Do you want to be informed on new Posts on this Thread? (members only)
| S&S Swan Maintenance - Standing rigging replacement: |
|---|
|
Join Date: 02 February 2007
Posts: 202 |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Standing rigging replacement: Dear all, here is a question which I know could bring a lot of discussions, but I believe that sharing experience and ideas on it could be very helpful. "How often should one renew the standing rigging on our dear old (and heavy) Swans?" As far as I am concerned, most of the rigging of our Swan 41/022 is now 15 years old or slightly less, with standard 1x19 wire, and I see no sign of broken strand, or sign of cracks on the terminals weather they are of the swage or norseman type, but... In more detail: - should norseman terminals last longer than swage terminals? - should forestay and backstay be changed more often than the shrouds (tall rig with one pair of spreaders = high loads)? - does an increased diameter allows for a longer lifespan (we have 10mm shrouds while Nautor recommends 9mm, and feel happy with it since the elongation under load is probably less) - how about the bottlescrew? We still have the originals, and have detected no cracks after die testing them, following Lars' recommendation?? As far as I know, there are no recomendations from Pantaenius. Many thanks for your input, and king regards. PhilippeV 41/022 |
|
Join Date: 01 February 2007
Posts: 234 |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Dear all, here is a question which I know could bring a lot of discussions, but I believe that sharing experience and ideas on it could be very helpful. "How often should one renew the standing rigging on our dear old (and heavy) Swans?" As far as I am concerned, most of the rigging of our Swan 41/022 is now 15 years old or slightly less, with standard 1x19 wire, and I see no sign of broken strand, or sign of cracks on the terminals weather they are of the swage or norseman type, but... In more detail: - should norseman terminals last longer than swage terminals? - should forestay and backstay be changed more often than the shrouds (tall rig with one pair of spreaders = high loads)? - does an increased diameter allows for a longer lifespan (we have 10mm shrouds while Nautor recommends 9mm, and feel happy with it since the elongation under load is probably less) - how about the bottlescrew? We still have the originals, and have detected no cracks after die testing them, following Lars' recommendation?? As far as I know, there are no recomendations from Pantaenius. Many thanks for your input, and king regards. PhilippeV 41/022 Phillipev I have just replaced my forestay, backstay and lowers after 13 years. No sign of wear with either the wire or swaged terminal. I am replacing with a smaller sized dye form wire to reduce weight aloft and have used staylock terminals as they are reported to be 3 times stronger than swage terminals, plus you can make your own repairs if your cruising. New bottle screws as well. The reason for the work is that I do not want to risk any problems with the insurance company if the rig should come down. The cost of a new rig would be huge as a percentage of the value of the yacht. John |
|
Join Date: 02 January 2008
Posts: 1547 |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Philippe If a detailed inspection of the mast and standing rigging did not reveal any problems the rig is technically in order. It must be considered, however, that insurance companies usually apply some chosen age limit, and refuse to insure rigs older than this age. As far as I know insurance companies do not inspect rigs, and the age limit is probably based on general experience for all kinds of yachts. I would suggest that Nautor built rigs have a longer life expectancy than most, and could well be treated differently when it comes to the age limit. I am not, however, aware of such individual deviations in insurance policies. Regular inspections recommended anyway, particularly if the yacht clocks up many miles. To your questions: Norseman terminals were used originally, and they last longer than swaged terminals. The added benefit with swageless terminals is, as John points out, that they can be assembled by the crew with ordinary tools. Can be re-used provided the internal cone is replaced. It appears there are no clear indications for stays versus shrouds. The loads in the stays may be higher, but they are more even than for the shrouds, which alternatingly see high and low load, this is more demanding, and tends to even out the differences. If the shrouds slack off much and flop around on the leeward side, this with the time will produce considerable fatigue effects. Increased diameter gives a longer life span and less elongation under load - the rig stays straighter. If the rigging screws were inspected and found good they should serve well provided the next inspection is done within a reasonable time. A comment about Dyform - the strands have rather sharp corners and this is likely to cause added chafe on the sails. Kind regards Lars |
|
Join Date: 02 January 2008
Posts: 1547 |
||
|---|---|---|
|
PS Another comment about Dyform This wire type is not recommended together with hydraulic tensioners. The reason is that the inner and outer strands have the same handing, and they will open under load as the tensioner allows rotation of the terminal. Lars |
|
Join Date: 30 January 2007
Posts: 461 |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Hi Lars, |
|
Join Date: 02 January 2008
Posts: 1547 |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Daniel Looking at the cross section the reason is likely to be the compacting of it. If the strands run in opposite directions this would increase the outside diameter, and probably increase the stretch under load, as the strands would then tend to straighten between the contact points. It can be noted that the manufacturer mentions the term "Torque balanced" for a number of their other products, but not for Dyform Best regards Lars  |
|
Join Date: 02 January 2008
Posts: 1547 |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Daniel More information about this subject can be found on Navtec's website under: Technical Notice - Dyform™ Wire with Hydraulic Cylinders Lars |
|
Join Date: 30 January 2007
Posts: 461 |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Thank you Lars, it was very interesting indeed. Everybody considering Dyform should read it. |
|
Join Date: 02 January 2008
Posts: 1547 |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Daniel Navtec has done much testing on rig fatigue, and based on the experiences many of their fittings are shaped for long life. Their main product is rod rigging, which can be used also within culture and art - the Louvre museum glass pyramide is held up by an intricate system of Navtec rods, 3600 of them. Loads are likely to be static though... Lars |
|
Join Date: 02 February 2007
Posts: 126 |
||
|---|---|---|
|
I don't know what they do now, but when I bought my 47 Black Tie and wanted to sail her from Newport, Rhode Island back to the UK, Pantaenius asked for the replacement of all standing rigging that was more than 10 years old. I did have it checked by a surveyor but the rule had to be followed and we bought the same again. |
|
Join Date: 03 March 2007
Posts: 241 |
||
|---|---|---|
|
Hi Gavin et al, |
- Threads : 1705
- Posts : 10224
- Members: 821
- Online Members: 0
