Connecting two chains for windlass use

Status
Not open for further replies.
Rich Stidger

Rich Stidger

.
Feb 10, 2004
3,948
Hunter 40.5 Warwick, RI
In the past I have used a connecting link like in the first picture below. You peen over the four pins and the connection is made. I have used this with G4 5/16" chain and found that it will pass through my windlass gypsy with a minor bump. I thik I have used the 3/8" size that has a 2750# working load limit. The 5/16" G4 chain has a 3900# WLL. So this link is the weakest.

Now I am about to replace my anchor chain yet again, and I will need to connect two pieces of chain together again. I'm wondering if I could use a mid link or a double clevis link as shown the second picture. The 5/16" size has a 4000# WLL which more closely matches the strength of the G4 chain.

The question is whether it will pass in a gypsy designed for G4 chain or will it jam? Anyone know the answer?
 

Attachments

Allan12210

Allan12210

.
Jan 22, 2008
1,655
Hunter 34 Alameda CA
Rich,

I don't know first hand, so this is only a guess. Each chain link is 90 degrees to the one before and after it, just like when you used your first connecting link. The length of that double link interrupts that sequence if it is longer than a single link length. Hopefully it would snag enough on the gypsy until the following links re-engage although under tension it may not want to lay back into the grooves for a considerable distance. So I can give it a definite maybe. Guess you'll have to try it and let us know.
 
Stu Jackson

Stu Jackson

.
Feb 26, 2004
22,783
Catalina 34 224 Maple Bay, BC, Canada
Rich, I agree with Allan and have other thoughts/questions:

1. You say you're "replacing your chain yet again", if so why not get a longer chain that doesn't need a link? Just not obvious from your OP, must be a good reason, like only needing to replace half your chain...:):):)

2. You've undoubtedly seen my many posts answering anchoring questions and i post a link to my anchoring SYSTEM thread. If the connecting link meets your anchoring SYSTEM criteria, even if it is the "weakest link" then I'd use one again, since it has worked for you in the past. BTW, we have a connecting link in our chain, I anchor out once a week and it's been just fine (inspected every time out) for the past 10 years or so. I haul by hand.

3. In addition to Allan's comments, I just don't like the "look" of the other connector, not to say it wouldn't work, and I might consider it in the future for my "haul by hand" chain link, but I don't know if it's cast or not. I hate cast anything, like the old M25 alternator bracket casting! :) I'll do some more looking into it in the WM catalog and Calder's books (Cruising Handbook is a good one). In spite of the strength ratings, one's zinc and one's steel. It says "drop forged" but I've forgotten too much "Strength of Materials" from shop classes to remember the differences between drop forged and cast, sorry. :)

4. The connections to the chain on the mid link seem less secure than the simple peening on the connecting link.

Good luck.
 
seadaddler

seadaddler

.
Dec 19, 2006
5,812
Hunter 36 Punta Gorda
No Way

It's too big to fit with out a problem for sure and would not take the chance of doing damage to your windlass.
I have used both chain connectors over the years and would only use the first for the windlass.
Nick
 
  • Like
Likes: Captain Larry-DH
Maine Sail

Maine Sail

.
Feb 6, 1998
11,675
Canadian Sailcraft 36T Casco Bay, ME
My thoughts on splicing a chain and trusting our boat to a few small peened over rivets...:eek::eek::eek:

This one was posted on another forum recently, it failed in 30 knots on them.....



These devices are a perfect place for salt to hide and corrosion to take hold and I have yet to see a single test of used or corroded c-links when compared to the same age chain... The "when new" SWL rating may not mean much when those tiny peened over rivets begin to corrode...
 
Rich Stidger

Rich Stidger

.
Feb 10, 2004
3,948
Hunter 40.5 Warwick, RI
Stu Jackson said:
You say you're "replacing your chain yet again", if so why not get a longer chain that doesn't need a link? Just not obvious from your OP, must be a good reason, like only needing to replace half your chain...:):):)
Click to expand
Well, the reason is that I can buy two 90' pails of chain for a better price than the "by-the-foot" price. I suppose I could buy a half-drum of 275' and then I would have an extra 95' to use in seven more years. Other than the cash outlay for chain I don't need right now and the uncertainly of a boating future in seven more years, the half-drum would be the best choice. Of course in seven years, I would then need a connector.

I have used the peened-style connectors for 16 years with no issues at all- not the very same connector but I have replaced it every seven years. However I can't argue with Mainesail's failed device. I recognize that it is the weakest link.
 
woodster

woodster

.
Sep 15, 2009
6,243
S2 9.2a Fairhope Al
Rich Stidger said:
Well, the reason is that I can buy two 90' pails of chain for a better price than the "by-the-foot" price. I suppose I could buy a half-drum of 275' and then I would have an extra 95' to use in seven more years. Other than the cash outlay for chain I don't need right now and the uncertainly of a boating future in seven more years, the half-drum would be the best choice. Of course in seven years, I would then need a connector.

I have used the peened-style connectors for 16 years with no issues at all- not the very same connector but I have replaced it every seven years. However I can't argue with Mainesail's failed device. I recognize that it is the weakest link.
Click to expand
why not buddy up with some one or two some ones and split a full drum of chaine and remember who they are so in 7 years you can do it again ...sorta like a reunion.....

regards

woody
 
jibes138

jibes138

.
Jan 27, 2008
3,045
ODay 35 Beaufort, NC
Could you cut a link in half and have a good welder weld a real link in place? Since all the links are welded anyway it might give you close to full strength and a better chance of going through your windlass.

Stu...were you kidding about castings versus forgings? In simple terms...castings bad, forgings good. Of course you could take a casting and hot isostatic press it (HIP) and have a very good and strong part. Castings are typically porous and have random grain orientations. Forgings are wrought material that is hot worked to orient the grain flow in the desired direction for maximum strength.
 
G

Gudenuph

.
Aug 4, 2009
204
Oday 25 Olympia
Don't skimp on chain size/ When the galvanizing shows noticeable wear, reverse the chain. Have the chain re-galvanized when needed. When the steel shows noticeable wear, replace.
To join two lengths of chain, open the end link on one chain, mate it with the other and weld the joining link back together. Paint the join with Armorall (cold galvanizing paint). Paint adjacent links white to locate the join for periodic inspection.
This was our maintenance plan for 30 plus years with no problems.
FWIW, Geohan
 
Stu Jackson

Stu Jackson

.
Feb 26, 2004
22,783
Catalina 34 224 Maple Bay, BC, Canada
Cast vs forged

jibes138 said:
Stu...were you kidding about castings versus forgings? In simple terms...castings bad, forgings good. Of course you could take a casting and hot isostatic press it (HIP) and have a very good and strong part. Castings are typically porous and have random grain orientations. Forgings are wrought material that is hot worked to orient the grain flow in the desired direction for maximum strength.
Click to expand
Dave, no I wasn't kidding, I have really forgotten all that stuff they drummed into me in "Strength of Materials" class in high school. :D

Thanks for the explanation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top Bottom