Chesapeake Anchor Holding Power Test

The friendliest place on the web for anyone who enjoys boating.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
jclays said:
Is it possible to dig up a genuine Bruce for the tests?
Click to expand...

I will look more carefully into it. We might have one or two at Fortress, but I am not sure about the weight(s). The Rachel Carson has (2) Bruce anchors aboard, but I think they are in the 60 lb. range and are larger than the 44-46 test anchors.

Again, we wanted to test anchors that are readily available in the USA, and that is what led us to the Lewmar Claw in place of the Bruce.

Thanks,
Brian
 
Daddyo said:
We have a 75lb Danforth. I just had Mr Pettigrow do some welding on her to restore her and then had a triple dip galvanizing done. I think she earned it!:thumb:
Click to expand...
Thanks for the anchor information Daddyo , 75 lb. danforth is good. Should work for me.
 
FF said:
>Could this mean no more anchor threads? Could the Great Debate be settled?<

YES!
For a boater that anchors in that same exact spot , and duplicates the anchor rode used.

NO for the rest of the world .

Different bottoms , different anchor rodes , different answers....
Click to expand...
Wind speed and direction, tide, current, all vary as time passes. Are all anchors under test put out and tested simultaneously to ensure Rocnas are being compared with XYZs under identical conditions, or are tests done serially, in which case conditions of test are likely to vary.
How is it done, is there an accepted method?
 
Capt.Bill11 said:
Independent Anchor Performance Testing
Click to expand...

ANCHOR TESTING ... Yes Yes Yes ... BUT this is done for a magazine is it not?, which in my mind is void. If its done for a magazine that has vested interests in the outcome then Its not "really" independent is it. the vested interest itself is a variable. I wont go into the obvious bias this testing would have on the company funding it etc but IMO its not independant

Testing has and always will be a controversial topic. The amount of variables to try and take in then duplicate to be fair to various anchor designs is never going to be possible when towing and setting anchors with a large boat.

On the following link you will find the SARCA T.A.T.S. R.I.G Tidal Anchor Test Rig. That rig is a worlds first and was invented –designed by Anchor Right Australia.

Ahhhh I hear you say. The designer made the rig that tests their own anchors so there in itself lays a variable and vested interest, but alas, you would be mistaken :facepalm:

The rig itself was independently deployed and tested by Robertson’s Lifting and rigging in an actual field test for Super High Holding Power certification. After 150 pulls over 8 months, T.A.T.S. was accepted by the N.M.S.C National Marine Safety Committee as a new and more accurate method for field testing,

The point I am trying to make is it is very hard to cheat when deploying the T.A.T.S. Rig, all and everybody can stroll along in the water, then whatever bottom type they are testing in all can watch , take notice of an anchors design and its reaction in various substrates with no variables, same weight length of cable, every anchor being pulled from the same height, no variations from throttle speed as when using a large boat, and no wave height to contend with.


http://www.anchorright.com.au/products/t-a-t-s this explains it a little better

anyway that's my 2c worth :thumb:

cheers
Hendo
 
The results of this test are already known..

The aluminum knock off of the Danforth will have the highest holding PER POUND , and claim victory on that basis.
 
FF said:
The results of this test are already known..

The aluminum knock off of the Danforth will have the highest holding PER POUND , and claim victory on that basis.
Click to expand...

While I expect that holding ratios (holding power divided by anchor weight) will be discussed, the ultimate holding power that each anchor is able to achieve will certainly be the main topic.

Thanks,
Brian
 
FF said:
The results of this test are already known..

The aluminum knock off of the Danforth will have the highest holding PER POUND , and claim victory on that basis.
Click to expand...


I've been looking on sportsbet.com.au but can't see what the odds are for the knock off mate :p ... Are you getting inside info? Lol :-D (tongue in cheek mate)


Sent from my iPad using Trawler Forum
 
Hendo78 said:
The amount of variables to try and take in then duplicate to be fair to various anchor designs is never going to be possible when towing and setting anchors with a large boat.
Click to expand...

Hendo78, this is exactly why we are not using this 81 foot research vessel for the pulling, we are using the aft winch as previously mentioned on post 38.

Brian
 
FF I hate the expression "knockoff".

Many products like non-Bruce anchors are in appearance just a duplication of the original but in fact may be significantly different. Most all anchors are to a great extent a modification of another design. The non-Bruce Claws you always call knockoffs are all different in that they are not forged. It's easy to call this a bad thing but I can make a good case that the less expensive construction method is better. How many Bruce knockoffs do you suppose there are? None of them are forged anchors and they sell very well. I've never heard of one breaking .. Bending yes but not total failure. The cheaper anchors are not as strong as the Bruce but if they wer'nt strong enough the word would get out (like w Rocna) and the market may swing back to forged anchors. So the knockoff Claws are better ...... strong enough but much cheaper. An improved product is not a knockoff. A knockoff is a cheap imitation of the original or even a plain duplication.

The Fortress is in no way a knockoff. It is a more expensive and extremely well engineered hinged shank anchor. There are lots of hinged shank anchors. The Dreadnought and Navy hinged shank anchors came long before the Danforth in 1938. The Danforth was (and is) an improved hinged shank anchor as is the Fortress.

You can call a Claw a knockoff or/and a girl a slut. The Claw may look like a cheap imitation but may not be and the girl may look like but not be a slut either. I once heard at work a phone conversation by an attractive redhead that was loaded w foul language and when the conversation was over she said "by mom".
 
Fortress Anchors said:
Chuck Hawley, who is a long-time sailor with an impressive resume will be aboard...

We will also have aboard a solid group from the boating media as well, with writers from several of the USA's largest magazines...
Click to expand...

Brian, is anyone involved with this who is expert in experimental design? Will there be tests of statistical significance of the results? Will the experiments be blinded, so the operators of the equipment and recorders of the data don't know which anchor is being used on a given run? In other words, are you going to try for any kind of actual scientific validity, or is this basically another industry media stunt?
 
QB said:
In other words, are you going to try for any kind of actual scientific validity, or is this basically another industry media stunt?
Click to expand...

Stupid question. Do you really think he would answer that it was just another industry media stunt, even if it was? Which, by the way, I don't think it will be.
 
QB said:
Brian, is anyone involved with this who is expert in experimental design? Will there be tests of statistical significance of the results? Will the experiments be blinded, so the operators of the equipment and recorders of the data don't know which anchor is being used on a given run? In other words, are you going to try for any kind of actual scientific validity, or is this basically another industry media stunt?
Click to expand...
The sample size is too small for statistical relevance and doesn't apply to direct measurement tests like this. If the person doing the anchoring could, by willing it, create a different result that would be a real breakthrough in anchoring technology. Since that is impossible, blinding would also be pointless.

Scientific validity as you are suggesting is completely irrelevant to a comparison test of anchors, and your accusation that Fortress would engage in deception is baseless.
 
So far the only name I've heard so far that I trust IS Chuck Hawley.

He has got quite the impressive resume' and though I haven't seen him in years I would still be proud to call him a "friend". It was he that among other good things, got me many connections in the boating business and was the one that convinced me to get out and do things in my expertise rather than take a sales job in a West Marine store after retiring.

He has been responsible for finding "better" brands and products for West Marine through the years and while I know he is under the gun in a "performance" like this....I'm sure his integrity wins every time....he may have to couch his words and writings...but listen very carefully to what he has to say. Don't read in to it and don't ignore any subtleties there....what he says will have a lot of impact on me as it has in the past....I doubt he'll let me down.

The rest of the gang I can't speak for or about...don't know'em.
 
QB said:
Brian, is anyone involved with this who is expert in experimental design? Will there be tests of statistical significance of the results? Will the experiments be blinded, so the operators of the equipment and recorders of the data don't know which anchor is being used on a given run? In other words, are you going to try for any kind of actual scientific validity, or is this basically another industry media stunt?
Click to expand...

QB, those are terrific questions and I greatly appreciate your healthy dose of skepticism. We had hoped to have Bob Taylor, a retired 40+ year US Navy anchor design and soil mechanics expert aboard, as he was for the SF Bay tests that we conducted in 1990, but due to a family health situation he will not be able to attend.

Fortunately though, he is serving as a consultant for us on this project and he has guided us on the proper equipment that we will need for the measuring and recording of the data, the soil shear strength (9-12 psf/ft of depth) of the mud bottom in which to test, and the pull speed for the anchors in this bottom type.

We don't see the need to have equipment operators "blinded" so to speak, as all of the testing will be performed and recorded in full view of the boating media who, for their own reputations, would certainly not want to be part of a "media stunt."

I expect that your next question might concern our past and recent advertising expenditures with the media who will be present, so please find below a listing:

All at Sea: Not in 2014 / (4) ads in 2013
Boat US: No, not in several years
Boating: Not in 2014 / (3) ads in 2013
Chesapeake Bay: No, never
Boating World/Sea: (2) ads in 2014 / (4) ads in 2013
Boats.com: No, never
PassageMaker: Not in 2014 / (3) ads in 2013
Sail: (1) small listing ad in 2014 Buyers Guide
Soundings: Not in 2014 / (1) ad in 2013
Southern Boating: Not in 2014 / (1) ad in 2013

Additionally, we have not made future advertising commitments in any of these magazines or media for the balance of 2014.

Thanks,
Brian
 
I am looking forward to the test as it may affect my future purchases. As a multi boat owner (6 under 20 feet and one over 20 feet) all with anchors of various sizes and types. I have three anchors on my 490 pilothouse an Ultra (chosen because it sets every time and holds great) on all chain as a main anchor and two Fortress Anchors, one Fortress as a backup for the main and another Fortress for the stern (both Fortress Anchors chosen for holding power vs weight as I will be handling them by hand)
 
Nice step-up there with the past ad info, Brian. I dunno, without an independent authority with enough independent money to fund an independently objective blind study, done live on Heraldo using unowned, abandoned, but perfectly suited test equipment supervised by expert, unpaid monks whose only knowledge and exposure to the world is in holistic anchoring, the majority of information will need to come from people who dare to bank the performance of their product against another within an environment that is as controlled, manageable, and recognizable as possible to a panel of independent observers.
 
healhustler said:
Nice step-up there with the past ad info, Brian. I dunno, without an independent authority with enough independent money to fund an independently objective blind study, done live on Heraldo using unowned, abandoned, but perfectly suited test equipment supervised by expert, unpaid monks whose only knowledge and exposure to the world is in holistic anchoring, the majority of information will need to come from people who dare to bank the performance of their product against another within an environment that is as controlled, manageable, and recognizable as possible to a panel of independent observers.
Click to expand...

As you imply, the reality is there is no perfect test. One takes all the tests available and combines that information with other knowledge they gather from experience of others and themselves and then chooses. And then argues with others and themselves. Just can't test every anchor on every boat in every circumstance.
 
Fortress Anchors said:
Hendo78, this is exactly why we are not using this 81 foot research vessel for the pulling, we are using the aft winch as previously mentioned on post 38.



Brian
Click to expand...


Seriously? So you design and make anchors yet that was your response to my initial post???? Reread my original post again Brian.

The winch on the rear of the large boat dragging the anchors to read holding power figures is incorrect to scope, you may start off with the correct scope but as winching starts the scope continues to become shorter/steeper as the anchor is winched toward the boat, where as the SARCA made T.A.T.S. Rig maintains the set scope for every anchor as the Rig is winched along a set length of chain is shackled from the TATS Rig and then to the anchor, as the Rig is winched toward the boat the chain anchor scope does not become steeper, exactly the same as if the anchor was holding the boat, only the cable from the TATS Rig to winch becomes steeper.

if you start winching at five to one rope scope, the rope scope continues to decrees as the anchor is dragged, gets steeper, it could end up by not setting the anchor at all because the scope became too steep before it could take hold.

The T.A.T.S. Rig over comes this problem by keeping all anchor scopes at the set desired length to test all anchors, this means you can test holding power at a three to one scope, if you want to test at five to one to record the difference this longer scope makes in holding power, you simply fit a longer chain between the rig and the anchor being tested.

Anything else is just a political exercise.


Sent from my iPhone 5S using Trawler Forum
 
Hendo 78,

I understand your point about the decreasing scope, but again, if you read my message, then you will note that the initial pulling will begin at about a 8:3 to 1 scope and end at 5:1, and certainly every anchor should be able to perform during that time.

Scopes can change and be shortened with rising tides, so this is not an unrealistic pulling environment.

Brian
 
Brian,

I hope you do understand that there is no way you can satisfy this crowd. Even if you did 100,000 tests with every imaginable variable thought of, many would still not be satisfied and attempt to pick the methods and results apart.

If I were you, I would forget trying to defend, justify or explain every detail to this crowd. Just show them the report when completed and let them have at it with each other. It will be both entertaining and ridiculous, as most anchor threads are. They'll probably also make some newbies heads explode.

You're doing the boating community a service here. It may not be perfect, but it seems as though we'll get valuable information from it, and, I for one, am appreciative.
 
Nsail said:
Brian,

I hope you do understand that there is no way you can satisfy this crowd. Even if you did 100,000 tests with every imaginable variable thought of, many would still not be satisfied and attempt to pick the methods and results apart.

If I were you, I would forget trying to defend, justify or explain every detail to this crowd. Just show them the report when completed and let them have at it with each other. It will be both entertaining and ridiculous, as most anchor threads are. They'll probably also make some newbies heads explode.

You're doing the boating community a service here. It may not be perfect, but it seems as though we'll get valuable information from it, and, I for one, am appreciative.
Click to expand...

Agree 100%...the more justifications are made...the less respect I have...

2 assumptions that stand out...that we are that stupid not to pick out what's reality about anchors in general and the reality of the test's limitations in general.

Just get on with the tests the best that can be done for the moment, be honest and let the cards fall where the test has laid them...
 
Last edited:
That's what he's doing Scott.

Just stepping up to the bar and revealing the details we are interested in.
 
Nsail said:
Brian,

I hope you do understand that there is no way you can satisfy this crowd. Even if you did 100,000 tests with every imaginable variable thought of, many would still not be satisfied and attempt to pick the methods and results apart.

If I were you, I would forget trying to defend, justify or explain every detail to this crowd. Just show them the report when completed and let them have at it with each other. It will be both entertaining and ridiculous, as most anchor threads are. They'll probably also make some newbies heads explode.

You're doing the boating community a service here. It may not be perfect, but it seems as though we'll get valuable information from it, and, I for one, am appreciative.
Click to expand...
:thumb::thumb:
 
Nsail said:
Brian,

I hope you do understand that there is no way you can satisfy this crowd. Even if you did 100,000 tests with every imaginable variable thought of, many would still not be satisfied and attempt to pick the methods and results apart.

If I were you, I would forget trying to defend, justify or explain every detail to this crowd. Just show them the report when completed and let them have at it with each other. It will be both entertaining and ridiculous, as most anchor threads are. They'll probably also make some newbies heads explode.

You're doing the boating community a service here. It may not be perfect, but it seems as though we'll get valuable information from it, and, I for one, am appreciative.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the advice Nsail, I will follow up next week with the results.

All the best,
Brian
 
>FF I hate the expression "knockoff". <

I thought knock off would be more PC than copy.
 
FF said:
>FF I hate the expression "knockoff". <

I thought knock off would be more PC than copy.
Click to expand...

In one way they're all knock offs. It's just a very simple concept. You take metal of some type and shape it in some way to try to anchor. But it's the subtleties, the fine details, that end up distinguishing them. Change the shape slightly. Change the way it connects to chain. Change the material ever so slightly. Even different grades of the same metal. I spent my career in soft goods and there's nothing new there as the products have looked similar for centuries. Yet there is new as materials and treatments of materials and methods of manufacturing change ever so slightly. So what looks the same often isn't quite. Sometimes then the apparent "knock offs" may not work as well and other times they may actually be an improvement.

This isn't at all to minimize praise for the creativity of anchor makers. In fact it is the opposite. They take a concept that has existed for centuries and make minor alterations to it, work in very careful detail, to improve it. But in some ways they all have aspects of being knock offs, but don't underestimate the fact that what looks or seems much the same may perform quite differently.
 
FF,
No "copy" is better. One can make a very good quality copy taking time to do a good job. A "knockoff" is a cheap quick and dirty imitation meant to fool people into thinking it's a good copy of the original.

Here's a "copy" of the only anchor test I know of that was done on a mud bottom. My first XYZ was the one in this test. It was an amazing anchor but I usually could not get it to set in anything but mud. It's in the landfill at Thorne Bay now.
 

Attachments

  • PracticalSailor-April06 copy 2.pdf
    698.2 KB · Views: 69
Capt.Bill11,
Thanks for the input Bill but I'm not impressed. How could anybody have trouble getting an anchor to set in mud. Unbelievable. They must have thrown the whole rode over the stern in a heap (they basically said as much) and then dragged the tangled up mess. The Claw is known to be one of the best and fastest setting anchors known.

But I'm not surprised the Super Max did well. With it's huge and wide fluke (and if it's used) the adjustable shank mud should be IMO an easy task. Can't imagine it setting on a relatively hard bottom. Like FF says ... Several anchors for different bottoms.

Again thanks. I'll read it more as I'm into anchors.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Nocanvas
12,500 miles still going
Replies
10
Views
2K
Nocanvas
Nocanvas
ranger58sb
Another Vulcan thread
2
Replies
33
Views
5K
Peter B
P
mvweebles
Travels with Weebles
2
Replies
34
Views
2K
koliver
koliver
slowgoesit
PNW to Mexico, Panama Canal, and Florida, on our way at last!
8 9 10
Replies
284
Views
30K
slowgoesit
slowgoesit
J
Newbie Entering Chesapeake Bay
Replies
29
Views
5K
Captain Pontoon
Captain Pontoon

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom