We use the 'Pool Noodle' approach mentioned further down in that thread. It works well.
Ken H. On Sat, 4 Apr 2020 at 08:47, David Knecht via CnC-List < cnc-list@cnc-list.com> wrote: > Hi - I read that Marine How-To article and then came across this which was > not encouraging: > https://forums.sailboatowners.com/threads/mooring-pendant-debacle.185630/ > I plan to use a double, but not link them together. Dave > > Dr. David Knecht > Professor, Department of Molecular and Cell Biology > University of Connecticut > 91 N. Eagleville Rd. > U-3125 > Storrs, CT 06269-3125 > 860-486-2200 > > On Apr 3, 2020, at 8:04 PM, <djhaug...@juno.com> <djhaug...@juno.com> > wrote: > > <https://marinehowto.com/mooring-pendants-thoughts-musings/> > https://marinehowto.com/mooring-pendants-thoughts-musings/ > > ------------------------------ > *From:* David Knecht via CnC-List <cnc-list@cnc-list.com> > *Sent:* Thursday, April 2, 2020, 3:20 PM > *To:* CnC discussion list CnC > *Cc:* David Knecht > *Subject:* Stus-List Mooring pendants > > I am planning to get a new pendant for my mooring float and have been > reading up on the topic. I am surprised by the variety of solutions I am > seeing and few are complete. My plan was to put a nylon pendant and > luggage hitch on a NE Ropes cyclone dyneema segment on one arm of the > double. The cyclone is 5’ or 8’ long. My old pendant is 12’ long. So I > am thinking a 5’ cyclone and 7-8 foot nylon/poly 3/4” for one side. What > I am more unsure of is what to do with the other arm of the pendant. I > like the idea of a double as it gives redundancy in the event of a failure > at that part of the chain of connections. Presumable, I would do that in > all nylon/poly. But should it be the same length or longer so it only > comes into play in the event of a primary failure. Alternatives I see are > making it the same length or making it shorter so that the dynema arm is > the emergency backup. I thought the science of this would be all worked > out by now but it seems not. The results of the cyclone/dyneema study in > the Boston area seems to be pretty strong that it does not fail due to > chafe which was the major source of failures in that area. So perhaps the > second pendant is overkill? Dave > > > S/V Aries > 1990 C&C 34+ > New London, CT > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions. Each > and every one is greatly appreciated. If you want to support the list - > use PayPal to send contribution -- https://www.paypal.me/stumurray > >
_______________________________________________ Thanks everyone for supporting this list with your contributions. Each and every one is greatly appreciated. If you want to support the list - use PayPal to send contribution -- https://www.paypal.me/stumurray
