[C38] Stanchions
Chuck Finn
charles at finn.ws
Mon Jan 31 23:17:44 EST 2011
T5 is a lower cost material than T6. Not as hard or strong, but still
some of the strongest aluminum made. It is a bit more ductile.
So, is it strong enough to support those torsional forces?
Inquiring minds want to know!
And Thanks!
Chuck Finn
Mighty Quinn #114
Great Lakes
On 1/31/2011 8:15 PM, Anders Finn wrote:
> Ask and you shall recieve
>
> http://tacomarine.com/item--1-9-16-x-1-1-2-Aluminum-Sailboat-Toe-Rail--A62-0009.html
>
> According to the tech's at Taco Marine, this is our toe rail spec.
>
> Anders
>
> On 01/30/2011 12:56 AM, Steve Smolinske wrote:
>> I have worm holes on the aft section of the stbd rail far away from
>> the gates. Good luck fishing that line I did that once took me most
>> of a morning
>>
>> Steve Smolinske
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On Jan 29, 2011, at 7:55 PM, "Patrick Harpole" <1derful at comcast.net
>> <mailto:1derful at comcast.net>> wrote:
>>
>>> *Speaking of stanchions and "worm holes" I got the pleasure of
>>> worming a wire through pulpit (aka stanchion) because the bow
>>> navigation light wiring failed.*
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> *From:* Max Soto <mailto:maxsoto at gmail.com>
>>> *To:* Catalina 38 Listserve <mailto:listserve at catalina38.org>
>>> *Sent:* Saturday, January 29, 2011 5:31 PM
>>> *Subject:* Re: [C38] Stanchions
>>>
>>> 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
>>>>
>>>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://catalina38.org/pipermail/listserve_catalina38.org/attachments/20110131/37a6f37c/attachment-0001.htm>
More information about the Listserve
mailing list