• Untitled Document

    Join us on March 29rd, 7pm EST

    for the CBEC Virtual Meeting

    All EYO members and followers are welcome to join the fun and get to know the guest speaker!

    See the link below for login credentials and join us!

    March Meeting Info

    (dismiss this notice by hitting 'X', upper right)

Replaced your SS Standing Rigging? What did you do?

Prairie Schooner

Jeff & Donna, E35-3 purchased 7/21
We’ve just had the standing rigging replaced on our E35-3 and run into a difference of opinion between the rigger who made it and the boatyard who installed it when they stepped the mast. There is no definitive answer here, but it adds data to the conversation.

Original Rig
standing rig original.jpg

New Rig, installed by boatyard
(note: we’ve since had the jib sheets and lifelines replaced)
standing rig new v1.jpg
The boatyard told us the toggles were too small to fit around the u-bolts and would not bend them to make them fit. They said it was a metal fatigue problem and wouldn’t sign off on it. They agreed to put the rig in by using clevis pins as shown above. This wasn’t the original configuration, and it looks like the pins could slide back and forth, creating wear. However, we needed the mast in and to get on our way. By the way, they charged us extra because they had to modify what the rigger gave them.

New Rig, re-installed by rigger
standing rig new v2.jpg
The rigger said that was wrong and reversed the toggles. They also charged us extra to modify what the boatyard had done. And kept $100 worth of new pins. The scoring in the toggle shows that they had to mangle the toggles to make them fit.

I think it’s clear that extra work hardening (metal fatigue) has been introduced. The question that still stands is whether it’s enough to endanger the rig.

There were other disconnects between the rigger and boatyard which resulted in extra charges from both parties to ‘do things right’ i.e. different from the other guy. The boatyard is a large RI institution which handles offshore racing boats and luxury yachts. The rigger is an established RI company with a long history and good reputation. We’re still deciding whether to contest the bills for an adjustment.
 

bigd14

Contributing Partner
Blogs Author
Wow, what an ordeal! I’m sorry you have to deal with this nonsense.

FWIW the original toggles on my boat showed evidence of being “mangled” into place and they held up fine for 34 years.

When I went through this process I measured the u-bolt diameters (new from Garhauer) and sent those measurements to the rigger. The toggles came back pre-sized to fit the u-bolts. I went with riggingonly (http://riggingonly.com/). You might send them the measurements and have them make you up some new toggles if the mangled ones are suspect.

Good luck getting it all sorted.

944E2AF5-C985-494C-8753-62ACB756D766.jpeg
 

Christian Williams

E381 - Los Angeles
Senior Moderator
Blogs Author
Isn't most of our stainless bent cold? Chainplates, all or some of them?

Does it really work-harden a part to form it that way?
 

Prairie Schooner

Jeff & Donna, E35-3 purchased 7/21
Isn't most of our stainless bent cold? Chainplates, all or some of them?

Does it really work-harden a part to form it that way?
Short answer, yes.
Background: I was trained as a silversmith, designed stainless flatware for years (among other stuff), and teach fabrication and manufacturing processes to industrial design students. BUT, I'm not a metallurgist. I know enough to ask the question, but not enough to have an answer.
 

Kenneth K

1985 32-3, Puget Sound
Blogs Author
I think it’s clear that extra work hardening (metal fatigue) has been introduced. The question that still stands is whether it’s enough to endanger the rig.
Yeah, this stuff is really frustrating....one step forward, one step back. I had the same issues.

Has work hardening been introduced? Probably, yes. Will the re-worked toggles fail earlier than an un-modified (new) toggle? Probably, yes. It's also likely that they will rust and become "worn" looking sooner, too, all of which might make you unhappy about your new project.

But, many of the original toggles have been in service for 30-50 years. So maybe you only get 20-25 years out of these. Not really a pressing problem. The important thing is you replaced the "weak link" in the rigging--the lower swage fitting that is most prone to failure. So, are the modified toggles now the weak link? Probably not, as even new swage fittings are thought to have a 10-20 year usable life. And, what about the chainplate U-bolts? Seems I've read at least 4 posts here of owners who've found cracked ones (I've never read of anyone finding a cracked toggle).

If you are like me, the U-bolts are on the "next big rigging project" list (maybe 2 per year over the next 4 years???). If so, I'd be content with your existing toggles, and maybe get new toggles custom made along with new chainplates, when you get to it down the road someday.

Isn't most of our stainless bent cold? Chainplates, all or some of them?

Does it really work-harden a part to form it that way?

I think the issue is not with the initial bending, say, in an angled chainplate or a u-shaped toggle, but with the re-bending.

After the initial bend, that part of the metal becomes harder (stronger) and more brittle. Upon a second bending, the more brittle metal is now more prone to cracking (and, it would take more force to put the second bend in the now-hardened metal). After a large initial bend (like a U-shape) the metal could likely never be fully straightened again by cold bending--it would crack first. So only the first bend is free.
 
Last edited:

Loren Beach

O34 - Portland, OR
Senior Moderator
Blogs Author
I do have a very small and tiny data point. 40 years ago when I was crewing a Ranger 29 that lost the whole rig off the coast, the direct cause was the break in one of the lower shrouds, just out of sight down inside a swage. Interesting thing was that the other lower shroud, taking the whole load in a millisecond, tore its U-shape toggle apart instantly. Then in one more micro second the mast, breaking at the spreader attachment, folded and went over the lee side. The sound of the initial wire breaking was a loud 'bang' and the parting of the other lower attachment was lost in the initial noise.
One bit of trivia is that those U shaped toggles seem like the "weakest" point in that particular rigging gang. That all said, if replacing 40+ year old rigging I would be most inclined to start over with all new parts.
Opinions rendered on the hour: deposit one cent please.
:)
 
Last edited:

Tin Kicker

Sustaining Member
Moderator
New Rig, installed by boatyard
View attachment 44104
Whoever did the install at the boatyard (version v) did not understand what they were doing and had NO idea about load transfer or rigging. To put the pins on the flat portion of the chain plates put the whole load in the center of the flat which would have either caused the rigging to slide back and forth, inducing fatigue, AND/OR stretched the center of the flat upward, loosening the entire rig more and more over time as the flat area bent upward in the middle. On top of that, they used extra long pins at the turnbuckle ends and then tried using washers to accommodate the excess lengths. The bottom pins are loose and would wear on the cotter/split pin. Having doubled the number of pins meant double the cotter pins to catch bare skin. As the wise man said:
"WTF?"
New Rig, re-installed by rigger
View attachment 44105
The rigger said that was wrong and reversed the toggles. They also charged us extra to modify what the boatyard had done. And kept $100 worth of new pins. The scoring in the toggle shows that they had to mangle the toggles to make them fit.

I think it’s clear that extra work hardening (metal fatigue) has been introduced. The question that still stands is whether it’s enough to endanger the rig.

There were other disconnects between the rigger and boatyard which resulted in extra charges from both parties to ‘do things right’ i.e. different from the other guy. The boatyard is a large RI institution which handles offshore racing boats and luxury yachts. The rigger is an established RI company with a long history and good reputation. We’re still deciding whether to contest the bills for an adjustment.
The v2 version has been assembled the right way, which is the biggest thing. The shackles appear to have been pressed in a bench vise to leave those marks, presumably over a bolt or pin of the correct diameter.* The diameter was correct because they fully seat around the flat area of the chain plates and that is what is paramount for load transfer. The only thing I see out of place is that at least one cotter pin is somewhat head down and the tails should always be on down/aft, or inboard.**

As for your fatigue question and as Christian said, these are cold formed anyway. Plus the wear and fatigue (stretch) surface would be on the interior. If mine, I would put some corrosion inhibitor on them, plus look them over with a magnifying glass before launching each year, but not overly worry.

Notes:
* In 10-20 years when this needs to be done again you can ask the rigger to cover the teeth of the vice with some thin aluminum (even beer cans) to prevent the marks.

** The idea is that if a tail gets straightened and the round head is on top the pin won't fall our of the hole. A memory jogger is to remember "DAIsy" for Down / Aft / Inboard for the orientation of the tails.
 

Prairie Schooner

Jeff & Donna, E35-3 purchased 7/21
@Kenneth K
"Has work hardening been introduced? Probably, yes. Will the re-worked toggles fail earlier than an un-modified (new) toggle? Probably, yes. It's also likely that they will rust and become "worn" looking sooner, too, all of which might make you unhappy about your new project."
- Ken, you've pretty well summed up my thought process, and better than I would have done.

"So only the first bend is free."
- That is my understanding as well.

@Tin Kicker
"Whoever did the install at the boatyard (version v) did not understand what they were doing and had NO idea about load transfer or rigging. To put the pins on the flat portion of the chain plates put the whole load in the center of the flat which would have either caused the rigging to slide back and forth, inducing fatigue, AND/OR stretched the center of the flat upward, loosening the entire rig more and more over time as the flat area bent upward in the middle. On top of that, they used extra long pins at the turnbuckle ends and then tried using washers to accommodate the excess lengths. . . ."
- Bob, that was my intuition, but as I said, I know enough to ask good (hopefully) questions, but I'm not an engineer. What's puzzling is that this is a large boatyard that services famous racing boats, as well as stately little old ladies like ours.

"The shackles appear to have been pressed in a bench vise to leave those marks, presumably over a bolt or pin of the correct diameter."
- The rigger did all this work on a dock, at a different boatyard. I didn't stay to watch the work, but he also made new lifelines for us. He had a hydraulic swager* there, but I don't know how that could be used for this, let alone make those kinds of marks. He might have had a vise at the truck, or used the boatyard's shop. It looks ratty, but I don't worry about that being appreciable structural damage.

"As for your fatigue question and as Christian said, these are cold formed anyway. Plus the wear and fatigue (stretch) surface would be on the interior. If mine, I would put some corrosion inhibitor on them, plus look them over with a magnifying glass before launching each year, but not overly worry."
- The rebending is what concerns(ed) me most. Between you and Ken, my mind is more at ease.

Best sailing group ever! Thanks all for chipping in!!
Jeff

*I first wrote that he had a hydraulic swagger, which would be a different set of affairs.
 

Loren Beach

O34 - Portland, OR
Senior Moderator
Blogs Author
I sometimes refer an interesting rigging thread over to a professional rigger for comment.
He sent back some comments and permission to share them.

" Thanks for sending the thread, it's a common problem with that design. I understand the thought process the designers had when using U-bolts as chain plates, but it makes it hard for the owners and riggers to attach turnbuckles. Flat chainplates are best and make things much easier all around.

In the first photo of the original rigging the Navtec turnbuckles were made specifically for this application. Unfortunately Navtec went out of business and no one, to my knowledge, is making a direct substitute. You can get custom made toggles from Hayn and other manufacturers.

The second photo, the yard "corrected" installation is the worst way to install. A couple of comments were made about the pin sliding back and forth, not really an issue once everything is loaded up. The problem lies in point loading the clevis pin and the chain plate/U-bolt. The stainless will deform and create divots in both the pin and U-bolt, leading to stress fractures and increased corrosion. We really try to avoid round to round contact wherever possible, sometimes it's unavoidable and will need to be inspected frequently for wear. The toggles the yard used are reversible. In the "right side up" orientation, with the threaded eye inserted through the strap, the clevis pin requires a washer on the cotter pin side to keep the pin from pulling through. I think someone commented they thought the pins were too long, not the case.
The third photo, where the rigger "corrected" what the yard "corrected" is the proper orientation for that installation. It is unfortunate the toggles required rebending to fit around the U-bolts, it does induce some work hardening, but I doubt enough to shorten the working life of the toggle. Another option, unless you get custom toggles, is to splay the toggle to fit around the U-bolt. In my experience this will cause the holes to be out of alignment and you can't get the clevis pin through. I've seen this on boats and the installer's solution was to use a smaller diameter clevis pin to get it to pass through and put a cotter pin in, VERY BAD IDEA.

The best solution, with that particular style of chainplate IMHO, is to have custom toggles made to fit the chainplate. It will add time and expense, but that's the nature of the beast, and less expensive than replacing all of the chainplates. "
 

Kenneth K

1985 32-3, Puget Sound
Blogs Author
If having custom toggles made, be aware that the side-by-side u-bolts (for the uppers and intermediates) offer very little excess clearance for slipping on the second (outer) toggle, after the first (inner) toggle is installed.

If you upsize the custom toggles too much (in either length or thickness), the outer toggle may not be installable without raising the u-bolt or cutting into the deck.

20220503_143258.jpg
20220503_143302.jpg
 

bigd14

Contributing Partner
Blogs Author
I ran across a photo of the original 1984 toggles that I sent to Rigging Only with my instructions. They were definitely beaten into place.

1662587834699.png

Also, the sizing of the lowers was inconsistent between upper and lower pins and fittings.

1662587987554.png
 
Last edited:

Kenneth K

1985 32-3, Puget Sound
Blogs Author
I ran across a photo of the original 1984 toggles that I sent to Rigging Only with my instructions. They were definitely beaten into place.

Yeah, those are pretty beaten up. I'm talking to Garhauer now about making custom toggles for the other half of the rigging I haven't replaced yet.
 

Kenneth K

1985 32-3, Puget Sound
Blogs Author
I got my custom toggles back from Garhauer last week. I'm very happy with them. I'm going to use them for the other half of the standing rigging I haven't replaced yet.

Without custom toggles, riggers try to make do with Hayn 7/16" double-jaw toggles. West Marine sent me 4 of the Hayns (at $60 each) on my first-half rigging order. The 7/16 Hayn toggles won't fit the Ericson u-bolts and need to be re-bent.

The new Garhauer toggles should be a direct fit, and they look much better than the old ones I removed. And, at $200 for the lot of four, they are cheaper than the Hayns and look a little sturdier too.

20221005_195616.jpg
 
Top