Your wisdom is needed

[Izikalvo]

Your thoughts are needed here.
We have decided to start working on our new bruce anchor.jpg version anchor that will have no roll bar, not that we think that roll bar is bad, on the contrary, a roll bar has many advantages mostly in resetting, and also enables us to design an anchor with a light fluke. but there are many boaters out there with pulpits, short positioned bow rollers, catamarans, or low structure railings that cannot use an anchor with a roll bar.

The main issue of not having a roll bar is that in order for the anchor to be self right it has to have a ballasted fluke or toe, meaning that it has to be heavy and we cannot accept that, we want to keep it light.
Since it is a complicated task we have decided to ask for the crowd wisdom to help, please let us know what you think, any crazy idea will be appreciated, and if you will, please share this with people and groups you think might help,

Looking forward to hearing from you.

I am adding here a photo of a Bruce anchor, a mighty big one, with respect I have for Peter Bruce who invented his unique design anchor in the seventies,

[Benz]

Why? There are three major roll-bar style anchors commercially available, and they're all about the same, and they all work very well. I think they all have more fluke surface area than a bruce. If you want market share, just design something that closely resembles them and sell it for less.

[tkeithlu]

While Benz's point is well-taken, you might start by questioning your own assumptions. Are there other ways to strengthen the fluke than a bar across the open space, such as a ridge in the flukes? Would increasing the fluke area result is self-righting without ballasting? The answers in every case may be "no," but your assumptions put you in a box, and thinking outside the box toward a new design is the task.

[GordMay]

It seems, to me, you want to design an anchor that is not form stabilized (no roll bar), therefore, ballast stabilized, but lightweight.
Hmmmm.
How about going to an inflatable/de-flatable roll-bar, to eliminate the interference problems, you cited?

[Yellowtulip]

Isn't the question of self-righting-by-ballast a matter of relative weight? So an aluminium or titanium anchor with a ballasted fluke (spade?) would still be lightweight.

[Halam]

I've thought for a while that some sort of float would encourage an anchor to orientate itself, perhaps make the upper half of the flooks hollow. Or make the whole thing out of polymer with a ballast shoe.

[SV__Grace]

Spring-loaded roll bar? Enough tension to grab bottom and self right, but folds when seated in bow roller.

[Cadence]

Originally Posted by GordMay

It seems, to me, you want to design an anchor that is not form stabilized (no roll bar), therefore, ballast stabilized, but lightweight.
Hmmmm.
How about going to an inflatable/de-flatable roll-bar, to eliminate the interference problems, you cited?

GordMay, I love the humor.

[Simi 60]

I'll just leave this here

[goeasy123]

This guy thinks a roll bar is a bad idea. I like a contrarian!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_wBGLL3fKw

IMHO... the market is now looking for a 'next generation' anchor at the lowest price, delivered.



What do you think?

[Simi 60]

Originally Posted by goeasy123

IMHO... the market is now looking for a 'next generation' anchor at the lowest price, delivered.



What do you think?

Absolutely.

Bugel would have to be the cheapest - bring on the clones.

[hpeer]

How about a roll bar anchor that naturally lays on the roller with the bar down? That way it would fit on a boat with a sprit.

I mean that is the identified issue no? That roll bars are great but do not fit on some boats.

I have had that fight, bought a Spade bt even then was size limited. When I had to replace the sprit I redesigned it to accept a big roll bar.

So make a roll bar that lays upside down and Bobs hour Uncle.

[noelex 77]

I have a soft spot for the Bruce anchor, although I have never owned one. It has been eclipsed for good reason by the modern designs, but the Bruce is unlike any other shape and consequently functions unlike any other anchor.

It is a difficult anchor to manufacture, as the twist and angle of the blades is an important part of its ability to adopt the correct setting position. Even the genuine Bruce has some significant flaws such as the relatively low holding capacity for the size. There are plenty of Bruce copies and I don’t think another model would gain much market share.

However, the design deserves some development. The original Bruce was based on large oil rig anchors and the design does not scale down to small sizes well. Bruce anchors less than say 30kg (60lb) do not work as well as the larger models, but unlike most other anchor designs there has been no subsequent development of the concept. It would be interesting to see if evolution could result in designs better than the current modern anchors.

[vpbarkley]

I saw reviews of the Mantus M1 anchor with roll bar which noted it had the heaviest tip weight of any anchor in the review. It also sets and resets as well as to better than any other anchor in the review. Mantus now has an anchor without a roll bar, the M2, which I haven't seen reviewed.

[Thumbs Up]

An anchor thread! How refreshing. But a Bruce??