ocean Solutions provide on their website:

Rocna is the ultimate in anchor design.
Independantly tested, in compliance with the
Super High Holding Power Standard
for international classification society
R.I.N.A.


Guaranteed for Life

This is what CMP had said in Sept 2011

quote:

Canada Metal is confident that the Rocna anchor exceeds industry standards and will in
the very near future submit current production samples to an internationally recognized
agency in order to confirm third party SHHP Classification.


Unquote

They followed the above statement with this one in Nov 2011

quote

Our Engineers have met with the RINA representatives who have confirmed that the
Current SHHP Classification as it relates to “Fabricated” anchors is valid. Canada Metal
has contracted them to provide audit services in order to validate our casting process
(currently used to produce anchors from 4 – 40kg). We expect the SHHP Classification
process for cast anchors (which perform at least as well as the fabricated flukes) to be
complete within three months.

unquote

There has been no update, or not one I have seen.

This is what RINA themselves said

quote:

We have recently issued a new revision of the type approval certificate with minor editing in the description. I confirm however that the range of RINA approval is still unchanged and so far we have not done any additional test on Rocna anchors.

I thank You for the notification and I will contact Rocna new representatives to request clarification and rectification.

As far as Your question is concerning herebelow please find my answers:

1- RINA Type approval certificate covers anchors made with a folded fluke welded to a Q 690 ( or BIS 80) shank.
Laminated shanks fall within the coverahe of type approval.
Rocna design foresses the use of a Q&T steel for the shank. The steel Q 690 - Q 620 are usually Q&T. Steel manufacturing process is however to be confirmed by the steel manufacturer

unquote


I might not understand Ocean Solutions statement on their anchor home page - but it seems to say, Rocna anchors, the ones that we sell to the customers, are RINA approved. My further understanding (and this is waht CMP themselves say) is that Rocna anchors, below 55kg have cast flukes (not flukes made by fabrication from plate steel). Maybe someone can explain to me whay I find some slight contradiction here. Especially as it comes from a company on whom customers rely on and who are part of the 'new' Rocna team being praised by some members of this forum.

I have noted that CMP have replaced every anchor when a customer has approached them. This is to their credit. However there were approximately 2,000+ off spec anchors sold and the individuals on various forum reporting they have returned theirs are few and far between. There would apear to be too many still out there, ready to bend (easily) as evidenced by Steve's post, above.

[impi]

Originally Posted by JonJo

For those members who find the topic a bit of a yawn - you are reading it voluntarily.



It would be my understanding that when anchored in an area subject to tide what might normally happen is at the chage of tide the yacht re-orientates itself, gently, and as the tide flow increases, gently, the anchor would either pull out or swivel round. The anchor will make these manouvres 'slowly'. In the event the anchor did not swivel or pull out and was oreintated 'backwards' the load would be along the length of the shank. In the scenarios I describe and envisage I can see no reason for any anchor to bend. If the anchor is aligned at 90 degrees - it is possible (it would bend) but it is unlikely it would bend prior to swivelling or pulling out. The fact your anchor bent suggests to me it was built from some pretty ropey steel.

You were wise to chage it, and lucky.

For information on tides there was a recent article in YM and this one in Afloat

http://www.afloat.com.au/afloat-magazine/2012/july-2012/Weather_-_Torres_Tides_not_Strait_-_the_Rule_of_Twelfths





This is what Ocean Solutions provide on their website:

Rocna is the ultimate in anchor design.
Independantly tested, in compliance with the
Super High Holding Power Standard
for international classification society
R.I.N.A.


Guaranteed for Life

This is what CMP had said in Sept 2011

quote:

Canada Metal is confident that the Rocna anchor exceeds industry standards and will in
the very near future submit current production samples to an internationally recognized
agency in order to confirm third party SHHP Classification.


Unquote

They followed the above statement with this one in Nov 2011

quote

Our Engineers have met with the RINA representatives who have confirmed that the
Current SHHP Classification as it relates to “Fabricated” anchors is valid. Canada Metal
has contracted them to provide audit services in order to validate our casting process
(currently used to produce anchors from 4 – 40kg). We expect the SHHP Classification
process for cast anchors (which perform at least as well as the fabricated flukes) to be
complete within three months.

unquote

There has been no update, or not one I have seen.

This is what RINA themselves said

quote:

We have recently issued a new revision of the type approval certificate with minor editing in the description. I confirm however that the range of RINA approval is still unchanged and so far we have not done any additional test on Rocna anchors.

I thank You for the notification and I will contact Rocna new representatives to request clarification and rectification.

As far as Your question is concerning herebelow please find my answers:

1- RINA Type approval certificate covers anchors made with a folded fluke welded to a Q 690 ( or BIS 80) shank.
Laminated shanks fall within the coverahe of type approval.
Rocna design foresses the use of a Q&T steel for the shank. The steel Q 690 - Q 620 are usually Q&T. Steel manufacturing process is however to be confirmed by the steel manufacturer

unquote


I might not understand Ocean Solutions statement on their anchor home page - but it seems to say, Rocna anchors, the ones that we sell to the customers, are RINA approved. My further understanding (and this is waht CMP themselves say) is that Rocna anchors, below 55kg have cast flukes (not flukes made by fabrication from plate steel). Maybe someone can explain to me whay I find some slight contradiction here. Especially as it comes from a company on whom customers rely on and who are part of the 'new' Rocna team being praised by some members of this forum.

I have noted that CMP have replaced every anchor when a customer has approached them. This is to their credit. However there were approximately 2,000+ off spec anchors sold and the individuals on various forum reporting they have returned theirs are few and far between. There would apear to be too many still out there, ready to bend (easily) as evidenced by Steve's post, above.

Common ... lets give up the TROLL crap!

Personally it matters one huge NIL to me what anchor you choose to put on your boat ... we all make our own choices but really guys ... lets give Rocna a break!

From personal experience (and I have the China made Rocna) ... was in a 5 knot current in Ilha Dos Lencois almost a year ago now ... current took my Lagoon 440 in a violent maneuver over the top of my Rocna anchor ... stopped dead on the other side so much so that the draws in the boat flew open together with a lot of other stuff that fell to the floor ... including Ana and myself!

Damage ... one seriously bent stainless steel chain shackle ... my Rocna ... not a twitch and still holds me to ground every single night and has done so all the way from Cape Town to the BVI in many different conditions including a storm off Saldhana Bay where a number of yachts broke ground ... my Rocna held solid ...

For me ... experience counts and my Rocna has done us no wrong!

Personally, I think the size of the Rocna is what counts and rather go one size up than be a borderline case.

[JonJo]

Impi, glad to hear you have a decent one, spare a thought for those that might not.

[impi]

Originally Posted by JonJo

Impi, glad to hear you have a decent one, spare a thought for those that might not.

Just smells like a troll to me ... sorry bud, but I think Rocna has taken enough flack over this one and we also need to hear about the hundreds and hundreds of satisfied customers such as myself ... personally ... I had hoped we could give Rocna a rest already! The guys have a great product and are doing whatever it takes to keep customers happy ... that speaks volumes and I bet closer inspection will show under size as being a problem.

I went to the Miami boat show and personally tested anchors for my own peace of mind ... Rocna came up second best only to Ultra anchor and they only manufacture in stainless steel. I left feeling VERY satisfied with what I saw there!

[impi]

Originally Posted by JonJo

Impi, glad to hear you have a decent one, spare a thought for those that might not.

By the way JonJo ... what boat do you sail and what anchor do you use?

[JonJo]

Impi, we might have a semantic problem here as I'm not conversant with your use of the wrod Troll - and I can only guess.

Its not my fault, or any of the others that might be critical, that Rocna shot itself in the foot.

The thrust of the thread is that CMP are doing good for those who come to them and want their anchors replaced. I cannot argue with that, CMP are doing good. They also appear to have put in hand manufacture of the product to the new spec. and imply they have quality control in place, independent of the manufacturing facility. This all seems good.

I feel for the individuals who have out of spec anchors, approx 2,000, minus those few who have changed theirs, and who are unaware that they have a below specification product, do not know it is below specification and are unaware there is an exchange mechanism in place. The original spec was for a shank based on a steel with a yield stress typically, 750 mpA, the new spec is typically 650 mpA - some of them were made with a tested yield strength of 355 mpA.

I'm also slightly concerned that the misleading statements made in the past might still be around - viz RINA - but maybe I do not understand.

Good news is .... good but tell me that someone unwittingly owning an anchor with a 355 mpA strength does not merit being made aware as often as it takes to get those anchors changed. If CMP put a mechanism in place - the rhetoric would stop, overnight.

You are lucky, and happy. What about those that are happy but not lucky?

[impi]

Originally Posted by JonJo

Impi, we might have a semantic problem here as I'm not conversant with your use of the wrod Troll - and I can only guess.

Its not my fault, or any of the others that might be critical, that Rocna shot itself in the foot.

The thrust of the thread is that CMP are doing good for those who come to them and want their anchors replaced. I cannot argue with that, CMP are doing good. They also appear to have put in hand manufacture of the product to the new spec. and imply they have quality control in place, independent of the manufacturing facility. This all seems good.

I feel for the individuals who have out of spec anchors, approx 2,000, minus those few who have changed theirs, and who are unaware that they have a below specification product, do not know it is below specification and are unaware there is an exchange mechanism in place. The original spec was for a shank based on a steel with a yield stress typically, 750 mpA, the new spec is typically 650 mpA - some of them were made with a tested yield strength of 355 mpA.

I'm also slightly concerned that the misleading statements made in the past might still be around - viz RINA - but maybe I do not understand.

Good news is .... good but tell me that someone unwittingly owning an anchor with a 355 mpA strength does not merit being made aware as often as it takes to get those anchors changed. If CMP put a mechanism in place - the rhetoric would stop, overnight.

You are lucky, and happy. What about those that are happy but not lucky?

I hear you, but man alive have we all been around the mill on this one ... and if you go back to those threads you will note that I was one of the first who were concerned having purchased my Rocna.

The whole escapade is something I would rather not regurgitate here but I have as a result kept a close watch on my anchor as have MANY who I personally know that own them including a mate of mine who purchased one a few months ago and cannot believe the difference it has made to his anchor holding.

I am not talking about casual cruisers ... I am talking about world cruisers living on board and anchoring EVERY DAY of their lives ... and yes ... on ROCNAS ...

I also realize there are those on the forum who purposefully are discrediting the product for their own reasons ... Trolls

I have no alliance to Rocna ... do not know the fellas, but will continue to share my experiences together with those of friends when there is a good product being bashed ... and Rocna is a good product ... as I mentioned before I have watched boats pop anchors in serious conditions when mine held and held well ... I am not going to withhold sharing these experiences just because its easier to 'say nothing' ... Ana and I both wish to share and inform all those sharing the dream of sailing what real day to day situations we have been successful at, failed at, laughed at and cried at ... we make mistakes ... Rocna is not one of them and I speak for a number of happy owners.

Again ... Under size is the problem ... go up a size!

[bobconnie]

No Matter what Connie says !! Bigger is BETTER !! an extra 100 bucks more for 2 sizes bigger anchor is Cheap Ins. Ive never had a Rocna, but I will sure look at ALL the New style anchors to replace the Main anchor on our new to me boat !! just sayin they can't be to bad, cus Ive never had a owner of one of em ever complain about there holding power !! Heck they stayed stuck even when the shank bent !!!

[impi]

Originally Posted by bobconnie

No Matter what Connie says !! Bigger is BETTER !! an extra 100 bucks more for 2 sizes bigger anchor is Cheap Ins. Ive never had a Rocna, but I will sure look at ALL the New style anchors to replace the Main anchor on our new to me boat !! just sayin they can't be to bad, cus Ive never had a owner of one of em ever complain about there holding power !! Heck they stayed stuck even when the shank bent !!!

Bigger is better

Definately think this is key to Rocna for borderline spec, but I would recon it should be true for most things

[JonJo]

At least now I know what a Troll is! And I have declared my motives.

I have another, motive, I do not like the idea of a precedent being set but when the first motive is resolved, previous post, advising those that do not know, the other one should go away. Impi, as you will know many blue water cruisers do not read forum and do not have monthly deliveries of Yachting Monthly. I have met boat owners, many blue water cruisers, from the UK to La Reunion to Yokohama who know nothing of the Rocna story.


Bigger is better - nothing to do with Rocna on this one.

I forget the formula but SHHP anchors can be specified smaller than a normal HHP anchor. I think by 30%, but do not quote me. So the theory is if you have an SHHP anchor and you own a vessel under survay then the SHHP anchor can be 30% lighter than the HHP, say a Delta, or Bugel. And its not me saying this its all written down in the Classification Society rules.

Accepting that we are all old enough to make our own decisions and our vessels are not in survey but the whole idea of buying the better anchor, usually at a cost higher than that older style HHP anchor, is the idea we can buy the same size as we would normally have bought but enjoy 30% better performance. You are suggesting 30% and plus.

And there was me thinking the use of the word Troll had something to do with Lord of the Rings.

[impi]

Originally Posted by JonJo

At least now I know what a Troll is! And I have declared my motives.

I have another, motive, I do not like the idea of a precedent being set but when the first motive is resolved, previous post, advising those that do not know, the other one should go away. Impi, as you will know many blue water cruisers do not read forum and do not have monthly deliveries of Yachting Monthly. I have met boat owners, many blue water cruisers, from the UK to La Reunion to Yokohama who know nothing of the Rocna story.


Bigger is better - nothing to do with Rocna on this one.

I forget the formula but SHHP anchors can be specified smaller than a normal HHP anchor. I think by 30%, but do not quote me. So the theory is if you have an SHHP anchor and you own a vessel under survay then the SHHP anchor can be 30% lighter than the HHP, say a Delta, or Bugel. And its not me saying this its all written down in the Classification Society rules.

Accepting that we are all old enough to make our own decisions and our vessels are not in survey but the whole idea of buying the better anchor, usually at a cost higher than that older style HHP anchor, is the idea we can buy the same size as we would normally have bought but enjoy 30% better performance. You are suggesting 30% and plus.

And there was me thinking the use of the word Troll had something to do with Lord of the Rings.

Ok ... I had a really good chuckle at your 'Lord of the rings' comment

Obviously you are involved with anchors? You speak from a very technical platform but we heard much of this before and still ... how many boats do you know of that have been damaged due to a faulty Rocna ?

Personally ... none I know of and I know a serious number of SERIOUS world cruisers using them. Do you think we are all just lucky?

Honestly ... the whole thing is just a 'storm in a tea cup', and of course that's the way competitors to Rocna would like it, and there are plenty of them lurking about ...