Swaging questions
 

I am going to order a new set of standing rig for my Bavaria 1060.
I plan to dismantle the shrouds one-by-one and order exactly the same length then the old (six years old) one. Is this correct, or the new shroud should be a bit shorter?
Is it necessary to fill the terminals (before the swaging) by silicon or other material to prevent corrosion? What is the recommended material?

Shroud Spec
 

Assuming your old rigging fits correctly (turnbuckles centered up when in tune) and was not overtuned (stretched), yes you would order the same length as the old.

It is recommended to fill swages with goo to keep the water out. I believe the correct goo is polysulfide caulk.

Bob Pingel

Goo to avoid
 

In general, silicone "sealers" should be avoided on boats because there is no reason to expect silicions to adhere or remain adhered to surfaces, especially metals. Once silicon contaminates a surface it is extremely difficult to remove and REAL adhesives and sealants will thereafter NOT adhere at all!

Silicon can make good gasket material (if formulated as such) when mechanically confined and compressed between appropriate surfaces. Any other applications are, in general, better solved by other materials.

Exceptions
 

Hello,
If, as Bob said, the old gang fits well when tuned, then you can duplicate the lengths. But in our shop, we also deduct for the constructional stretch of new wires. This won't be much ó maybe an eighth of an inch for your longest pieces ó but you might want to as well. See the "Apprentice" for details.
Next, if you measure the wires off the boat, there's no problem, as they will immediatel shrink to their unstressed length. But if you measure in place, from tang to chainplate, then you will also need to deduct for tuning stretch for the new pieces. Does this make sense?
Fair leads,
Brion Toss

Thanks!
 

Thanks!
Practically I will not measure the rig: will dismantle the old shrouds one at a time, put it in the local rigger's workshop and order "the same" and check the new shrouds by compare with the olds.
Bob, please send me the commercial name and manufacturer of the polysulfide caulk.

Thanks again

A. Renyi

swaging goo
 

As swaging is the working of one metal onto and into the gaps of another, and relying on the metal to metal contact for strength-it amazes me that goo would be even considered. Have seen test results and any goo reduces the ultimate strength of the swage.
Stick to the old-timer method of beeswax melted into the swage AFTER swaging. Still the best way to go, all other methods are SCARY!

I respectfully disagree with the bees wax method
 

I would use polysulphide caulk -- like BoatLife. Dip the wire and swage away. It is important to keep water out.

Bob
.

More Info
 

By adding sealant unswaged, the sealant is pushed throughout the swage.

By dripping in wax, the "seal" is only on the the very top.


I haven't seen any studies where sealant impacted strength, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. I deal with one of the best swagers in the country and they dip.

Bob

"dipping" swages??
 

I have to interject here - I rigged here in San Francisco with a major boatyard, with a well respected rig shop, for several years - and - we NEVER dipped, sealed, or slathered anything on the wire before swaging - or afterwards. In regards to the "protection" of the inside of the swage with goo - after swaging there isn't really much of an "inside" to protect - if you cut apart a swage there shouldn't be much more than solid metal - maybe trace lines of the wire strands, but it's not like there are channels in there that are going to rust out on you. We also avoided and had our customers avoid putting anything on their standing rigging, swages, wire and all, becuase application of anything hastens the onset of stainless deterioration, which occurs in the absence of oxygen. In my humble experience, the best care for sawges was regular rinsing with fresh water and careful examination throughout the seasons - and a realistic expectation of how long it should all last. This is the opposite of galvanized mild steel, which you would want to wrap up and seal away in tar, yes. I think the best protection for stainless steel, though, is fresh water - lots of it.

Brion?
 

The idea is too keep salt water out, I wouldn't worry about fresh water.

As far as the different opinions, I'll chalk it up to "differnt ships, different long splices".

Maybe Brion has some solid tech reasons. I do know that he has wire dipped before swaging, and uses sealant in StaLoks.

Bob

Gooless swaging
 

Hello,
I also would like to see any evidence of sealant affecting swage strength. It would have to be really compelling, because I definitely have seen assiduously drip-waxed swages splitting open from internal corrosion in the tropics, the same territory where sealed swages stay just fine. Show me the numbers.
ps,
There also seems to be a logical disconnect between metal-to-metal integrity and the effect of internal sealant in a swage; with Sta-loks and Hayn's, for instance, we've seen reliable test results up at or near the wire's actual break strength, even though the compression on these fittings is far less than with any swage.

So...? is the answer, or concensus anyway, that the sealant doesn't hurt strength (as suggested by Brions' comments on Low-Compression mechanical fittings), but may or may not effect longevity depending on weather or not oxygen/salt/water isolation is better than free supply of water/salt, and on down facing terminals oxygen ?
Or , as I have notice when cutting swaged fittings open to inspect, there really isn't any room left inside the swage once it if swaged. I have noticed on new swages when cut open that I can hardly discern the outline of just some of the strands, as it all appears one solid rod, even when sanded and polished or cut rough. I must admit that I have not cut an older swage open in a while, but I will next time I come accross an example of both kinds, and post my results here. At our shop we do not use any sealant in any swage fittings we press, unless we are un-able to talk an adamant owner out of this practice.

One should note that the 'excellent' Hi-Mod Low Compression mechanical fitting Brion mentions only reccomends using a thread locker adhesive for final assembly, and not sealant, if I recall the directions properly... I must admit I only read directions for fittings I use regularly , on occasion, as opposed to every time I open one, as that would be really time consming considering the normally repetitive nature of instructions for the same fitting :: )

very interested in the results of this discussion, as I feel that every one of us should know the answer to this question.

I will say that the Hayn insulators that I installed last fall are a wonderfully designed bit of functional art.

rich morpurgo

Swaging question
 

I thought that I asked a simple question, but I see, even Brion doesn't have a simple answer.
I sliced my old swages (around eight years old) to learn what happened inside.
In the first slice, around 4 mm from the top the wires were very rusty. There is no doubt that it is the time to replaceÖ..
In the second slice, around 8 mm from the top, the metal was clear; however three rust dots were seen in the space between the wires. Is it "local" rust, or just dirty water that penetrated from the upper parts? I don't know. Anyhow, it is evident that internal sealant would eliminate this by filling the space between the wires.
The third slice, around 15 mm from the top, was absolutely clear.
Since the wires always break near the open end of the swage, I am not sure if the internal sealant can -for long term- really seal the open end of the swage and if water can penetrate under the seal, the situation may deteriorate.
I asked two local riggers and ñnaturally- both replied that they are "working exactly according the manufacturer's instructions, and they don't require any sealing".
It may be very interesting to see professional cutting of old swages, microscope photos and explanation of an expert in metallurgy. Maybe this was done by one of the swaging machine manufacturers?

Great discussion
 

Hi again,
Very, very few riggers dip wire before swaging, and they tend to work in warm climates, where the effects of corrosion are greatest. Since most cruisers spend at least some time there, we work to do what we can to limit corrosion. I came to embrace the Dipping School while working in the South, and seeing side-by-side examples, with the undipped ones failing, and the dipped ones not. I have also cut apart numerous swages, of all ages and from all climates, and I can tell you that they are far from impervious to water. I can also tell you that crevice corrosion is a bit more complex than the absence of oxygen; otherwise any piece of stainless would corrode from the inside out. A surface oxide coating is stainless's defense, and it can be replenished in the presence of oxygen. But if you exclude both air and corrosive elements, like saltwater, deterioration is largely arrested.
The next time you see vertical cracks on a swage, know that internal corrosion ówhich always causes the corroded material to expand ó is trying to blow the swage apart (horizontal cracks usually speak to fatigue, though there might also be a corrosion component). This usually, as noted above, happens close to the top of the swage, but I have some samples in my shop that are cracking near the bottom.
As for Hayn's instructions, all I can say is that they are roughly the same as Norseman's and Sta-lok's once were; leaving sealant out works pretty well in low-salt, low-temperature climates like England, for there you can count on plenty of fresh water to rinse out salt, and also count on that water evaporating, helping that oxide coating. But as Norseman and Sta-lok found out, and as I predict that Hayn will, Tropical waters are an entirely different story, with a lot more heat and salt, and a lot less fresh water rinsing. That's why we see a lot of internal corrosion in unsealed and inadequately sealed compression fittings, and none in properly sealed fittings.
Fair leads,
Brion Toss

Yes, I also have cut some of our old swages apart, and can see dark (probably 'rust' colord) lines showing me the strnad pattern, which implies that moisture does make its way down into the swage, as others here seem to have noted to. So I guess that means that we should be using sealant in swage terminals to try to keep the water, and everthing else out ?

From what I have noticed on many occasions, with hardware such as chainplates and tangs, stainless steel does seem to just "corrode from the inside out". One sees the tight pocket of rust on the surface, and starts sanding of wire brushing looking for a crack, usually finds a crack, and with further investigation realizes that much of the mateial in that area is riddled with 'crevice corrosion' or a network of voids 'caves and tunnels' benieth the surface. It has always seemed to me that stainless does just corrode away on its own, but I suppose that really these are the effects of electrolisis.

Like was noted, or swage manufacture, if I remember correctly, tells us to swage dry, is that really the best thing to do. I still think there hasn't been a definate answer. Or mabe this is another typical boat question, with an answer that varies from with region and preference ?

The next question would be what sealant to use, as I have 'heard' that silicone is not good to use with stainless becasue it is corrosive, but the sta lok instructions call for silicone. I typically use a polyurethane when assembling mech fitting, and have not recieved any bad reports ...

Clarifying corrosion
 

Hi again Brian,
Let's leave the sealant question aside for a moment, and address some of the points in your most recent letter. Stainless does not, in fact, "corrode from the inside out", or at least not the way I meant it. Crevice corrosion has to eat into the metal from a surface; it can't start on the interior. So when you find a crack, it will always have propagated from a surface. That's why we polish metal surfaces, and construct them from corrosion-resistant alloys: to prevent corrosion from affecting the surfaces.
Electrolysis is a specific kind of corrosion, quite distinct in cause from crevice corrosion. Electrolysis is a galvanic reaction fueled by live current. It can coexist with crevice corrosion, as can chloride corrosion, stress corrosion, etc., but it definitely should not be confused with it. And if you see evidence of electrolysis in a swage, you probably have much more serious issues than cracks, anyway.
Now back to sealants. It is true that most silicones are mildly acidic, but to a trivial degree, and even then only before it has cured. Automotive silicone is usually low-acid, because gaskets are more readily affected by acidity than large chunks of stainless. But there's a better reason not to use any type of silicone in a terminal: it is less efficient at maintaining adhesion than other goos, particularly over wide temperature changes. We've found that 3M's 4000 or 101 are far more stable, yet not so adhesive that they make reusing the terminals diffcult.
Arenyi noted, in a previous letter, that "...wires always break near the open end of the swage...". If only it were true. Many times we've found broken wires inside swages, a consequence of corrosion from water intrusion.
Fair leads,
Brion Toss

One more swaging question .
When using a roller swaging machine should the swage be rotated 90* for the second pass, or should the ridge be left intact and the swage pulled the same orientation twice ?

I have been taught that the swage should be rotated to yeild a more 'smooth' apperance and feel(safer), and to force more metal and more pressure by pushing all the material into less space.
Then the other day somebody once again asked the question, doesn't that push the swage open by pressing it 90*, or cause excess fatigue right off the bat ? I always have argued against this , and turned my swages. Today I noticed once again that the swages supplied by Selden Masts have the ridge proud on each side, so whats up ?

Roller Swaging
 

To start with I would use rotary swaging over roller -- you end up with a more symmetrical swage.

If forced to use roller swaging, I would swage only once, don't turn 90 degrees to smooth the ridge. The second swage will fatigue to body of the fitting.

Also, make sure the roller swager is in spec/adjusted correctly.

Bob

one pass
 

Brian wrote:
"One more swaging question .
When using a roller swaging machine should the swage be rotated 90* for the second pass, or should the ridge be left intact and the swage pulled the same orientation twice ?"

Hi Brian,
I agree with the "one pass" camp. Stainless steel hates to be worked... it's kinda like a bureaucrat, I guess. Also, the second pass will expand the outside dimension of the first pass. The outside diameter is critical to the integrety of the swage, so if you expand it slightly it will loosen the "grip" a bit.
Cheers, Russ

Kearneys and Passes
 

Hello,
Oh, dear. As far as I know, only Wire Technic (sp?) swages are suited for single-pass swaging; standard Kearneys specifically require two passes, with the second 90? to the first. Yes, this makes for fatigue, but one pass simply doesn't compress enough metal far enough. Make two passes ó and no more than that, or fatigue happens in a bigger way ó unless the machine manufacturer says otherwise.
We see far fewer fatigue problems with rotaries, and the ones we do see are often from machines that have gotten out of spec. This seems to happen rarely with rotaries, and I can only speculate that this is because the much more expensive machine tends to end up with much more careful people. Kind of like being more likely to attend to oil changes with a Rolls than with a Yugo.
Fair leads,
Brion Toss

Ok, great, I had a feeling I had been doing it right. I suppose I should have thought to double check the manufacture (of machine) instructions, but they are filed away up in the office somewhere, so thanks for the clarification.
We have a couple of kerny swagers, and a Wire Technik too, I was un aware that the Technik only required one pass, I will double check the instructions and make sure.
Thanks for the clairification.
oh, and I kno a rotorary swager is better, but like brion mentioned, they are expensive, and our shop doesn't have one. actually only one of the dozen or so riggers in Annapolis has a rotorary swager. they are not very common...

Feeling like a better rigger already... :D

caveat
 

Hi Brion,
Opinions should always be packaged with a caveat. Yes, the one pass machine is the Wireteknic. Are people still using "banana swage" machines? I supposed they are okay with a good operator.
What is your opinion on the net result of a swaged fitting when the second pass expands the outside dimension of the first pass?... even slightly.
Cheers, Russ L

Russ L.
What machine do you use in your shop to swage 'swage insulators' commonly requested by owners for using thier backstay as a radio antenna?
the only tool we have to do that is a Kerny swager, as they cannot be pulled by the WireTeknic . I suppose that is the only reason to use a 'bannana swage' machine.
Oh , and for making vinyl coverd lifelines, which I dont like but were standard for many years and still preferred by many owners ?

Hoping to learn a new trick or tool from this,
Brian

Hi Brian,
No shop... I'm just an old hand. A couple o' decades ago they would have called me a "ship's husband" now they just call me opinionated.
I recently (last year) stepped away from the 36 ton cutter I fitted out over the course of 16 years and now I'm happily sailing a 7 ton classic plastic yacht.
I would use reuseable insulators, such as StaLok, in the backstay. They are expensive intially but cheaper over the long haul.
I too am not a fan of wire lifelines. The best liferail I made was sch 40 pipe welded atop S/S tapered stanchions... unfortunately that doesn't scale down to smaller boats (and still look good).
Cheers, Russ

Goop and Swaging
 

I too heard that applying goop into the swage before swaging weakens the overall strength of the assembly. Swages rely on metal to metal contact for their strength so applying goop before swaging would be comparable to adding WD-40 to Super Glue. Regardless, in most cases, this is a non issue because the safe working load allows for the reduction of strength due to the goop.

Thinking of swaging machines and the notion that two passes on a roller swage causes too much fatigue, I ask what makes a rotary swage machine any better than the rest if it beats the crap out of the swage fitting? I've seen some swages that were formed with a rotary and the stainless had been worked so much that it changed to a darker color. Sure, theyíre smooth, but also work hardened. Again, this is a non issue because of applied safe working load

Different swages, different rotations
 

Hi Brian,
Most Kearney-type swagers need to be turned 90? for the second pass, according to their manufacturers. The dies prevent the second pass from undoing the compression of the first pass, but as I understand it, fatigue from the radical distortion of metal is much more of a problem than with rotary swages, which bring the metal down in smaller, smoother increments.
There will still be a ridge showing, with a Kearney-type machine, even if you turn it 90?, unless either the machine or the operator has some trick way of preventing or minimizing this (in other words, to try to make it look like a rotary swage).
What you might be seeing from Selden is the product of a WireTecnic (sp?) machine, which leaves a very pronounced ridge, almost a fin, on either side. And with these machines, one is instructed not to make a second pass. The back story here is that the WireTecnic machine, unlike its cousins, pulls the swage along by its end; every other Kearney-type machine powers the dies. The idea is that, with unpowered dies, one can get less deformation in the machine ó the metal of the swage compresses more at its own rate, with a constant pull, instead of being forced through at the rate set by gearing. Or that's how I understand it. These swages have a very good rep in Europe, where they originated, but haven't much caught on here yet. This might in part be due to their appearance, which isn't smooth like we're used to. Some shops will grind off the flashing, which strike me as a bad idea for at least a couple of reasons, and which adds noise, hassle, and time to the swaging process. And one outfit in Seattle still, as far as I know, makes repeated passes with their WireTecnic, to eliminate the flashing. When I suggested that this might be a time-consuming way to accelerate metal fatigue, the machine operator said that his manager, who was an engineer, said that's the way to do it. An engineer. Right.
Fair leads,
Brion Toss