The cult of the Proper Flanged Thru-hull

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by tsenator

LOL So now you are at least admitting that the hardware on these Benny/Jenny's are the lowest possible/passable to put on a boat and "should" (emphasis "should") make it 10 years LOL



Yeah sure I think if theses boats are 5 years old you should be fine, but there are plenty of people I know where they started looking extremely suspect within just 10 years -



Here is ANOTHER EXAMPLE - one just 5 year old Jenneau already looking questionable with pink metal starting -- https://jeanneau.proboards.com/threa...hull-corrosion



Just admit they use the absolutely lowest quality thru hull's and valve metals possible to get by.



For christ sakes people are spending $400,000 , $500,000 ...... $700,000 (?) for these boats !! You'd think they would spend another $500 and put in QUALITY Seacocks & Metals !



As ANOTHER example (and yes there are HUNDREDS) Here on the left is a VERY LOW QUALITY hose bib off of a Jeanneau its thin and cheap - now compare to a quality Bronze Hose bib just a few dollars more but its quality is night and day.



I could go on and on with page and pages and pages of proof of how cheap their underwater metals have been that they have put on their boats

Please read the links you quote

“ I recently noticed that I have a through (thru) hull with rather severe corrosion on my 2012 SO 409. It is the shower sump thru hull which is right next to the head intake thru hull under the bathroom sink (2 cabin 1 head version). When I discovered it the hose clamp closest to the thru hull was totally corroded and loose (the screw was gone). I replaced the clamp prior to taking the pictures below. I assume there must have been a small leak in the fitting which caused the lower hose clamp to disintegrate. The good news is that the corrosion appears to be on the inboard side of the shut off valve, so if I leave it closed it shouldn't be a problem.”

He has a hose clamp problem. Bad yes but not related to the tru hull. His other pictures of other fittings show clean fittings.

Again I’m not arguing for “ perfect “ I’m arguing it’s adaquate

Jeanneau and other mass production boat builders build 100000 of boats far more then anyone else on the planet

Firstly Jeanneau mushrooms are bronze. ( as confirmed on the jeanneau forum ) the ball valves as supposed to be CR brass. Good for at least 10 years.

I suppose you could argue they’ll last as long as the (a) sails , (b) Volvo /Yanmar sail-drive Seals (c) standing rigging.

I’m kinda surprised people want the sea cocks to last 40 years !!! Yet the rigging needs to go in 5-8!, far cheaper to replace a few sea cocks. Personally i want a 20 year sail drive seal I’m fine with the CR brass sea cocks

[s/v Jedi]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Maestrini certify the non-flanged valve screwed directly onto the skin fitting as ISO 9093-1 compliant. That standard is much more complex than the ABYC standard, and includes side loading. I posted the relevant screenshot from the document, and also the statement of the manufacturer.

No they don’t. If they would, they would be able to show test results and the certificate of compliance, just like TruDesign does (after upgrading their product to be able to pass tests).

Maestrini has been given the chance to send in the documents and they have failed to provide them. We must assume they do not passed the required tests.

Sure, their alloy is certified to be okay, but that is only a small part of compliance: passing the side load test is what counts.

The reason that I can recommend their product is that they sell proper flanged valves which are certain to pass testing; my reservations are for their non-flanged valves.

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by s/v Jedi

No they don’t. If they would, they would be able to show test results and the certificate of compliance, just like TruDesign does (after upgrading their product to be able to pass tests).



Maestrini has been given the chance to send in the documents and they have failed to provide them. We must assume they do not passed the required tests.



Sure, their alloy is certified to be okay, but that is only a small part of compliance: passing the side load test is what counts.



The reason that I can recommend their product is that they sell proper flanged valves which are certain to pass testing; my reservations are for their non-flanged valves.

The certificate must be supplied by the boat builder. A sea cock manufacturer can claim compliance but the CE certification is provided to the builder as the spec requires in boat testing. The manufacturer cannot provide a CE cert to the ISO spec as he’s not fitting it.

The manufacturer can merely claim metallurgy compliance.

Clearly 10000000 of EU bosts from oyster , amel downwards are passing the latest iso standards and this clearly includes ball valves.

To suggest otherwise without significant proof means you’re engaging in conjecture

[tsenator]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

Shock. You mean US sailboats don’t follow ABYC standards. Well that’s good to know.

Funnily the passport yacht I viewed in Miami was all bonded.( nearly bought it to )

Ummmm I think there are a lot of North American Sailboats that are still bonded - Sabre, Hinckley, Tartan. (None of those boats have issues with their metal thru hulls) Plus a lot of Manufacturer's have gone to Marelon . Many have switched almost 30 years ago !! So there is that !

LOL - And you are showing your ignorance in ABYC, they do not make it a requirement to bond thru hulls (Go to & ABYC E-2, Cathodic Protection)

QUOTE --> "2. The need for a cathodic protection system for metal appendages on non-metallic hulls may not be justified if the metals coupled are galvanically compatible (see TABLE II); however, individual testing on a
case by case basis is necessary."

But if YOU DO, they put down on paper how its to be done .

http://www.pcmarinesurveys.com/E-2%2...protection.pdf

What else do you need to learn about ? LOL This is too funny

[s/v Jedi]

Wow, it seems they completely flip when confronted with the facts. The idea that their boats probably don’t comply with ISO regulations must be too much to handle. Look at all these raging posts and the flooding number of them, dismissing expert members with the highest qualifications, while admitting their knowledge is based on some household plumbing… where they use teflon tape on compression fittings

In summary: nobody ever showed a 1/2” or 3/4” skin fitting survive mandatory side loading testing with a simple valve mounted. The only ones that have shown to pass tests are either flanged valves, or the load bearing collars added to the TruDesign valves, which act like flanges and which they had to add to pass the tests.

The overwhelming number of cases where the “seacocks” went bad, some brought forward by World’s most renowned experts incl. pictures of boats sunk at their mooring and detailed descriptions, others showing videos that put the finger on the sore spot exactly (Rod Collins, who actually contributes to ABYC) as well as decennia of 1st person experience with problem cases from many forum members like me all prove that these problems are real, boats sink and the EU production boats are in the midst of it, often not compliant with ISO regulations.

It’s up to every owner to make sure their boats are safe, their seacocks have not dezincified, and to understand that the manufacturers have covered themselves with written statements that include requirements like mandatory yearly inspections by professional experts and complete replacement every 5 years or even less (“some years of use”), which no owner can afford. You’re on your own, nobody is coming to help, it’s up to you.

[goboatingnow]

I wasn’t talking about cathodic protection , I was talking about the standard practice of connecting all underwater metals to a anode but equally connecting that to dc negative and ac earth , that’s known as equi-potential bonding

This is very common on US sailboats , I saw it on several yachts over the years.

It’s a recipe for extra corrosion and definitely you need high end seacocks

Eu boats do not bond tru hulls and do not habitually connect ac earth to dc negative once a RCD is fitted, which it has been for 20-30 years.

If you need to understand RCD/ISO specs and the various bonding processes I’m happy to fill you in.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by s/v Jedi

No they don’t. If they would, they would be able to show test results and the certificate of compliance, just like TruDesign does (after upgrading their product to be able to pass tests).

Maestrini has been given the chance to send in the documents and they have failed to provide them. We must assume they do not passed the required tests.

Sure, their alloy is certified to be okay, but that is only a small part of compliance: passing the side load test is what counts.

The reason that I can recommend their product is that they sell proper flanged valves which are certain to pass testing; my reservations are for their non-flanged valves.

Maestrini did send documents. They state that the fittings conform to ISO 9093-1. These fittings are used in the best boats in the world, the makers of which certify them to comply with the whole RCD scheme, which includes ISO 9093-2 for the underwater fittings.

So it's one man's blind prejudice, against a first rate maker of underwater fittings and all the best boat builders in the world, all of whom have certified compliance of this system -- including side loading! -- on pain of grave legal consequences? Hmm, I'll have to think about which of these to give the most weight to.

Yes, Maestrini make flanged as well as unflanged fittings. Interesting that not a single high end builder uses the flanged ones? Not much difference in cost. So on top of all of the other conjecture, you're saying that besides the maker of the fittings, the whole European boat industry is lying about complying with legal standards, risking lawsuits, penalties, bankruptcy, when for nearly the same cost, they could actually comply by using these magic flanged fittings? I mean, really, Nick.

The standards did have a flaw -- they didn't until the last version of the standards in 2020 specify materials or corrosion resistance standards, only that there must be no sign of deterioration after 5 years. So mass production builders building to a cost could use really unsuitable materials and still certify compliance legally, so long as you could see nothing in 5 years, and that apparently happened at some point with some of the mass production builders.

But you could never get away with something like that, with fittings which are too weak to fulfill the mechanical strength requirements of ISO 9093-2. That's a legal obligation. Do that, a boat sinks, or even doesn't sink, just someone complains -- lawsuits, fines, and you're bankrupt. You honestly think that this is what Nautor Swan and Halberg Rassey are doing? Really?

Note that Contest -- unique among European builders as far as I know -- actually provide Lloyd's Register Hull Construction Certificates for their boats. So their boats are actually inspected and tested by Lloyd's during construction. I don't know if the Lloyd's certificate covers underwater fittings or not, but even if it doesn't, do you seriously think that Contest would go to all that trouble and expense, and then turn around and lie about compliance with ISO 9093-2? Seriously? Yes, Contest use unflanged Maestrini bronze underwater fittings, just like Swan and HR, and have for decades.

And I ask again -- has anyone heard of a single case of the mechanical failure of these allegedly dangerously weak flangeless underwater fittings? I didn't think so. If they were "dangerously weak", wouldn't at least one boat have sunk by now, or more likely, hundreds of boats? After 50 years or more of hundreds of thousands of boats using this construction?

[s/v Jedi]

Originally Posted by boatpoker

https://www.firstforvalves.co.uk/339...ds-iso-71-blue

Exactly (picture of link attached) this is the **** people buy and install on their skin fittings. Look at the specs: BSP tapered female threads. Completely violating ISO requirements and all installation practices. When manufacturers put this in their boats and accidents happen, they can be sued for negligence.

You are never allowed to mount a tapered female valve onto a skin fitting, which is parallel thread. Exactly this is why they first claimed the skin fittings were tapered thread, nuts!

[s/v Jedi]

Originally Posted by tsenator

Ok -- Did a little more research -- It was 1993, so 30 years, that Catalina did a "proper Seacock with flange" installation on their boats --

"Fast forward another decade to late 1993. Another improvement to the through hull and valve design became available and was implemented by Catalina Yachts.

The newest design consists of a seacock that incorporates a large diameter buttressed flange directly onto the base of the valve body. The through hull screws directly into this large flange. It eliminates the flange nut and places the flange directly against the hull and backing block. It prevents a moment or force from making it to the portion that passes through the hull, the weakest link. "

https://www.catalinadirect.com/through-hull-evolution/

That installation shows the compliant Forespar valves, installed correctly. This is a safe boat and those handles won’t break. I know, I have one of these: it is 28 years old and functions like new.

[s/v Jedi]

Originally Posted by tsenator

Actually yes - I personally know of one too , but it was 20 years ago. It was on the "smaller handle after market" forespar version. Not the Manufactuer Version. I'm not sure if they changed the design. It was just the handle and the Seacock did not leak. Kind of like breaking a handle off of a metal ball valve or spinning the part attached to the ball in a metal ball valve. It was not on the "Tru_Design" but on the Forespar lower end version.

For those that don't know, there are two different types of Forespar Marelon Seacocks the smaller handled "after market" smaller tabbed version and the much more robust version that are what the manufacturers put in with bigger more robust handle -- personally I would not use the "aftermarket Version" for anything too important, just source the "manufacturers version" . They might have upgraded the design though.

(On the right is the one I would avoid)

I have also replaced some ball valves with the Tru_Design. Extremely robust design. Very smooth action, very large handle. The biggest downside is they are quite large for the same size of metal or Forespar and might not fit in tight spaces.

Indeed, the valve on the left meets ABYC requirements, the one on the right does not. Rod Collins shows their failure in his test videos.

[boatpoker]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

I wasn’t talking about cathodic protection , I was talking about the standard practice of connecting all underwater metals to a anode but equally connecting that to dc negative and ac earth , that’s known as equi-potential bonding

This is very common on US sailboats , I saw it on several yachts over the years.

It’s a recipe for extra corrosion and definitely you need high end seacocks

Eu boats do not bond tru hulls and do not habitually connect ac earth to dc negative once a RCD is fitted, which it has been for 20-30 years.

If you need to understand RCD/ISO specs and the various bonding processes I’m happy to fill you in.

Cathodic protection has more than one aspect. The equalization of potential, what you refer to as equi-potential bonding is under that umbrella ... semantics.

[boatpoker]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

I wasn’t talking about cathodic protection , I was talking about the standard practice of connecting all underwater metals to a anode but equally connecting that to dc negative and ac earth , that’s known as equi-potential bonding

This is very common on US sailboats , I saw it on several yachts over the years.
.

How very curious that I've never seen a US built sailboat with bonding, not even a Beneteau.

[tsenator]

Originally Posted by goboatingnow

Firstly Jeanneau mushrooms are bronze. ( as confirmed on the jeanneau forum ) the ball valves as supposed to be CR brass.

Yes, I will give them that, in my own destructive tests the actual "Mushroom Thru Hulls" were decent and MUCH better than the cheap ball valves and hose bibs that they put on -- I saved the underwater fittings from when I replaced them - many were very bad . This is the only one I have with me now - The "Mushroom Thru Hull is decent but the hose bib was the cheapest paper thin metal I ever saw " Here are pics I just took of the hose bib part - paper thin.

[goboatingnow]

Originally Posted by s/v Jedi

Wow, it seems they completely flip when confronted with the facts. The idea that their boats probably don’t comply with ISO regulations must be too much to handle. Look at all these raging posts and the flooding number of them, dismissing expert members with the highest qualifications, while admitting their knowledge is based on some household plumbing… where they use teflon tape on compression fittings



In summary: nobody ever showed a 1/2” or 3/4” skin fitting survive mandatory side loading testing with a simple valve mounted. The only ones that have shown to pass tests are either flanged valves, or the load bearing collars added to the TruDesign valves, which act like flanges and which they had to add to pass the tests.



The overwhelming number of cases where the “seacocks” went bad, some brought forward by World’s most renowned experts incl. pictures of boats sunk at their mooring and detailed descriptions, others showing videos that put the finger on the sore spot exactly (Rod Collins, who actually contributes to ABYC) as well as decennia of 1st person experience with problem cases from many forum members like me all prove that these problems are real, boats sink and the EU production boats are in the midst of it, often not compliant with ISO regulations.



It’s up to every owner to make sure their boats are safe, their seacocks have not dezincified, and to understand that the manufacturers have covered themselves with written statements that include requirements like mandatory yearly inspections by professional experts and complete replacement every 5 years or even less (“some years of use”), which no owner can afford. You’re on your own, nobody is coming to help, it’s up to you.

Now your just a nasty adhominen attack person , this post is beneath you Nick.

My plumbing is better then your opinions. My plumbing has stood the test of 30 Years. ( and yes you use tape on the threads. , argue with a time served U.K. plumber not me please )

Thanks now please desist from such attacks. I suspect you’ve never stooped to plumbing anything. Not if you own a million dollar boat.

No European boat sold on the European market has ever been supplied with a provision for yearly professional survey. I unlike you actually bought a stock new Beneteau from them at the Paris boat show in 2000, this is a fact.

By the way I inspected her in 2020 her tru hulls were perfect. ( I was about to buy her )


No such yearly undertaking from Beneteau France was ever advanced or required or insisted upon by insurers. etc.

You don’t own a euro production boat. So why this crusade.

Secondly 10000000 of boats are not sinking , loosing their keels or rudders.

Just stop the BS

The only renowned experts here are ISO technical groups , reputable European builders and their literally hundreds of thousands of happy customers. Today these boats are being snapped up.

These are demonstrable facts. A few cases on a forum or two prove nothing , no more accurate then people damming a whole class of boats cause one or two keels fell off

There is ZERO evidence of any systemic issue certainly not anywhere near 5 years.

( the same hysteria was started in the U.K. about osmosis and scare stories were hyped by vested interests. , it’s proved to be largely nonsense, this is the same nonsense )

Unless you can get a notified body to release customer confidential documents nobody can provide the iso test results. You know this , some chap in a workshop on YouTube is NOT an ISO certified test house, whatever his reputation


Give it up Nick. Both Dockhead and I have pointed out the nonsense of your arguments.

[tsenator]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Have you ever even seen a Maestrini ball valve?


Maestrini is a serious company with large engineering resources, halls full of CnC machines, a different kind of shop than Spartan or Groco which are much more artisanal operations. They do extraordinary quality control on an individual piece basis, have RINI certifications, etc.

What is "best" is always a matter of opinion, but Maestrini is what is used by all of the best yacht builders in this part of the world. It's what you get when you buy a multi-million dollar Swan. If not "best" then certainly first rate.

And by the way, you have a choice of ball material with Maestrini ball valves -- bronze or plastic. The model with the plastic ball, called "Vittoria", is more expensive, but is supposed to be smoother acting and immune to seizing. That's what was recommended to me, and what I chose when I replaced mine.

Attachment 264464
bilge jewelry

Hmmm Interesting. Here it says Oyster and Swan (Among others) use Marelon. Maybe they do in mixed use situations and use both

"Today
Marelon® plumbing is now used by custom builders such as Wally Yachts, Oyster, Swan, Baltic, Morris and many other production builders "

https://www.forespar.com/marelon-history-1.shtml