myHanse.com - Hanse Yacht Owners Website myHanse.com - Hanse Yacht Owners Website myHanse.com - Hanse Yacht Owners Website myHanse.com - Hanse Yacht Owners Website

Welcome to myHanse.com the forum for Hanse Yachts owners throughout the world.

Forum Home Forum Home > Hints and Tips > 505/508
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Main Sheet Padeye failure
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Main Sheet Padeye failure

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
Message
ohthetrees View Drop Down
Lieutenant
Lieutenant


Joined: 24 November 2019
Status: Offline
Points: 49
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote ohthetrees Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Main Sheet Padeye failure
    Posted: 19 June 2020 at 04:29
Hello, I just wanted to share an unfortunate experience. 

I'm in Hawaii, preparing for a passage to Seattle. I just had new standing rigging (shrouds, backstay, headstay, turnbuckles, etc) installed on the boat. The rigger wanted to go sailing to tune the rig. I also have brand new sails, first time out with them.

It was blowing a steady 20, with frequent gusts to 30. 

The rigger told me he wanted to see the rig under a strong load, and asked for the whole main sail up. The rigger was calling for frequent maneuvers, we were tacking, and changing points of sail, and the maneuvers were coming rapidly as the rigger called for them. As you know with german sheet systems, and only two winches to run the main and jib, the crew was very busy working the winches, having to frequently change which ropes were on or off the winch. Anyway, we were on a close reach, blasting along at 9-10 knots, the main relatively eased, boom well off the side of the boat, and the starboard main block padeye exploded out of the deck. We headed up into the wind, and dropped the main, which our crew did very well, with challenging conditions. The wind was strong, the boom was only controlled initially by the port mainsheet, the boom is very high off the deck, and we have no lazy-jacks at the moment (they should be installed tomorrow or next day). 

I recognize I made a mistake of judgment. I'm the skipper and owner of this boat. I know that it is a relatively light boat with a relatively big rig. I should have asserted myself and said that was too much sail, and we needed at least one reef in, maybe two. Certainly, on my own, I'd have two reefs in in that wind. So I want to be clear, what happened was my responsibility, and I should have asserted myself to the rigger, rather than just deferred to him. I want to kick myself, because I felt quite nervous about having that much sail up at the time. So that was my fault to have too much sail up. However, I want to criticize Hanse. This wasn't a slam jibe. We weren't knocked down. The rail wasn't in the water. Nonetheless, the strain was too much stress for the attachment point of the main sheet, a point that Hanse could predict would experience high loads, and frankly should be engineered to survive forces of being knocked down. Maybe a slam gybe is too much to ask. However, in my case, the rail wasn't even close to the water, and the attachment point failed. 

The padeye is threaded into a small aluminum 8cm square reinforcing plate which is embedded in the deck. The aluminum plate is retained only by the top skin of the deck. The top skin does not seem particularly thick in this location. There was no backing on the bottom side of the deck where the long bolts penetrate the bottom skin of the deck. They bolts may or may not have been threaded into the epoxy, but there was no backing under the deck, and the majority of the retention appeared to come from the top skin keeping the plate in place. I have attached some photos. 


It happened only today, but my tentative plan is to repair the fiberglass of the deck, but not bother making the embedded plate concept work. The top skin of the deck just isn't a good enough system to retain such high loads. quite a small plate too, just 8cm across.  I will have fabricated, and install a very large stainless plate, 30cm across or greater, on top of the deck (think of a super giant padeye) that will bolt in many places. Each bolt will penetrate the entire deck, and will have a very large washer backing it. Between the through bolting and the large surface area, I believe this will be much stronger. 

I likely won't even bother contacting Hanse, they are not known for providing post-warranty support, or support to 2nd owners. But I thought all of you other 505 owners should be aware of this weakness. Do you think this is mistake? Is it worth contacting Hanse? I wouldn't even know how, they don't seem to make it easy for a customer to interact with them.

Has anyone else experienced this failure with their 495, 505, or 508?

Thanks for listening to my sad story.



Back to Top
H8jer View Drop Down
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral


Joined: 14 September 2010
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 724
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote H8jer Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 June 2020 at 09:18
Damn I feel sad on your behalf.

Will it be possible to see the bolts from beneath if the ceiling is removed? If this is possible then other owners perhaps could apply washer/spacers and a nut from beneath?

On my Hanse370 I last year removed the small/useless mainsheet traveller track and made the same sheeting as you have on the newer designs. All work was done from above. Taking down the ceiling is now on the to-do list...

Thanks for sharing your experience. I would contact Hanse - could not hurt.  
Hanse 370#487 30HP 3-cabin
Back to Top
kipwrite View Drop Down
Captain
Captain


Joined: 14 October 2015
Location: New York
Status: Offline
Points: 182
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote kipwrite Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 June 2020 at 17:15
Thanks, for this update. This is worrisome, regardless that you were overpowered   
Question:
On the photo, it appears thereís a remaining plate of some sort still embedded in the deck, gray colored and likely aluminum, and I can see at least a few holes where the bolts were threaded. 
It doesnít appear the bolts from the piece that yanked out have nuts on them. Were there nuts there? As noted by the poster above, it might make sense to affix nuts and washers from
below. 
For what itís worth, I upgraded all the main sheet blocks, as these are also prone to failure. 


Edited by kipwrite - 19 June 2020 at 17:39
Kipwrite
Back to Top
iemand View Drop Down
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral
Avatar

Joined: 13 February 2004
Location: Germany
Status: Offline
Points: 940
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote iemand Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 June 2020 at 22:10
i am pretty shure this is a production failure. The GRP looks much too thin for that purpose. The too big sail Area should not be the problem for the sheet since the righting moment is in the end creating the load not the sail area. 
I would Contact Hanse in Greifswald. It is a hidden failure! Maybe they are not interesting in bad press.
Hanse 312 MJ 2004 - Hanse 370e MJ 2007
Back to Top
ohthetrees View Drop Down
Lieutenant
Lieutenant


Joined: 24 November 2019
Status: Offline
Points: 49
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote ohthetrees Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19 June 2020 at 22:59
Originally posted by H8jer H8jer wrote:

Damn I feel sad on your behalf.

Will it be possible to see the bolts from beneath if the ceiling is removed? If this is possible then other owners perhaps could apply washer/spacers and a nut from beneath?


There are fabric trim panels on fastened to the ceiling with velcro. Under this, it is possible to cut the ceiling panel and see the fitting from below. It was easy to cut with an oscillating saw. It would be difficult to replace matching the look of the ceiling, but luckily this area is covered by the fabric panel. 

In other words, you will have to cut, but the damage will be easy to cover. Even better to inspect only, a small hole cut with a hole-saw, and use a boroscope? But if you find what I have found, I think you will want to reinforce this area. 

Originally posted by kipwrite kipwrite wrote:

Thanks, for this update. This is worrisome, regardless that you were overpowered   
Question:
On the photo, it appears thereís a remaining plate of some sort still embedded in the deck, gray colored and likely aluminum, and I can see at least a few holes where the bolts were threaded. 
It doesnít appear the bolts from the piece that yanked out have nuts on them. Were there nuts there? As noted by the poster above, it might make sense to affix nuts and washers from
below. 
For what itís worth, I upgraded all the main sheet blocks, as these are also prone to failure. 
There is no plate. There is no backing. What you are seeing is the bottom skin of the deck. I have attached more photos. Even worse, when examined from below, it becomes obvious that this area is particularly thin! Very bad. The tradesmen who are here repairing it were shocked, and shaking their heads, and amazed. The only thing holding the padeye was the thin top skin of the deck. 

The construction seemed to be to embed the small 8cm square aluminum in the deck. Then from the top, they drilled and tapped into the plate. The drilling and tapping went all the way through the top skin, the aluminum plate and the bottom skin. 

Originally posted by iemand iemand wrote:

i am pretty shure this is a production failure. The GRP looks much too thin for that purpose. The too big sail Area should not be the problem for the sheet since the righting moment is in the end creating the load not the sail area. 
I would Contact Hanse in Greifswald. It is a hidden failure! Maybe they are not interesting in bad press.

A shocking new discovery is that the bottom skin is particularly thin precisely under the aluminum plate. It is only 1.5mm!! The top skin is very thin as well, no thicker than surrounding deck area. You can see how thick in my last photo. There were no washers, nuts, or backing plate under the deck, so only the top skin is holding the aluminum plate in place.





Edited by ohthetrees - 19 June 2020 at 23:21
Back to Top
H8jer View Drop Down
Rear Admiral
Rear Admiral


Joined: 14 September 2010
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 724
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote H8jer Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 June 2020 at 08:14
From your new pictures it looks like the alu square was not glassed in with fibers wrapped around enough at the side that faces the hatch cover. Very obvious that the failure began there.

It looks like the alu square only on the one side resides in a blob of polyester or faring compound.
It also looks like there is about 10 mm polyester (5 mm with glassfibers) on top of the alu square. This could perhaps be sufficient if it had the full 10mm with glassfibers on all sides, but not if one of the sides is not wrapped in.

If other boats are build the same, this could happen again to others. A quick-fix would be to have a stainless steel square tubing between the main sheet payeye on the other side of the hatch cover, to distribute the forces in play.


Edited by H8jer - 20 June 2020 at 08:18
Hanse 370#487 30HP 3-cabin
Back to Top
mglonnro View Drop Down
Captain
Captain
Avatar

Joined: 31 July 2015
Location: Turku
Status: Offline
Points: 218
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote mglonnro Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 June 2020 at 07:33
Originally posted by H8jer H8jer wrote:

From your new pictures it looks like the alu square was not glassed in with fibers wrapped around enough at the side that faces the hatch cover. Very obvious that the failure began there.

:/

Did the failure happen on a port tack? 


Edited by mglonnro - 21 June 2020 at 07:33
Back to Top
ohthetrees View Drop Down
Lieutenant
Lieutenant


Joined: 24 November 2019
Status: Offline
Points: 49
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote ohthetrees Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 June 2020 at 08:17
Starboard tack. 

Two guys have been working on my boat for the last 2 days. We are getting close to finished with a repair. Should be finished tomorrow. We peeled back a large section of delaminated deck, cleaned out the hole in the deck left by the aluminum plate that ripped out. Then filled with glass, epoxy, and carbon fiber. Created a new top deck skin. Under the deck, carved some carbon-foam to fill a cavity (that thin spot I have circled in my photo), then put in a 6" aluminum plate.  Drilled through from above, and through bolted. Tomorrow some cosmetic finishing work, and going to put a plate under the port one too. 

I don't know what the bill is going to be, but 2 skilled guys, 3 days, 2 of those days on a weekend. It's going to hurt. I contacted my Hanse dealer, sent some pics, and asked them to ask Hanse Germany to cover the repair. I'm not holding my breath!

I must say, I'm worried about how all the other deck hardware on my boat is attached.

If I were any of you other 505 (and probably 495 and 508 too) owners, I'd open up the ceiling and reinforce those points. The opening can be entirely hidden behind the fabric ceiling panels, so it isn't that big a deal.  Even if you don't want to bother with the carbon foam and all that, just removing the bolts, switching to longer ones, and putting some big washers and nuts on there would probably be a big help, and could be done in an afternoon without too much technical skills. Without the carbon foam to make a flat surface, the washers would lie kind of crooked on an uneven surface, but I still feel it would add a lot of strength. Good luck guys.


Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.01
Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.078 seconds.

Links : www.hanseyachts.co.uk www.hanseyachts.com www.fjordboats.co.uk www.dehler.co.uk www.varianta.co.uk