Low friction rings

[Hayden Watson]

I am planning to add some cascades to increase purchase and think that low friction rings would be just the ticket. Given that everybody makes them now, is there any difference between brands and if so, which is the best.
I am adding purchase to high load, low movement items like aft stay tensioner, vang, Cunningham, etc.

 

[jssailem]

Note. These are low friction not no friction.
I’ve used them redirecting lines up to 90degrees with success. When I go 180 the friction becomes more notable. Since these are anodized aluminum after a period of tension and adjustment a chafe pattern will begin to be evident.

Use of a dyneema type line will reduce friction on the rings, as dyneema is treated with a slick coating.

 

[Hayden Watson]

Thanks John.
My intent is to use them for high load, low movement lines such as the outhaul where I have a 3:1 x 2:1 cascade x 2:1 cascade for a total of 12:1. The load will only move maybe 6" max and under a loaded condition, much less than that. I am currently using this system but was thinking that it would work just as well with rings. My firsts exposer to the rings was on a J90 that used 6 of them in single line cascades to produce a 64:1 backstay adjuster.

 

[MikeHoncho]

If I'm interpreting the drawing and your notes correctly, the ring in the middle of the drawing will have "6" around the circumference of the ring and spliced back onto itself which will make "3" thread through the ring's eye. This will twist the ring so the outer perimeter of the ring's edges will be contacting the boom and not allow it to lay flat. Not an issue but noisy if loose. The opposite will happen with the other one, and it will be orientated properly. The drawings do not represent what the notes describe.

 

[Hayden Watson]

If I'm interpreting the drawing and your notes correctly, the ring in the middle of the drawing will have "6" around the circumference of the ring and spliced back onto itself which will make "3" thread through the ring's eye. This will twist the ring so the outer perimeter of the ring's edges will be contacting the boom and not allow it to lay flat. Not an issue but noisy if loose. The opposite will happen with the other one, and it will be orientated properly. The drawings do not represent what the notes describe.

The drawing was made for my current setup which uses single blocks. With rings, they would be rotated 90º with the 2-part line threaded through the ring and the load side with a tight eye splice to keep it captive. This would be true on both the internal ring and the external one. It should not be any more prone to sound that it currently is. I have never heard anything from it given that it almost always has a little bit of tension.
I am not planning to change my rig but was looking at options for another C30 that wants to do the same upgrade. Rings are much cheaper than blocks for a given line size and load.

 

[dlochner]

Take a look at the Practical Sailor article below.

In your drawing it appears that you have the restraint or mounting for the ring going through the middle of the ring and the load going around the ring. I believe this is incorrect. The loaded line should go through the middle of the ring, running around the circumference will increase the line's contact with the ring which will increase the friction of a loaded line.

Low-friction Rings - Practical Sailor

Since 1974, Practical Sailor’s independent testing has taken the guesswork out of boat and gear buying.

www.practical-sailor.com

 

[Scott T-Bird]

Dave is right about the diagram improperly rigging the rings - but I see the explanation notes, which call it correctly. Still, I wouldn't use a low-friction ring inside the boom like this. All you need is a single block with a becket in the center of the boom where you show a ring. The end of line 6 only needs to terminate at the clew. That would provide plenty of purchase.

 

[Hayden Watson]

As I have noted before, the drawing is of my current system which uses single blocks. IT DOES NOT SHOW RINGS. It was just posted to show the system I am considering.
Meanwhile, please ignore the drawing because it has nothing to do with my question.

My question was "Is there any difference between the brands of rings or do I just shop for the cheapest."

 

[dlochner]

My question was "Is there any difference between the brands of rings or do I just shop for the cheapest."

Did you read the P-S article I linked to? That should answer your question.

 

[Hayden Watson]

Did you read the P-S article I linked to? That should answer your question.

Perfect. I had not seen the link. (I got discracted looking at the pictures.)

 

[Hayden Watson]

It sounds like the conclusion of PS was exactly in alignment with my preliminary hypothesis.
"Conclusions
While not a replacement for ball bearing blocks, rings are probably the best choice for something on every boat. Next time you are rigging a small cascade, a rigging tweak, or something with huge loads, give low friction rings a look."

 

[Richard19068]

Perfect. I had not seen the link. (I got discracted looking at the pictures.)

Funny. I did too.

 

[thinwater]

Perfect. I had not seen the link. (I got discracted looking at the pictures.)

I have 6 different brands on my boat. They are all good, within the limits of what they are (lowish friction, compact, strong, and very light).

 

[Jaxn]

I like the tylaska rings, but haven't tried others. I'm using them for inhaulers, vang cascade, etc.

I recently did an in-boom outhaul cascade and used Ronstan 20mm soft attach blocks instead of rings. I spliced the dynema to the block and then ran a control line through the cascade. it was a little cheaper than rings.

 

[All U Get]

I made my own with Dyneema and used them to redirect lines and as emergency connections With a mechanical advantage.