Sacrificing Sacrificial Anodes

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jul 25, 2007
320
-Irwin -Citation 40 Wilmington, NC
I call them awful because they are either a complete waste of money or a band aid for another problem that should be correctly fixed. As for scrap zinc I do not recommend it. First problem would be a good electrical connection to the zinc. With the fish ones the wire is molded into the zinc this insure a good contact for the life of the zinc. Attaching a wire to the outside it would be difficult to maintain the connection as corrosion would be constant. If you know your reg zincs are wasted and you want a short term back up the fish could help but you have to make sure you have a good contact to your bonding system. The spring clamp they come with is not in my mind good enough to keep a good electrical connection.
 
Feb 6, 1998
11,701
Canadian Sailcraft 36T Casco Bay, ME
Zinc wastage needing replacement every 90-150 days is way too fast. Properly set up you should see no more than 25% wastage per year.
This is dependent on many, many factors including current, salinity of the water you are in, the electrical contact between shaft and zinc, electrical potentials of the submersed metals, weight,volume of the protected metals. etc..


The reason zincs get wasted and are there in the first place is to protect metal as electrons flow from 1 metal to another. Electrons will only flow if there is an imbalance between metals. If your bonding system is properly set up with a bonding wire connecting the metals there should be no imbalance as the metals will be at the same electrical potential, therefore no electrical flow.
They are there to be the sacrificial metal, why they are named a sacrificial anode.. Any time there are dissimilar metals submersed in an electrolyte there is a "galvanic circuit" and the resulting electron flow, bonded or not. Each metal has is own electrical signature or "potential" + or -.... If bonding worked, as described, (unless I misinterpreted the statement) then theoretically we would not need a sacrificial metal to protect the more noble metals. But when you submerse dissimilar metals in an electrolyte you have created a galvanic circuit which now needs protection beyond bonding. A bonded boat will also require more zinc content to protect the added weigh/volume of the underwater metals and maintain good protection levels..

If all your underwater metals were identical and you were not plugged into your neighbors boat then, in theory, you may not need a sacrificial anode because with identical metals, electrically, there is no galvanic cell created.. Unfortunately we have numerous dissimilar metals on our boats, each with their own electrical potential, and all submersed in an electrolyte.

When dissimilar metals are immersed in an electrolyte the electrical potentials of the different metals cause the least noble metal to corrode and shed into the electrolyte. We attempt to control this by adding a metal that is not critical to the system and that becomes the new least noble metal. It sacrifices itself to save the more noble and more critical metals from erosion. Usually these are zinc in salt water but more boaters are now using Mil Spec aluminum anodes.

The key with zincs is that they are more negative in electrical potential than the metal we are trying to protect but not too negative, like magnesium, as that can cause other issues. These metals are termed "sacrificial" because that is what they are, expendable.

Some anodes in salt water can last longer than others, such as MIL Spec MIL-A-24779 aluminum anodes.

Salinity, current, how much you use the boat, mass/weight of the metals being protected, electrical contact and the electrical potentials of those metals being protected all contribute to the zinc erosion speed. Because of these factors what is "normal" for one boat may not be "normal" for another boat in another area and the best we can hope for is a range of "normal" for a certain area.




Assuming your bonding system is intact if you are plugged into shore power you could get an imbalance from the shore ground that will cause DC currant (AC does not cause galvanic corrosion in most cases) to flow from your boat to the dock or a boat nearby. Installing a galvanic isolator will prevent this.
Exactly, without some form of isolation when you "plug in" you now are physically connected to all the underwater metals of your neighbors boats. If their zincs have eroded your zincs are now trying to protect their underwater metals. If you have a bronze shaft/bronze prop and have normally had 12 months service in your water, and plug into a boat with a lot more metal, and AQ-22 shafts and graphite packing the speed at which your anodes erode will increase.


If you are having to add more zincs or worse yet hang those awful fish zincs from your boat then you have an issue and the best thing to do is fix it.
If you have been taken out of your normal range and your normal range is within what is considered normal then yes you must address why the zincs are eroding so fast. I often find little protection on boats with fully intact slow eroding zincs.

For the OP he should be able to get by with 1 zinc once a year at most.
I don't know how that can be said without taking actual measurements of the boat in question using an Ag/AgCl reference cell to first determine how much zinc he actually needs to hit the desired level of protection. We would ideally then need to know what is "normal" erosion for the salinity, current etc. at that marina on perfect boats known to have sufficient zinc protection and zero on-board or foreign electrical issues.

It is important to remember that anodes should be replaced when about 50% depleted, not when they are gone.

Just yesterday I was working on a boat where the steaming and deck light circuit to the spar had "shorted" to the spar.. Without a thorough corrosion inspection, testing every part of the on-board electrical circuits, it is hard to know why the zincs are eroding so quickly or lasting so long...

Most people just slap on more zinc than they technically need and call it a day. In most cases they have decent results...
 
Feb 26, 2011
1,440
Achilles SD-130 Alameda, CA
Zinc wastage needing replacement every 90-150 days is way too fast. Properly set up you should see no more than 25% wastage per year.
While having to replace zincs every 3 months can certainly be considered excessive, your expectation of 2 years is completely outside of my experience. Having performed over 20,000 hull cleanings during my time in the business, I find that properly mounted anodes typically need replacement every 6-9 months.
 
Jan 4, 2006
7,166
Hunter 310 West Vancouver, B.C.
Two Years Expectation ....................

While having to replace zincs every 3 months can certainly be considered excessive, your expectation of 2 years is completely outside of my experience.
...................... for zincs is actually within my expectation when you consider the following:

1. Although I haul my boat annually to inspect, I use three shaft zincs. Lots of zinc surface area. Also good insurance against some piece of crap stink potter (with major electrical problems) moving in next to me.

2. I protect a very small surface area of exposed SS shaft and bronze prop.

3. We have a large stream flowing into our marina and the water is brackish. Freezes every winter when we get a degree or two below 0 deg. C.

4. The water here is bloody cold, year 'round.

I also use Camp zincs which we are told are REALLY cheap crap. After cleaning my shaft and prop on the hard, I get complaints from the neighbours about the excessive glare. Now, what would happen if I used a really high class zinc :confused: ? ? ? ?

“Common sense is as rare as genius.”
Ralph Waldo Emerson
 
Jan 30, 2012
1,140
Nor'Sea 27 "Kiwanda" Portland/ Anacortes
The "zinc fish" connected to the prop/shaft/motor assembly and/or bonded fittings is not inherently bad and probably not worthless.

Provided the zinc is clean and there is a low resistance connection to the metals you want to protect it is no different than bolting a zinc to your underwater metal. Hull potential difference does not change but zinc surface area is increased. For example, over-the-side zinc is very useful in an electrically active marina. FastBottoms customers would call on him perhaps once a year rather than every 6 mo because using an over-the-side zinc in the marina means total surface area of the zinc on the boat is increased and the rate of mass loss is less rapid. His customers would use him to unwind the zinc wire from the prop because they forgot to pull up the zinc before leaving, but - this is the only risk involved.

By the way stray AC is very much a factor in marina zinc wastage. Stray AC will accelerate wastage of underwater metals and is effective at accelerating waste at the least noble end of things - zinc, aluminum, magnesium. AC is also effective at destroying alloys like manganese bronze and brass because these alloys that have appreciable zinc content. AC is not effective as wasting alloys with little or no zinc content - cupro nickel and silicon alloys.

By the way also - scrap zinc as anodes - used over the side or in any other situation is worthless. It is impossible to avoid contamination by other metals in a remelt case.

Charles
 
Last edited:
Feb 26, 2011
1,440
Achilles SD-130 Alameda, CA
...................... for zincs is actually within my expectation when you consider the following:

1. Although I haul my boat annually to inspect, I use three shaft zincs. Lots of zinc surface area. Also good insurance against some piece of crap stink potter (with major electrical problems) moving in next to me.

2. I protect a very small surface area of exposed SS shaft and bronze prop.

3. We have a large stream flowing into our marina and the water is brackish. Freezes every winter when we get a degree or two below 0 deg. C.

4. The water here is bloody cold, year 'round.

I also use Camp zincs which we are told are REALLY cheap crap. After cleaning my shaft and prop on the hard, I get complaints from the neighbours about the excessive glare. Now, what would happen if I used a really high class zinc :confused: ? ? ? ?

“Common sense is as rare as genius.”
Ralph Waldo Emerson
Your experience with your personal boat notwithstanding, I service many hundreds of boats and so get to see every available zinc brand in action under a wide variety of conditions. You have good feelings about Camp zincs- hey that's great for you. Me, I would never use them unless there simply was no other option. I find that they do not last as long as my preferred brands, which are Reliance and Sea Shield.

BTW- in brackish water you should not be using zinc anodes.

 
Jun 21, 2007
2,117
Hunter Cherubini 36_80-82 Sausalito / San Francisco Bay
... Some anodes in salt water can last longer than others, such as MIL Spec MIL-A-24779 aluminum anodes...
I am wondering why there hasn't been more discussion about Aluminum/Indium anodes that were mentioned by Maine Sail.

I posted about a year ago about these as an alternative to traditional zinc anodes.

About the time of my posting, I was beginning a trial with a different anode regime. Learning that Aluminum anodes were a bit less noble than zinc (see the attached table and diagram jpg's*), I thought that maybe adding an aluminum fish anode, while at the same time still maintaining the zinc traditional shaft anode, would mean that the aluminum anode would sacrifice faster than zinc and so retard the depletion rate of the zinc shaft anode. Presumably, both would still protect my prop! I installed a shaft brush inside the boat to provide the least electrical resistance between the Al fish and the prop shaft. Also, I connected a fish pig tail lead to the engine block for good measure.

Six months later, I replaced the Al fish anode which maybe was down 40-50%. From visual observation, the zinc shaft anode still looked pretty robust. Prior to adding the Al fish, my zinc shaft anodes tended to last about 4-5 months and certainly were "thrown off" by six months if I hadn't asked a diver put on a new one.

Just two weeks ago, noticing a diver was cleaning my neighbor's boat, I asked him to take a hard look at my shaft zinc, now 11.5 months in service. He said that it probably had a couple of more months useful life left. Since he was at hand, I did have him put on a new shaft zinc. He left the 11.5 month zinc in place to be thrown off eventually.

So to me anyway, it appears that the Al fish anode is significantly retarding the depletion rate of the shaft zinc. For the Al fish anode, I am using ones sold to the crab/lobster industry for protecting pots. Cheap compared to shaft collar zinc + diver fees to install. He is a link to my purchase location.

http://www.rotometals.com/Crab-Lobster-Pot-Anodes-Zinc-or-Aluminum-s/41.htm

The other photo is of my six month Al/In anode next to a brand new one.

I await the backlash from forum members!

(* On the diagram attachment, observe the Al/Indium Alloy location to the left of zinc -- not the aluminum location which is to the right.)
 

Attachments

Feb 6, 1998
11,701
Canadian Sailcraft 36T Casco Bay, ME
By the way stray AC is very much a factor in marina zinc wastage. Stray AC will accelerate wastage of underwater metals and is effective at accelerating waste at the least noble end of things - zinc, aluminum, magnesium. AC is also effective at destroying alloys like manganese bronze and brass because these alloys that have appreciable zinc content. AC is not effective as wasting alloys with little or no zinc content - cupro nickel and silicon alloys.

By the way also - scrap zinc as anodes - used over the side or in any other situation is worthless. It is impossible to avoid contamination by other metals in a remelt case.

Charles
Charles,

Do you have any data on this? I have taken numerous courses with guys like Rifkin etc. and never heard this at the typical "leakage" rates we see in marinas. The opposite is what we tend to hear. Would love to get some data on this if you have it avaiable...
 
Jan 30, 2012
1,140
Nor'Sea 27 "Kiwanda" Portland/ Anacortes
Yes

Dick Troberg published an article on this. He is ME EE worked for engineering consulting firm, presently does corrosion exclusively, and was also at Fluke for a time. He lives near Everett WA. Can't remember where his article was published but I will look. Have his phone if you want.

Also take a look at Rifkin's article here - http://www.qualitymarineservices.net/ - Go to Documents, Item No. 8 "Ibex Advanced Corrosion Seminar" and begin at page 29.

Charles
 
Jul 25, 2007
320
-Irwin -Citation 40 Wilmington, NC
Back to the Op's question. Given your boat a hunter 35 with a prop shaft a prop, a strut , a rudder shaft, and keel it is common, no let me change that very common for a vessel of this type in good condition without electrical problems to use 1 use zinc per year. And this one zinc would not be totally wasted at the end of that year. I base this on surveying well over 100 boats a year, 30-40 galvanic corrosion surveys a year and 40 years doing this stuff. This would apply to average conditions. Yeah sure with a 2 knot current and different salt levels you will see a change. I know we can get drawn into endless discussion here but the fact is a boat of this size and type with this amount of underwater metal should not be going though 3 zincs in less than 12 months. I would recommend to the OP that he hire someone who knows how to do a galvanic survey (if he can find one) to find the cause. His claim of going 2 year with 3 zincs sounds about right to me I bet he could have gotten away with 2 but that point is moot. If he is eating up 3 in less than 12 months there is a problem. If a boat of this type is going through zincs in 3 or even 6 months something is wrong.
 
Jan 4, 2006
7,166
Hunter 310 West Vancouver, B.C.
So to me anyway, it appears that the Al fish anode is significantly retarding the depletion rate of the shaft zinc. For the Al fish anode, I am using ones sold to the crab/lobster industry for protecting pots. Cheap compared to shaft collar zinc + diver fees to install.
Can you supply a cost comparison for zinc versus Al/In given a comparable mass for each ? Looks like a good way of saving your zincs (and submerged metal) if you're in a bad electrical situation.

Sure, elimination of the electrical problem is the first route to go but I can tell you from personal experience, when you're in a nice looking marina but surrounded by poorly maintained stink pots and you keep losing zincs ................ correcting the problem is going to be difficult if not impossible. They don't maintain their boats for themselves so they're sure as hell not going to maintain them for you.
 
Feb 26, 2011
1,440
Achilles SD-130 Alameda, CA
Can you supply a cost comparison for zinc versus Al/In given a comparable mass for each ?
Not too tough to get that info:

1" streamlined collar
Zinc- $6.00
Aluminum- $7.20

2 3/4" rudderplate
Zinc- $5.77
Aluminum- $7.07

"C" cap prop nut
Zinc- $10.26
Aluminum- $$10.22

Prices from www.boatzincs.com
 
Jun 21, 2007
2,117
Hunter Cherubini 36_80-82 Sausalito / San Francisco Bay
Hi Ralph:

To mention, I'm not an electrical engineer or chemist.

So I would advise that the cost/weight information is out there on the Internet if you search. The Al/In alloy crab pot anode I am using as a fish type costs only $2.59 each plus shipping. From memory (about a year ago) for equivalent dimensions, Al/In anodes will weigh about 50% of the zinc. And give the same or more amount of sacrificial life. Al/In collar shaft anodes are available. But my thought was/(is) that if the Al/In is less noble then a Al/In fish will sacrifice at a slightly faster rate than the collar zinc anode thus increasing the interval between zinc shaft anode replacement which is more costly. But please recognize that this is the logic of a person with only chemistry 1A/B/C and physics 4 A/B/C in college. Not a masters or a Phd.

Another supposed advantage of Al/In is environmental. A local and well-known boatyard told me that they are phasing out Zn in favor of Al/In for this reason.

Some more background about my situation. I do not plug in to AC. I let the solar keep my batteries topped up. The DC switch when I'm not visiting the boat is always off. However, I suppose that I might have some current leakage through the always-on power to the bilge pump and the maintenance current for the memory of my 12V Pioneer stereo.

rardi
 
Feb 6, 1998
11,701
Canadian Sailcraft 36T Casco Bay, ME
His claim of going 2 year with 3 zincs sounds about right to me I bet he could have gotten away with 2 but that point is moot. If he is eating up 3 in less than 12 months there is a problem. If a boat of this type is going through zincs in 3 or even 6 months something is wrong.
He did say he had normally been using two, not three...

I normally place two zinc anodes on the exposed section of my prop shaft and haul the boat every two years for new zincs and anti-fouling. On this schedule the zincs are usually pretty shot when I get to see them again around their second anniversary.
 
Aug 19, 2004
239
Hunter 35 Vancouver, BC
He did say he had normally been using two, not three...
Wow! What have I started? Surprisingly both Maine Sail and Sailvayu are correct. I did say that I normally have been installing two zincs and this is what I have done the last two times. However I just looked at some old notes and found that before that I had been using three zincs each time! Despite this totally unscientific variation, the prop and shaft have cleaned up beautifully, show no sign of any damage and the boat is now back in the water.
 
Jan 30, 2012
1,140
Nor'Sea 27 "Kiwanda" Portland/ Anacortes
Really don't think you started anything because what you are describing amounts to an electro-chemical event and so things are really not a matter of opinion. What you see is a pretty good discussion on the factors that can lead to accelerated zinc wasting.

You are two years for two zincs or two years for three zincs (according to your last post.) The only thing one should be interested in is whether the zincs are calcified at the end of two years time - that is they have considerable white deposits. In that case, the zinc amount is too much and the combination of these several zincs (3) will not erode fast enough to stay active over the full 24 months.

The general idea is enough zinc (surface area) to last one year and the term "last" means 50% gone in one year. If that is what is happening then you are dead-bang on quantity wise. Just consider you should replace them when 50% gone even if that occurs before 24 months.

Charles

ps Personally I lay on new zincs every year. If the boat is out of the water during the winter - like I do - I would still change them every year even though they have only had 8 months submersion time. Keep 'em clean thus active.
 
Jan 4, 2006
7,166
Hunter 310 West Vancouver, B.C.
The only thing one should be interested in is whether the zincs are calcified at the end of two years time - that is they have considerable white deposits. In that case, the zinc amount is too much and the combination of these several zincs (3) will not erode fast enough to stay active over the full 24 months.
How does the calcium (or calcium salts) precipitate out on the zinc if it's initially dissolved in the sea water? Something change the solubility constant ?
 
Aug 19, 2004
239
Hunter 35 Vancouver, BC
Two and Half Zincs?

You are two years for two zincs or two years for three zincs (according to your last post.) The only thing one should be interested in is whether the zincs are calcified at the end of two years time - that is they have considerable white deposits. In that case, the zinc amount is too much and the combination of these several zincs (3) will not erode fast enough to stay active over the full 24 months.

The general idea is enough zinc (surface area) to last one year and the term "last" means 50% gone in one year. If that is what is happening then you are dead-bang on quantity wise. Just consider you should replace them when 50% gone even if that occurs before 24 months.
Now that I think about it, I do recall that there was calcification after two years with three zincs. So unless conditions in the marina have changed (entirely possible) then perhaps 2 and a half zincs is about optimum for me!
 
Jan 30, 2012
1,140
Nor'Sea 27 "Kiwanda" Portland/ Anacortes
Ralph

It is a calcium carbonate precipitation thus the whitish color - I think. Stems from calcium salts and CO2 which are a part of the seawater mix. Where surface degradation of zinc occurs at too slow a rate then calcium salts apparently can precipitate and build on the zinc surface and eventually the zinc can no longer degrade to Zn++ + 2e-. No zinc ions obviously means no protection is available to the more noble metal the zinc is supposed to protect. Just like if you painted over a zinc.

I will try to find references for the equations. Meanwhile try maybe UBC or U of W SeaGrant for better sources than me.

Charles
 
Status
Not open for further replies.