Photos of Anchors Setting

[44'cruisingcat]

Underwater photography seems too tricky for me, so Ijust waited for low tide!

Our Bruce as it usually looks:

[Orion Jim]

Saw a picture of a Sasquatch once that reminds me of this photo. The photographer pointed at some thick bush and insisted it was in there.......

[downunder]

Originally Posted by 44'cruisingcat

Underwater photography seems too tricky for me, so Ijust waited for low tide!

Our Bruce as it usually looks:

Great anchor result.

We are waiting to see the roll bar anchors disappear like that. Must be the med anchorages.

Its also cheating and not an underwater photo. smiling

[noelex 77]

This was a genuine Bugel (I think)

It was doing a nice job in the medium soft sand.

[noelex 77]

This was a CQR (genuine I think).

It was on a very long scope of 7:1 in 7m of water and had dragged about 9m to reach this point. The drag marks were only very shallow scrapes. The shank had left as much of a mark as the fluke in the sand.

The boat is actually being held by the weed. There is almost no penetration into the substrate.

I sometime see this confusing people when they are setting. If the anchor is not engaging the substrate, it is initially pulled with almost nothing to slow its progression across the hard sand. When the anchor hits a patch of weed the increased resistance from tangling with the weed roots is taken by the owner a sign that the anchor had started to dig in.



Not a very good photo, but you can just make the two shallow scrape marks. These were made by the shank and the fluke. These scrape marks extended over 9m over some hard, but otherwise good sand.
The first encounter with some resistance was this isolated patch of weed. I suspect the owner falsely concluded the anchor was starting to dig in because of this increased resistance, when in reality he had left the anchor in the worst spot.

[Kenomac]

Only four boats in the anchorage. Winds 15 knots with gusts to 25. Hard sand bottom with vegetation roots, some areas like sod.

We just watched a 4 million dollar Sunreef 60 power cat go dragging past while the professional crew was eating breakfast in the dining room. Another boat they almost hit alerted them, otherwise? The anchor had held the boat all day yesterday and last night in similar conditions and with winds at times gusting to 30 knots. It decided to let go when things had calmed down.

The anchor in use.... A 60-70 pound Brittany which looks like a cheap Danforth. A curious choice for a boat that size 39 tons. I assume it has a professional crew, since I watched the woman climb head first down into the anchor well to get something. Probably waiting here to pick up a charter.

Additional info: During the time it took to write the above.... They dragged a second time, this time making it almost to the other side of the inlet. Time to rent a berth? Yep... There they go into the marina. That anchor will probably cost them $1000 in mooring fees today alone.

[noelex 77]

This is a Bugel copy that, as you can see, is not doing very well. The holding ground at this anchorage is very unpredictable and variable, but I have come across this boat before. This is the same anchor was photographed in post # 203. It was doing the same thing in that anchorage, with a high list and poor set. In this case it had dragged about 6m to this point.

The Bugel copies can be a bargain if you are on a very tight budget, but you must check the geometry and balance very carefully against a genuine Bugel. Some of these copies are terrible and while in this case the substrate might be to blame, after these two results I would be thinking about a new anchor.

[noelex 77]

It's nice to show a Delta doing reasonably well. In the right substrate the Delta will bury and disappear from view. Unfortunately, it quite rare to see a fixed plow design doing well in the generally harder sand of the Med, as the photos so far have shown.

Interestingly, this was in a loose rocky/gravely type of substrate. The fixed convex plow anchors do very well in this unusual substrate. They can often beat far more respected designs in gravel. This bottom in this case is a bit more like small rocks than gravel, but the anchor has set quicker and with less heaping up than it normally does in soft sand.

The back of fluke and much of the shank are still visible, but the appearance does give some confidence that with a bit more force the fluke would bury, rather than just continuing to plow a trench and heaping up more sand as we see so often.



In the next photo note the rock in the background elevating the chain. With some force this will tighten and form a straight line with the shank. This will cause the shank to be lifted exactly like anchoring at short scope. What is important to the anchor is the angle the chain makes with the bottom, not the numerical scope value.
This was obviously not a factor here, the rock is only small. The Delta loses more performance than most when the shank is lifted (like at a short scope) and the anchor has done well.

However, the topography elevating the chain like this is a cause of an anchor failing to set (or dragging), that should be considered more. It is not uncommon.

The only defence is an anchor that still performs well when the shank is elevated (in other words the short scope performance is good) and an anchor that sets in a short distance, as when the anchor moves back towards the obstruction the chain angle will become steeper and steeper.

Of course the chain elevation can also occur due to some other cause like debris.

[noelex 77]

This was a great result from a steel Spade on a private yacht, but with poor technique.

The first time they dropped going forward and when some 20m in front of their anchor, put the yacht into reverse. Combined with the 20 knot breeze they managed to develop some considerable speed in reverse by the the time the chain tightened. The new generation anchors will sometimes set with this sort of brutal treatment, but this one did not. They motored forward, let out some more chain and repeated the exercise with the same result.

They then picked up the anchor and tried again, although this time with a bit less backward speed. The Spade did a great job to grab with this sort of treatment. The result you see is in 6m @ 4.5:1.

The Spade has set very nicely with the fluke completely buried and only a small amount of the top of the shank visible. Despite the less than perfect setting technique, it has managed to do this in only a metre. Contrast this with the 5-6 m taken by a typical convex plow anchor.

There is a tiny bit more heaping up of sand than the Mantus (the two anchors were very close together in what looks like a very similar substrate), but with an equally impressive result, especially given the setting technique used on the Spade. The Mantus was set in a much more sympathetic way, even if I do say so myself . Top class anchor performance shows even in this easy terrain.

If your boat cannot fit a roll bar anchor, the range of anchors with excellent performance is very limited. There is a big price difference between the Spade (or possibly Ultra) and the second tier of anchors like the Delta and the Kobra. This is further complicated by the difficulties re-galvanlising the Spade which makes the effective cost higher again.

If you are debating spending this extra money, have a look at the set of this Spade and then review the results for the Delta and Kobra. Most of the time the owners are unaware there is any difference and perhaps see little value for the extra money. Diving, the difference between an excellent anchor like the steel Spade and a good anchor like the Delta is very apparent.

[monte]

Nice job noëlex, but I can't agree with your summary there. If you can't fit a roll bar/afford a new gen anchor etc. the fact is they may or may not set easier or better, buts what it really comes down to is technique, or lack of it. Many of the anchors you have photographed (most of the m with poor sets) have been put down to poor technique.
We had a 20 kg delta on our lagoon 380, 8 tonne cat. I thought it was a bit undersized but in over 2 years use in the med it never dragged and usually set at least as well as the well set plough type photographs you have taken. It didn't set straight away 2 or 3 times and we had to re anchor. Once was where we are currently anchored, off baleeira where the pilot describes the anchorage as rocky and particularly foul.
We are now using a 25kg kobra on a lagoon400, 10t cat and so far so good, although I haven't dived on it much as the water on the Atlantic Coast isn't much warmer that a Melbourne winter!
I haven't seen any photos of the Manson with a smaller weight than yours and would be interested to see the performance comparison of the set for one at 20-25kg as most of the other anchors seem to be. I think the weight has a lot to do with the set of your anchor, but mainly as can be seen in most of the bad sets, poor technique.

[Factor]

Originally Posted by noelex 77

Contrast this with the 5-6 m taken by a typical convex plow anchor.

My Convex anchor doesn't take that long to set. I suppose this is because its not a plough (australian spelling) - a plough is something designed to lift the earth up and move it to one side, as an aside if you look at an old cqr you will find its two plows side by side counteracting the forces, and is not a convex anchor, I actually find the description of all convex anchors as ploughs quite disingenuous. The Excel convex shape is clearly not a plough. Perhaps - if you must adopt a generalised, lump them into arbitrary categories, approach you might do Scoops, Ploughs, Flats and Convex anchors. To describe all non concave non roll bar anchors as convex ploughs is quite wrong, it is analogous to describing all flat plate anchors as danforths, the difference in performance between a cheap crap flat plate anchor and a genuine danforth is marked, and the difference between a genuine danforth and a Fortress is simply amazing.

Not only is the lumping of all non scooping, non roll bar anchors into the arbitrary convex plough category wrong , its not actually all the helpful.

If your boat cannot fit a roll bar anchor, the range of anchors with excellent performance is very limited. There is a big price difference between the Spade (or possibly Ultra) and the second tier of anchors like the Delta and the Kobra. This is further complicated by the difficulties re-galvanlising the Spade which makes the effective cost higher again.

And the Excel? Yes I know its rare over there, but I haven't seen too many ultras here, nor spades, nor kobras over here

[avb3]

Originally Posted by Factor

..,..

And the Excel? Yes I know its rare over there, but I haven't seen too many ultras here, nor spades, nor kobras over here

We all know you are an Excel fan. Many of us know nothing about it, so maybe you can arrange to have actual pictures taken under different conditions and in different substrates.

It might be educational for all of us, including you. Are the any reasons you would not be able to?


Sent from my GT-P3113 using Cruisers Sailing Forum mobile app

[44'cruisingcat]

Originally Posted by downunder

Great anchor result.

We are waiting to see the roll bar anchors disappear like that. Must be the med anchorages.

Its also cheating and not an underwater photo. smiling

Next time I'll wait 'till high tide then....

[Factor]

Originally Posted by avb3

We all know you are an Excel fan. Many of us know nothing about it, so maybe you can arrange to have actual pictures taken under different conditions and in different substrates.

It might be educational

I dont sell them, but nevertheless you think I should spend time and money organising a wide ranging photo shoot.

[avb3]

Originally Posted by Factor

I dont sell them, but nevertheless you think I should spend time and money organising a wide ranging photo shoot.

If you don't sell them, you must know individuals who either do, or who use them.

Perhaps you can encourage them to contribute to this thread. I suspect most here would be seriously interested to see what other anchors that are not commonly known would perform like. After all, at one time the CQR was considered the height of anchor technology.

Is there any reason you can't suggest these real life tests to those that own the anchor? It truly would be great to see them in action.