Anchor setting Videos

[BruceK]

Pleasing on 2 counts, SV Panope. First as a S/S owner, objective tests like this are very reassuring. I never know just what is happening at the seabed, this shows me, it adds to confidence. The S/S sits perfectly on my bow, it has good balance, it self launches, and if looks mattered (they don`t) it doesn`t look nearly as "agricultural" as the aptly named "plough".
Second, the tests have affirmatively righted the disservices of past criticism of the anchor, and its manufacturer. It is a good product, tried and tested.

 

[Peter B]

Pleasing on 2 counts, SV Panope. First as a S/S owner, objective tests like this are very reassuring. I never know just what is happening at the seabed, this shows me, it adds to confidence. The S/S sits perfectly on my bow, it has good balance, it self launches, and if looks mattered (they don`t) it doesn`t look nearly as "agricultural" as the aptly named "plough".
Second, the tests have affirmatively righted the disservices of past criticism of the anchor, and its manufacturer. It is a good product, tried and tested.

Bruce, these videos might even get FF having a re-think...d'yuh think..? :lol:

 

[Panope]

Anchor testing suspended.

I brought Panope to my house for the winter. I will likely start into some fairly 'deep' projects that may or may not be completed by spring time.

I appreciate all the participation/interest in this thread.

Cheers,

Steve

 

[Moonstruck]

A well deserved rest. Great job. Thanks ever so much for sharing your test results.

 

[MurrayM]

Thanks for your efforts...you are a man of considerable determination!

 

[Peter B]

Yes, thanks Steve. Great project overall, doing those videos. Probably more impressive than all the 'official' tests combined. Good luck with your winter land-based projects now.
Cheers,

 

[Art]

Wow Steve - I appreciate all you have done. Have great winter! - Art

 

[BruceK]

Looking forward to more revealing anchor tests next summer. Thank you Steve for all you have done.

 

[Nomad Willy]

Steve,
I like your "dually dolly" for Panope. Interesting V strut on the bow and trailer tongue. I assume it's to keep her steady in pitch mode.

I'll be playing your vids over the winder and making some notes. Looking fwd to it.

I'd like to be privy to what's in your skunk works. You could be creating your own anchor. Bruce B once said to me "Eric stop modifying other peoples anchors and design your own". I wouldn't have time for my own boat if I did. Now that I've got two modified anchors that work very well and many other things to do ...... also I don't have welding equipment so I need to spend a few bucks at a local shop in Mt Vernon at times. Haha I do have several more mods in mind for both my modified anchors including taking the upper part of the shank off the Supreme .. above the slot. But there's little to be gained. I want to use the anchor more as is and don't want to ruin what I have.

However .. hmmm .. I'd like to peek into your shop this winter.

 

[Panope]

Y'all, are very welcome.

V-strut on the trailer is designed to transmit ALL vertical and lateral loads between the boat and hitch. Longitudinal loads (slamming on the brakes) are transmitted through the white pipe that runs along the keel. That pipe happens to be Panope's old foremast (she was a schooner prior to my modifications) and is nowhere near stiff enough to carry the vertical load of the boats bow.

In the picture above, the bow of the boat is sitting on a hollow steel box that the pipe passes through. If desired, the pipe can be unbolted from the main axle and drawn out forward, leaving the boat supported by just the rear cradle and the forward box support.

Winter projects are going to focus on some changes to Panope, so no anchor development.

Steve



Axle and wheels came from an old "lowboy" trailer. Generous amounts of steel added to keep from bending axle. Static load on this dolly is about 6 tons.

 

[sean9c]

Surprised that no one has asked what changes to your boat are you planning? So I will.

 

[Panope]

Sean, assuming I actually get energized for it, I'd like to tear-out the forward 1/3 of the interior and replace with a different layout that moves the head to the forepeak and has a double Pullman bunk just aft.

Also, I'd like to remove the 5,000 lbs of lead and cement ballast from the keel box. Inspect, repair (if necessary) and properly coat the keel. Then re-cast the lead pigs into shapes that perfectly fit the keel. This will allow the ballast to be placed lower and/or more centeraly located. Lead will be beded in epoxy. Might even weld a cover plate to permenantly seal off and create a nice clean sump in a location that has easy access.

The potential exists to convert an empty, unused portion of the keel box into a fuel tank of about 60 gallons. I don't need the extra capacity, but it would allow a partial fuel load to be stored lower. Full tanks would give just enough range to make Hawaii under power only.

I'd like to cut 4 feet off the mast to further lower the center of gravity. Working sail area will not be affected but I will loose the ability to set a gaff topsail (something I have never done).

We'll see how much of that actually gets done.

Steve

 

[Nomad Willy]

Steve,
How bout 60 more gallons of water? Showers?

Head all the way fwd was at one time standard for small cruisers. Could be exciting in headseas.
Side seats facing inbd that became bunks was popular too. I don't like L setees because they face in instead of out. Personally I like seats on a boat that affords a good view outside at the passing scenery. In port and socially the inbd facing seats do have merrit.

 

[sean9c]

Well, that sounds ambitious. Headroom always seems the limiter in moving the head forward. Looking at the pics of your boat it certainly looks deep enough.
Best of luck with your project

Sean, assuming I actually get energized for it, I'd like to tear-out the forward 1/3 of the interior and replace with a different layout that moves the head to the forepeak and has a double Pullman bunk just aft.

Also, I'd like to remove the 5,000 lbs of lead and cement ballast from the keel box. Inspect, repair (if necessary) and properly coat the keel. Then re-cast the lead pigs into shapes that perfectly fit the keel. This will allow the ballast to be placed lower and/or more centeraly located. Lead will be beded in epoxy. Might even weld a cover plate to permenantly seal off and create a nice clean sump in a location that has easy access.

The potential exists to convert an empty, unused portion of the keel box into a fuel tank of about 60 gallons. I don't need the extra capacity, but it would allow a partial fuel load to be stored lower. Full tanks would give just enough range to make Hawaii under power only.

I'd like to cut 4 feet off the mast to further lower the center of gravity. Working sail area will not be affected but I will loose the ability to set a gaff topsail (something I have never done).

We'll see how much of that actually gets done.

Steve

 

[Panope]

Eric, No shower on board except for a sun shower that does not get used much. If I ever plan an epic voyage of some sort, I might consider a water maker to supplement the 90 gallons the boat now carries.

Sean, your intuition about limited headroom forward, is correct. New head will be for "seated" use only. In fact, even seated headroom is only possible due to the fore-hatch/seat being very tall.

I might install some tiny port-lights in the side of the hatch so one can have a decent view when taking care of business.

Steve

 

[Nomad Willy]

slots

Steve I think the convex (rather than concave) shape of the fluke is providing the element of anchor design that allows the anchor to shed sticky bottom material like mud. The concave flukes just pack in the mud pressing it to the fluke. When it sticks to the fluke and becomes a fixed shape and looses it's fluid nature the likeyhood of it breaking out is high but even if it stays burried the shape of the anchor becomes more like big metal pear .. small end fwd. holding power can only go far south.
A big part of the Supermes problem w compaction is the small radius of the fluke. It's made that way as part of the self righting feature the roll bar delivers .. But it is greatly aided by the excessively curved concave fluke. The Rocna is not as deep (convex) so it's problem of compaction is a bit less. But the Super SARCA (SS) seems to have all bases covered. I've often said it's probably the best anchor in the world. But stowage, the agricultural look and having slightly less holding power than some other anchors put a big dent into it's sales numbers. However I think setting and dependability should rank higher than ultimate holding power

Must be a combination of the two features that amplifies compaction. The concave fluke is the dominant feature and clearly the best for holding power. The Supreme packs in mud with the best of them .. my opinion .. but most of the time it's not a problem.

Something interesting about the slots on the Anchor Right of Australia anchors is that long before ARA did that there were Navy anchors w one siglificant slot in the center of each of the two flukes. Could have been the first slotted anchor.

Re this last paragraph this is the Navy anchor that I refered to. In the past I'd thought the slots were for bolts to be used to secure the anchors to the decks of ships. When I was a waiter on the Alaska State ferries one of them (at least) had a very large Navy anchor on her fwd deck. Don't know how they moved the thing around but thought the slots could be for security. Of course I wasn't thinking about it then and made no observations about anchor security or slots.

But at times we talk about the Anchor Right fluke slots and hear they are to reduce suction and improve sluffing bottom material off the flukes while weighing anchor.

Well the slot is not a new element of anchor design as some Navy anchors have slots very similar to the Australian anchors.

Does anybody have any input re the question of whether or not the Navy anchors slots were put there for reasons similar to the slots on the SARCA's and the Excel?

 

[Panope]

Eric,

Rex just E-mailed me, asking if you could contact him directly about your question regarding the slots in the Navy anchor.

Here is his E-mail:

rex@anchorright.com.au

Steve

 

[Panope]

Here is a condensed version of Panope's rebuild.

40 years stuffed into 15 minutes:

 

[angus99]

Fantastic and heartwarming. This made my day. Thanks for posting.

 

[Art]

Wow - What a GREAT life / boat story! Super Congrats!!


Art

 

[BruceK]

Thank you Steve, an interesting history. I was moved to search the name Panope, finding a number of attractive origins and attributions. Enjoy your off season labor of love.

 

[Peter B]

Great story. I love the vessel. I guess at heart I'll always be a sailor. And man, are you a dab hand at metalwork. I hereby name you the TF metal whisperer...

 

[FlyWright]

That's another great video, Steve! So great that you are able to carry on the family tradition with the vessel your Dad (and you) built and that he's able to enjoy it with you still. Well done, sir!

 

[Panope]

Thanks Guys,

Bruce, the name "Panope" was a natural choice for my father as the study of the Geoduck clam species was his "life work".

PANOPEA GENEROSA (scientific name for "Geoduck")

Steve

 

[Panope]

Since starting my anchor testing one year ago, I have received numerous requests to test various anchors, with the DELTA anchor generating the most requests.

Cruisers Forum member Cotemar offered up this 20 Kg / 44 lb. example in new, unused condition. It arrived by package delivery today. Thank you Cotemar.

As Panope is high and dry for at least the winter and much of spring, we will have to wait for a proper test under my normal protocol. That said, I might do some preliminary testing with a smaller boat sometime soon.

Steve

 

[Nomad Willy]

The weather is so warm we should do something with it.

In the pic the fluke tip look shorter than it should be. Do you have a wide angle lens camera? Maybe I've seen too many Excel's w their very long flukes. Aspect ratio is a big part of the design (I think) and Rex (re the Excel) I think made the right move making it long and narrow. IMO this type of anchor needs to make up for not having the ideal fluke shape. Speaking of fluke shapes is this anchor considered a "plow"?

Even though I'm not a fan of this type I'm looking fwd to your vids as I have a mod in mind for the Delta. Part of it is getting rid of the ballast.
Ready for the winter follies.

As a preliminary you could measure the tip weight percentage. May be nice to have a list of many anchors re their tip weight percentage on the flat. Tip weight seems important but many do well w/o much tip weight... like the Dans.

 

[Moonstruck]

Steve, this test will be of interest to me. I have both the Sarca ExCel and Delta 44#. Can't wait. Thanks for sharing your work.

Also, because of your tests I'm using a shorter scope with my ExCel.

 

[Nomad Willy]

Don,
You'll scare him re the short scope.
And that frightens me because I'm very interested in short performance. If an anchor does not do well on short scope I'm not interested. My thinking could probably be shown to not be universally true. Anyway I want to see Steve continue to do the reducing scope test.

 

[Panope]

The weather is so warm we should do something with it.

In the pic the fluke tip look shorter than it should be. Do you have a wide angle lens camera?

A normal lens used for that shot.

Maybe I've seen too many Excel's w their very long flukes.

I will conduct a side by side, bench top comparison of the Delta and Excel.

Aspect ratio is a big part of the design (I think) and Rex (re the Excel) I think made the right move making it long and narrow. IMO this type of anchor needs to make up for not having the ideal fluke shape. Speaking of fluke shapes is this anchor considered a "plow"?


I do not use the word "plow" to describe any anchor.

Even though I'm not a fan of this type I'm looking fwd to your vids as I have a mod in mind for the Delta. Part of it is getting rid of the ballast.
Ready for the winter follies.

As a preliminary you could measure the tip weight percentage.

Yes. Tip weight will continue to be measured with each anchor that I test.

May be nice to have a list of many anchors re their tip weight percentage on the flat. Tip weight seems important but many do well w/o much tip weight... like the Dans.

Steve

 

[Panope]

Don,
You'll scare him re the short scope.

The only thing that I am afraid of is that you will make baseless assumptions about me and my work.


And that frightens me because I'm very interested in short performance. If an anchor does not do well on short scope I'm not interested. My thinking could probably be shown to not be universally true. Anyway I want to see Steve continue to do the reducing scope test.

Steve