Rocna Anchor Recall

[Ken Juul]

WM recall on Ronca Anchors.

http://content.westmarine.com/documents/pdfs/RECALLS/PRODUCT%20SPECIFICATION%20NOTICE%20FOR%20WEBSITE%20-%208%2001.pdf

Disclaimer for "noworries":  changed topic heading to include the word "recall"

[David Urscheler]

It's not a recall as much as it is a "heads-up" which I commend WM for. What it doesn't say is if this use of a "weaker" steel was a glitch or a permanent change.

[scotty]

I got the "recall" notice also.  It will take some research to find out if I'll keep the anchor, or switch.  I'll share what I find out, and would appreciate hearing what you all (y'all) find out too.  I went to the West marine site (recalls) and linked to the Rocna website.     www.rocna.com/WMupdate
Thier site was slim on technical details (citing proprietary intellectral property concerns) about the steel involved.  They did, however, cite the cirteria for thier RINA (whatever that is?) standards. The breaking strengths they cite are very impressive, with a deformation strength of 63,140 lbs of force (which is twice the breaking load of G40 chain).  I have questions about how the steel will hold up over time, but have to admit that the underwater time of most anchors is minimal.  At this point my thought is that I'll probably keep the anchor because it has great set and break-loose performance.  I need to think on this a bit more.

[mainesail]

I got the "recall" notice also.  It will take some research to find out if I'll keep the anchor, or switch.  I'll share what I find out, and would appreciate hearing what you all (y'all) find out too.  I went to the West marine site (recalls) and linked to the Rocna website.     www.rocna.com/WMupdate
Thier site was slim on technical details (citing proprietary intellectral property concerns) about the steel involved.  They did, however, cite the cirteria for thier RINA (whatever that is?) standards. The breaking strengths they cite are very impressive, with a deformation strength of 63,140 lbs of force (which is twice the breaking load of G40 chain).  I have questions about how the steel will hold up over time, but have to admit that the underwater time of most anchors is minimal.  At this point my thought is that I'll probably keep the anchor because it has great set and break-loose performance.  I need to think on this a bit more.

Consider that this anchor came back aboard with the chain and rode..



Also keep in mind that as of Aprim 2011 they did not yet have a RINA certification. They have been  simply misleading customers on that subject since at least 2009. All they have had is a letter stating that the testing has been completed.


The Rocna specs used to be plastered all over the web site. Steve Bambury the CEO posted these specs back in April of 2011. When proven to be untrue as related to past and currently built Chinese Rocna's they pulled the specs off their site and replace it with "our anchors are fit for purpose"....

Material correctness
The design and manufacture specification of metals for the Rocna anchor is as follows:

For the fluke: G400 grade high strength low alloy steel. Rocna Anchors use equivalent grade Q235D.

Properties:
UTS (Ultimate Tensile Strength) – typically 370-500 MPA
2% yield – minimum 215 MPA
Elongation – typically 25%

For the shank: G800 grade high strength low alloy steel. Rocna Anchors use equivalent grade Q620D.

Properties:
UTS (Ultimate Tensile Strength) – typically 710-880 MPA
2% yield – minimum 600 MPA
Elongation – typically 15%

[Ralph Masters]

Hey mainsail,
It fits better in the roller like that, not hitting the fiberglass, nice mode.

Ralph

[scotty]

Mainsail,
Holy s**t!  What conditions were in effect then that happened???  What year was the anchor bought?  Is it your boat?

The Rocna web-site does link to a page which showes a certification issued by RINA on May 25, 2011 good to May 24, 2016.  Thanks for the information, especially the picture.  It's worth more than just a few thousand words.

[mainesail]

Mainsail,
Holy s**t!  What conditions were in effect then that happened???  What year was the anchor bought?  Is it your boat?

The Rocna web-site does link to a page which showes a certification issued by RINA on May 25, 2011 good to May 24, 2016.  Thanks for the information, especially the picture.  It's worth more than just a few thousand words.

You're right they FINALLY got approval. As of April of 2011 Steve Bambury admitted they did not have RINA certifications. This despite the fact that they had been claiming it since 2009!!!!! With all the mistruths from Rocna it's hard to determine what's true and what's not anymore...

Here's a press release from 2010 stating RINA but they only got in in late May of this year. Look in the WM catalog and it also claims the same well before they had the certification for SHHP.
http://www.prweb.com/releases/2010/05/prweb4032664.htm

[Ron Hill]

MainSail's anchor almost looks like it was made in some foreign country that may not have too tight a QA &/or exacting metallurgy!!

That's why I caution - don't ever think that a Bruce made in Belgum is the same as the Claw made in China! 
Metallurgy does make a difference. 

[DaveM]

I emailed Rocna a few days ago and this is what I got back. Enjoy.

For a period of time during the first quarter of 2010, the shanks of some Rocna anchors were manufactured in China with steel sourced from a different supplier than usual.

While this steel had been approved on the understanding that it was of the same specification as that used previously, we recently discovered that this was not the case and that some anchors were produced using shank steel with a reduced specification. We stress that only a limited number of anchors were affected and at the same time we are deeply sorry for this mistake and apologise for any concern this may have created. Since discovering this discrepancy, our primary concern has been to ensure that these particular anchors are undeniably fit for purpose and pose no safety risk. With this in mind we engaged a number of professional independent organizations to undertake extensive evaluations and testing. This has been a comprehensive and time-consuming process that is now complete.

All Canadian and New Zealand made anchors were not affected and were made to original specifications.

We hope this answers your questions but please feel free to contact us anytime if you have further concerns.

Kind regards,

Tanya Le Fleming Burrow
Rocna Anchors
t: +64 9 447 1961 | f: +64 9 480 9576
www.rocna.com | www.rocna.com/kb

[mainesail]

I emailed Rocna a few days ago and this is what I got back. Enjoy.

For a period of time during the first quarter of 2010, the shanks of some Rocna anchors were manufactured in China with steel sourced from a different supplier than usual.

While this steel had been approved on the understanding that it was of the same specification as that used previously, we recently discovered that this was not the case and that some anchors were produced using shank steel with a reduced specification. We stress that only a limited number of anchors were affected and at the same time we are deeply sorry for this mistake and apologise for any concern this may have created. Since discovering this discrepancy, our primary concern has been to ensure that these particular anchors are undeniably fit for purpose and pose no safety risk. With this in mind we engaged a number of professional independent organizations to undertake extensive evaluations and testing. This has been a comprehensive and time-consuming process that is now complete.

All Canadian and New Zealand made anchors were not affected and were made to original specifications.

We hope this answers your questions but please feel free to contact us anytime if you have further concerns.

Kind regards,

Tanya Le Fleming Burrow
Rocna Anchors
t: +64 9 447 1961 | f: +64 9 480 9576
www.rocna.com | www.rocna.com/kb

More rubbish.... This company has no ethics... The anchor pictured above bent in 2009 and was not the first of the sub standard Chinese anchors. Manson tested some Rocna anchors in APRIL or 2011 and found them VERY, VERY sub par with ultimate tensile strengths of the shanks to be less than HALF of Peter Smiths design specification and less than HALF of what Manson uses on the Supreme. They even posted the receipt of the purchase date.

A customer in Washington state also had his own Rocna tested in May of 2011 by an independent lab, paid for it himself, and also found it to be made well below Peter Smith's original spec so these "few" anchors seem to still be well populated well into 2011. The fact remains that Hold Fast is NOT building these anchors to a spec that Peter Smith the designer INSISTED must be used.

I can assure you that WM would not put out that notice without doing their own testing so they too know the anchors don't meet the specs Peter Smith intended the anchor to have.

If I owned a Chinese Rocna it would be going back to WM and I'd be walking out with a Manson Supreme..

The Rocna is an incredible design but unfortunately manufactured by a company with little in the way of ethics, honesty or integrity..

Just my .02 from a guy who still uses and owns a BC built Rocna....

The bottom line is Hold Fast is STILL NOT building these anchors with the grade of steel Peter Smith INSISTED must be used.

[DarthOccam]

As fate would have it, I took delivery this week of a Manson Supreme anchor.  The enclosed literature claims that they are all manufactured in New Zealand.  Was also $100 less expensive than the equivalent Rocna.

Michael

[scotty]

I got a reply from Rocna today.  I underlined an interesting section:

Hi Scotty

Thank you for your enquiry and the concerns raised.

The exact materials used and grades of steel are carefully chosen to ensure they exceed the RINA Super High Holding Power (SHHP) requirements by a considerable margin, as mentioned above. Our manufacturing material specifications have evolved over time, primarily to reflect the material locally available in the different countries where our anchors have been produced, our technical website content had remained largely unchanged. This oversight has recently been brought to our attention and we apologize for any confusion this may have caused. We have now updated this website content accordingly.

All Rocna anchors are designed to meet or exceed the requirements of SHHP according to RINA and Lloyds rules, and our relationship with RINA has resulted in Type Approval classification to SHHP (currently Rocna Original sizes 4kg-110kg only – you can see our certificate http://www.rocna.com/assets/Uploads/Rocna-RINA-Cert.pdf  ). This involved extensive seabed tests, mechanical tests, and drawings approval, and our work with RINA continues.

Current production anchors were recently tested again and found to withstand forces significantly in excess of the SHHP proof load requirements, and also exceeded the breaking strength of the recommended G40 chain by a considerable margin.

For a period of time during the first quarter of 2010, the shanks of some galvanised Rocna anchors were manufactured with steel sourced from a different supplier than usual. While this steel had been approved on the understanding that it was of the same specification as that used previously, we recently discovered that this was not the case and that some anchors were produced using shank steel with a reduced specification.

We stress that only a limited number of anchors were affected, and no 15kg Rocna's were part of the batch of reduced grade steel shipped to the North America market. We apologise for any concern this may have created. Since discovering this discrepancy, our primary concern has been to ensure that these particular anchors are undeniably fit for purpose and pose no safety risk.

In regards to your second email and testing, we engaged a number of professional independent organizations to undertake extensive evaluations and testing. This has been a comprehensive and time-consuming process that is now complete.

The results are:
•             Our current production anchors were independently load tested using the RINA Super High Holding Power (SHHP) Type Approval test methodology. SHHP is the highest anchor rating available.
•             Due to the unavailability of any of the limited number of anchors produced with the alternate material, we engaged a highly reputable marine engineering consulting company to calculate the maximum load capability of these anchors.
•             The model developed predicted the load capability of the current production anchors within 1% of the demonstrated value, validating the accuracy of the model.
•             The model then calculated a load capability for the alternate specification anchors of 471% of the RINA SHHP Proof Load requirements.
•             This load capability exceeds the breaking point of the recommended G40 chain rode by a considerable margin.

These results confirm that all Rocna anchors, including those produced with alternate material, exceed RINA's proof load requirements by a significant margin, clearly demonstrating the significant factor of safety in our design.

We pleased you are happy with your Rocna and hopes this answers your questions but should you require any further information please do not hesitate to contact us anytime.

Kind regards,

Tanya Le Fleming Burrow
Rocna Anchors
t: +64 9 447 1961 | f: +64 9 480 9576
www.rocna.com | www.rocna.com/kb



-----Original Message-----
From: Lisa Correa-Mickel [mailto:correa-mickel@sbcglobal.net]
Sent: Tuesday, 9 August 2011 6:17 p.m.
To: Support
Subject: West Marine Notification, Ronca anchor

Hello,

I bought a Ronca 15Kg anchor from West Marine in February of 2011.  I have read your website (Update for West Marine Customers) in response to the notification that I received.  Thank you for the information.

I have several questions that are not covered in your information:

               Is the anchor I bought (from that time frame) made from the same materials cited on the Seabed Test of 12/March/2008?
               Is the anchor I bought made from the same materials cited on the Mechanical Test of 18-219/January/2011?
               Is the anchor I bought made from the same materials that are cited on the West Marine products test?

*If any of the answers are no, will there be a re-test?

Actually, I have a question that is less technical, but which needs some technical data to understand.  What did you guys change?  I'm not asking for proprietary information, just a simple explanation.  (Your website explanation - the section on the grade of steel - sounded like one to many lawyers proof-read it)

I amy extremely happy with the performance of my new Rocna anchor -  although, thankfully, I have not had the bad fortune to need it in a worst-case situation.  I chose your product because I wanted to buy the best anchor for my boat (a 34 foot sailboat).  Price is no object compared to the safety of my family.  Is that the anchor you sent me?

Thank you for your consideration,

Scotty Correa-Mickel
Catalina 34, "Paradise"

[Hawk]

Rocna's response to DaveM's post saying that Canadian and NZ made anchors are fine has led me to request that WM in Vancouver trace the location of manufacture of the 15kg Rocna I bought from the WM Vancouver store in May 2010. And convince me that the anchor is up to specs...or I'd be in for my replacement Manson Supreme. Her response was a curt, "I'll get back to you sir".

Will advise what they tell me.

Hawk

[mainesail]

Rocna is worse than a lying politician at this point. Read carefully and you'll see they are talking about BREAKING the anchor not bending it like a pool noodle..

The fact still remains that the designer, Peter Smith, INSISTED for MANY YEARS that the shank needed to be made to the exacting SPECIFICATION. They are no longer built to this specification. Also this "problem" began before 2010...

G40 might fail before the anchor breaks but clearly NOT before it bends, as we have photographic evidence of such...

[yonar]

Michael,
What model or weight of Manson did you buy? How does it fit to our anchot locker lid?
Thank you,
Yonar

As fate would have it, I took delivery this week of a Manson Supreme anchor.  The enclosed literature claims that they are all manufactured in New Zealand.  Was also $100 less expensive than the equivalent Rocna.

Michael