Trident Anchor Chain?

[angus99]

Anybody using it? Planning to buy 300+ ft of 3/8” G4. I’ll get a sample from the dealer first to check on the gypsy. I see better prices on it vs ACCO and assume it’s Chinese, but has met ISO standards.

I’d appreciate any direct knowledge/experience with it.

Thanks in advance.

 

[Bmarler]

I see nobody has chimed in on this, surprisingly enough.
I don’t have direct experience with that chain, but I have a certain amount of experience using different metals made in china. I’ve found the mechanical properties of their metals to vary to the extreme higher and lower limits of their expected ranges. I’ve seen this in regards to hardness, tensile strength, and weld ability.
If you’re a fair weather boater, and won’t really stress the chain often it’ll probably last your lifetime. But on the other side of the coin, if you are thinking you may be weathering out storms on that chain, I might hesitate.
The anchor system as a whole isn’t the place I choose to use budget products.

 

[angus99]

Thanks for the feedback. Looks like no one has used Trident windlass chain for anchoring. Also, I’m told the ISO label deals with dimensional standards rather than tensile strength. Agree with you that anchor chain is not a thing I want to cheap out with.

 

[angus99]

Interestingly, I received this chain certification today from E-Rigging, which indicates tensile strength and working load limits. I’m interested in the 3/8” G43 hot-dipped galvanized, second from the top on the list. Any metallurgists out there who might tell me how much credence to give a report like this?

 

[TJM]

I would have very little faith in an "Inspection Certificate" such as this one.
There is no certifying body such as ISO 1704-2008, No authorizing signature, Mr Li is printed. The blue stamp just states origin.
There is no chain of custody, which says this chain and the results were sold to _________.
I have dealt with foreign material certifications in Aerospace for years, this one has a few loose ends.

 

[freshalaska]

Ask eRigging to test it.

 

[angus99]

I would have very little faith in an "Inspection Certificate" such as this one.
There is no certifying body such as ISO 1704-2008, No authorizing signature, Mr Li is printed. The blue stamp just states origin.
There is no chain of custody, which says this chain and the results were sold to _________.
I have dealt with foreign material certifications in Aerospace for years, this one has a few loose ends.

Thank you for the informed comments. E-Rigging says the chain meets ISO G43 specs. I don’t know what that means—dimensional specs, tensile strength or all of the above. E-Rigging says they’ve been carrying it for years without problems, but I don’t want to make a mistake with ground tackle.

 

[Bmarler]

I tend to agree with tjm. There are some things about that document that raise more questions than answers them. The iso designation speaks to dimensions and pull strength. But, there aren’t really any iso police to enforce the standard, the manufacturer simply says that they meet it.
I’m also a little confused at the g40 on the “cert”. I thought g40 was dropped in 2005 or thereabouts and it was rolled into the g43.
Plus, the chemistry on the same cert lists a whole bunch of different chain at different chemistry. Are these just the averages they manufacture to? Did they list a heat number for your batch of chain? I didn’t see it. I ran a heat treating facility for many years, and our level of documentation far exceeded what I’m seeing here.

While this chain could be just fine, and really, would most likely never be an issue unless you rode out a hurricane or something, but would you always wonder if it was as reliable as domestic?

 

[cafesport]

I’m due for chain again but I’ll stay with acco/peerless.

 

[angus99]

I tend to agree with tjm. There are some things about that document that raise more questions than answers them. The iso designation speaks to dimensions and pull strength. But, there aren’t really any iso police to enforce the standard, the manufacturer simply says that they meet it.
I’m also a little confused at the g40 on the “cert”. I thought g40 was dropped in 2005 or thereabouts and it was rolled into the g43.
Plus, the chemistry on the same cert lists a whole bunch of different chain at different chemistry. Are these just the averages they manufacture to? Did they list a heat number for your batch of chain? I didn’t see it. I ran a heat treating facility for many years, and our level of documentation far exceeded what I’m seeing here.

While this chain could be just fine, and really, would most likely never be an issue unless you rode out a hurricane or something, but would you always wonder if it was as reliable as domestic?

Thanks. Even though I never deliberately anchor out in rough weather, it will likely happen. I’m just not going to roll the dice. I’ll stick with Acco/Peerless and sleep better.

 

[freshalaska]

Consider Titan chain rode. Sold by Fisheries Supply in Seattle. Says proff tested.
Think this what I’ll buy soon.

 

[rslifkin]

Consider Titan chain rode. Sold by Fisheries Supply in Seattle. Says proff tested.
Think this what I’ll buy soon.

Titan is made by Canada Metal Products who also manufacturers Rocna anchors. I'd consider their stuff trustworthy.

 

[rpackard]

3/8 g4 sounds like overkill for your 41ft vessel. i think your windlass will tear off the deck and your snubber will break before you even reach the load limit for 5/16 g4. Remember it is the weakest link that determines your safety.
we sleep without worry when using a 25kg rocna, 5/16g4 chain, 40ft 3/4" snubber in 50k winds.

 

[Shrew]

3/8 g4 sounds like overkill for your 41ft vessel. i think your windlass will tear off the deck and your snubber will break before you even reach the load limit for 5/16 g4. Remember it is the weakest link that determines your safety.
we sleep without worry when using a 25kg rocna, 5/16g4 chain, 40ft 3/4" snubber in 50k winds.

To me the chain weight has more to do with catenary, than it's breaking limit. The more chain on the floor the better.

 

[TJM]

I have 300' of 5/16 G4 on my 41" Trawler with the 25Kg Rocna and it has never failed. Also pulling it with a Lofrans Tigres. As the Shrew has mentioned above, the chain is about catenary and chafe protection.

 

[rpackard]

Most analysis shows that there is no longer much catenary in winds greater than about 25k. So in high winds you rely on anchor holding, breaking strength of rode/snubber/deck combination and scope. Even a heavy kellet is not as efficient as placing an equivalent weight on the anchor.

Heavy chain cold be very useful in deep, crowded anchorages such as in British Columbia in peak season.There, if you don't use a shore tie you better have very short scope to avoid dirty looks from your neighbors. Fortunately those anchorages are very sheltered.

'Nuff said.

 

[rslifkin]

Most analysis shows that there is no longer much catenary in winds greater than about 25k. So in high winds you rely on anchor holding, breaking strength of rode/snubber/deck combination and scope. Even a heavy kellet is not as efficient as placing an equivalent weight on the anchor.

Heavy chain cold be very useful in deep, crowded anchorages such as in British Columbia in peak season.There, if you don't use a shore tie you better have very short scope to avoid dirty looks from your neighbors. Fortunately those anchorages are very sheltered.

'Nuff said.

Agreed. Catenary effect is much more significant in deep water, but in shallower water, you need a heck of a lot of very heavy chain for it to become significant.

And yes, an extra 20 lbs in the anchor is far more useful than 20 lbs of heavier chain.

Personally, I take the attitude that chain is for chafe resistance, anchors are for holding. So chain shouldn't be bigger and heavier than required for strength, as that allows you to carry a heavier anchor and fit more chain in the locker (especially on boats with smaller chain lockers or where weight in the bow is a concern).

 

[freshalaska]

The above two posts nailed it.

 

[O C Diver]

Most analysis shows that there is no longer much catenary in winds greater than about 25k. So in high winds you rely on anchor holding, breaking strength of rode/snubber/deck combination and scope. Even a heavy kellet is not as efficient as placing an equivalent weight on the anchor.

Heavy chain cold be very useful in deep, crowded anchorages such as in British Columbia in peak season.There, if you don't use a shore tie you better have very short scope to avoid dirty looks from your neighbors. Fortunately those anchorages are very sheltered.

'Nuff said.

No, catenary is a function of scope ratio, depth, and wind / waves /current. To say catenary is gone at 25 knots of wind without listing the other components is silly.

Consider a vessel anchored in 15' of water. With 4:1 scope the catenary is likely gone with 25 knots of wind. At 7:1 there's likely still a curve to the rhode. At 10:1 there's no chance that the catenary is gone.

Ted

 

[angus99]

3/8 g4 sounds like overkill for your 41ft vessel. i think your windlass will tear off the deck and your snubber will break before you even reach the load limit for 5/16 g4. Remember it is the weakest link that determines your safety.
we sleep without worry when using a 25kg rocna, 5/16g4 chain, 40ft 3/4" snubber in 50k winds.

Thanks for the thoughts, all.

rpackard, our boat is a 44 weighing +/-50,000 lbs with half tanks and gear and 3/8” chain is common for this model. The Maxwell Nilsson windlass is sized for 3/8” so that’s what I’ll be looking for.

I would never allow the windlass to bear the load from anchoring. The actual strain from our bridal/snubber goes on a pair of cleats that are pretty robust on a DeFever.

Ultimate breaking strength of the 3/4” bridle us 16,700 lbs. 5/16” G4 chain has a published breaking strength of 11,700 lbs while 3/8”, at 16,200 lbs, is much closer to the bridle. All that said, I hope never to be in conditions that test any of this.