I’m not going to go into depth about the correct size, distribution and correct anode material for your yacht. The correct choice will depend on the hull material, salinity of water, berth location and quantity of submerged metallic equipment. There’s already plenty of information out there and I would recommend the website of MGDuff for the best guidance: http://MGDuff Catalogue

This article gives an example of a recent problem of a 5-month old steel widebeam canal boat that was fitted from new with the wrong anode material. According to MGDuff: Use Zinc anodes in salt water, Aluminium anodes in salt & brackish water and Magnesium anodes in fresh water.

The two following images were taken of a five-month old steel widebeam canal boat. From new she was launched into the brackish water of a coastal marina. Within the five month period, all of her Magnesium anodes had been consumed. As well as being the wrong material for brackish water, there were only four anodes for the entire vessel. Of primary concern was the condition of the hull paint. In the regions of the Magnesium anodes, the paint coatings had disappeared. The surfaces nearest to the anodes were bright, bare steel. As the distance from the anodes increased, the level of missing paint decreased. The missing paint around the Magnesium anodes occurs due to the caustic salts that build up in the surrounding water. These caustic salts are a by-product of the electrolytic decomposition of the over-reactive Magnesium. Note that in most areas, the exposed plating was shiny, bright and free of significant corrosion and free of pitting. This lack of corrosion could be attributed to the protection given by the anodes, but now that these were wasted, there was no longer any paint or anodes to protect the steel.

In the image above, the conical-shaped object on the end of the red wire is an Aluminium hanging anode, installed by Fieldhouse Yacht Surveys as a temporary measure, to protect the bare metal until new Aluminium anodes could be fitted and the paint repaired.

The advice from Fieldhouse Yacht Surveys regarding the correct anode material was to replace all Magnesium anodes with Aluminium ones and to increase the quantity of anodes from two per side to five per side (ten hull anodes in total). Recommendations for the temporary application of paint were made, with a more thorough treatment in the Spring, when weather conditions were more suitable.

The steel widebeam canal boat was lifted yesterday in order for the paint to be applied under the right conditions. The following images show that in the intervening 5 months, almost no paint has been removed from the hull. This means that the anodes haven’t created any caustic by-products that would remove the paint. Additionally, the Aluminium anodes have decayed to some extent, which shows that they are doing their job. I would be concerned if the anodes were free of decay. In brackish water, Zinc anodes of form a layer of Zinc Hydroxide on their surface. This indicates that they are not active enough, plus the coating of hydroxide salt reduces the effectiveness of the Zinc.

Day 1: Pre-purchase Survey with vessel afloat

In order to inspect a vessel of this size with the appropriate level of detail required for a pre-purchase survey, this boat was inspected over a two day period. The first day was spent with the vessel afloat, tied to her pontoon berth at Chichester Marina.

This boat had spent time cruising the Thames Estuary and the East Coast, so I was looking carefully for evidence of grounding damage (although any surveyor should always be looking for signs of this). The lead keel wouldn’t necessarily show evidence of grounding as any dents could have been be hammered back into shape and faired. The internal stiffening structure beneath the sole can suffer badly in the event of a grounding. The top hat sections of the stiffening structure can become debonded from the hull and extensive repair work can be required in order to return the strength and stiffness to the hull.

My survey commenced at the very forward end of the forepeak, working my way aft. All bunk covers, locker covers and sole boards were lifted in order to get the best possible access to the inside of the hull. In order to get beneath the large central sole board of the Hallberg-Rassy-Rassy 36 Mk1, the board has to be unscrewed and then lifted, together with the bolted-down dining table.

The two massive fuel tanks beneath the saloon sole didn’t provide much direct visual access, so the keel fasteners and adjacent hull structure had to be inspected with an endoscope. Not as ideal as direct visual access, but enough detail to see the good state of a number of the the studs and nuts.

The rest of the first day was spent working my way through the inside of the boat, ending the day deep inside the large cockpit locker. I had also performed a visual inspection of the engine & transmission, but the engine test in the harbour was going to have to wait until the second day of the survey.

Day 2: Pre-purchase Survey with vessel ashore, followed by sea trial

As anticipated before the survey, there was a higher possibility that the vessel may have suffered grounding damage as it was know that she had spent some time cruising the Thames Estuary and the East Coast. Detailed examination of the hull interior found no evidence of this: All bulkheads were free of damage and their connections to the hull and deck mouldings were free of movement, cracks or delamination. The substantial hull stiffening structure around the keel & beneath the mast compression post, was also found to be free of debonding, cracks or other damage.

Once the boat had been lifted ashore,  evidence of minor grounding was found at the fore & aft ends of the keel. The base of the lead keel had various scrapes and gouges from 30 years of cruising. There were no significant dents at the forward, lower corner, but some touched-up paint indicated that a repair to this region may have been carried out since the original coating had been applied.

Once the boat was back in the water, it was straight out into the harbour to test the Volvo Penta MD2020 Diesel engine. It’s really important to get the engine up to full working temperature and to assess the engine at various speeds whilst under load. The close, but not too close inspection of the engine & transmission (with ear defenders) found excessive levels of vibration, most notably at the output shaft. Earlier crowbar testing of the engine mounts had revealed that these were old but intact. The out-of-water inspection had found that the propeller shaft was straight. There was some vertical wear in the cutlass bearing, but almost none in the lateral direction. Whilst the boat was ashore, I had also noted some gel-coat cracking around the area where the bronze stern bearing was attached to the hull. This evidence lead me to conclude that the most likely cause of the excessive engine vibration was the aged engine mounts. It is likely that the rubber has also distorted over time, leading to the dropping of the engine, shaft misalignment, increased vibration and uneven wear of the cutlass bearing.

 

A Yacht Insurance Survey may be required by your Insurance Company. If your Insurance Company has made it a condition of cover, Fieldhouse Yacht Surveys and Consulting Ltd can undertake the Insurance Survey for you.

Our reports are accepted by all of the marine insurance underwriters.

The Insurance Survey report will be acceptable to your Insurance Company. In addition to this, the document will contain recommendations relating to defects or equipment deterioration that would affect the vessel’s or crew’s safety. Each recommendation will state whether the defect should be rectified immediately or within a set period of time.

Press here to view a number of our sample reports

Contact us via this link or telephone us on +44 (0)7411 740 789 to discuss your specific requirements.

I have nearly completed the Insurance Survey report for the inspection of this Etap 32i. These boats were designed by Philippe Harlé & Alain Mortain and built by Etap Yachting of Belgium. About 150 were built between 1992 and 2000, making this 32i one of the earlier ones.

They have double-skinned hulls, with the majority of the voids filled with closed-cell polyurethane foam. Etap claim that this makes the boats unsinkable, but also like to point out that the foam improves sound & heat insulation and adds to the stiffness of the hull too. This particular yacht has been very well maintained by her first and only Owner. Approximately three years ago I managed the partial re-fit of this boat, which included the overhaul of many bits of equipment, including the replacement of all of the below-water skin fittings & valves with ones made from glass-reinforced nylon by Forespar. Yesterday’s survey of the boat was fairly uneventful, but the lack of hose connections to the vessel’s only manual bilge pump was a surprise. If the boat was flooded during an incident, the built-in buoyancy might prevent it from sinking, but would their insurance policy cover them if the pump was known to be poorly maintained?