What's new

Splicing Eye Loops Close Together

JLBennettCo

New Member
Any thoughts on how you best splice two eyes close together? 3mm Single Braid Dyneema would require 300mm+/- between the eyes for the 50x bury for each eye. I need to keep them about 100mm total.

Thanks,
JB
 

LaLi

Well-Known Member
If you want them closer than that, just do a shorter bury and stitch the whole thing.

What do you need this for?

_
 

LaLi

Well-Known Member
Nicely out of focus, but there are likely a couple whippings and plenty of stitching there.

This is actually a good example of what one might call "fake sophistication": something complicated with no real benefit to it. Just tie it.

_
 

JLBennettCo

New Member
I like that term, fake sophistication. You’re probably correct.
The biggest benefit I see is that when you set your markings on the boom for your outhaul based on the floating block and not the end of the sail this would set you up in the exact same spot every time.
 

LaLi

Well-Known Member
when you set your markings on the boom for your outhaul based on the floating block and not the end of the sail this would set you up in the exact same spot every time.
That depends completely on the length of the primary line. The turning block can be anywhere.

_
 

JLBennettCo

New Member
Agreed. The way I was setting it up is setting the primary line with spliced eyes at each end, luggage tying to the end fairlead and cow looping to the becket block. Then luggage tying the other block to the boom cleat. If both of those lines are a static length, then my markings line up everytime(theoretically).

I can just tie bowline loops on the block that attaches to the cleat and luggage tag that way but I do enjoy the beauty of a spliced line!
 
There is a neatness in splices that I also like, and sometimes I put them in things that could just as easily be done with a bowline.
However it should be said that those tails are not nearly long enough to be considered proper splicing technique. (Fortunately there is not a huge amount of tension in the outhaul but still). That’s why you’d need the stitches—which immediately tips it over the edge into “overly complicated“ territory IMO.
I think spliced “systems” are often a way for line companies to charge you more, because they look pro.
 

andyatos

Well-Known Member
Any thoughts on how you best splice two eyes close together? 3mm Single Braid Dyneema would require 300mm+/- between the eyes for the 50x bury for each eye. I need to keep them about 100mm total.
Are you using a Brummel lock splice? Is yes then never mind. But if not if you use one to create each eye on the ends of your line, you might just be able to fit them within your 100 mm limit. I'm looking at some I have laying around here that are 4-5 mm Dyneema with eyes on both ends and the "cosmetic" bury is under 20 mm. I say cosmetic because with a Brummel lock splice for your outhaul the bury doesn't need to add any strength to the splice. To get under your 100 mm limit also depends upon how big your eyes need to be.

Cheers,

- Andy
 
Last edited:
I’ve done something similar for the luggage-tagged lower Cunningham line that wraps around the mast under the vang tang. It’s probably around the same length as the one you’re describing, maybe a bit more. However in that case I believe the buried tails are important because there is a lot of tension on it at times. I didn’t use the standard 15-25x diameter length, but probably 10x at least. Obviously the thinner the line diameter, the less you have to bury.
 

JLBennettCo

New Member
So, is the bury with a Brummel lock just to keep the tail from coming out and not a strength issue?? Would you use the same 20mm bury for a Cunningham or other high load applications? Maybe add some stitches to keep the tail buried?
 

JLBennettCo

New Member
With a short bury, would you go up in size of Dyneema? Say instead of using a 3mm, increase it to a 4 or 5mm?
If the bowline reduces the strength by 25 - 30%, I’m not sure it makes a difference with a short bury Brummel.
As the sail shop being able to charge more for spliced pre-done systems, 100% agree. Definitely a “value added” product. But it’s just so clean looking!!! :)
 
the tail is considered structural/necessary, although with my splices I’ve been going shorter and shorter with the tail over time to see if they will fail and so far nothing has (probably because dyneema is overkill for most laser applications in the first place).

as for your question, you should do the reverse. Meaning, the length of tail is proportional to the diameter of the line. So while a given bury for 3mm line might work, for 5mm that would be “insufficient”. you multiply the diameter by like 20.
 
Not sure whether it’s better to have a higher strength (thicker) line buried less or a lower strength/diameter line buried properly. Probably the latter.
I will say that once you get up to 5mm dyneema the buried area becomes very bulky and thick so it isn’t great for applications where you’d want to luggage tags something. It just becomes too stiff to bend over short distances. Stick with 3mm for that. I think my lower Cunningham section is 4mm and that’s the thickest I could Comfortably go.
 

andyatos

Well-Known Member
I’ve done something similar for the luggage-tagged lower Cunningham line that wraps around the mast under the vang tang. It’s probably around the same length as the one you’re describing, maybe a bit more. However in that case I believe the buried tails are important because there is a lot of tension on it at times. I didn’t use the standard 15-25x diameter length, but probably 10x at least. Obviously the thinner the line diameter, the less you have to bury.
With the situation that you are describing with your Cunningham, where there are significantly higher loads, I agree completely. I have the Brummel spliced, double eye scenario you describe for my Cunningham as well on my mast right now that wraps around the mast and under the Vang tang. And for the reasons you point out my bury tail is significantly longer than the one in my earlier post. I just measured it and it's over 50 mm. Don't know what the X diameter length is for that one. However, with JLBennett's outhaul where there is not nearly the load I figure he could probably get away with much less bury and come in under his 100 mm limit.

I've spent a bit of time tinkering with Brummel splices while making the tail and bury shorter and shorter until I was able to get the splice to unlock when under a lot of load. Quite frankly, I was surprised at how little you need to keep the tail buried. But whenever there's room I always bury as much tail as I can. And of course, playing around with bury lengths on Brummel splices when it comes to a 14 foot dinghy probably isn't going cost you much. Not so with larger boats were a splice failure could be dangerous for everyone on board.

Cheers,

- Andy
 

andyatos

Well-Known Member
So, is the bury with a Brummel lock just to keep the tail from coming out and not a strength issue??
It's both. It keeps the tail from coming out and "helps" with the strength. The main thing to remember is a Brummel locking splice isn't nearly as strong as a regular splice without a lock that has a long bury. If I remember correctly, some testing I read about once said that if the tail wasn't quite long enough, under load the Brummel splice would fail (the braid on the tail would unravel) when the tail would pull out of the bury. And then when they tested the Brummel with a super long tail, the tail didn't pull out under load but the splice would usually break at the lock... and at less load than a regular splice with a long bury.

- Andy
 
Last edited:

andyatos

Well-Known Member
Agreed, Southeast was what I was looking at. I REALLY love clean systems.
I 100% know/agree that knots are perfectly fine and capable BUT a splice is just so sexy.
And don't forget about the Fake Sophistication Bling (FSB) factor. I consider that an essential piece of sailing equipment. Whenever I hit the water I always make sure my FSB is on full display.

Fake sophistication... that's a good one Lali. :)

- Andy
 
Top