Keel bolts... is this the end?

[Motown]

How do y'all feel about the Simpson epoxy idea? Guess it's either the big 'ole lag screws from McMaster Carr or use the Simpson epoxy and some threaded rod.

Both feel like a stronger spare tire, and something quickly accomplished.

[rbk]

Not looking into specific sizes, but I’d personally be more comfortable with expansion anchors and epoxy as a temporary fix over lag bolts and I have seen 6” expansion anchors and I’m sure there are specialty ones over 12” if you look hard enough. Id be dropping the keel and seeing how far gone all of the bolts are and re-bed to prevent further water intrusion and crevice corrosion. If you’ve got 3/4 that are good a couple we’ll placed expansion anchors might be your final solution.

[Sailmonkey]

Originally Posted by Motown

Jesus guys...



as per Catalina (and others here)- lag screws won't be "fixing" anything. But apparently they may be an acceptable spare tire and get my unhappy ass to a capable boat yard?



Im hesitant to attempt a proper fix myself given the importance of the keel and the trend I see in sailboats- they turn into complete garbage when people are too cheap or too proud to say a project is beyond them. Who knows though, some of you guys seem to think this is a fairly straight forward job.



More questions-

keel stepped mast needs to be pulled before the keel is pulled

Why would the only bolts that have (visible) corrosion be midship

Here’s the only real “right” way to do this.

https://marskeel.com/production/repa...t-replacement/

And yes, the mast should be pulled to drop the keel.

Only you will know if the cost of this is worth it to you for this boat.

[wyb2]

Originally Posted by Motown

How do y'all feel about the Simpson epoxy idea? Guess it's either the big 'ole lag screws from McMaster Carr or use the Simpson epoxy and some threaded rod.

Both feel like a stronger spare tire, and something quickly accomplished.

I wouldn't use anything intended for concrete in lead without serious confirmation that it will work. They are very different materials.

In the case of epoxy-set anchors, in concrete the epoxy has a rough porous surface grab onto, which means even if the epoxy had no adhesive properties at all it will still resist pullout. Imagine trying to slide 2 sheets of sandpaper against each other. In lead, it will be relying almost entirely on adhering to the relatively smooth inner surface of the hole.

[captlloyd]

I just don’t like the idea of lags into lead. If it were me, I would be thinking of horizontal and vertical holes in the keel. The horizontal hole would be for a shaft with a threaded hole in center, the vertical would be for a threaded rod which would thread into the horizontal shaft. I am talking at least 5/8 rod for the vertical. It could all be bedded in the adhesive . I would think three or four of these assemblies would do the job, easily costing less than $500 for the whole ball of wax.

[wyb2]

Originally Posted by rbk

Not looking into specific sizes, but I’d personally be more comfortable with expansion anchors and epoxy as a temporary fix over lag bolts and I have seen 6” expansion anchors and I’m sure there are specialty ones over 12” if you look hard enough. Id be dropping the keel and seeing how far gone all of the bolts are and re-bed to prevent further water intrusion and crevice corrosion. If you’ve got 3/4 that are good a couple we’ll placed expansion anchors might be your final solution.

Again, are we talking concrete style expansion anchors? I used to use these at work, they are extremely strong, but specifically intended for materials like concrete and rock. The actual bearing area is tiny compared to a threaded fastener.

In soft lead I suspect an expansion anchor would pull out at a very disappointing torque value, leaving a slightly deformed hole in it's wake.

[wyb2]

Originally Posted by Sailmonkey

And yes, the mast should be pulled to drop the keel.
.

Just curious, why is this?

[Motown]

Heard rumors that the weight of the mast on the hull without the keel could be destructive

[chris95040]

Oh man maybe I was being irresponsible.

[NevisDog]

Just some thoughts: (a) a lag bolt or similar could be inserted then removed, to 'roughen' the internal surface of the lead in a drilled hole and provide a better mechanical bond for epoxy around a threaded rod inserted, of slightly smaller diameter; (b) expansion bolts pressing on 'soft' lead would likely deform the lead locally but I'd lay odds the lead would hold at least as well as any concrete if you tried to pull them out - 'soft' is a relative term; concrete crushes locally but lead can only deform and that requires colossal force or very thin material around the hole. It is just a temporary fix after all; just ensure the keel-stepped mast is not overly tensioned down and the sails are never hoisted, as mast compression/rigging tension will create the greatest downward force on those temporary keelbolts.

[wyb2]

Originally Posted by Motown

Heard rumors that the weight of the mast on the hull without the keel could be destructive

If that's the reason I'm guessing people are convoluting mast weight with mast compression forces. A tight rig will pull down on a mast with thousands of lbs of force, but I can't imagine the mast of a sub 40 ft boat weighs more that 200-400 lbs. Loosening the rig is a lot easier than pulling the mast.

[Terra Nova]

Originally Posted by Motown

How do y'all feel about the Simpson epoxy idea?...

Please tell us you are not seriously considering this.

[NevisDog]

Originally Posted by Terra Nova

Please tell us you are not seriously considering this.

But surely it's just a question of 'how many' lag-bolts, or expansion bolts, or epoxy studs will provide the required adhesion and load-spread - not whether the ideas can work or not? And what's the alternative - walk away?

[jimbunyard]

Originally Posted by Motown

Jesus guys...

as per Catalina (and others here)- lag screws won't be "fixing" anything. But apparently they may be an acceptable spare tire and get my unhappy ass to a capable boat yard?

Im hesitant to attempt a proper fix myself given the importance of the keel and the trend I see in sailboats- they turn into complete garbage when people are too cheap or too proud to say a project is beyond them. Who knows though, some of you guys seem to think this is a fairly straight forward job.

More questions-
keel stepped mast needs to be pulled before the keel is pulled
Why would the only bolts that have (visible) corrosion be midship

Yeah, we're a bunch of hardheads here, sorry about that. You get used to it.

How many keelbolts are there? What size are they?

Obviously you'll have to make the decision whether the boat is seaworthy for the trip back across, but you can at least make an educated assessment.

An attempt to tighten the bolts could tell you all you need to know; if none of them move when torqued to or near to spec, that is a good sign. If the glass around the bolts compresses or water squeezes out or the nut tightens, not such of good sign.

The sound the bolts make when struck with a hammer might also give you an idea; if they all have the same solid sound when struck, that is good, if one or more sound 'off' that may indicate trouble with those that do.

If most of the bolts turn out to seem good, I'd hazard a guess that you'll be fine crossing, especially if you pick (and have) good weather.

Certainly you could use lag screws as a 'crutch' if more than half (or whatever number you're comfortable with) of the bolts are suspect. If you are assuredly going to repair, or have repaired, the keel promptly, I see no reason to use stainless or bronze lags; regular steel or galvanized will work just as well and is probably stronger. I would try to avoid as much as possible drilling many holes in either the lead or the fiberglass, because doing so will only complicate matters further down the road.

The job is relatively straightforward, especially if you have, like many here do, a lifetime of experience in these and related matters. There is nothing very complicated about any of it, but planning, attention to detail, patience, access to tools and time are all very necessary. You will be dealing with powerful machinery and much heavier loads than the average person has experience with. It's all actually pretty fun if you approach it with the right frame of mind, and have the money to do things correctly.

I don't think it's absolutely necessary to remove the mast, when they haul the boat they'll loosen the rigging, but with a job this size it might be advantageous to unstep it anyway. Plus, it's a lot easier to do maintenance while it's on the ground, so plan on that while you can. If the step is in way of any issues with the keel sump, then of course you'll have to remove the mast to address them.

There is no good answer as to why the midship bolts have deteriorated; that will have to wait until the ballast is dropped. Did you notice any weeping or separation when you had the bottom done?

[rbk]

Originally Posted by wyb2

Again, are we talking concrete style expansion anchors? I used to use these at work, they are extremely strong, but specifically intended for materials like concrete and rock. The actual bearing area is tiny compared to a threaded fastener.

In soft lead I suspect an expansion anchor would pull out at a very disappointing torque value, leaving a slightly deformed hole in it's wake.

Yes, but they’re also used in structural steel work as well. While the lag has more purchase area, the failure plane on an anchor runs out 45 degrees from the shaft and are cone shaped (look up conical failure in rock anchors). Bolts strip out, anchors take large masses of substrate with them. If you used a Ss sleeve on a large anchor it would compress the lead keel quite easily around the expansion sleeve. Again not a permanent solution but 1000x better than a lag bolt.