Anchor Chain Twist Nightmare

[Dockhead]

Gotta go with Jedi's logic here. Safe Working Load means just what it says -- it's supposed to be safe for repeated use at that load with no deformation or damage to the gear. The Kong swivels FAIL that test. No way am I trusting my boat -- and potentially my family's life -- to that.

Originally Posted by s/v Jedi

Okay, I see that I need to elaborate on my previous post.

Let's start with a quote of the first interesting section from the test report:

So what this says is that when pulled straight at SWL they didn't break but the majority deformed. The deformations are described in the quote above and they all mean that you need to replace the shiny thinghy.

Now, where I come from SWL means that this is the maximum load that you can use it for without any damage as a result. These Kong thingies deform at the stated SWL so they are flawed, even in a straight pull test which is much too nice to compare with real world anchoring loads.

The next quote:

They test side load at SWL. All of the tested samples deformed and one even broke. This means that the breaking load has been reached. SWL is normally 20% of breaking load so this 5/16 Kong thingy has a breaking load of 4,400 lb and a SWL of 880 lb, not the SWL of 4,400 lb as advertised.

The report also agrees with my statement that these thingies are normally considered to both swivel and connect the anchor to the chain without a shackle. I don't make that up. Use of an extra shackle is a dirty quick fix like I mentioned in my previous post. When you use a shackle the SWL will go up but not to 4,400 lbs because they deform at that load. They should have tested for the max. load they didn't deform yet and confirm that by x-raying the samples after the test.

I want to end with GMac's facts:

1. Galvanized steel swivels fail much more than SS versions. I don't believe that. I have never seen one that failed while in reasonable condition. They only fail when one selects an undersized swivel or let it corrode through. These swivels have an end of life just like chain. I renew mine when I turn the chain end for end and when I replace my chain (so two swivels over the lifespan of one chain). So, I don't believe it is a fact galvanized steel swivels fail more often. Many stainles swivels don't fail because they are never used or only for lunch on a daysail. A lashing of 1/8" spectra will do a better job than these shiny thingies (I am still serious ;-)

2. I understand that you know as a matter of fact about 5,000 stainless swivels that were sold (which shop sold so many???) and only one was reported as failed within the first 5 years. Sorry but I can't believe that and it is far from fact. I will bet you a night of free drinks (incl. my beloved Cuba Libre's) that if one would take 10 of those swivels and load them sideways to their SWL that at least 8 deform. And that is conservative as the Kong test showed that 10 out of 10 deformed.

3. They tested twice SWL. No, I read 1 x SWL.

ciao!
Nick.

[captain58sailin]

Stainless is more brittle than galvanized steel, I do not believe stainless will tolerate the shock loading that you get when surging on your rode during a storm. I have never had a galvanized chain, swivel, or shackle fail under that stress. As Jedi has pointed out, if all the parts are of the same value then that is the load it will tolerate. The old saw goes, a chain is only as strong as it's weakest link. There is nothing wrong with oversized ground tackle, you just have to follow through the whole system that way.

[robifz]

Well after all of this I have finally fitted a swivel to try and stop my chain twist problems. I have spoken to many wise souls and this is the recommendation of the majority. I have a S/S WASI Power ball - looks stronger and massive than anything else I have seen.

I will let you guys know if it fixes my problem.

BTW - cannot understand this S/S vrs Galvanised discussion. Both have merits and costs. It all depends on the engineering and not the material. My swivel is replacing a S/S shackle that has been in place for 13 yeards without any metal problems. And owning a Steel boat with heaps of S/S and mild steel welded together I can tell you that there is no problem with mixing the two metals.

[s/v Jedi]

Originally Posted by robifz

BTW - cannot understand this S/S vrs Galvanised discussion. Both have merits and costs. It all depends on the engineering and not the material. My swivel is replacing a S/S shackle that has been in place for 13 yeards without any metal problems. And owning a Steel boat with heaps of S/S and mild steel welded together I can tell you that there is no problem with mixing the two metals.

It is more about engineering than about the metal, I agree. You should have connected the swivel between the shackle and the anchor instead of replacing the shackle with it.

I think that many reading this thread like the two sides engaging in heated discussions but don't really know the details of what it is about. If you have one of these stainless steel swivels/connectors, do this: look at it when it's attached to your anchor. The jaws fit around the anchor-shaft and the pin is smaller than the hole in the shaft. When you put a sideways force to the chain/swivel, the jaws are loaded sideways instead of a straight pull; the anchor shaft forces them apart. With the sideways force, the jaws will bend and the pin is loaded in ways it wasn't designed for. It will lead to total failure.
Now picture it with the shackle in between. The shackle allows the swivel to line up with the chain so that this sideways force doesn't happen.

The two metals: there's more than 2 metals because of the galvanizing of the chain and anchor: there's also zinc. The issue is between steel and zinc.

Let me elaborate on that: when you take a piece of galvanized chain and hang it in the water, only the zinc is in contact with the water, not the steel. This means that there is no galvanic corrosion between the two metals as only one is in contact with the water (like a battery with the positive plates removed: it doesn't work). Now put a stainless swivel/shackle at the end of the chain and hang it in the water: the steel of the shackle and the zinc are electrically connected and both in contact with the water. Galvanic corrosion will occur (this is fact, not point of view). The result will be that the zinc sacrifices itself, exposing steel from the chain to the water which accelerates the process.

You must know this: galvanizing a chain has two functions: first is protecting the steel from corrosion and second is it's sacrificial function when the zinc layer gets abraded exposing the steel to the water. This is just like the zincs protecting other underwater metals on a boat. When you attach a non-galvanized steel shackle or swivel to your chain (and use it, not just showing it on the bow roller in a marina) you deliberately defeat the primary protection mechanism and only enjoy the secondary one: sacrificion of the zinc. This is where all the talk about "they don't make chains like they used to" comes from: people put stainless shackles and swivels onto it; the chain didn't change (much).

The stainless steel will show little change (some black spots) but when done long enough, it will start to show pitting. At that point you will have replaced the chain many times, quickly stripping every new chain from it's galvanize.

ciao!
Nick.

[anathema]

I also have to say I agree with Jedi on this for the most part.

The article clearly states that the swivels were pulled in a normal straight fashion to their safe working load and many deformed and some stopped operating (swiveling, etc). This means they have rated their product far too high. Safe working load should be without any damage or deformation.

If you bought some fancy Dux rigging using the normal working load for your boat, and it started to part and fray, but not totally snap, neither you nor anyone else would find this acceptable, even with your mast still standing.

The part where I disagree is the side loading issue. The device being pulled from the side clearly has a different safe working load as stated by the manufacturer. Pulling to the lateral load and seeing deformation should not be a surprise.

About the corrosion, I would say more real world testing would have to be done. I'm not sure why you say Jedi that the stainless would begin to show pitting as the Zinc is way up/down on the table and should be nearly completely sacrificed before any stainless began to corrode. Actually damn near everything should corrode before the stainless showed any pitting and failure.

Since stainless is fairly corrosion free in the presence of oxygen, I would guess one swivel would not make a very large difference in the total life/corrosion time of the whole chain, but maybe it would, and only proper real world testing will tell.

[GMac]

Good golly this still going.

As much as I respect Jedi's views I do think there is some over cooking of the downsides. Also he hasn't made much or anything of the varying constructions of the assorted swivels available, they all aren't made the same way as the Kongs.

And by the way if you look at Kongs packaging it does very clearly state a in-line SWL and a side load SWL, which are different. If you only read and work on the in-line load it's hard to blame Kong for your stupidity.

Yes, fully agree that at a stated SWL nothing at all should change in any product especially its shape and reserve strength.

Real world testing, there has been masses of it already. It has shown that in some cases some of the galv on end by the SS swivel has gone but some of that is purely due to that's the chain that spends it's time being rubbed on the seabed, which does and can very quickly strip galvanising in some bottom types. But saying that I do believe in some cases galv lose could be due to the SS/ Galv mix. But yet again, as someone who sees a LOT of anchor rodes in every stage of their life span, I can say having a SS swivel on the end of galv chain usually does NOTHING to either.

I think you will find that issues are a lot more likely to occur only if you anchor for extended periods. As we all know having SS underwear for long periods isn't that good really.

Real world testing also shows some, admittedly very few, swivels are perfectly fine in everyway inc strength.

I have a lead filled alloy anchor joined to galv chain with a SS fitting, which in theory is the worse possible combo. 3 years in and every part looks perfectly fine inc the chains galvanising.

I think this is another of those theory V's practice subjects. In many cases the theory just isn't borne out in practice. But it's an interesting one all the same.

[estarzinger]

I am late to this party and the OP has already bought one, but I should note I had a kong swivel and used it in about 55kts in Hurricane Lenny in English harbour. It deformed and I tossed it away and have not been using any swivel since - no chain twists yet.

I will be curious to hear if this solves the chain twist problem. I do hope we hear back from the OP.

[GMac]

Chain twist can be brought on by many things, often a small amount of a few things in combination.

A swivel won't always stop it.

One usual big cause is a bent anchor. Doesn't take very much at all to make some spin and a little turn in the chain this time, another next time and before you know it you have a lot.

[Geoff H.]

used to get my heavy 3/8 chain/75 CQR twisted, added SWIVEL, which took care of the twist, but then the anchor started to get jammed where it attached to the swivel, where it actually would stick out at out angles coming out of the water, the shank caught or jammed at the swivel groove. Then someone showed me better way to attach, by adding 6" of chain after the anchor, and before the swivel, i.e. putting the swivel in the chain, not attaching it to the anchor shank, and i've never had a problem since.

[s/v Jedi]

Originally Posted by GMac

As much as I respect Jedi's views I do think there is some over cooking of the downsides. Also he hasn't made much or anything of the varying constructions of the assorted swivels available, they all aren't made the same way as the Kongs.

The Kong was brought up as a good swivel by it's supporters in the thread, so that is why I targeted the Kong because tests showed it's flawed or at least, doesn't meet it's specifications.

And by the way if you look at Kongs packaging it does very clearly state a in-line SWL and a side load SWL, which are different. If you only read and work on the in-line load it's hard to blame Kong for your stupidity.

Half agree. People should read the specs correctly but Kong should put the smaller SWL as the only one on the packaging to protect it's buyers.

Yes, fully agree that at a stated SWL nothing at all should change in any product especially its shape and reserve strength.

Great, but as you can read back in the thread, many think it's okay.

Real world testing, there has been masses of it already. It has shown that in some cases some of the galv on end by the SS swivel has gone but some of that is purely due to that's the chain that spends it's time being rubbed on the seabed, which does and can very quickly strip galvanising in some bottom types.

Galv abrading by the seabed is minimal for the links close to the anchor. Just watch which part gets dragged over the seabed most: the part that just touches the seabed before going up to the bow. There is no movement close to the anchor.

I have a lead filled alloy anchor joined to galv chain with a SS fitting, which in theory is the worse possible combo. 3 years in and every part looks perfectly fine inc the chains galvanising.

So, in those three years, how many months/weeks/days have you been at anchor? Nothing happens to it when the anchor is resting on the bow roller. I clearly stated that this only matters for boats that use their anchor often and long. We spend 5 out of the last 6 years at anchor and can positively state that stainless swivels/shackles on a galvanized chain & anchor is bad practice. We saw more than 50% loss of steel in the first links after 4 months continuous at anchor with a stainless shackle. We see no degradation with galvanized parts only, not even after 1+ years continuously at anchor.

cheers,
Nick.

[GMac]

The SWL's are very well listed on the Kong packaging. If a buyer isn't smart enough to read the packaging of something so important that isn't a manufacturers problem. All people buying things like this have their own brain and should use it rather than all manufacturers having to down grade gear to the level of dumbest moron afloat. Sorry but I believe we aren't all stupid and shouldn't be treated as such. The packaging is very clear.

But in saying that not all packaging is, which I agree is seriously wrong and a fast growing problem we all have.

The longest we would go at anchor continuously with the current gear is a week. If I was going longer I'd make sure no SS fittings are in the system at all. SS doesn't like long times under water, certainly not 4 months.

Sorry Nick, I did get a little cross-over action going on there with Cruisers and the day trippers. Spend too long each day speaking to nutter fishos at this time of the year. But shortly it's cruiser season again, which is a lot more enjoyable as they tend to have a higher level of brain activity than the fishos

Dives for cover to miss the flying Penn 6000's Reels

[jkleins]

s/v Jedi, where did you get the G7 galvanized chain? You mentioned in one thread you ordered it from the company and I can't seem to find it in any of the literature. Was it something you had to special order? Did you have to have a special wildcat for it or did Maxwell have one that fit it? I like the idea of stronger, smaller and lighter chain so I can carry more of it and wanted to look at all the options.

Thanks,
Jim

[Gene :^)]

Shackles and Swivels aside... Maybe I read the first post wrong, but didn't he say it was getting twisted inside his chain locker to the point that he could not drop the anchor because it would jam?

It is also my understanding that the relationship of the chain links to the wildcat never changes unless the chain somehow skips/jumps a few teeth/links. Or am I wrong and perhaps some wildcats allow the chain to roll as it passes?

Also, his bow roller/guide has a slot for the chain links, this also prevents twists to pass into the locker.

In other words, the side of the link of chain that touches the wildcat going out will also touch it coming in.

So, if the deployed portion of chain (in the water) twists or untwists or whatever, it should not matter after it goes through the wildcat and back into the locker. I think you guys were trying to fix a twist on the wrong side of the wildcat.

So if the bitter end of the chain down at the bottom of the locker is not twisting, then in theory the chain within the locker can not twist since the wildcat keeps it in position.

However, I suppose half of the chain piled in the locker could twist one direction and the other half could twist the other until all the slack between the links is taken up. But why would this occur?

Is there a flaw in his chain locker and the way it piles the chain? Stack falling over because he has an awful lot of chain (80 meters)?

Am I reading his first post wrong or have you guys argued for 72 posts on the wrong topic? Help me to understand and learn.

[GMac]

Twisting in the locker isn't that uncommon. If the chain comes up with any twist in it, it will usually work most of it out when it comes over the roller, the slotted ones do help. But it only take a 90 degree turn in the chain to get a smidgen of that twist that will go through the wildcat and into the locker. It's not uncommon to see that happening and it is cumulative. So after a few times in and out the twist in the locker can build up.

If your chain has any twist evident between the roller and wildcat, it could be telling you that is happening. Doesn't mean it is, just it might be. If you chain is sitting all nicely lined up, it would suggest you wouldn't have that issue.

This is more likely to happen when your winch is further away from your roller than it will when it's close to the roller. If the winch is close the wildcat will often be able to straighten the chain out removing any twist.

[Extemporaneous]

Somewhat related.
I have seen somewhere a horizontal chain guide/wildcat that is not a windlass at all. It is just a sheave for chain and sits bolted to your deck to redirect the anchor chain. I thought it was a Maxwell product but can't see anything like that on their website. Perhaps it was at a boat show and was for display purposes only (not for sale).
Has anyone seen this and can you direct me to it?

Thanks,
Extemp.