Synthetic rigging vs. Stainless steel

[Chotu]

Originally Posted by Nauticatarcher

A lot of good info on Colligo site also soaked up a lot of info from web, it’s not rocket science

Actually, as a former physicist and NASA employee, you just made me laugh quite a bit. It’s pretty much definitely as difficult as rocket science. Ha ha ha.

Lots and lots of things to account for.

I would like to get up to speed on that stuff a little bit. It’s interesting. I’m going to have a little bit on my boat actually. I have some uppers and some lowers. And they need to come together to a single chain plate. And my Rigger is using some of that Colligo stuff to put that together at least temporarily. Just to get me sailing right away. Then we will revisit and finalize the rigging at the end of the summer.

[sailingharry]

I just finished reading through this interesting thread. My rigging is stainless and has several more good years, so this is more of a awareness issue for me at this point.

I have read through many threads on lithium batteries, and how insurance companies don't seem to understand the technology, and as a result apparently some are writing in exclusions for lithium batteries.

So I start to ponder. Some insurance companies do write some rather onerous rigging requirements into their policies. I know Markel for one has stipulations that made them unattractive for me.

Has anyone heard of any similar objections to synthetic rigging? Lithium batteries are unquestionably a safe product on a boat. I suspect that the potential risks from synthetic rigging, especially with less than professional installations, could be more significant than those associated with lithium batteries.

Just to be clear, I am not nay-saying synthetic rigging. Rather, I am curious how the insurance companies see it.

[geoleo]

Originally Posted by CharmCityBoater

Yet another one of these threads...

I have the stick down and getting ready to order all new standing rigging. Boat is a Hans Christian 43T. I have been told it is getting very hard to find good quality stainless steel wire that is not made in China. I was opposed to using something like heat set dyneema but starting to consider it now due to the fact good stainless is becoming more of a challenge. My questions:

1. What is the current thinking around the right places to order high-quality stainless-steel wire / rigging with swages at the top.

2. Is synthetic rigging still a higher cost than SS? 4 years have passed since I last looked into this and was curious what the current wisdom of using synthetic rigging on a cruising sailboat is. Has it changed?

Thanks

No SS is made in USA. So Korea mades good ss wire rope as its called. Synthetic can be easily cut with a steak knife so its vulnerable to that .

[Nauticatarcher]

Originally Posted by sailingharry

I just finished reading through this interesting thread. My rigging is stainless and has several more good years, so this is more of a awareness issue for me at this point.

I have read through many threads on lithium batteries, and how insurance companies don't seem to understand the technology, and as a result apparently some are writing in exclusions for lithium batteries.

So I start to ponder. Some insurance companies do write some rather onerous rigging requirements into their policies. I know Markel for one has stipulations that made them unattractive for me.

Has anyone heard of any similar objections to synthetic rigging? Lithium batteries are unquestionably a safe product on a boat. I suspect that the potential risks from synthetic rigging, especially with less than professional installations, could be more significant than those associated with lithium batteries.

Just to be clear, I am not nay-saying synthetic rigging. Rather, I am curious how the insurance companies see it.

I have had no problems with insurance through Pantaenius, Dux is a Lloyd’s certified product, I think Colligo have done around 900 yachts now with a zero failure rate.

[neilpride]

Originally Posted by sailingharry

I just finished reading through this interesting thread. My rigging is stainless and has several more good years, so this is more of a awareness issue for me at this point.

I have read through many threads on lithium batteries, and how insurance companies don't seem to understand the technology, and as a result apparently some are writing in exclusions for lithium batteries.

So I start to ponder. Some insurance companies do write some rather onerous rigging requirements into their policies. I know Markel for one has stipulations that made them unattractive for me.

Has anyone heard of any similar objections to synthetic rigging? Lithium batteries are unquestionably a safe product on a boat. I suspect that the potential risks from synthetic rigging, especially with less than professional installations, could be more significant than those associated with lithium batteries.

Just to be clear, I am not nay-saying synthetic rigging. Rather, I am curious how the insurance companies see it.

As a rigger, I don't want to extend too much on the aspect of synthetic v SS, nothing against synthetic, it has its good and bad things, but I can say that when we have changed a complete set of SS, a pre-inspection has been done on the old rig, a report has been made, all the rigging has been changed, and a report with invoice is made again, that the owner submits to the insurance company, provided he has insurance.

The material used has nothing to do with the insurance as long as it is installed by a professional and the material used is certified and designed for the job.

If someone comes with wires in hand looking to replace them with the same wires, the material is warranted. Not the installation.

As far as I know, DIY is not accepted by many insurance companies, not even if the owner goes up the mast to inspect it. Nothing. Then you better clarify this issue with your insurance company.

Again, the use of synthetic materials, Dux, PBO, Aramid etc, are recognized by the insurance company as long as they are certified and installed by professionals.

For example, almost the entire fleet of mega sailing yachts, maxis, racing boats, have changed the old heavy nitronic 50 rod rigging for PBO and are insured.

[GinoDelG]

I used Dux on my 44 monohull five years ago and have had no problems. I like that you can easily do it yourself and unlike SS any problems will be obvious.

[Ratty1978]

Originally Posted by Nauticatarcher

A lot of good info on Colligo site also soaked up a lot of info from web, it’s not rocket science

I'd rely on Colligo, too. For racing, I've used a synthetic backstay for years, but there were class rules, swept spreaders and wanted a stainless forestay for a hanked on jib anyway. I'm specifcally addressing the comment about turnbuckles. Synthetic is so slick (literally) and the options for terminals sufficiently numerous, that you can pretty much re-think using "deadeyes".

[skipperguy]

Had a good friend with a Hans Christian 43. I believe he has passed. Prior name would not have been Lady Guinevere would it?

[CharmCityBoater]

Originally Posted by skipperguy

Had a good friend with a Hans Christian 43. I believe he has passed. Prior name would not have been Lady Guinevere would it?

No, s/v GRACE is current name. Was called s/v CAMELOT when purchased new. Those are the only two names it had that I am aware of. It is a cutter rigged 43T with a Telstar keel. Not many of those around...

[skipperguy]

You have to admit it is an interesting connection between Guinevere and Camelot. Makes one wonder.

[dial_amonkey]

One reason I didn't go with Dyneema was I could not find any metrics on shock loading Dyneema (Vs SS)

* With SS there is should be some shock absorption when the cable is stressed, even when preloaded to 15-20% of breaking load? that might be quite a bit considering the lengths of wire..

* With Dyneema there is almost no stretch even up to the breaking load ~ well less than %5?

There have been many times when I have fallen off a wave and the whole boat has flexed and shuddered and some of that was absorbed by the the rig, flexing stretching etc.. I imagine a non stretching shroud or backstay might shock load the chain plates?

I wonder how those shock loads are managed in the racing fleets which have used synthetic rigging for decades?

[seacap]

Originally Posted by geoleo

No SS is made in USA. So Korea mades good ss wire rope as its called. Synthetic can be easily cut with a steak knife so its vulnerable to that .

😂😂😂 go ahead and try the steak knife. Then get back to us.

[markxengineerin]

Synthetic can be easily cut with a steak knife so its vulnerable to that .

I always thought this was kind of a crazy argument. Has it ever happened? Any running rigging can be cut the same way, and yet, nobody does. Any axe or drill can put a hole in any boat, etc etc.

There have been many times when I have fallen off a wave and the whole boat has flexed and shuddered and some of that was absorbed by the the rig, flexing stretching etc.. I imagine a non stretching shroud or backstay might shock load the chain plates?

Unless your rig had to be re-snugged up after the incident, you did not get into plastic deformation of the wire, and chain plates would have felt essentially the same forces if you had dyneema, assuming you had sized the dyneema for stretch, which is the popular thinking.

How much dyneema elongates between yield and when it ultimately breaks, I'm not sure. Anyone have data? Stainless is nice because it's a huge amount, but I don't think it's a very critical property in a rig. If you've seen loads high enough to plastically deform the dyneema, something else is likely to be the weak link. Mast tangs come to mind in most cases, and poorly maintained chain plates.

[wyb2]

Originally Posted by markxengineerin

…

Unless your rig had to be re-snugged up after the incident, you did not get into plastic deformation of the wire, and chain plates would have felt essentially the same forces if you had dyneema, assuming you had sized the dyneema for stretch, which is the popular thinking.

How much dyneema elongates between yield and when it ultimately breaks, I'm not sure. Anyone have data? Stainless is nice because it's a huge amount, but I don't think it's a very critical property in a rig. If you've seen loads high enough to plastically deform the dyneema, something else is likely to be the weak link. Mast tangs come to mind in most cases, and poorly maintained chain plates.

This info page from Marlow has a stress/strain chart for various grades. It shows no flattening off like you would expect for the plastic region of a metal, but the data looks very low res as the lines are basically straight.

The grades vary from 2.5% to 4.5% strain at ABL (presumably average breaking load).

https://www.marlowropes.com/innovati...ema-tech-info/

[Benz]

Originally Posted by dial_amonkey

One reason I didn't go with Dyneema was I could not find any metrics on shock loading Dyneema (Vs SS)

* With SS there is should be some shock absorption when the cable is stressed, even when preloaded to 15-20% of breaking load? that might be quite a bit considering the lengths of wire..

* With Dyneema there is almost no stretch even up to the breaking load ~ well less than %5?

There have been many times when I have fallen off a wave and the whole boat has flexed and shuddered and some of that was absorbed by the the rig, flexing stretching etc.. I imagine a non stretching shroud or backstay might shock load the chain plates?

I wonder how those shock loads are managed in the racing fleets which have used synthetic rigging for decades?

Racing boats with synthetic rigging (now usually ECSix carbon), have the rig tuned bar-tight, then jack up the mast from underneath for more pressure. There isn't dignificant shockloading, no matter how much they throw the boat around.
As for plastic deformation before breaking, all the samples I've broken elongated all they were going to early on, then stayed put until snapping with a loud bang. Some test benches have a nice screen that graphs all the forces and movement--pretty slick, and really tells you what's going on when.