28 Jun 2006 09:29:16
Peter
Broke two masts in last month...

Same sail: Simmer X-Type 7.4 (2004, 2005?). First the original SC8 mast
broke ~10cm above the boom. While waiting for replacement I started using
old Powerex Wave 430 75% on 58cm carbon extension which promptly broke ~30cm
above the boom (inside the sleeve, puncturing it in several places).

I wonder if I'm rigging the sail wrong? I usually apply enough downhaul to
make 2/3 of upper (big) panel loose, then ~2-3cm positive outhaul. Both
times when mast broke there was a bit more outhaul than usual, and I was
just sailing along without making any radical moves.

Peter




28 Jun 2006 06:46:49
Glenn Woodell
Re: Broke two masts in last month...

How old were the masts? What was happening each time. I can't imagine
that rigging it as you described would cause it.

Glenn

On Wed, 28 Jun 2006 09:29:16 +0300, "Peter" <[email protected] >
wrote:

>Same sail: Simmer X-Type 7.4 (2004, 2005?). First the original SC8 mast
>broke ~10cm above the boom. While waiting for replacement I started using
>old Powerex Wave 430 75% on 58cm carbon extension which promptly broke ~30cm
>above the boom (inside the sleeve, puncturing it in several places).
>
>I wonder if I'm rigging the sail wrong? I usually apply enough downhaul to
>make 2/3 of upper (big) panel loose, then ~2-3cm positive outhaul. Both
>times when mast broke there was a bit more outhaul than usual, and I was
>just sailing along without making any radical moves.
>
>Peter
>



28 Jun 2006 14:20:14
Peter
Re: Broke two masts in last month...

Well, the SC8 was <1yo, and Powerex 430 was really old (bought it used in
2003) but in really good shape and not used often - no nicks or cuts or
anything, always stored in protective tube thingies.

We'll see if Simmer honours the warranty... should have answer soon (btw I
cant imagine why these guys use serial number sticker instead of engraving
it on the mast... the sticker got washed off really soon)

As I said there was bit more positive outhaul than usual, maybe 4-5cm - I
had released the downhaul a bit to get some more early planing juice out of
it, but didnt bother with the outhaul.

> How old were the masts? What was happening each time. I can't imagine
> that rigging it as you described would cause it.
>
> Glenn
>
> On Wed, 28 Jun 2006 09:29:16 +0300, "Peter" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>>Same sail: Simmer X-Type 7.4 (2004, 2005?). First the original SC8 mast
>>broke ~10cm above the boom. While waiting for replacement I started using
>>old Powerex Wave 430 75% on 58cm carbon extension which promptly broke
>>~30cm
>>above the boom (inside the sleeve, puncturing it in several places).
>>
>>I wonder if I'm rigging the sail wrong? I usually apply enough downhaul to
>>make 2/3 of upper (big) panel loose, then ~2-3cm positive outhaul. Both
>>times when mast broke there was a bit more outhaul than usual, and I was
>>just sailing along without making any radical moves.
>>
>>Peter
>>
>




28 Jun 2006 11:54:07
Ellen Faller
Re: Broke two masts in last month...

If you were using a 58 cm extension with a 430 mast, your boom
attachment was in an area of the mast which was not reinforced. With a
fair amount of downhaul, it may have been more than the mast was
designed to take.
You didn't mention what length the first mast was, and if it was a 460,
the cause may be different.
Ellen

Peter wrote:
> Well, the SC8 was <1yo, and Powerex 430 was really old (bought it used in
> 2003) but in really good shape and not used often - no nicks or cuts or
> anything, always stored in protective tube thingies.
>
> We'll see if Simmer honours the warranty... should have answer soon (btw I
> cant imagine why these guys use serial number sticker instead of engraving
> it on the mast... the sticker got washed off really soon)
>
> As I said there was bit more positive outhaul than usual, maybe 4-5cm - I
> had released the downhaul a bit to get some more early planing juice out of
> it, but didnt bother with the outhaul.
>
>
>>How old were the masts? What was happening each time. I can't imagine
>>that rigging it as you described would cause it.
>>
>>Glenn
>>
>>On Wed, 28 Jun 2006 09:29:16 +0300, "Peter" <[email protected]>
>>wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Same sail: Simmer X-Type 7.4 (2004, 2005?). First the original SC8 mast
>>>broke ~10cm above the boom. While waiting for replacement I started using
>>>old Powerex Wave 430 75% on 58cm carbon extension which promptly broke
>>>~30cm
>>>above the boom (inside the sleeve, puncturing it in several places).
>>>
>>>I wonder if I'm rigging the sail wrong? I usually apply enough downhaul to
>>>make 2/3 of upper (big) panel loose, then ~2-3cm positive outhaul. Both
>>>times when mast broke there was a bit more outhaul than usual, and I was
>>>just sailing along without making any radical moves.
>>>
>>>Peter
>>>
>>
>
>


28 Jun 2006 18:34:40
sailquik (Roger Jackson)
Re: Broke two masts in last month...

Hi Peter,
Gotta agree with Ellen here.
If your "Simmer X-Type 7.4 (2004, 2005?)" sail needed a 460 cm mast like
the current 2006 7.4 m2 X-Type (for a luff length of 486) and you were
using an SC-8 430 mast then I don't think you will get any help with a
warranty replacement as that's not the correct mast for 7.4 m2 sail.
The failure of the Powerex 430 cm 30 cm above the boom is also
indicative of having too short (and soft at IMCS 21-23)a mast in a sail
designed to rig on a 460 cm IMCS 24-26 mast.
As Ellen suggests, most masts are only reinforced (for hoop strength to
avoid being crushed by the boom clamp or boom clamp lines) up to a
certain height. On Powerex masts, this is the area that has the "X"s
on it. Was your boom significantly higher than the area marked out with
the "X"s?
If you've been using 430 cm masts in a sail designed for a stiffer 460
mast, you've probably been losing alot of performance.
The top of the sail would "dump" way too early, and you would never get
the tension profiles right lower in the sail on a 430 mast.
Hope this helps,

Ellen Faller wrote:
> If you were using a 58 cm extension with a 430 mast, your boom
> attachment was in an area of the mast which was not reinforced. With a
> fair amount of downhaul, it may have been more than the mast was
> designed to take.
> You didn't mention what length the first mast was, and if it was a 460,
> the cause may be different.
> Ellen
>
> Peter wrote:
>
>> Well, the SC8 was <1yo, and Powerex 430 was really old (bought it used
>> in 2003) but in really good shape and not used often - no nicks or
>> cuts or anything, always stored in protective tube thingies.
>>
>> We'll see if Simmer honours the warranty... should have answer soon
>> (btw I cant imagine why these guys use serial number sticker instead
>> of engraving it on the mast... the sticker got washed off really soon)
>>
>> As I said there was bit more positive outhaul than usual, maybe 4-5cm
>> - I had released the downhaul a bit to get some more early planing
>> juice out of it, but didnt bother with the outhaul.
>>
>>
>>> How old were the masts? What was happening each time. I can't imagine
>>> that rigging it as you described would cause it.
>>>
>>> Glenn
>>>
>>> On Wed, 28 Jun 2006 09:29:16 +0300, "Peter" <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Same sail: Simmer X-Type 7.4 (2004, 2005?). First the original SC8 mast
>>>> broke ~10cm above the boom. While waiting for replacement I started
>>>> using
>>>> old Powerex Wave 430 75% on 58cm carbon extension which promptly
>>>> broke ~30cm
>>>> above the boom (inside the sleeve, puncturing it in several places).
>>>>
>>>> I wonder if I'm rigging the sail wrong? I usually apply enough
>>>> downhaul to
>>>> make 2/3 of upper (big) panel loose, then ~2-3cm positive outhaul. Both
>>>> times when mast broke there was a bit more outhaul than usual, and I
>>>> was
>>>> just sailing along without making any radical moves.
>>>>
>>>> Peter
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>


28 Jun 2006 22:22:38
Peter
Re: Broke two masts in last month...

Hi Roger & Ellen,

you're prolly right about that 430 Powerex. Yes, it's too short - sail calls
for 460 and this is what my SC8 was. Never noticed any X marks on the
mast... but actually the sail felt almost right even with 430, just needed
lots of downhaul. Well, that 430 was really old anyways, but it's still a
(financial) loss.

SC8 mast was correct length (460), in fact I bought it together with the
sail. Too bad X-Type 7.4 does not call for RDM... I would happily go that
route.

Peter


> Hi Peter,
> Gotta agree with Ellen here.
> If your "Simmer X-Type 7.4 (2004, 2005?)" sail needed a 460 cm mast like
> the current 2006 7.4 m2 X-Type (for a luff length of 486) and you were
> using an SC-8 430 mast then I don't think you will get any help with a
> warranty replacement as that's not the correct mast for 7.4 m2 sail.
> The failure of the Powerex 430 cm 30 cm above the boom is also indicative
> of having too short (and soft at IMCS 21-23)a mast in a sail designed to
> rig on a 460 cm IMCS 24-26 mast.
> As Ellen suggests, most masts are only reinforced (for hoop strength to
> avoid being crushed by the boom clamp or boom clamp lines) up to a certain
> height. On Powerex masts, this is the area that has the "X"s
> on it. Was your boom significantly higher than the area marked out with
> the "X"s?
> If you've been using 430 cm masts in a sail designed for a stiffer 460
> mast, you've probably been losing alot of performance.
> The top of the sail would "dump" way too early, and you would never get
> the tension profiles right lower in the sail on a 430 mast.
> Hope this helps,
>
> Ellen Faller wrote:
>> If you were using a 58 cm extension with a 430 mast, your boom attachment
>> was in an area of the mast which was not reinforced. With a fair amount
>> of downhaul, it may have been more than the mast was designed to take.
>> You didn't mention what length the first mast was, and if it was a 460,
>> the cause may be different.
>> Ellen
>>
>> Peter wrote:
>>
>>> Well, the SC8 was <1yo, and Powerex 430 was really old (bought it used
>>> in 2003) but in really good shape and not used often - no nicks or cuts
>>> or anything, always stored in protective tube thingies.
>>>
>>> We'll see if Simmer honours the warranty... should have answer soon (btw
>>> I cant imagine why these guys use serial number sticker instead of
>>> engraving it on the mast... the sticker got washed off really soon)
>>>
>>> As I said there was bit more positive outhaul than usual, maybe 4-5cm -
>>> I had released the downhaul a bit to get some more early planing juice
>>> out of it, but didnt bother with the outhaul.
>>>
>>>
>>>> How old were the masts? What was happening each time. I can't imagine
>>>> that rigging it as you described would cause it.
>>>>
>>>> Glenn
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, 28 Jun 2006 09:29:16 +0300, "Peter" <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Same sail: Simmer X-Type 7.4 (2004, 2005?). First the original SC8
>>>>> mast
>>>>> broke ~10cm above the boom. While waiting for replacement I started
>>>>> using
>>>>> old Powerex Wave 430 75% on 58cm carbon extension which promptly broke
>>>>> ~30cm
>>>>> above the boom (inside the sleeve, puncturing it in several places).
>>>>>
>>>>> I wonder if I'm rigging the sail wrong? I usually apply enough
>>>>> downhaul to
>>>>> make 2/3 of upper (big) panel loose, then ~2-3cm positive outhaul.
>>>>> Both
>>>>> times when mast broke there was a bit more outhaul than usual, and I
>>>>> was
>>>>> just sailing along without making any radical moves.
>>>>>
>>>>> Peter
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>