Welcome to the Dockwalk.com Forum

 

In order to post a comment in one of the forum topics, you must log in or sign up. Your display name will appear next to your posts unless you check the Post Anonymously box. When writing a post, please follow our forum guidelines. If you come across a post that you would like us to review, use the Report Post button. Please note the opinions shared in the forums do not necessarily reflect the views of Dockwalk.


RSS Feed Print
Velsheda's EC6+ rigging breaks?
Davidj
Posted: Wednesday, June 3, 2009 3:47 PM
Joined: 02/06/2009
Posts: 2


Anyone else see what’s happened to Velsheda’s rigging? I was in Palma and managed to catch a glimpse of the damage caused by Ranger last month. We were told when it happened that it was just the jumper that was damaged but according to the guys in Palma, the V3 was apparently hit as well. I tried to ask someone from Southern Spars what they were going to recommend but they didn’t seem very interested in answering questions!

 

I hear now that the whole shroud is being sent back to the states in a 5m x 5m box! If they have to replace the whole rigging package because of some small amounts of damage surely it puts some fairly serious doubts about the suitability of continuous rigging in the superyacht market. In the race market, most of the teams have a spare shroud just in case but I can’t imagine an owner being very happy to shell out half a million on a spare set of rigging ‘just in case’. I am guessing the other option is to try to repair it, but imagine if a rod rigging company suggested welding up a crack in rod head, I can’t see any super yacht owner accepting that!


kdhguard00
Posted: Wednesday, June 3, 2009 5:21 PM
Joined: 16/09/2008
Posts: 31


I agree completely.  Superyachts tend to be significantly larger than the sleek race boat counterparts they emulate.  Not only is the scale therefore larger, but these boats have greater volume and are completely differently balanced.  Furthermore, I can't image the acceptable breakage threshold would be anything similar to that of a competitive maxi.  It seems to me that rigging companies should developer higher tensile strength versions for superyacht-maxi-wannabes and be ashamed to be pushing the most high-tech goods to these owners.
Davidj
Posted: Thursday, June 4, 2009 11:59 AM
Joined: 04/06/2009
Posts: 3


I think these guys probably do understand the loads superyachts experience – I´m a rigger, if they didn’t I think I´d be a lot busier! But I agree totally that some systems are not so well suited to this market. Southern's continuous EC6 looks clean so I can see the attraction but when there is so much at stake, not least financially, it seems a very big risk.

 

Playing devil’s advocate, does Velsheda prove that it’s a risk not worth taking?  

 


Dan
Posted: Thursday, June 4, 2009 12:04 PM
Joined: 10/05/2009
Posts: 3


On the otherhand most superyachts won't be put in the same situation as the Velsheda/Ranger match race.

With a rigging clash they had they are lucky the rig didn't come down. On any Superyacht after that kind of clash the rig is likely to be pulled out for a full check, replacing the rigging is the least of their worries, half a million is small change compared to the cost of the rig coming down!


Davidj
Posted: Friday, June 5, 2009 11:26 AM
Joined: 04/06/2009
Posts: 3


The point I was trying to make was that with rod or PBO you would only have to replace the damaged span(s). With a continuous system, if the damage is not repairable, the entire shroud will need to be replaced and that will take months. It’s going to cost a lot more than half a million if your boat is out of action for most of the summer!  


Dan
Posted: Friday, June 5, 2009 12:20 PM
Joined: 10/05/2009
Posts: 3


I see your point David, and for many superyachts a continuous system may be unsuitable. Perhaps they would be better considering something like standard EC6 (discontinuous). I'm of the belief that rod rigging is now old technology for most serious boats. PBO/EC6/EC6+/Halls SPR are growing in popularity as they deliver more desirable properties.

Getting back to Velsheda, she's perhaps a slightly different case given she is raced hard on an on the water basis and in handicap racing against Ranger. As with most serious race programs, they will spend huge amounts for a small boatspeed advantage and accept that there is a risk involved.


Davidj
Posted: Friday, June 5, 2009 4:04 PM
Joined: 04/06/2009
Posts: 3


I agree that there will always be owners out there where money is no object and who don’t care about the potential risks but from my experience they are in the minority.  For most, the 500,000 potentially extra cost is still something to consider when choosing the rigging package.

 

Discontinuous EC6 is an interesting one as well though, because it’s much heavier than other composite options out there. That’s why Southern is pushing the continuous so hard, isn’t it?


Anonymous
Posted: Saturday, June 6, 2009 2:01 PM
Having worked as a temp stew on the boat, I happen to know that the lovely Velsheda's owner really loves sailing the boat himself and would imagine that he would not spare any expense and make sure that the end result is absolutely safe and suitable for further J class racing.
Anonymous
Posted: Sunday, June 7, 2009 11:37 PM
Your argument against EC6 referencing Velsheda I would say that this is a bad case in point. The owner races the boat like a dinghy, damage is only a minor consideration for the fun he and the crew/race crew gain from the boat !!! The boat is more a race boat than a super yacht no matter what she looks like. The boat is set up and rigged for racing, was originally designed for racing. It is a J Class after all. The owner has a large motor yacht that he uses as a mother ship. Your point regarding the EC6 not being replaceable. Well if you have a rig collision with the amount of force Velsheda did in your example, you would be an idiot not to pull your rig, and more than likely would have to replace the same amount of gear as Velsheda are. EC6 is a great product, no less durable than PBO or nitronic Rod. Think of this the other way round, with carbon or PBO rigging it is a lot easier to see the damage than on rod rigging.
Anonymous
Posted: Sunday, June 21, 2009 11:47 PM
I’d have to agree with “Anonymous”, you make good sensible observations and are right on the boats origins, it a racing yacht and is used as such, so is Ranger for that matter. DavidJ - I think you should get your facts right before stepping out into a public arena such as this, you really don’t do yourself or the actual facts any favours....especially as a rigger...I'm not and I know the following by good research. Fact One – Velsheda required a replacement of one side of the jumper stay and a repair to the jumper spreader IBE. The stay could have been “repaired” but the boat & assume insurance company elected to replace it - standard procedure in something like this & wise. 2 x 200T boats coming together, amazed it was two new rigs required. Fact Two – the side of the rigging was sent back for a “check”, cover was removed, no damage found, stay recovered and arrives back this week. As for a 5m x 5m box……(shakes head), I saw the rig go together in Falmouth, box the rigging arrived in wasn’t anywhere near 5 x 5…… Fact Three – the one side of rigging isn’t worth any where near $ 500 K in value, try closer to ¼ of this figure – most likely about one main sails worth…. Fact Four – Southern offer discontinuous, continuous and a combination package (so you can have discontinuous V1 or cap for example….I now Southern are work on a new system which addresses the complete stay package on one side for true “super yachts” – unsure what it is but sure it’s been well thought out knowing them. Fact Five – if the rigs used rod, any rods “kinked” or surface damaged would have to be replaced, but as the EC6 rigging can take impact, its probably saved a lot of hassle and as metal that’s been stressed is very hard to identify, I’d say they’d been looking to replacing the one side in rod anyway ? Fact Six – has Halls SRC rigging been sailing yet ??? lots of marketing but no “pudding” as it where….. Fact Seven – yes I understand the Discontinuous EC6 is heavier, but it can’t be that bad, the new Bristolian has it fitted to the rig so it must still be a feasible option ? I think for other reasons like the EC6 comes with other advantages over the “other composite options” – no environmental issues (heat, moisture, UV, higher chafe resistance etc). Longer life span by a huge factor, so no replacement of stays over time or mileage like PBO etc. You want to talk about cost of super yacht rigging options, what happens when you have to replace PBO stays after 4 or 8 years, EC6 has tested out to 5 times that of rod without failure, PBO has a known replacement cycle…….so go figure. Fact Eight – (this is for kdhguard00) composite rigging is in fact twice as strong (strength) as Ni50 for "approx" same given diameter but it stretches more, the composite stays are design to have the same “stretch as rod” (hence the bigger diameter) so they behave the same when tuning the rig, as it works out you get a lot more safety factor in a composite rigging solution than you get in rod – so your “ashamed” rigging companies are in fact offering a safer solution when it come to strength (from new in the PBO case as it degrades over time). I know there’s guys from Southern here for the Palma regatta, I’m sure they can shed some more light on the above more than me…… Things that make you go “Mmmmm” !
Dan
Posted: Monday, June 22, 2009 7:45 PM
Joined: 10/05/2009
Posts: 3


FYI, saw Halls SRC on a new Wally in Ancona last week, looks cool in Red
Anonymous
Posted: Monday, June 22, 2009 9:24 PM
Mmmmm - cool any pictures? has it sailed, how does it look, reports - come on Hall usually have a big splash on this stuff ? unlike them to stay schitum.....or treading carefully...
Anonymous
Posted: Tuesday, July 7, 2009 1:36 PM
The rigging of w130 is not Hall's carbon rig, but Future Fibres Rigging with red cover instead of the black one!!!! I think no one at the moment will be happy to sail with hall's srs carbon rod on a mast big like the 130's one!!!! better to go on safe tested systems on boats like these!
Henning
Posted: Wednesday, July 8, 2009 10:14 AM
Joined: 01/06/2008
Posts: 1052


Yeah, the bleeding edge of technology is best left to the racing community. Everything has its place, and large yachts, heck, any sized yachts are typically not the best place for these types of options. A yacht in charter or simple recreational sailing are better served with field repairable systems, and typically, that's what we are seeing. One of the things I liked about the old schooners, parceled and served galvanized steel. Wasn't the slickest and most streamlined, but it was durable as hell and very damage tolerant.
Davidj
Posted: Thursday, July 9, 2009 3:03 PM
Joined: 07/07/2009
Posts: 1


Hey everyone, I have been working away so I haven’t been able to comment but I’m pleased to see others have joined the debate, including someone from Southern Spars!..Sorry ‘Anonymous’

 

I know from a very reliable source (whose facts I do trust) that some of the carbon rods on Velsheda’s verticals were broken, although there was no sign of damage on the surface...so shame on you Mr SS! You should know better!  However, marketing rubbish aside, it’s useful to have someone online to answer some questions I have regarding EC6+’s suitability on superyachts, so if you wouldn’t mind...

 

I have always wanted to know, how you check the rigging? How can you test a full shroud set at load? I don’t know of any test beds in the world capable of it so I’m very intrigued to know. If you can’t test it, what guarantees are there that the cable, the terminations and bonded spreader junctions are all ok?

 

Also if some rods do get damaged, how do you repair them? Pump a load of extra resin into the cable?
Henning
Posted: Thursday, July 9, 2009 7:29 PM
Joined: 01/06/2008
Posts: 1052


To Anonymous, saying CF can "take impact" as a fact makes the rest of your claims of fact to be dubious as well. I've been dealing with the material since the 70s. It is good stuff and tolerant of many things, impact isn't one of them. Microcracks develop and in a dynamic environment will eventually fail there, and the failure mode is explosive and utter. There still is no perfect way of doing NDT on the material, an issue which is coming up in the aviation industry as they are implementing more and more CF parts in their structures as well as complete CF structures and they are breaking, like tails off of Airbusses. I would no more reuse a piece of damaged CF rigging than a piece of damaged SS rod rigging. Both of them have been compromised and are going to fail catastophicaly, the only question is when. It is the way of the future for racing yachts, I don't think it's particularly suitable for charter service or cruising yachts.
Gareth Griffiths
Posted: Friday, July 10, 2009 1:13 AM
Joined: 01/06/2009
Posts: 7


Surely you are far less likely to damage Carbon Rigging on a Super Yacht during a charter than you are on a race boat? Carbon Rigs and Non Metal rigging are the way forward on all boats. It saves weight making the boats more economical, more efficient, and easier to control. I think it was fantastic of the owner of Velsheda to use his boat as a flagship for Southern Spars modern rig and standing rigging design.
Henning
Posted: Friday, July 10, 2009 10:57 AM
Joined: 01/06/2008
Posts: 1052


LOL, I'm not sure with some of the dockings I see. I see CF as the way of the future in racing, no doubt. For general use, stranded stainless still makes the most sense from a safety and repairability standpoint regardless the cost.
Anonymous
Posted: Sunday, July 12, 2009 1:34 PM
Thats not true at all Henning mate... It is a lot simpler for even the most uneducated of deck crew to see if there is a problem with carbon or pbo rigging...! anyone can it is obvious... you have to dye test or ultra sound rod rigging plus rod rigging is made of nitronic not stainless steel
Henning
Posted: Sunday, July 12, 2009 3:04 PM
Joined: 01/06/2008
Posts: 1052


No sir, microfracturing is not something "anyone can see", no one can. You actually have to be damned good with a 70* ultrasound crystal to see it. A glancing hit into something hard but smooth can leave no mark at all, yet weaken the structure by over 70%. Large damage, sure anyone can see that. Microfracturing however leads to the same explosive failures as large damage, because that is the main mode of failure of CF regardless of if it is placed in tension, compression or sheer, and it often give no preindicators of failure. When CF was first introduced to Indy car chassis back in the 70s, we found they were good for 5 seasons. Season 6 they would disintegrate, often at 200 mph. 1st tier teams would run them year one and two, second tier teams would buy them for year three and four and us low dollar teams would run them year five, and if you didn't make all the races of five, you might campaign it year six. I know several guys who didn't make it through year six. NDT has been one of my sidelines since I was 15, and I've done it in many industries including railroads aviation and marine along with race car components back in the day. There is the claim made that CF composites have no fatigue life, but matrix in which it is bound does, take Double Bullet IIs mast for an example. That thing waved like wet spaghetti on sea trials through Hurricane Gulch "It's engineered to do that"... it exploded on the way back up from Acapulco. Often there are adhesion problems within the laminate structure that are completely undetectable yet severely weaken the structural integrity. There is also overload failure. There is no stretch or bend or crumple, there is only explosive destruction. Couple of Airbuses have lost their vertical tails where the CF structural components exploded in an overload condition. That is the only failure mode for CF. Don't get me wron, I'm not against the stuff. It has some wonderful qualities that are very useful and advantageous in certain applications. Considering it as a "wonder cure all" though is a falacy that even the Swiss engineers I know from the glider community who pioneered the use of the stuff warn against. I consider it best when combined in a laminate structure with aramid and glass fibers as well.
Anonymous
Posted: Sunday, July 12, 2009 5:50 PM
As a rigger I would say that the benefits of modern composite rigging far out way the negatives. It is not exactly a modern intervention to use composites and most of what you are seeing on modern super yachts has been well tried and tested with minimal failures. The main issue with all Super yachts is the lack of knowledge of the deck crew in how to maintain boats. They are happy to clean a rig but not learn how to do a correct rig check. The captains know this and are more than happy to employ riggers to do the work their crews should bee doing.
Anonymous
Posted: Friday, July 17, 2009 8:01 PM
To true i think that guy henning is one of the deck crew you were yabberin' about... ultrasound crystalz on fibre rigging.. WTF mate you can see its damaged when the chafe cover is damaged you sound like a motor boater who wishes he could earn the same money sailing
Henning
Posted: Saturday, July 18, 2009 12:47 PM
Joined: 01/06/2008
Posts: 1052


EC6 is carbon in an unlaminated form? Then it's impossible to test in anything but x-ray and since that won't happen, visual only. That's a lot of trust. Yeah, I'm just an idiot deckie.... BTW, is it BF carbon?
Anonymous
Posted: Saturday, July 18, 2009 1:58 PM
Henning mate.. either reed one of the websits or actually go sail on a boat that has anything mor modern than galv wire riggin yor a bit outa touch mate..!
Henning
Posted: Sunday, July 19, 2009 1:51 AM
Joined: 01/06/2008
Posts: 1052


Yeah, I'd sail if they paid better and it wasn't so much damn work. As for the websites, all I can find is marketing hype, no science or engineering behind the actual product. Just a bunch of yada yada "latest greatest" crap. Point me at a link where I can see the actual data on the materials and processes involved. I'm just seeing sales pitches and a few "How cool" media articles.
Nicholas Pearson
Posted: Sunday, July 19, 2009 9:38 AM
Joined: 19/07/2009
Posts: 1


Its a no brainer for me. If you have a bottomless money pit and can afford to stop sailing somewhere in the world due to a rigging concern for long periods then EC6 is fine. for me as a rigger, a once racer and now cruising skipper individual stays in PBO is the only way to go. If i have a concern i remove the stay, put it in a jiffy bag and post it to Spain for testing. Else i put it in hand luggage and do the same. Try doing that with a 6 metre fixed carbon rod! I could imagine telling my boss half way through his round the world trip that we need to stop for a few months to freight a 6m rod back to NZ or anywhere due to a spinnaker tylaska hitting it or something! I'd be back working onshore very quickly thats for sure!!!
Gareth Griffiths
Posted: Sunday, July 19, 2009 10:17 AM
Joined: 01/06/2009
Posts: 7


Very Funny...! I can imagine the same scenario with a S/S D1... Customs would go nuts.
Anonymous
Posted: Thursday, July 30, 2009 2:07 AM

Maybe you should go back & read my post in more detail…..(not sure who your reliable source is) but maybe you should talk to Adam the skipper or the riggers who took the rig apart or even someone from Composite Rigging….LOL – sorry David not from Sth Spars so no shame here….

Like I said the jumper was damaged and could have been repaired, but they replaced it instead, the main vertical rigging was sent for checking, “no damage”, so was recovered & returned.

Your facts are more likely refer to the jumper.

I can’t answer you on the testing question, I don’t know so ask them, how do the PBO guys do it ? they obviously don’t pull to destruction ? that would waste a possibly good stay.

I think you’ll find it’s subjective from the testing results they have ? The stuff tests out with no fatigue and any increase stretch etc judging from the info I have and what the guys on the Volvo boats have said....

David you should know, what do they do with BIG rod rigging ? -320 above ?? Die test and test pull ? I haven’t see a rigging shop with test gear that big to pull test a -320 rod ?

As for the repair, from what I was told they scarf in and glue the damage “fibres”, so a little more tech than pumping in more glue…but I guess that would work too ? Ask them…..

Henning – maybe you should email the guys at Composite rigging, get the tech blurb they sent me, it may give you a better insight into the system and testing they have done….and it will answer your questions.

Wirng rigging has had it's day as i think rod and maybe even PBO they way its going....

As for impact – I have seen a video showing impact tests and two J Boats just ran into each other with minimal damage ?

Your wrong about “EC6 is carbon in an un-laminated form? ” this is shown on the website, you should check again, maybe it’s been updated since you looked ?

 From what I've read, seen & been told - the stays are a collection of pultruded rods that are loose between the end terminals (apart from the cover) they can absorb the impact energy by dispersing – well that the theory I guess, everything will get damage by impact of some sort, rods on boat need replacing if they get banged around to much… I think a solid laminate which you are referring is a different story.

Nicholas – read my post above about the box size, I’d like to see you get a -320 PBO stay in carry on luggage of a jiffy bag….the coil diagram required by Futures is a bit bigger than your carry on….

I have info from the maker, and have seen the stuff in action, a bunch of Volvo boats just finished the Volvo with it, so it must be reasonably strong & resilient ?

Why don’t you all contact the makers and ask the questions, instead of speculating here ? there’s some big boats coming out soon with this stuff….
Gareth Griffiths
Posted: Thursday, July 30, 2009 9:23 AM
Joined: 01/06/2009
Posts: 7


Good post mate.
Henning
Posted: Friday, July 31, 2009 4:13 PM
Joined: 01/06/2008
Posts: 1052


You wouldn't have to pull to destruction, you can pull to 5/4th design load or some similar percentage over. That's the common way to test most things, just take them some over their design max working load and if they hold, call them good. Should be just fine with CF since it's not supposed to suffer from fatigue, ie, if it didn't break, you didn't damage it with the test.
rrsails
Posted: Friday, July 31, 2009 6:06 PM
Joined: 29/07/2009
Posts: 8


if ec6, future fibres etc are so great how come people still build rigs with rod? surely the cost difference is not that much when you consider how superior the product is? lighter stronger resists this and that blah blah blurb. or is it a compromise like all other parts of a yacht?

Gareth Griffiths
Posted: Sunday, August 2, 2009 12:07 AM
Joined: 01/06/2009
Posts: 7


Most large modern yachts do have composite rigging.
Henning
Posted: Monday, August 3, 2009 9:41 AM
Joined: 01/06/2008
Posts: 1052


Why is a good question... Why do most mistakes get made? At this point from my personal experiences, I'd use one of the light weight low stretch aramid fiber soft lines. I wouldn't personally use the CF on anything but an all out bouy racer. Whether I would go with continuous or segmented, I'd still have to do some weighing on that, but my initial feeling is to go segmented, but my mind could be changed. I haven't played with sailboats hard in 2 decades, and don't really have any desire to. I put in my time and miles and earned my gold hoop earing on an old wood schooner. My sailcloth pants are retired.
 
 Average 4 out of 5