[C38] Stanchions
Chuck Finn
charles at finn.ws
Sat Jan 29 21:27:58 EST 2011
Max,
Pictures would be good. Starboard side? One of the only ways aluminum
can get in trouble is electrolysis.....
Chuck Finn
Mighty Quinn #114
Great Lakes
On 1/29/2011 8:31 PM, Max Soto wrote:
> The weirdest thing is that the worm holes on the rails are not located
> near a single fastener. Thy are located on the sides of the rails...
> Most of them on a single side.....
> Max
>
> Sent from my iPod
>
> On Jan 29, 2011, at 6:09 PM, S Orton <ssorton at hotmail.com
> <mailto:ssorton at hotmail.com>> wrote:
>
>> I should of continued with the "worm hole" discussion, adding I don't
>> consider it a structural problem unless a hole develops at several
>> adjacent fasteners thereby destroying the clamping force between the
>> hull and deck. If it is a hole here and there, fill it with 5200 and
>> forget it.
>> Cheers, Steve O
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2011 13:26:43 -0500
>> From: steve.ribble at gmail.com <mailto:steve.ribble at gmail.com>
>> To: listserve at catalina38.org <mailto:listserve at catalina38.org>
>> Subject: Re: [C38] Stanchions
>>
>> Don't know who made the toerail, but the same cross section is used
>> by several different boat builders of the era so it must be an
>> established extruder...I had the same thing on a 1980 Mirage.
>>
>> On Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 1:11 PM, Chuck Finn <charles at finn.ws
>> <mailto:charles at finn.ws>> wrote:
>>
>> Steve,
>> I called Garhauer yesterday about stanchions and the toerail.
>> Mike told me they never made the toerail as that is not something
>> they are set up for. He was interested in my idea of a toerail
>> stanchion, but would make no comment until he had seen what our
>> toerail looks like. He offered to work with me on this after I
>> got him some specs/pictures of our rail. Does anyone have a
>> cross-sectional view and/or measurements?
>>
>> If I were to guess, I would say our toerails were made of T6
>> aluminum as it extrudes and anodizes well and is one of the
>> hardest and strongest types. I have cut this stuff on a lathe
>> and it does not remotely behave like ordinary aluminum! You need
>> ear protection. I agree with Steve O. that low bidder could be
>> our problem here, which of course would vary by batches and
>> years. All aluminum I am aware of can contain some small levels
>> of iron, but I recall Grumman successfully figured out how to
>> reduce this back when they were the aircraft frame folks. By the
>> way, don't try to weld on this stuff as it requires TIG and a lot
>> of practice! One more thing, aluminum can corrode when exposed.
>> The neat thing about this stuff is it almost immediately begins
>> to form an impermeable skin as part of the corrosion process that
>> essentially stops further corrosion and it is able to do this
>> across a wide PH range. Now you know pretty much all I know
>> about this stuff!
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Chuck Finn
>> Mighty Quinn #114
>> Great Lakes
>>
>> On 1/29/2011 12:19 PM, S Orton wrote:
>>
>> Phil, I don't think a backing plate is worth the effort- the
>> underside clearance/access is very tough. Use oversize
>> washers if possible. If the holes are rotted out, fill with
>> epoxie and redrill. My toe rail also has worm holes, near
>> the gates. I assumed the reason was low bidder on the
>> extrusions with much more impurities included. The aircraft
>> specs would preclude what we a seeing. Has anybody contacted
>> Garhauer about this problem? I can understand corrosion at
>> the SS fasteners, but these worm holes appear unrelated.
>> Cheers, Steve O
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2011 10:09:44 -0500
>> From: steve.ribble at gmail.com <mailto:steve.ribble at gmail.com>
>> To: listserve at catalina38.org <mailto:listserve at catalina38.org>
>> Subject: Re: [C38] Stanchions
>>
>> Great thought about the backing plate, Phil. I've always
>> considered stanchions and lifelines to be expendable in the
>> event of emergencies...that they were basically to break your
>> fall, not necessarily there to support the weight of the
>> world. That said, obviously I/we don't want to replace these
>> things every month or two so they need to be stout enough.
>> It seems like one of the first things to go, when looking at
>> the entire stanchion "system" is the through-bolt hole (as
>> Phil indicated) and that a backing plate would disperse the
>> loads/forces among the 4 bolts/holes rather than the two that
>> experience expansion when torque is applied the the
>> stanchion. Long story short, assuming we're all not going to
>> run out and replace our stanchions for another design, that
>> Garhauer already has the the backing plate (the base prior to
>> welding to the stanchion tube) so it should be an easy and
>> relatively inexpensive process to upgrade the holding power
>> of our existing equipment.
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 8:07 PM, Phil Gay
>> <eyriepg at comcast.net <mailto:eyriepg at comcast.net>> wrote:
>>
>> I thought I would explain what I think I know about
>> metals from my aircraft engineering background. I agree
>> that the toe rail on our C38s is an aluminum alloy. Pure
>> aluminum does create its own oxide coating which retards
>> corrosion. But, when it is alloyed to increase its
>> hardness and strength, it loses the ability to protect
>> itself unless it has a pure aluminum cladding on the
>> surface. Typically these alloys have an anodic coating
>> (the dark surface on our toe rails) or a chemical
>> conversion coating which created this protective oxide on
>> the exterior surface.
>>
>> Near the bow of my C38 the toe rail has started to pit.
>> I don’t think it has progressed much lately with all the
>> rain water that we get here in the NW. I doubt that it
>> has weakened the extrusion much at all. I agree with the
>> statements about the loads on the stanchions. Later
>> model Catalinas have the stanchions that fit into sockets
>> molded into the toe rail as well as being bolted through
>> base plates to the deck. BTW I am pretty sure that the
>> deck area where the toe rails are attached on our C38s is
>> solid un-cored fiberglass. A lot of the looseness of the
>> bases is caused by the rocking of the bolts, and
>> subsequent elongation of the holes, because they don’t
>> have backing plates to hold them vertical. I think that
>> there are ways to securely attach our stanchions to the
>> toe rail if they are also bolted inboard to the deck. I
>> have also thought about having the existing stanchions
>> modified so that they angle outboard to allow more room
>> to pass around the shrouds.
>>
>> Phil Gay
>> C38 049 Que Linda
>> Everett WA
>>
>>
>> *From:*listserve-bounces at catalina38.org
>> <mailto:listserve-bounces at catalina38.org>
>> [mailto:listserve-bounces at catalina38.org
>> <mailto:listserve-bounces at catalina38.org>] *On Behalf Of
>> *Anders Finn
>> *Sent:* Friday, January 28, 2011 4:25 PM
>>
>> *To:* listserve at catalina38.org
>> <mailto:listserve at catalina38.org>
>> *Subject:* Re: [C38] Stanchions
>>
>>
>>
>> Really? I thought that toe rail was aluminum. Should be
>> pretty resistant to salt corrosion. I think what my old
>> man is trying to say is that the toe rail is at least as
>> strong, if not stronger than the plywood under the deck
>> to which the stanchions are currently screwed into. It
>> would be interesting to know the dimensions of the toe
>> rail if anyone has them (I think my dad is going up to
>> measure in a few weeks) and I can figure out what kind of
>> moment could be applied safely to the toe rail if one
>> could find a way to apply the load evenly.
>>
>> Anders
>>
>> On 01/28/2011 04:06 PM, Don Strong wrote:
>> The toe rail really is not that tough. As well, in salty
>> boats as old as mine (1980), the toe rail has some
>> indication of chemical decomposition along the bottom
>> side. I treat my toe rail with care. Like the rest of
>> this wonderful 30 year old device, I hope it lasts longer
>> than I last.
>> Don
>>
>> On 1/28/11 2:15 PM, Anders Finn wrote:
>> Think about pivot point. If there is indeed only two
>> bolts, the only thing keeping it from pivoting is
>> compression between the plate and the toe rail. The bolts
>> are there simply to provide a leverage point. That's what
>> concerns me.
>>
>> Anders
>>
>> On 01/28/2011 02:13 PM, Chuck Finn wrote:
>> This type of fitting is used by: C&C, Hunter, PDQ,
>> Bayfield, and Freedom yachts. I think the footprint is
>> the entire toerail, which is significantly stronger than
>> our pad fastened to a plywood deck.... If I was to
>> worry about strength, it would be the shear force exerted
>> on the bolts if the toerail stanchion base is not a good
>> fit with our toerail... I would weld the stanchion to
>> the base rather than rely on the throughbolt. I can also
>> comment on the strength of at least the C&C toerail as I
>> have raced these boats and that means bounced a time or
>> two off the lines and stanchions! Have crewed Hunters as
>> well, but don't remember the stanchion design.
>>
>> I think my next step will be to contact Garhauer as they
>> are reputed to have first made our toerail. I also could
>> easily fabricate my own bases that would incorporate
>> Ander's ideas.
>>
>> But, will it look pretty?
>>
>> Chuck Finn
>> Mighty Quinn #114
>> Great Lakes
>>
>>
>> On 1/28/2011 4:16 PM, Anders Finn wrote:
>> Yeah, I just got a chance to look at this. I think Steve
>> is right here about a large drop in torsional resistance.
>> However, that being said, those stanchions forward of the
>> cockpit are not really THAT strong. I would like to see
>> at least a three bolt design with a larger outer plate to
>> provide some surface to disperse the torque to the hull.
>>
>> Anders
>>
>> PS. They say they're used on Freedom 32's however, from
>> pictures, I can't see anything resembling a toe rail that
>> would support load on them.
>>
>>
>> On 01/28/2011 12:42 PM, S Orton wrote:
>> Chuck, If I understand the concept correctly, it is a
>> very poor structural design. There is no foot print to
>> react the outward cantilever force on the stantion- you
>> need a four bolt pattern to react this force in all
>> directions and I only saw two fasteners parallel to the
>> toe rail.
>> Cheers, Steve O
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2011 08:27:31 -0500
>> From: charles at finn.ws <mailto:charles at finn.ws>
>> To: listserve at catalina38.org
>> <mailto:listserve at catalina38.org>
>> Subject: Re: [C38] Stanchions
>>
>> Max,
>> Here is the rigrite url:
>> http://www.rigrite.com/Hardware/Stanchions_&_Bases/Stanchion_Bases_SS.html#SS%20Stanchion%20Bases%20that%20Attach%20to%20Toerail
>> <http://www.rigrite.com/Hardware/Stanchions_&_Bases/Stanchion_Bases_SS.html#SS%20Stanchion%20Bases%20that%20Attach%20to%20Toerail>
>>
>> As you can see, this would put the stanchion on the
>> outside edge of our toerail and would eliminate the
>> base. This would result in a lot of room on the deck. I
>> am thinking of using two of the bases for the gate and
>> then moving forward. My issue about this would look is
>> that I will have to connect to the stern rails and bow
>> pulpit, which would remain as they are.
>> I would also have to fill all the holes in the deck from
>> where the plates were and re-route the holding tank vent,
>> but that would be worth it for the extra room on deck and
>> the elimination of possible leaks.
>>
>> What to our C38 folks think?
>>
>> Chuck Finn
>> Mighty Quinn #114
>> Great Lakes
>>
>>
>> On 1/27/2011 11:21 AM, Max Soto wrote:
>> Chuck, Did you send a link for the rigrite stanchions?
>> Regards,
>>
>> Max
>>
>> 2011/1/26 Chuck Finn <charles at finn.ws
>> <mailto:charles at finn.ws>>
>> One way I know it is sailing season is the scrape on my
>> shin obtained as I climb from the cabin to the cockpit.
>> The other wound is the bruises on the side of both legs
>> as I bang into the stanchions. I love the look of our
>> boats, but the design idea that the stanchions should
>> follow the inward bend of the tumblehome really does not
>> work for me. There just is not enough deck for a guy my
>> size. I am still considering bending and re-welding the
>> current stanchions into a vertical position, but perhaps
>> even a better solution would be to remove the current
>> stanchions altogether and going with a toe rail stanchion
>> like you see on C&C yachts. Rigrite.com
>> <http://Rigrite.com> has these. Attaching stanchions
>> directly to our toerail seems to be a viable option as
>> the rail is really heavy duty. Additionally, you can buy
>> the bases and use the current tubing assuming it is not
>> the light weight stuff Tom has commented on. This would
>> give us a lot more deck space for size 11 feet.
>> Just thinking aloud at this point, but I really am tired
>> of the bruising!
>>
>> Chuck Finn
>> Mighty Quinn #114
>> Great Lakes
>>
>>
>> On 1/25/2011 3:25 PM, Max Soto wrote:
>> Good to know that they share the same foot print... If
>> the removable stanchion's base also fits, I'll go for
>> that one next time..... A little heavier, but if they
>> bend, it will be so much easier to replace.......
>> Thanks, Max
>>
>> 2011/1/25 Steven Ribble <steve.ribble at gmail.com
>> <mailto:steve.ribble at gmail.com>>
>> Max, yes...same foot print. Garhauer has a square-ish
>> base that I think are for removable stanchions and a one
>> that's trapezoidal for the solid/fixed type, which is
>> what mine are (also characterized by the "flat top"). I
>> can't speak to the quality comment that Tom refers to, I
>> just know mine have been on the boat for 30 years and
>> only needed to be replaced because the over-wintering
>> force exerted by the shrinkwrap caused them to bend. I
>> thought I saw reinforced/gate style stanchions on their
>> website, but don't know about the footprint.
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 12:13 PM, Tom T.
>> <tdtron at earthlink.net <mailto:tdtron at earthlink.net>> wrote:
>>
>> After hurricane Dennis (the Menace) skirted Tampa Bay a
>> few years ago with a near miss, we got tangled up with a
>> piling with the surge and had our starboard lifelines
>> damaged along with the stanchions on that side.
>>
>> I replaced the stanchions near the rail at the aft end of
>> the cabin with Catalina Direct stanchions. I replaced
>> both sides so they would match. My boat had standard
>> stanchions and those stanchions should have been the
>> reinforced gate entry types which are heavier and more
>> expensive.
>>
>> I didn't shop Garhauer and I probably should have but the
>> original stanchions were JUNK so anything was an
>> upgrade! The metal in the replacement stanchions was
>> much heavier gage and with the reinforced foot design of
>> the gate type stanchion there was no comparison between
>> quality or strength of the two types.
>>
>> The reason I bring this up is some of our members may
>> have stanchions like the ones I replaced which may be a
>> disaster waiting to happen. If the stanchions at the
>> front of the gate are like the thin, weak ones like I had
>> they could fail. The thin tube original stanchions may
>> be OK for middle of the lifeline mounts but where the
>> gates terminate they are inadequate
>>
>> Tom Troncalli
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> *From:*Max Soto <mailto:maxsoto at gmail.com>
>> *To: *Catalina 38 Listserve
>> <mailto:listserve at catalina38.org>
>> *Sent:*1/25/2011 12:00:20 PM
>> *Subject:*Re: [C38] Stanchions
>>
>> Steve, do they have the same footprint???
>> Regards, max
>>
>> Sent from my iPod
>>
>>
>> On Jan 25, 2011, at 9:30 AM, Steven Ribble
>> <steve.ribble at gmail.com
>> <mailto:steve.ribble at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Our stanchions are Garhauer...I replaced a couple
>> last season...about $50 each.
>>
>> On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 7:06 PM, Max Soto
>> <maxsoto at gmail.com <mailto:maxsoto at gmail.com>> wrote:
>> Hey Steve,
>>
>> I'm not surprised if they were made by
>> Garhauer......
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Max
>>
>> 2011/1/24 Steve Smolinske
>> <SSmolinske at rainierrubber.com
>> <mailto:SSmolinske at rainierrubber.com>>
>> Does anyone know who made our stanchions?
>>
>>
>> Steve Smolinske
>> President
>>
>> 425-227-4500
>> www.RainierRubber.com <http://www.RainierRubber.com>
>>
>> The information contained in this email may be
>> confidential and/or proprietary in nature and is
>> intended for the recipient of the email only.
>> Please treat all information contained in this
>> and any communication with the 4M Company as
>> such. Thank you.
>>
>> PBefore printing, think about ENVIRONMENTAL
>> responsibility
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://catalina38.org/pipermail/listserve_catalina38.org/attachments/20110129/87d14f5c/attachment-0001.htm>
More information about the Listserve
mailing list