1492 From: sae140 Date: Wed Apr 9, 2003 11:05am Subject: archive posts text files Hi - have just placed plain text files of the archived posts in the files section. Pity they're not indexed - big hint ;~) Any takers ? Whilst editing, I noticed that there weren't too many references to the 26 ft. Brent Swain hull. Does anyone have facts and figures and any opinions re: seaworthiness etc. Thought it might make a nice single stick junk rigger - jus' thinkin' out loud .... Colin 1493 From: withamazinggrace Date: Wed Apr 9, 2003 2:34pm Subject: Re: New 40 footer album Alex I'll answer this one. The disc Alex referred to (for finishing SS weld sites) is made by SAIT. It is called the SAITBLEND A54F- Flexible PN:29271. SAIT released them (to this marketplace at least) in Feb/2003. Gord 1494 From: nadim Date: Wed Apr 9, 2003 2:40pm Subject: Re: Re: New 40 footer album Hi Gord (on?) Thank you for the information, any chance you have a reference to a web (best as I am in Sweden) site or a distributor. Nadim. 1495 From: Alex Christie Date: Wed Apr 9, 2003 2:50pm Subject: SAITBLEND disks I've found a reference to the disk at United Abrasives http://unitedabrasives.com/catalog.php?page=39 It's an American company, but it also has a warehouse in Ontario, Canada. Alex 1496 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Wed Apr 9, 2003 3:00pm Subject: Re: SAIT Nadim, Here is a web address for SAIT; http://www.sait-abr.com. They are an Italian Company, United Abrasives sell them in North America. I have used their very thin cutting discs here in the UK. They are excellent. I got their web address using the Google search engine. Regards, Ted 1497 From: nadim Date: Wed Apr 9, 2003 3:08pm Subject: Re: Re: SAIT Thank you Ted. Nadim. 1498 From: brentswain38 Date: Wed Apr 9, 2003 5:43pm Subject: Re: From Vancouver to Nanaimo The first owner ran out of money when the briex stock market investments he had his money in collapsed. The second owner was talked into building a 57 footer . I don't know the story on the current owner . I hope to leave Tonga today for a two month non stop , internet free sail back to BC. I'll talk to you when I get there. Brent Swain 1499 From: Alex and Kim Christie Date: Thu Apr 10, 2003 6:06pm Subject: Chine line Hi Gord, Thanks for the information to the group about that elusive name of the feathering wheel! I was wondering about the chine line on your boat; did you have to extend the length of it, or modify it some while building? I am thinking that perhaps the line simply looks long from being scaled up from the 36, or else Brent designed it with a longer chine. Regards, Alex 1500 From: greenguy2ca Date: Thu Apr 10, 2003 7:36pm Subject: Insurance Hello All... Just wondering if anyone has looked into the cost of insurance for these boats. I know the general outlook is not to insure as one can always weld up another boat. However, with my 36' pilothouse hopefully launched this year on Vancouver Island I would at least like to get into this topic a little bit. Thanks.... Gary 1501 From: Gord Schnell Date: Thu Apr 10, 2003 10:15pm Subject: Re: Chine line The chine line is 113%(scale factor for 36' to 40') of the 36'. We didn't extend it, although I did score it another 5 to 6" with a grinder (before pulling the half-hull into shape) to encourage the formation of a softer entry into the complex curve of the bow and stern (mostly the bow). Caution: the dimensions for the hull plate cuts are in error and result in adding small filler plates near the center of the chine and also in the vertical "belly" seam. Gord 1502 From: nelstomlinson Date: Fri Apr 11, 2003 10:45am Subject: Re: Insurance I can't help with cost info, but maybe I can offer some insight on insurance. If one boat out of twenty is lost each year, the expected value of the loss is 5% of the replacement cost. Actuarially fair insurance would cost that same 5%, and would be a great deal. Unfortunately, you can't get it. The problem with insurance as practiced today is that it is generally offered on a for-profit basis. Thus, you have to pay not only the expected present value of the loss, but also the insurance company's overhead and profits. Even a non-profit insurance company has the overhead. Furthermore, there are a host of problems like moral hazard, selection bias, and so on, which require higher rates than that 5%, just to let the companies break even. In the real world, actuarially fair insurance just isn't available. Commercial insurance is always a loosing bet for you, in the sense that the ``house'' always wins in the long run, just like at Vegas. It is often a good idea none the less, if you can't stand the loss alone. If you were to put aside 5% of the replacement cost of your boat every year, invested in US TIPS (Treasury Inflation Protected Securities, I think), after 20 years you would probably have at least the replacement cost, and possibly a bit more, IF you didn't loose your boat in the mean time. If you lost your boat in the first few years of that program, you'd have a problem. That risk, of loosing the boat before you've saved up the replacement cost, is what insurance is designed to make more tolerable by spreading. The decision between insurance and self-insurance is one that you have to make each year; it depends on how much it would hurt to loose the boat each year, and how bothered you are by uncertainty. If you could afford to deal with the loss of the boat right now, I would suggest not insuring. ``Deal with the loss of the boat'' might be as simple as starting over without a cent. If you can't stand the thought of being broke and on the beach, you'd better insure, if you can afford the premium. If you could replace the boat out-of-pocket today, you would have to be far more risk averse than I am to justify buying insurance. I would suggest that you plan to put aside the 5% (or more!) each year, whether you buy insurance or not. After a few years, you may decide that the replacement fund is big enough that you don't need the insurance. Hope this helps, Nels 1503 From: Alex and Kim Christie Date: Fri Apr 11, 2003 11:58am Subject: Re: Insurance This is excellent advice, Nels. I've got a few ideas: I'm probably stating the obvious, but I think the number one insurance against loss is simply to build out of steel. Not invincible, but it won't crack up on a reef -- which seems to be the number one way people lose boats in the SoPac! The next thing on my mind is that replacement cost for one of these boats can be much less than a brand new boat "off the shelf". Therefore, the less money you have into it, the less you have to lose. You can keep that in mind while you build (ie "how much can I stand to lose?"). Granted, no one wants to lose an investment, but it can and does happen. And taking Nels' advice about putting away that 5% each year would have you quite well off in good time, especially if you didn't go offshore right away. That's what I will do, simply because I can't stand giving away money to insurance companies, and I think the choice of steel for a hull material will protect the investment quite well. The more years you get out of your boat, the more it has payed for itself, as well. ...I know the Titanic was steel, but it was an object of large mass meeting another object of equally large mass, and therefore unstoppable in the limited space they had to maneuver, which is quite different than a small steel sailboat bouncing off something! Lastly, even if you don't insure you boat against loss, the most important thing is to at least insure yourself against is that scary monster, Liability. I don't think this has much to do with your actual boat (ie what it is made of), but is rather a blanket protection for yourself doing damage to someone else with your boat, the same as basic automobile insurance. You'd want to protect yourself against complete ruination by someone who sues you after your steel boat breaks free from a mooring and bashes up their Beneteau Oceanus (I assure you, your steel boat will come out the winner in that fight). And they or their insurance company WILL SUE! It is the way of our times. While many people are very confident with their seamanship, they forget that boats get up to all sorts of naughtiness by themselves (speaking from several experiences...). I've also had several near misses with handling larger boats in tight quarters of marinas; people in more easily handled smaller boats are famous for zooming in and cutting you off, forcing you into an emergency maneuver which may end up saving their boat from being split in two only to end up bashing into another boat instead! It is much better having a nice large insurance company go to bat for you when the owner of the second, completely smashed boat sends his insurance company after you. Once the incedent is over, do you think the original boater that caused the accident to begin with is going to 1)stick around, and 2) take the blame for an accident he obviously caused? Nyet. It was YOUR boat which split the Beneteau in two. Murphy's law of accidents while docking: "A thousand witnesses will be around to see your boat split the Beneteau in two; NONE will be found that witnessed the jerk in the zodiac or small sailboat cutting you off in the first place." That, you can count on! Just a few scary thoughts to darken your day....sorry! Alex 1504 From: nadim Date: Fri Apr 11, 2003 1:10pm Subject: Re: Insurance Hi all, I'd like to describe my philosophy On Friday 11 April 2003 20:58, Alex and Kim Christie wrote: > Therefore, the less money you have into it, the less you have to lose. Very philosofic but what does misses Alex say about the confort of your spartan skiff? ;-) > ...I know the Titanic was steel, but it was an object of large mass > meeting another object of equally large mass, and therefore unstoppable > in the limited space they had to maneuver, The Titanic was lost because of uncomplete design and very dumb handling. People thought it was unsinkable,that's the first and last error they made. > which is quite different than > a small steel sailboat bouncing off something! Alex, may I recommend you don't start thinking like the Titanic folks? Now about insurance, I won't talk about liability as I agree with Alex. The important thing to understand is that every singe cent you invest in your boat is lost. Yes, lost. if you are looking for an investment or something to ressel in a few years, invest in something that can't sink nor rust nor be flattened big a bigger boat. Hell with the money, you are putting the fruit of your hard labor into something you like, It's more like going to a nice restaurant than buying a house. You want insurance? here are a few things I recommend (again this is _my_ philosophy and no one has to agree): - Install water tight bulkheads (real one not like the Titanic) or something that will make you float whatever happends. - Throw away the life raft and build a better boat - Don't drink and sail - Take it easy - Be prepared! my 2 cents, Nadim. 1505 From: Archie Date: Fri Apr 11, 2003 5:32pm Subject: Chine hulls Is the extra drag created by the chine significant? Archie 1507 From: Claude Poitras Date: Fri Apr 11, 2003 7:01pm Subject: RE: Re: Insurance There is two part to insurance. ( The "boat replacement" and "the Public liability" ) I would think that the public liability insurance would be a must. Without that, you could loose a lot more than the boat. Liability insurance alone should not be that much. does anyone know? Claude Poitras 1508 From: nelstomlinson Date: Fri Apr 11, 2003 11:32pm Subject: Re: Insurance Obviously I was only thinking about casualty insurance. I agree that liability insurance is an entirely different matter. The crux of the difference is that with casualty insurance, your loss is limited by YOUR pocketbook, while with liability insurance, your loss is limited by the OTHER GUY'S pocketbook. So, if your little boat sinks, you're only out what you put into it. If you contrive to sink Bill Gates' boat, you're on the hook for all the billions HE put into it. It seems to me that there is something wrong with our way of doing things when poor folks have to carry insurance to protect the rich people's toys. On the other hand, the principle that we should make good damage we do seems to be a necessary principle, so I'm not sure that there is a better way. Back to casualty insurance: Nadim suggested watertight bulkheads, positive flotation, and spending life raft money on a more survivable boat. Those sound like sensible ideas to me. There was an article in ``Ocean Navigator'' recently (see http://www.oceannavigator.com/site/csrv/content.asp?id=4315 ) about a 60ft aluminum yacht with positive flotation. The boat was pounded across a reef in the Bahamas, and its 1/4 inch plate hull was holed below the waterline. The bilges were filled with foam, so no water got in, and it was sailed for some time before it was repaired. I think that in the first picture of the damage, I can see evidence of transverse frames, with the plate dished in around them. The article says that the hole was a ``... a 6- to 8-inch-long open vertical fracture in the plates, surrounded by deep indentations.'' It doesn't say whether the hole was right at a transverse frame. Maybe if they'd had only longitudinal frames, it wouldn't have been holed. The article talks about another safety feature on the boat. The engine space was a watertight box, sealed on all six sides. That's a watertight bulkhead where it will do a lot of good. It could save your bacon if the rest of the boat started to fill, since it could keep the engine dry and able to power your pumps. It would also keep diesel noise and stink out of the cabin, and go a long way to minimize fire hazards. Putting a water-tight bulkhead in the bow would give some more flotation without cutting into the accommodations too much. The space could still be used for storage of light stuff. I think that Brent said awhile back that 3 inches of foam would float the 3/16th steel plate he uses for hulls. Three inches on the 1/8th inch plate overhead would give some extra flotation for engine and so on. Three inches of foam all around would probably be about right for thermal insulation here in Southeast, so even if the boat never got holed, you'd get a lot of good out of it. Has anyone tried putting positive flotation into one of the Brentboats? If so, I'm curious how much space it took up, and whether it's been tested. Nels 1509 From: Glen Date: Sat Apr 12, 2003 0:06am Subject: Insulation When People are talking of insulation to the hull and cabin I assume that the type of insulation that is being sprayed in is a closed cell type right? As I understand it open cell would allow water to penitrate and eventually find the hull. Can this foam be done by a do-it-yourselfer? 1510 From: Alex Christie Date: Sat Apr 12, 2003 0:47am Subject: Re: Chine hulls I recall Brent saying something about this once, that basically there is very little difference in performance between a hull with the chine, and hull without (and there are a few who have elected to round out the chine midships with insertions of curved plate, most notable the Leckie hull, a 39 foot aluminum origami hull seen in the photo files). Technically, there could be drag any time water flows sideways across a hard hard corner like a chine (instead of along with it), as this would creates vortices that go spinning off the edge like clouds over the top of a high mountain. But in the practical use with these boats, in the already chaotic hull-to-ocean interface (due to wave action and the movement of the boat) I doubt one could tell the difference between a chined boat and a radiused chine boat were you hopping from one to another as they sailed side by side. Plus you'd be giving yourself more work cutting welding in the radii, plus possible adding heat distortion. It come down to looks, in my view, though the aesthetics of the rounded chine would only be appreciated on the rare occasion that the hull is hauled out and put on land:-) Alex 1511 From: nadim Date: Sat Apr 12, 2003 6:31am Subject: Designing for boat safety. Hi guys, I thought I'd start another thread so the insurance one keeps focused. Here my thoughts, ideas and philosophy (and experience). I have been thinking about safety the last 10 years. A life raft cost is around 2000$ for a piece of near to useless rubber. On my side of the Atlantic, life rafts are mandatory except if the boat is certified unsinkable. Thank you for the link. I am on the multihull builder mailling list and I've been flammed when I said I wanted a steel hull. You might want to look at the archive to see how much people think grp is a strong enough material. I'd like to comment the article first, 2 starts are put before the sentences I extracted from the article: ** "If I'd had the time or money, I'd have made these decks and overheads more resistant to condensation," you may have thought. ** "If we'd thought more about it, we'd have added higher bulkheads for watertight compartments," a voice may have once whispered in your ear. I am planning to sail with family and friends, The one and only driving force for me is "SAFETY". Whatever boat you build (or multi million boat you buy), it all boils down to one thing: a bathtube with sail and/or engine that takes you from a point to another. The very essence of a boat is to take you to land again. The trip might be important but nothing is more important than the life of your beloved and your own life. This might sound obvious but when I read the sentences above it seems to me not all do the same. There is only one way to insure your safety, design. I am not talking about using the services of a hot shot designer (who would certainly do a great job at it) but your own ability to design safety in your boat. Life rafts are the most common example of badly designed safety because it is not part of the boat but added (and detachable). For those that can read French and are lucky enough to find the green book in the 'nauticus' series, it is worth reading more than one time. I'll tell more about life rafts if you are interested. If you just think "I have a life raft in case ..." then stay at home, spare the boat money and buy yourself a swimming pool. This sounds unpleasant indeed. I don't want to be unpleasant with such nice guys as you are but I simply think boating has to do with mind set and preparedness, relying on a life boat is the best sign for someone that should not sail, the only worse case being people not thinking about sinking at all. ** Ms. Fitz isn't your everyday, built-in-the-garage custom sailboat. That's lots of bull. Owner build boats are often better than production boats. How many production boats are unsinkable? **Actually, there aren't really any bilges because he had filled the areas below the sole with expanding urethane foam Not a very good idea if the foam gets soaked, you have no more flotation available. Test the foam by soaking it yourself! Keep some places with direct access to the hull so you can check it. I think Brent wrote something on foam and corrosion, check the archive. * - as much as 5 feet of it! If it is 5 feet, it's non sense. It it is 5 inches, the journalist should be more professional and have his articles corrected. *The job cost about $2,000 The only real intressting information. Osram VII web site (it's a cat but the problem is the same) has something about insulation. Foam weights 30-70 Kg/m3, it's light but it still have a weight that should be accounted for. > The bilges were filled with foam, so no water > got in, and it was sailed for some time before it was repaired. Possible but silly. If the problem happends at sea, you don't have much choice, though I would snorkel around and to fix it, there is epoxy that hardens in the water, pop nit a plate, do whatever you can before you sail more. There is no point in sailing in a foam hull. If it happends at shore, then it is ridiculous to sail more before attempting a reparation (it can be an ugly reparation who care?). I am to build a cat, but for mono, there is the question of single vs twin keels. In my opinion and without any doubt, twin is a safer design because of: 1/ shallower draft that might avoid the problem all together 2/ the double "bumper" that the keels offer. The boat might offer the bottom plate of both keels instead for the more sensitive round of bilge a single keel boat would do 3/ the possibility to repare without sailing back to a harbor. If you have an engine in your boat than you can have a welder, there are few home build welder designs available. I have pdf file available for those who want their own emergency welder on board. I don't know about sailing ability but I'd hapilly loose some of it for ability to repare and the peace of mind. > I think that in the first picture of the damage, I can see evidence of > transverse frames, ... Maybe if they'd > had only longitudinal frames, it wouldn't have been holed. Maybe but if you encouter a container angle then the problem is reversed. I think it is very important to not rely too much on the strength of the boat only. Floatability, pumps, water tight bulkheads, ... it's like having belt, suspender, life jacket, ... at the same time. > The article talks about another safety feature on the boat. The > engine space was a watertight box, sealed on all six sides. You tell me how you take water in and out, air in and exhaust out, fuel in, produced mechanical energy out. You talk about pumps, if they are mechanical, it would mean that the bilge is shared with the rest of the boat, if they are electrical, they might be submerged. I am not going against the idea but the description of it, read on. > That's a > watertight bulkhead where it will do a lot of good. It could save > your bacon if the rest of the boat started to fill, since it could > keep the engine dry and able to power your pumps. > It would also keep > diesel noise and stink out of the cabin, and go a long way to > minimize fire hazards. I agree 100% here. Separating the engine from the cabin is more than great idea it should be a must (except if you like smell diesel). Easy to do in a cat, very difficult in a mono. Propose your designs and let's see which one is best. The best way to control a fire is to control the air intake (if the engine box is relatively air tight). If you have an engine fire and the engine is in a box, then 'nautilus' had a nice tip. Envision the engine box (that can also be made of wood by the way), it's closed, the air intake is accessible so you can close it easily. You also need a 10 cm hole in the box, that hole should be close by a thick piece of wood or a metal flap. If a fire starts at the engine, open the flap (that must be easy to do without getting burned, stick the fire extinguisher nozzle in the hole and kill the fire (The hole should be of the same size of as the nozzle, 10 cm was an example). A fire alarm sells for 20$ with a 10 years battery. it is a good investment. I'd put one in the engine box and one outside. Remember that you should be able to hear or see the signals wether you are inside out outside the boat. > Putting a water-tight bulkhead in the bow would give some more > flotation without cutting into the accommodations too much. The space > could still be used for storage of light stuff. Water tight bulkheads (note the plural) are the best solution.They are easy to built in a cat but much more difficult in a mono. They can be replaced by any type of flotation. In a self righting mono, you need them to be as low as possible (not the case for a cat that can be upside down). The interior design has to take the flotation safety into account. Those flotation items can be made of multiple material: - foam (styrene base foam produce very nasty gazes when it burns, check the house building codes) - air (within a metal container) - the furniture can also be boyant (it should) In a non heeling boat, the water tight bulkheads don't have to be vertical. I haven't thought about a heeling boat but there is certainly a solution. An important point is that the bulkheads don't have to be of uniform thickness. The part that is welded to the hull and deck can be 4mm thick and few cm wide. The wall of the bulkhead can be as thin as 0.5 mm of may be thiner. If you have difficulties welding thin plate, pop nit and braze (extra precaution should be given to corrosion problems in this case). Some silicon paste you are ready to go. Nadim. 1512 From: sae140 Date: Sat Apr 12, 2003 3:38pm Subject: Re: Insurance > I think that Brent said awhile back that 3 inches of foam would float > the 3/16th steel plate he uses for hulls. Three inches on the 1/8th > inch plate overhead would give some extra flotation for engine and > so on. Sounds good in principle - but don't forget the couple of tons of ballast in the keel(s)... Colin 1513 From: Claude Poitras Date: Sat Apr 12, 2003 8:17pm Subject: RE: Re: Insurance Colin, you are right. The only true "unsinkable" sail boat that I know of is a Belgian made boat. 1514 From: Marco Ahrens Date: Sun Apr 13, 2003 5:39am Subject: Electricity & Intergrated tanks Hi folks, I have two questions which does not specifically concern origami boat building bur might be of interest anyhow. 1. Does any one of you have experience of fuel and water tanks integrated with the boats hull. As this to me would increase safety by in effect creating a double bottom in parts of the boat, ok you would loose the tank content should you go aground but the boat would remain nice and dry inside. Any negative thoughts on this except from coating/corrosion. 2. On my present boat I have a 24V electric system consisting of 3 banks with 2X100A 12V in serie in each bank. Also I have a windcharger purchased by the previous owner unfortunately this charger is only is only 12V. Does anyone know if I can use this charger by viring it to two batteries in one bank parallel or will this create a mass of sparks and fire. Or would it be possible to connect it only to one of the batteries in a bank as I presume the batteries will equalise themselves. Best regards From Marco on Cyprus 1515 From: nadim Date: Sun Apr 13, 2003 6:36am Subject: Re: Electricity & Intergrated tanks Hi Marco, It can work as you expect but if the tanks are vented, they ave to be vented outside the boat. That is the case for fuel but it might not be so for water. In any case integrating tanks with the boat construction is a good design ide as it increases the strength of the boat and saves place. iven if the tanks are not part of the hull, you could fix them in a way that add to the hull structural strength. If you want the safety of a double bottom, go for a double bottom at least under the water line. I don't think it it too difficult and the weight and extra price should not be to much. I also depends on where you are going to place the tanks, if they are close to the stern, then they won't be of much use as you seldom hit something there. Let us know what yo want to do exctly, the olume of the tanks, their placement, their construction, .... Choosing steel for material is already a good step towards safety. Nadim. PS. almlost all GRP boats have integrated tanks. 1516 From: Glen Date: Sun Apr 13, 2003 8:48am Subject: Re: Electricity & Intergrated tanks Well I see that the question about tanks has been answered so I'll talk about your electrical problem. If your boat is now a 24 volt sytem and the wind charger is 12 volt they are NOT compatable. I do not know if the charger could be changed to produce 24 volts, I have not seen one but I have never looked for one. It might be wise to contact the manufacturer and ask the question to them. If it is not that old you might be able to find somone who wants it or trade for something of value you need. As for your battery problem this is all very easy to understand if you don't make the problem hard to understand. 2 - 12 volt batteries if wired parallel meaning the same + to + and - to - will still be 12 volts. The only thing gained is a stronger longer lasting battery. This how most boats are set up with the corresponding inverters and chargers etc. Should you wire 12 volt batteries in series or + to - to + to - your would have 24 volts. Being that you have doubled the output to 24 volts 12+12=24. This does not get any harder! If your boat has 24 volts and you want to change it to 12 volts you could then use the wind charger you have but you would also have to change everything that uses the 24 volts down to 12 volts. As I do not know what your boat uses this could be very costly as it would also have to include the motor's electrical system as well. Hope this answers your question! 1517 From: nelstomlinson Date: Sun Apr 13, 2003 10:25am Subject: Re: Designing for boat safety. I think that Nadim and I are more or less on the same wavelength. We seem to agree that relying for safety on a strong hull is a good start, but not a good finish. About positive flotation: Steel weighs 490 lb/ft^3. 3/16th plate then weighs 490 lbs/64ft^2, or 7.67 lbs/ft^2. Urethane foam, such as builders use here to insulate houses, weighs about 2 lbs/ft^3, and sea water weighs 64 lbs/ft^3. That's 62 lbs flotation /ft^3. Pretty plainly, for the 40 footer with its 25,000 lbs displacement, we'd need 400 ft^3 of foam. Wow. Remember, though, that a tank of diesel has roughly neutral buoyancy (a 55-gallon drum of oil will float with an inch or two of free-board). I'm told that interior joinery is also neutral. The freshwater in your water tank will be neutral. So, that 400 ft^3 has a bit of safety margin. Getting back to the per square foot approach, a square foot of foam 1.5 inches thick would be 1.5/12=0.125 ft^3, and thus displace 7.75 lbs of water. So, 1.5 inches of foam would float the hull plate. One inch would float the 1/8th inch deck plate. As long as the plate is more than half the displacement of the boat, 3 inches of urethane over the entire inside would do the trick. I'd want that much for insulation, anyway. I suspect that the insulation, plus bulkheading off the forward few feet of the bow and last 18 inches or so of the stern, plus filling the bilge spaces with either foam logs or spray-in foam, would give positive flotation, even for a pack rat like me. The contractor I spoke to assured me that urethane foam doesn't support combustion. We tried to light a chunk, and I believe him. It slowly withered, a bit, as it got hot. He assured me that it didn't give off poison gasses as it heated. I haven't verified that yet. University of Alaska, Fairbanks, inadvertently did a relevant experiment while I was there, years ago. We learned that polyurethane foam (blue foam, commonly used in roofs and underground because it is ``waterproof'') DOES absorb enough water to significantly degrade its insulating ability. It still floated, after many years being submerged under 15-plus feet of water. By the way, Nadim, I interpreted the ``5 feet of insulation'' in the article to mean that the bilge was 5 feet deep, and filled all the way down. I would think that if you prepped the bilge with epoxy paint, sprayed in the foam, then put a coat of the epoxy over the top, the foam should never get wet, and there shouldn't be any water logging or corrosion problems. I agree that it was mighty brave to sail home without inspecting the hull. Or mighty foolish. About bulkheads, and sealing off the engine room: A big problem with watertight bulkheads is that you can get holed on both sides of one or more. I suggested bulkheading off the very ends of the boat. If the bulkheaded areas are portions which are (almost) entirely above the waterline, there shouldn't much danger of them being holed along with the rest of the boat. They won't take too much away from the accommodations, and could still be used to store sails, lines, and similar light stuff. Bulkheading off the engine, if possible, would help too, though this compartment couldn't be above the waterline. The article said that they'd somehow sealed the engine compartment in that 60 footer. You'd have to have a BIG snorkel, to pull in combustion air and some extra for ventilation. You would have to have a water-cooled engine. It might be a good idea to have your day tank in there. Nadim's idea of a fire-extinguisher-sized inspection port sounds sensible. You could mount a big Jabsco pump on a PTO, with big suction hoses running to each compartment. You'd want a pump which can handle pumping cats, rats, and whatever trash might land in the bilge. If you were holed, a 40HP diesel pump should be able to keep up with a fair sized hole. I don't know whether it would be practical to have an ``engine room'' on a smaller boat. I do know that I have lived close to engines a bit, and it's not good. It would be worth compromising the accommodations just a tiny bit to get the engine out of the cabin's air. The fact that it could add to safety just ices the cake. An engine needs good access all around. You need to be able to work on it occasionally, and to keep it clean. On that 60 footer in the Ocean Navigator article, they may have been able to bulkhead off a nice, big, stand-up engine room. I doubt that would be possible on any boat I could ever afford. It still might be possible to isolate the engine. If you could put it under the cockpit floor, for instance, you could make that floor bolt down over a neoprene gasket for access from above. You could fasten the longitudinal bulkheads to the longitudinal frames at the bottom, and to the cockpit frame above. The snorkel could be a couple of 4 inch tubes running to the top of the pilothouse, one on each side (sounds ugly!). As long as you could operate the engine without opening the compartment, you'd be set. Brent has said repeatedly that fastening transverse frames or bulkheads to the skin is a bad plan, and if we don't believe him, why are we betting our lives on his plans? So, how could we fasten a watertight transverse bulkhead? Tell me if this proposal sounds workable: Fasten angle irons to the longitudinals in a ring where the bulkhead is to go. Epoxy paint the inside of the hull. Bolt on to the ring a plywood bulkhead, and bed it against the hull with something like 5200. The bulkhead could be made of 2 layers of 1/2 inch plywood with a layer of glass between, and reinforced with one or two angle iron bolted on across the storage side, if need be. Now foam the hull, burying the edge of the bulkhead in the foam. This could be done with accommodations bulkheads, too, though they wouldn't be truly watertight if you cut a passage way through them. I suppose that you could rig up submarine-style doors, to be hung at sea, and stashed somewhere in port. You'd have to have a deck hatch to each such compartment, of course. This might be more gilding than the lily could stand. It seems obvious that flotation and bulkheads aren't going to work as afterthoughts; you'd have to plan for them, and build them in, right from the beginning. Nels 1518 From: Stephen Wandling Date: Sun Apr 13, 2003 11:17am Subject: Re: Re: Electricity & Intergrated tanks In the back of my mind I seem to recall systems where the battery configuration was able to switch from the series connection to parallel to allow charging at the individual battery voltage, while allowing your current series-parallel 24 V hookup. I'll keep looking. I think it was in HomePower Magazine, which is a great source stuff like this. Check them out at: http://www.homepower.com You can download all of their magazines for free! [I have no interest in this organization.] Question: I would assume that you have 24 V lighting. What other items do you currently power with the 24 V system? I am not that familiar with 24 V systems on boats and am wondering if conversion to a 12 V system might be advisable. 1519 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Sun Apr 13, 2003 1:21pm Subject: Re: Electricity & Intergrated tanks There are DC to DC converters available now. Most PC boards with serial ports on them nowadays use DC to DC converters to get 12vdc for the port power from a 5vdc power supply. By the way, when you want as much capacity as you have 12 volt batteries are not a good choice. 6 volt batteries provide considerably more capacity because there is less wasted space in the case for cell separators and such. Gary H. Lucas 1520 From: nadim Date: Sun Apr 13, 2003 2:00pm Subject: Re: Re: Designing for boat safety. Hi Nels, On Sunday 13 April 2003 19:25, nelstomlinson wrote: > I think that Nadim and I are more or less on the same wavelength. We > seem to agree that relying for safety on a strong hull is a good > start, but not a good finish. I'll keep on playing the devils advocate even if we agree. > Steel weighs 490 lb/ft^3. 3/16th plate then weighs 490 lbs/64ft^2, or > 7.67 lbs/ft^2. > Urethane foam, such as builders use here to insulate houses, weighs > about 2 lbs/ft^3, and sea water weighs 64 lbs/ft^3. That's 62 lbs > flotation /ft^3. Do I hate imperial units! I switch to SI. So that's 32 Kg/m3 for the foam. Is that a closed cell foam? For how long time? In the air or in the water. You wouldn't want your boat to float just to see it sinking slowly. > Pretty plainly, for the 40 footer with its 25,000 lbs displacement, That's 11400 kg. Is that fully loaded? did you count the batteries, the chains, The two girl friends you made in the last harbor (OK they can swim so they don't need to be counted in the displacement) > we'd need 400 ft^3 of foam. Wow. 11.3 m3, yes wow. now those 11 m3 weight 350 Kg that you must also count in. Now you have a boat that has density 1 but that's not good enough because that doesn't actually float. You need the density to be 0.8. > Remember, though, that a tank of > diesel has roughly neutral buoyancy (a 55-gallon drum of oil will > float with an inch or two of free-board). I'm told that interior > joinery is also neutral. The freshwater in your water tank will be > neutral. So, that 400 ft^3 has a bit of safety margin. I'd recommend not going with the approximations. Take the hour or 2 that are needed and find the weight of your boat when immersed. > As long as the plate is more than half the displacement of the boat, 3 > inches of urethane over the entire inside would do the trick. I'd > want that much for insulation, anyway. You want the flotation to be as low as possible. so insulation on the top sides is not going to help you much. The indulation of the deck/roof is completely useless for floatation so it is best not to count it at all. You'll float but that's about it. > plus filling the bilge spaces with either foam logs or spray-in foam, Foam in the bilges is not a very good idea, it gets soaked (again only what you see with your own eye is the truth (don't even trust me on this one)) and you have no flotation when you need it. Buy some of the stuff you want to use. Weight it and then put it in a bucket with sea water and diesel so the diesel is in contact with the foam, put a weight on it and tell us about it in six months (weight it again then). > would give positive flotation would? Buy now I think you understood that would is not good enough. > The contractor I spoke to assured me that urethane foam doesn't > support combustion. We tried to light a chunk, and I believe him. It > slowly withered, a bit, as it got hot. Have you seen a fire from close? that's not the same as trying with a lighter. There is one source that I would trust (after I do my own test), the fire brigade. Give them a call they would certainly be happy to give you the information you are looking for. > He assured me that it didn't > give off poison gasses as it heated. I haven't verified that yet. I am interested in knowing when you have the information (the fire brigade might help here too.) > University of Alaska, Fairbanks, inadvertently did a relevant > experiment while I was there, years ago. We learned that polyurethane > foam (blue foam, commonly used in roofs and underground because it is > ``waterproof'') DOES absorb enough water to significantly degrade its > insulating ability. It still floated, after many years being > submerged under 15-plus feet of water. To what extent did it float? > By the way, Nadim, I interpreted the ``5 feet of insulation'' in the > article to mean that the bilge was 5 feet deep, and filled all the way > down. For me the bilge is the part that is not used,it's under the floor (tell me if I am wrong). then 5 feet of foam to fill the bilge definitely rings a bell. Something is wrong with that image. 60 ft is a big boat but believe me you don't want to loose 5 feet even under the bilge. Just consider the weight and money put in foam. how do you inspect a hull under 5 feet of foam. Now if the bilge is everything under the deck, the information doesn't help much. >I would think that if you prepped the bilge with epoxy paint, > sprayed in the foam, then put a coat of the epoxy over the top, the > foam should never get wet, and there shouldn't be any water logging or > corrosion problems. :-) I say you are wrong, very wrong. You'll get water logging and you corrosion problems will get worse. Someone with hands on experience could tell us if you or I am right? > About bulkheads, and sealing off the engine room: > A big problem with watertight bulkheads is that you can get holed on > both sides of one or more. I suggested bulkheading off the very ends > of the boat. If the bulkheaded areas are portions which are (almost) > entirely above the waterline, there shouldn't much danger of them > being holed along with the rest of the boat. They won't take too much > away from the accommodations, and could still be used to store sails, > lines, and similar light stuff. Do you access it from the deck or from within the boat? > You would have to have a water-cooled engine. Except if you are going to build a sauna, you don't have much choice > Nadim's idea of a fire-extinguisher-sized inspection > port sounds sensible. It's not my idea. it is very sensible and extremely cheap. Have you counted the weight of the 12 Kg fire extinguisher_S_? >You could mount a big Jabsco pump on a PTO, What's that in plain English? > with big suction hoses running to each compartment. You'd want a pump > which can handle pumping cats, rats, and whatever trash might land in > the bilge. Do you know the size and weight of those things? Most pump problem are due to paper floating around. small stuff is as dangerous as big one and should not be under estimated. > If you were holed, a 40HP diesel pump should be able to > keep up with a fair sized hole. Hold on sailor. how are you going to connect it your engine? how big is it? can you run that without having the propeller rotating? if not, you'll never get 40 HP at the pump. And to finish destroying your dream about the mighty pump, a 40 HP pump is not worth a rat ass if you get any serious hole in you hull.If you want we can get to the figures. I don't say that you shouldn't actively try to pump the water out but one or two m3 of well placed foam might get a better result and cost much less. Foam is always ready, your engine not. > I don't know whether it would be practical to have an ``engine room'' > on a smaller boat. I do know that I have lived close to engines a > bit, and it's not good. It would be worth compromising the > accommodations just a tiny bit to get the engine out of the cabin's > air. The fact that it could add to safety just ices the cake. OK, I can tell you how I have done in my boat (well I have room in it but I think it still applies to small boats). What you want is to have the possibility to get close to your engine if it is in fire. if you have a frame around your engine (can be very close to the engine) and plank it with 2-3 cm thick wood so you can't see the engine any more, you have multiplied your chance. The planks can be bolted or hinged or slid in a U shape profile. The engine box doesn't have to be 100% water or air tight but it's definitely a plus. > Brent has said repeatedly that fastening transverse frames or > bulkheads to the skin is a bad plan Why is that? >, and if we don't believe him, why > are we betting our lives on his plans? Brent has experience but you might have an idea he didn't have yet. I like Brent's approach but while you or I might be pumping water out, Brent might be sipping a beer in Hawaii. No, I don't bet my life or my kids life on any of Brent's plans (or any other designer) because it's not about betting but being sure. > Tell me if this proposal sounds workable: Fasten angle irons to the > longitudinals in a ring where the bulkhead is to go. Epoxy paint the > inside of the hull. Bolt on to the ring a plywood bulkhead, and bed > it against the hull with something like 5200. The bulkhead could be > made of 2 layers of 1/2 inch plywood with a layer of glass between, > and reinforced with one or two angle iron bolted on across the storage > side, if need be. Now foam the hull, burying the edge of the bulkhead > in the foam. It does sound workable. What surface of bulkhead are we talking about here? How much does all this weight? > suppose that you could rig up submarine-style doors, to be hung at I am not building a mono (the simple fact that I want to float and that a mono needs a few tons of lead to stand right make me choose a cat). That doesn't mean cat are safer by design. Looked at some cats lately? They all seem to have _BIG_ 2 panes doors-window so the owner feels like he is on a Riviera somewhere. I can't stop myself from seeing a big wave crash on the deck in front of the door and get in thought that big open door (yeah it's closed by then but it is still made of glass). U boat type doors, specially if the opening starts 30-50 cm from the floor, make a lot of sense. > It seems obvious that flotation and bulkheads aren't going to work as > afterthoughts; you'd have to plan for them, and build them in, right > from the beginning. What boat are you building? What are the dimentions? Twin or single keel? Cheers, Nadim. 1521 From: Glen Date: Sun Apr 13, 2003 6:55pm Subject: twin keeler web site Found this web site thought some of you might find it interesting! www.lerouge-yachts.com/mono_TKS.htm Glen 1522 From: Red Green Date: Mon Apr 14, 2003 7:06am Subject: Re: Re: New 40 footer album Hello Gord, Congratulations on the job well done on the 40 footer. Keep up the good work and I look forward to seeing pictures from the maiden voyage. Gord, could you give some dimensions for your 40 footer. Beam, height from where you will attach whatever flooring you will use. How much tank/stowage will that leave below? I assume you will have berths fore and aft(possible staterooms). What are the sizes you expect to get out of the 40 footer? How much common area is left for galley and salon? Thanks for your input. Again well done, Daniel 1523 From: jalborey Date: Mon Apr 14, 2003 11:20am Subject: Re: Insurance About liability: Annie Hill, in her book "Voyaging on a small income", speaks highly of a German company, called Pantaenius (http://www.pantaenius.com), which apparently offers good insurance prices for covering boat's liability. Regards, Jesús 1524 From: De Clarke Date: Mon Apr 14, 2003 11:36am Subject: Re: Re: Insurance I contacted them at one point, and iirc I was told they would not insure any boat in US waters. I asked whether there were unusual numbers of losses in US waters, and the representative after a brief pause said No, but there were an unusual number of lawsuits :-( so check w/them about the region you live/sail in... de 1525 From: Gord Schnell Date: Mon Apr 14, 2003 9:56pm Subject: Re: Re: New 40 footer album Lots of questions....some too complex to address in an email. She is 40' on deck and just short of 42' - bow rollers aft bumpers (rudder guards). Beam is 11'11.5". The pilothouse and salon soles are designed to give 6'4" headroom, although that decreases in the forward v-berth. Tankage is 200 imp. gals. of water in 4 tanks - 2 tanks either side of the keel. The keel itself has been extended vertically to accommodate approx. 200 imp. gals of diesel. There is a 50 imp. gal. wastewater tank just forward of the keel. All tanks are integral to the hull. The engine/transmission is below the pilothouse floor between the two aft water tanks. Pilothouse is approx. 8' x 8' at floor level and salon is about 10' long and full hull width. V-berth sleeps 2, aft cabin (beneath the cockpit) sleeps 2, 2 sea berths under the decks of the salon sleep 2 and we may make the table drop into the salon seating to add 2 more (but I doubt it). Galley fills entire port side of the pilothouse to centerline. Nav. station and inside steering fill starboard side of the pilothouse. Head is immediately aft the v-berth. Just added a hard dodger this weekend. With bimini and side curtains, the cockpit can become a living area. Hope that gives an idea. Gord 1526 From: sae140 Date: Tue Apr 15, 2003 11:05am Subject: Re: Electricity & Intergrated tanks While you are considering the installation of diesel fuel tanks, you may care to hear of the following experience. The event occurred whilst delivering an 18 ton yacht from Cowes (IoW) to Holland in early December last, whilst motoring into headwinds across the shoal grounds north-east of Calais in a moderating 7, but with the sea-state still rough from the previous day's gale ... The boat was thrown around with some violence, and despite being fitted with the usual baffled tanks, the diesel began frothing badly. Not surprisingly, the engine kept cutting out and required frequent bleeding under extremely difficult circumstances. Although the vessel was never in immediate danger, it could have been a far different story with a short-handed or novice crew on board. Following this event, I've discovered that commercial vessels are often fitted with 'spinners' - centrifugal devices which quite literally spin any air out of the diesel before it reaches the injector pump. Being lesser mortals, we came up with the idea of a 'feeder tank', which is now being installed in all new builds - being a nominal half gallon fuel tank mounted as centrally low down as possible in the vessel, and being supplied by 2 pipes from the main fuel tank(s). The upper (gravity return) pipe from the feeder tank allows air to escape, and the feeder tank is thus kept permanently 100% full and as air-free as possible. Take-off from the feeder tank is taken from just above the bottom of the tank, where any air still in suspension will be minimal. Usual precautions for periodic removal of water etc should be taken. All part-empty diesel tanks are subject to the risk of frothing from violent movement, whether they are fitted with baffles or not. By having a small permanently full feeder tank (which could be incorporated into the bottom of a new tank install), frothing should be eliminated. Colin 1527 From: sae140 Date: Wed Apr 16, 2003 3:22pm Subject: Re: Insurance whilst looking through past posts I came across: "... the quotes of $30K seem to be reasonable for insurance damage on some minor mooring incidents." Think about that: your steel yacht hull nudges a workboat and you're both only the worse for a couple of square inches of paint - who cares ? Nudge a hitech balsa sandwich complete with toy rubbing stake and the lawyers are called in. One problem is that insurance claims are based largely on the cause and effect of an incident - not on the inherent suitability of the damaged craft to sustain reasonable knockabout wear and tear in the first place. Under British law, an object offered for sale has to be "fit for the purposes for which it was intended." Perhaps with regard to boats this ought to include the ability to withstand being touched by other boats. Or is it the idea that yacht-owners should keep their precious toys permanently in marinas wrapped-up in cotton-wool ? 1528 From: nadim Date: Wed Apr 16, 2003 3:34pm Subject: Re: Re: Insurance Here is a idea, don't get into harbors and even less into marinas. We sailed a 28m boat, guess if we went to the marina or the commercial harbor. I am planning a 18m * 9m, even if I had the insurance and the superior skills needed to park that boat between 2 tupperware in the marina, I don't think I'd stand all the sweat on their face when I get in. Nadim. 1529 From: sae140 Date: Wed Apr 16, 2003 3:32pm Subject: Re: Unfold I've placed a copy of 'Unfold' in the Files section - it's a fairly old public domain program which is none to easy to get hold of these days - just in case anyone fancies playing with it. I can't think of a better place than OrigamiBoats to hold a copy of this program. Colin 1530 From: sae140 Date: Wed Apr 16, 2003 3:35pm Subject: another unfold program almost forgot to mention - there's a neat unfold cad program at http://www.revcad.com/SheetLightning 1531 From: Alex and Kim Christie Date: Wed Apr 16, 2003 7:51pm Subject: insurance thru avoidance strategy Ya! Nadim's got Brent's good idea; Brent never uses marinas, ever. If you don't go near the expensive Beneteaus, you simply aren't there to hit them in the first place. His twin keel configuration allows him to anchor in what he calls the "Low Rent District", that area in a harbour that dries at low tide where no single-keel boat (unless it had legs for the purpose -- something Brent details in his plans for the single keel configuration) would ever bother anchoring. Since no one ever wants it, he's never been hassled about using such spots as far as I know, and he rarely has any neighbours. As harbours and marinas grow more crowded in many coastal areas, the use of shallow, drying bays for mooring is an excellent solution to the problem (as long as you don't plan on going anywhere at low tide...). We'll be building our boat as a twin keeler for this very reason. Colin's point about the fragility of some boat hulls is interesting to ponder; if someone builds a boat out of a material which can't stand any impacts without compromising it's integrity, are we as steel boat owners responsible for protecting them? This could be a scenario encountered when a fragile-hulled boat drags anchor and ends up snuggling with a steel boat. It is clear whose hull will end up with damage, and whose hull will endure no more than scratched paint. As long as you can prove he dragged onto you, you're in the clear, otherwise your boat might be painted as the agressor! Again, the single-keeled fragile boat is unlikely to be anchored near you if you are in Brent's low-rent mudflat zone, so my concerns about this may be unfounded. I was once broadsided by a small harbour ferry while resting down below on my 27 foot (glass) liveaboard sailboat; upon jumping up and sticking my head out of the hatch to see how and why the world was ending (it sounded quite bad down below), I was met with an angry barrage of verbal abuse from the skipper of the 20 foot Benford harbour ferry (plywood), as if I were somehow at fault, simply for being there. The fact that I was tied to a dock, whereas he was under way, seemed to have completely escaped his attention! His boat sustained no damage, while mine had a section of its rubrail ripped off. The owner of the company, a boatbuilder himself, refused to fix the problem even though I told him I wouldn't file an insurance claim if he just fixed the problem, but he met my simple request with a barrage of foul language well beyond the original barrage of the skipper. I've learned since then to never underestimate the possibility of people at fault for accidents to do their best to turn the tables and make themselves out as the victims. I call it a healthy paranoia, though I try to temper this with the knowledge that most true sailors are fair, honest and helpful people who more often than not take complete responibility for their actions. Another year later, our 36 foot teak-hulled motorsailer was t-boned by an irrate commercial fisherman (said by local dock-dwellers to be mentally unstable) on purpose because of his hatred of liveaboard boatpeople. I encountered the usual verbal abuse after I protested that he was going to split my hull in two. About a month after that, I was rammed in the transom by a fisherman's boat tied behind me whose gear had jammed in forward and full throttle. He was extremely apologetic, and since no harm was done I told him to not worry about it. I was thankful for my tough teak hull, but I think it was about then that I started to ponder the possibilities of steel for a hull... Dockside is definitely not always the safest place to moor, in my mind! Alex 1532 From: sae140 Date: Fri Apr 18, 2003 0:37am Subject: Re: insurance thru avoidance strategy Staying out of marinas ? Sure, if it's possible. No-one cringes more than yours truly at the thought of paying - sometimes just for the dubious priviledge of anchoring in an exposed harbour. But sometimes it's necessary. Anyone who sails around the English Channel knows that it can be impossible to gain sea-room if the weather suddenly deteriorates - we're talking about an area of water which on occasion can have horizon-to-horizon commercial traffic in the separation lanes, plus many car ferries crossing these lanes - often at the same time !! So not the place to head to for safe water .... So, if you get caught out in the Channel, running to a harbour is usually the only option available. This happened to me last year, when our 20 ton Spray - torn sails flapping around it's v e r y long 4" diameter steel bowsprit - sought sanctuary from a storm in the Royal Oostende Yacht Club Marina. As we limped in it was uncanny just how many skippers simultaneously considered that that was the moment for checking that their insurance documents were up to date .... I'll go on record here as saying it was the worst marina I have *ever* visited. There was zero hospitality for visitors, although a full dinner-jacket banquet was in full swing for members and their guests. And despite taking serious money from us, the electricity was switched off overnight. The following morning our exit was blocked by several pairs of Beneteaus to leeward, rafted onto a brand spanking new pontoon finger. These craft were being polished and prepared for a midday sales promotion, but as we started-up our big Ford diesel, the outermost boat of one pair wisely moved to allow us sufficient room to leave, and as we began to single our lines the other skipper nervously called across to ask if we wished him to move as well. I just couldn't help myself, and called back to ask if he would stay exactly where he was, as I was a little concerned that we might back into the new pontoon finger and damage it. "You mean you want my boat to act as your fender ?" came back the astonished voice. "Well - if you don't mind", says I, with tongue held firmly in cheek .... I have never seen a boat cast-off so quickly before. Steel boats - don't you just love 'em ? Colin 1533 From: farmulation Date: Fri Apr 18, 2003 9:31am Subject: ocean pearl I saw the ocean pearl photo album and wonder if the boat is still for sale? Regards John 1534 From: J & H Fuller Date: Fri Apr 18, 2003 11:07am Subject: Re: ocean pearl John, An ad in the current Buy Sell & Trade (Nanaimo) shows a 36' Brent Swain bilge keel sloop, loaded, for $60,000 obo. This one has a 35hp Kubota and is located in Union Bay. The ad says call Brian at 250 335 1719. I just did, no one home. The ocean pearl looks nice, pity it's got an outboard and no twin keel. Sorry I can't go look at this one, we're moving into a new house today. Another John. 1535 From: John Doyle Date: Fri Apr 18, 2003 11:35am Subject: RE: ocean pearl Hello Another John -- Is there any way to look at the boat you mention on the Internet? I can't seem to find a "Buy Sell & Trade" for Nanaimo on the web (there are others, of course). Yet Another John 1536 From: J & H Fuller Date: Fri Apr 18, 2003 11:40am Subject: Re: ocean pearl Sorry it's not an online paper, but there is another Brent Swain boat in buysell.com. Good luck Is there any way to look at the boat you mention on the Internet? I can't seem to find a "Buy Sell & Trade" for Nanaimo on the web (there are others, of course). 1537 From: sae140 Date: Sat Apr 19, 2003 0:15am Subject: A few words about twin-keelers and 'low-rent districts' ... Glad to hear that's the case elsewhere - over here drying moorings are very much the norm; they are already over-crowded; and yes - you'll almost certainly have to pay to anchor there (!). Something to bear in mind if you're planning on a visit to the UK. This is exactly the subject about which I swapped a few words with Annie Hill recently - she confirmed that free moorings (and anchoring) can be found just about everywhere *except* the southern half of the UK. I think it's fair to say that Britain is the home of the twin-keeler, but their popularity here is principally due to a dearth of deep- water moorings rather than their sailing characteristics. Every twin- keeler skipper I know would much rather sail with a classic full keel such as those favoured by the Scandinavians, who are blessed with deep water. However, if you plan on drying-out on a regular basis, or for maintenance, then twin keels are certainly the way to go. If you've a deep keel, then I'd use drying-out legs with caution, and never rely on them 'in absentia', as I've seen several cases where even massively over-built professional legs have collapsed, due to the boat being buffeted by strong winds and rough seas when taking the ground. Afloat is ok, high and dry is ok, it's that in-between state which can quite literally take your legs from under you. And to make things worse, when the hull goes over it then falls onto the broken leg, compounding the damage. On balance, I would guess that twin keels fitted with torpedo bulbs, together with Brent's existing skeg would probably provide the best all-round compromise. On a separate topic, I'd be interested to learn whether Brent recommends extra ballast be installed if junk rigs are fitted to his hulls, especially the twin-keelers. Regards, Colin 1538 From: Red Green Date: Sat Apr 19, 2003 3:06am Subject: Re: Re: New 40 footer album Hi Gord and all, Your answers were what I needed to hear. Looks/sounds like ample roominess. Who'd have thunk it by the pics. Most pics lack scale. Sorry for the heavy questioning. Yours by far the most pictorially documented 40 on this site. Hope you can add more pics as everything comes together for you. After all Q and A are what most of us are here for. Builders or thinking about it. Thanks so much, best of luck, Cheers, Daniel Chicago. 1539 From: Alex and Kim Christie Date: Sat Apr 19, 2003 8:58am Subject: junk-rig thoughts and ballast I would with junk rig you'd theoretically need less ballast, since that type of rig is considered low aspect and puts less heeling forces on the hull under sail. Anyone out there with junk rig who can comment on this? Alex 1541 From: greenguy2ca Date: Sun Apr 20, 2003 5:33am Subject: Buy & Sell On Vancouver Island does the buy & sell have a web access? If not would anyone know the phone number. I wish to place an ad for a mast and engine for my boat located near Nanaimo and I am currently working in Ontario. Thanks ... Gary 1542 From: J & H Fuller Date: Sun Apr 20, 2003 8:14am Subject: Re: Buy & Sell Hi Gary Looks like you have a choice. Toll Free 1 877 753 9115 or e-mail freeads@b... I think you'll get a better ad from using e-mail. Unless you actually can talk to someone on the phone. If you like, send me a copy off the list and I'll check it in the paper for you. John....... in Campbell River. 1543 From: claudepoitras Date: Sun Apr 20, 2003 9:17am Subject: Re: Origami boatbuilding course announcement > We are in the early planning stages of a 2 week course called > Introduction to Origami Steel Boatbuilding Techniques. Is there any further word on this Origami boatbuilding course? Is the date established yet. I know that Brent has to get back, first. 1544 From: Alex and Kim Christie Date: Sun Apr 20, 2003 10:20am Subject: Buy & Sell vs. Buy, Sell and Trade Just to clarify, the free advertising paper that people are refering to on Vancouver Island is actually called "Buy, Sell, and Trade", though all us locals call it Buy'n'Sell. It is a family-owned operation that prints only on paper (no web format). I think it is THE main commerce conduit for used stuff on Vancouver Island and some people read it religiously looking for deals. The actual one called "Buy and Sell" is based in Vancouver, and is available online as well at www.buysell.com . Vancouver Islanders advertise there if they want to reach a wider audience than the island. It is owned by Trader Publications (same one that does Truck Trader, Auto Trader, etc). It isn't free, but it has very wide readership being available in both print and web format. You can look at the version from the previous week for free, otherwise the current edition is a few dollars (via credit card). I always look at the free version first, then get the current one if I don't find what I need. Alex 1545 From: sae140 Date: Sun Apr 20, 2003 2:27pm Subject: Re: junk-rig thoughts and ballast Yeong, a bilged-keel Kingfisher 30, had an extra 112 lbs of lead added to each keel when it was converted to junk rig, to offset the weight of the mast, which was of hollow wood construction. This is what stimulated my enquiry. Colin 1546 From: greenguy2ca Date: Sun Apr 20, 2003 3:33pm Subject: Buy & Sell Oookay.... so following John's suggestion I went to www.bstonline.ca/ Is this the same publication you are referring to Alex? Thanks... Gary 1547 From: Alex and Kim Christie Date: Sun Apr 20, 2003 5:03pm Subject: Re: Buy & Sell Yep, www.bstonline.ca is the free one (Buy, Sell and Trade) on Vancouver island. That page simply gives you a form with fields for your information, and you then click submit ad, and it's good to go. Your ad goes for 3 weeks. Photo ads can be done too, for a fee. www.buysell.com is the one for Vancouver which has the last week's addition online free, or the current week for a few bucks. Alex 1548 From: gjm123smau Date: Sun Apr 20, 2003 9:09pm Subject: 40 ft origami boat Gordon Nice job on your dream . What is the beer barrel for water storage I HOPE Alex when is the course in origami boat building going to happen seems like there is interest stirring again. Regards Graeme 1549 From: Alex and Kim Christie Date: Sun Apr 20, 2003 9:28pm Subject: Re: 40 ft origami boat Hi all, Regarding the idea for the course, I would like to do it, but unfortunately I am still lacking resources (ie rural land-space) to set it up until we sell our current house. Just the usual realities creeping in when trying to set something like this up! As a former student of a shipwright school, I should have known better that it takes plenty of time to develop something like this, but I believe it will come together at some point. I'll keep y'all posted as soon as something develops. Regards, Alex 1550 From: Graeme Mitchell Date: Sun Apr 20, 2003 10:49pm Subject: Re: 40 ft origami boat Double bugga<<<<<<<<<<<<< I was looking foward to a hoilday in Canada Graeme 1551 From: Gord Schnell Date: Mon Apr 21, 2003 9:44pm Subject: Re: 40 ft origami boat The beer keg is "in storage" but eventually two kegs will be mounted in that location to store wine on board. Gord 1552 From: Jon Richards Date: Sun Apr 27, 2003 9:38am Subject: U.K. BOATS . Hello everyone , I live in Perth Australia and am going on holiday to the U.K. in early May , as l have never seen one of Brents boats and am considering building one does anyone know of any being built or in the water in the U.K. that I could go and look at . any help much apreciated . 1553 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Sun Apr 27, 2003 11:26am Subject: Re: U.K. BOATS . Jon, I am building a 36' in the UK midlands. You are welcome to visit and have a look at it. Regards, Ted 1554 From: greenguy2ca Date: Fri May 2, 2003 7:44am Subject: Used Diesel Hello All: I am looking for a used diesel for my 36' bilge keel and saw this one advertised for $3500 cdn. Does anyone recognize this name brand or should I run in the opposite direction. Thanks .... Gary 1.5 Lt 30 HP The British - Tempest Marine Diesel -FWC c/w new jabsco impeller pump ... 0 hours since overhaul...2:1 Newage/PRM hydraulic gear .. right hand propeller (c/w from rear) ...c/w companion flange .. .2pc coupling....both supplied ..COMES WITH FACTORY MANUAL 1555 From: sae140 Date: Fri May 2, 2003 3:17pm Subject: Re: Used Diesel They are made a few miles from here at Stamford, Lincolnshire ("here" being Boston, Lincolnshire). More of a commercial/ military engine supplier than leisure. Their site is: http://www.thornycroftengines.co.uk/ Regards Colin 1556 From: sae140 Date: Sun May 4, 2003 3:22am Subject: Book Received my copy of Origami Metal Boatbuilding today, and have just spent most of the morning buried in it's pages. Truly one of those books you just can't put down ! As a source of good ideas and inspiration it's worth every penny and, in case it's of interest to others, Cliff Swain (Brent's dad) enclosed a note mentioning that Brent "sailed to Tonga last year in his boat, and is returning home this June." Out of all the dozens of excellent ideas in the book, I found myself at odds with only 2: one which can't be worth the effort and the other being totally unrealistic. De-salinating sea-water by evaporation using fossil fuel as a power source doesn't appear to be worth the hassle or the investment in effort or complexity, as you're not exactly carrying a huge supply of fuel to begin with. Seems to me you'd be better off installing another fresh-water tank or carrying a couple of extra 5 gallon containers when you first set off. If you're in a survival situation, the amount of water you could generate by using up your diesel (which you might be grateful for later ?) would probably not make much difference to the outcome. Better by far to carry a 60ml syringe and a gastric tube (used by farmers to tube-feed weak lambs - get 'em from your local agro store) and self-administer salt-water enemas. This will keep you alive until the rains come, or when you finally sight land, at which point you might be glad you still have some diesel on board. Towing a 100ft line behind your boat to trip the self-steering gear won't give "... a man overboard a fair amount of time to reach it", and may encourage sloppy seamanship in the misguided belief that it will. Sod's Law being what it is, you'll be going over the side at 2 in the morning on a pitch dark night with the boat being driven at full hull speed. That'll give you a whole 10 seconds to grap the rope - but sadly it doesn't quite work like that ..... You'll hit the water unexpectedly, and probably head-first. Your first reaction will be one of shock, disbelief, and complete disorientation - you won't even know which way is up. By the time you've surfaced and realised what's going on (and in cold water, forced yourself to breath), and remembered that you're towing a line, it's too late. Even if you're towing a much longer line (say 250 ft), the problem is that you need to see your boat in order to know in which direction the line can be found. If there's anything of a sea running, the boat will be out of sight for much of the time (ask any scuba diver what the world looks like from a few inches above the surface when there'a a sea running ...). By the time you've done a 360 scan under those conditions - even on a clear night - the boat's long gone. On a dirty night, you've no chance at all. Better by far to make sure you don't go over the side in the first place! I'd suggest you don't trail a line at all, but instead clip the end of a tripping line onto anyone alone above decks, whether in the cockpit or not. Clipping on by habit is the key. If you really want to invent a stand-alone device for tripping self- steering gear (which is most desirable), then you really need to make it "fail safe" - i.e. it will trip if you *don't* do something (then by inference, it 'confirms your presence on the boat') - say some sort of timing device which will trip the self-steering should it not be manually reset at reasonably short intervals. Otherwise - an excellent read. When Brent returns, I must ask him if he'll also consider addressing junk rig issues... Colin 1557 From: islands502000 Date: Sun May 4, 2003 4:46am Subject: Re: Used Diesel Gaty, Those engines are good, and parts are available but I belive you can do better, I have a used 4-71 detroit, w/gear I will take $500 us for it needs an InFrame kit it is heat exchanger cooled with pumps. and a MG 502 trans, also have a S/S shaft and prop, 1558 From: Bert Eggers Date: Mon May 5, 2003 5:43pm Subject: Bow Rollers... I'm trying to design a bow roller for carring the anchor chain...and I'm not sure which way to go. What type of roller have you used? The one's in the catalogs seem so expensive. What works for you? Diameter? Material? Sure would appreciate your experience. And thanks for all the good thoughts. Bert in Saginaw, Mi 1559 From: nadim Date: Tue May 6, 2003 1:15pm Subject: Re: Bow Rollers... Hi, Depends on the chain, rope and anchor you want to use. Gives us more information or follow this advice: Find a catalog which gives dimentions and material designation or go to a harbor and find something you'd like to have, mesure, draw and build. Not more complicated than that. cheers Nadim. 1560 From: Bert Eggers Date: Wed May 7, 2003 4:51pm Subject: Re: bow roller material and size... Hi Nadim and all, I'd love to hear what others have used for bow rollers....Material and diameter... The boat we're trying to equip is a 34 footer with about 6 tons displacement. I'm thinking of 5/8" line and perhaps the stronger 1/4" chain, does that help? In my Great Lakes area, the only ones I see in the harbor are quite generic, and not "custom made"... I've read Brent's book, wondering if any have tried his approach? Thanks for the help, if you might care to respond. Bert in Saginaw, Mi 1562 From: rbyzitter2001 Date: Fri May 9, 2003 1:45pm Subject: Re: Used Diesel Hello, Just for the record, I have an Isuzu 3LB1 (25hp)low hours with a new key start panel wet manifold but no gear, $3200.00 Can. there is a file in the files section on it. I also have a Isuzu 4cyl C240 56hp marine engine, key start panel, sump pump, drive plate and transmission adapter. I would like to get $3500.00 Can. for this. These are both well proven engine on the BC coast. Cheers. 1563 From: undrsol Date: Mon May 12, 2003 7:01am Subject: POR-15 Has anyone ever used POR-15 to recoat a hull? Seems like it might be a great solution and easier than blasting to white metal. Any advice or feedback appreciated 1564 From: sae140 Date: Wed May 14, 2003 3:22pm Subject: Steel choice Have found an even better build site - with fork-lift and crane - and am now firming up plans. There are just a couple of final points I'd seek advice on: Firstly the choice of steel thickness. Over here in the UK we can no longer get steel in imperial thicknesses, only in 3, 4, 5, 6 mm etc. 1/8" is equal to 3mm, but the 3/16" recommended for Brent's hulls is 4.76 mm. Ted Stone (the only other known builder in the UK) has chosen 5mm for his 36 ft hull, which makes sense, and I'd do the same if building the 36. However, for the 31ft hull, would anyone consider using 4mm ? I must say I'm tempted, even if it means extra stringers. With 6mm for the keels and skeg, and 3mm topsides, as standard. I'd appreciate any views. Secondly, I'm finding it almost impossible to source pre-primed steel in decent sized sheets over here. Would anyone consider blasting and priming the flat plate *before* starting work, or only after the hull has been completed ? I'm dreading the process of blasting the inside, so priming before starting work has it's attractions. Thanks in advance. "D-day" fast approaches ...... Colin 1565 From: Paul Faulkner Date: Thu May 15, 2003 8:50am Subject: Re: sandblasting Colin, I can't comment on steel thicknesses for your boat, but I do have something to say about blasting. I'm have plated a 29' semi-displacement power boat in Phoenix, Arizona. It is not an origami design. I thought it would be wise to blast and prime before plating, so I attempted to do so. I ended up blasting only one side of each sheet, figuring that I'd prime this side and put it on the inside. I needed to blast twelve 4' x 10' 10 guage sheets. I rented a tow-behind compressor that put out 125psi and 185cfm. The blasting pot that I got was a 100lb pot. Both of these were the biggest I could find. This cost about $175US for a day. I worked a deal to keep it for a weekend for the same price, which was a good thing, because I had the thing going both days. I used 2400 lbs of 20 silica sand (200 lbs per side) that cost around $170US. Each side took 1/2 hour just to blast. Moving the steel into and out of place took a couple of friends (persuaded with beer) and additional time. If I had it to do over, I would never have done this. It was very hard and hot (gotta wear a special jacket, gloves, and helmet), even though it was only 75-80 degrees F outside. All the welds inside will still need to be cleaned, and blasting is preferred. The outside needs to be blasted. I got a quote from a professional sandblaster. He has a bigger compressor and blasting pot. He'll do the whole thing (inside and out) for $800, and can do it in less than a day. Prior to my blasting experience, I could not find any detailed information on the process and costs, so I went into it blindly. Hopefully, the information that I have provided will allow others to make a more informed choice. Paul F. 1566 From: nadim Date: Thu May 15, 2003 8:48am Subject: Re: Steel choice Hi colin, > Have found an even better build site - with fork-lift and crane - and > am now firming up plans. My advice is to get started ASAP. > However, for the 31ft hull, would anyone consider using 4mm ? I > must say I'm tempted, even if it means extra stringers. I understand the temptation but could you please tell us what _your_ motivation is? > Would anyone consider blasting and > priming the flat plate *before* starting work, or only after the hull > has been completed ? I also thought about this a lot, from the technical point of view, there is no difference. good luck, Nadim. 1567 From: nadim Date: Thu May 15, 2003 8:56am Subject: Re: sandblasting Hi Paul, On Thursday 15 May 2003 17:50, Paul Faulkner wrote: Could anyone who has blasted the hull oneself (after the hull was build) tell us about his experience so we get even more informed about the process? Nadim. 1568 From: John Jones Date: Thu May 15, 2003 11:50am Subject: Re: sandblasting Sand blasting gives a good clean holding pattern on the metal but, the associated mess (sand gets "into" EVERYTHING) is always a problem as well as silica is no good for the lungs,bearings,pumps or valves. An other useful method is high pressure water blasting (10,000 to 40,000 psi) with an orbital head spray and a small ammount of sand or glass beads added...it's not the easiest gun to hold onto and it's REALLY LOUD but it does a good job and is not harmfull to the environment or the operator and someone can be at work on the port side while the starbored side is being blasted...wear a raincoat;and if you use the abrassive a face shield would help. The water runs off and all is kewl. Be carefull though... high pressure water has been used as a cutting tool too, for steel, coral, stone, marble, sponge, plastic, wood, people, etc., etc., etc. 1569 From: John Jones Date: Thu May 15, 2003 11:54am Subject: Re: Steel choice 4 mm that's 1/4" isn't it? 1/16th thickerer than the plans call for. (I'm not so good with metric) 1570 From: Stephen Wandling Date: Thu May 15, 2003 0:08pm Subject: Re: Steel choice 4 mm is about 0.1574803 inches, which is bit more than 1/8". 5 mm is about 0.1968504 inches, which is a bit more than 3/16". 1/4" is about 6.35 mm. I agree. 1571 From: nadim Date: Thu May 15, 2003 1:16pm Subject: Re: Steel choice Hi, for those of you using a unix computer the 'units' program is of great help. ex : $ units '(1/4) inch' 'mm' * 6.35 / 0.15748031 $ units '(3/16) inch' 'mm' * 4.7625 / 0.20997375 If I understand you right, the plan asks for 3/16 inch (+/- 4.8mm) but you want to use 4mm instead for 5mm. Why do you want to do so? Nadim. 1572 From: Keith Green Date: Thu May 15, 2003 7:29pm Subject: Re: Steel choice Actually is 5/32 or .1575. Inches = millimeters divided by 25.4. keith 1573 From: Graeme Mitchell Date: Thu May 15, 2003 7:34pm Subject: Re: Steel choice Bloody metrics I have to live with both as i finished school at the change over point and missed out on the real meaning of metric life. Old geeeezer. 1 INCH = 25.4 mm 1/2 in =12.7 mm 1/4 in = 6.35mm 1/8= 3.175mm 1/16 =1.587 5 mm The change to Metric was one of the biggest wastes of money of all times in Australia ABSOLUTE B/S DAMN THE POLITICIANS an the people that made a fortune out of it . Graeme 1574 From: Graeme Mitchell Date: Thu May 15, 2003 7:39pm Subject: Re: Steel choice I think you should be able to buy 3.5 mm plate ??? Graeme 1575 From: Glen Date: Thu May 15, 2003 9:14pm Subject: Re: Steel choice Colin As you I pondered the idea of buying pre-primed plate to save the money of having to sand blast everything. I did some asking and priced out the difference from primed to un-primed and told Alex about the diiference. Here in Canada pre-primed steel enough to build a 40ft hull will cost somewhere in the area of approx. $ 12,000.00 and the price for the un-primed steel approx. $ 5,500.00 So with this information I could build two hulls for the same price as pre-primed steel. In my case this means a savings to me off $ 6,500.00 which would buy alot of sand!!!! People may argue about the mess or clean up the savings says it all for me! Hope this helps! 1576 From: nadim Date: Fri May 16, 2003 3:24am Subject: Re: Steel choice hI Graeme, I'd like to give my opinion on this subject, nothing argumentative, just for the fun of it. I understand your disapointment with what happend when you made the jump to metrics but IMHO the imperial rates first when it comes to stupid systems (no ofense intended). Having an inch or a mm as a unit is more or less the same, a common base to build on. Dividing an inch by powers of two is actually closer to human thinking than dividing it by ten so at the very begining the idea could be considered better. The problem is that the good ideas stopped there. Why 12 inches in a foot instead of 2 or4 or whatever power of 2? The proliferation of multiplication constants betwin one unit an another is a waste of time. The system is fuzzy even for people born in a country using it. Addition of metric is an order of magnitude easier than than imperial because it doesn't involve multiplication to a common denominator. Even worse is when adding, say, 10 figures , you end up with something like 1/2 an inch and 1/32 instead for 17/32 inch that is more difficult to grasp for most people. Multiplication? well before this day I didn't think about multiplication in the imperian system but that must be tough. what is the surface of 1 and 5/16 * 3 and 3/8? going from that to sq ft involves 1 multiplication and one division if you don't know the coeficient by heart. The diffrence between metric and imperial isn't in the units, it's in the use of them. We must have a common system to permit interaction on a global scale. If you'd permit me a little word of advice, when using the metric system, don't think about how much a centimeter is in inches it's just a centimeter. The problem you have existed in europe too when Napoleon decided that enough was enough and forced the move to metric systems. There was not only a proliferation of unit systems but those systems used the same names. For example the Swedes had an inch that is not the same size as an English inch. Few years ago a Swedish replica was made. When the boat was finished, it was compare to other boat and found to be longer than the original. The builders used the wrong inch! Trains going from a country to another must change boogy because the distance between the rails is not the same, I have a a bunch of adapters for the diffrent contacts I meet during my travels, .... The NASA lost 180 M$ on a probe they lauched a few years ago. The flight went right till it crash landed on the surface of the planet it was going to probe. The firm who wrote the landing software used the, since very long, obsolete pascal per sq/ft thrust unit, while the propulsion system used the metric one. Arghhh. Anyhow they should have spend that money building an hospital instead of sending a piece of steel in space. If it helps you knowing that other people have the same propbelem as you have (it does help me anyhow ;-), We (on the metric side of the world) also have lots of problems converting to the metric system and worse is visualizing the imperial units. In 3 generations the problem will desapear, it is unlucky these generations ar our generation. Nadim. 1577 From: sae140 Date: Fri May 16, 2003 5:40am Subject: Re: Steel choice Hi - thanks for the input so far - I'm about a day behind everyone else with the posts, so sorry if anything new has crossed the aether in the meanwhile .... Having visited and spoken with some giant chemical tank fabricators near my new build site yesterday (giants being the tanks, not the guys), they suggested blasting and priming just prior to pulling together, i.e. whilst the hull is still at the "2 half-shells and a transom" stage. I'll ponder on this some more and seek out a blaster for a quote ..... then go for a beer or 2 to recover ..(!). > If I understand you right, the plan asks for 3/16 inch (+/- 4.8mm) > but you want to use 4mm instead for 5mm. Why do you want to do so? > Nadim. Well, I'd much prefer to use 3/16", quite simply because the plans call for this thickness, and who am I to argue ? If Brent was around, then I'd ask him directly .... But - in this crazy metric Europe (I'm still a Florins, Guineas, perches and bushels man, m'self), I'm stuck with a choice between 4 and 5mm ('cause 4.5mm is *extremely* rare). There are no other choices available - short of getting my backside over to Vancouver and building there (and I'm not kidding !). Nadim - I note you've rounded-up 4.76 to 4.8, so your preference for the heavier plate is clear . My thinking is that 3/16" (4.76mm) is acceptable for the 36 (which has >40% displacement than the 31), so *may* be a tad over-thick for the 31 (as I say, can't ask Brent 'cause he ain't around). 3/16" certainly *is* considered too thick by Brent for the 26. So - it appears that there exists something of a sliding-scale between displacement and preferred plate thickness, and I just wondered where the 31 lay on this hypothetical sliding scale. i.e. is 3/16" 'just right', or a tad too heavy ? and whether a lighter or heavier plate would bring us closer to optimum, given that I can't obtain 3/16" anyway. The advantages of a slightly heavier plate would of course be extra shell strength and an extra margin for corrosion. The advantages of a lighter plate are significantly less weight above the water-line, and a reduced sail area - which might make the difference between sporting one mast or two. I'm adopting junk rig, which normally requires a sail area of around 100-110 sq.ft. per ton. The 31 is spec'ed at 12000 lbs, which is ~5.4 tons. If I can get the weight down a little, then a single mast (with half the number of ropes !) is just possible. Also with junk rig there is the question of extra weight aloft, which usually calls for additional keel ballast to offset this. If I can trade plate weight - safely - for the extra ballast weight down low, then I'd be a happy bunny. I'm already pursuing a keel torpedo option with this in mind. So that's why I'm asking for views on plate thickness, as it's not something that I'm undertaking lightly. If I was building the 36 footer, then this wouldn't be an issue, as the slightly extra weight of metric steel can be absorbed very easily into this much heavier boat. Again, thanks for the input so far. Colin 1578 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Fri May 16, 2003 6:12am Subject: Re: Re: Steel choice Colin, Plate stiffness is a function of both thickness and length. As the hull gets smaller the stiffness for any given plating increases as function of the square of the difference. A hull half as long would have 4 times stiffer sections. If 3/16" is adequate for a 36' hull, as proved by actually usage, the slightly thinner 4 mm plate would be adequate for a 31' hull. I'd use the 4mm, even though it will be slightly more difficult to weld, over building a heavy slug of a boat. 1579 From: nadim Date: Fri May 16, 2003 6:19am Subject: Re: Re: Steel choice Hi, On Friday 16 May 2003 14:40, sae140 wrote: > they suggested blasting and priming just prior to pulling > together, i.e. whilst the hull is still at the "2 half-shells and a > transom" stage Sounds like a good idea but what about behing the stringers? > Steel size: > Well, I'd much prefer to use 3/16", quite simply because the plans > call for this thickness, and who am I to argue ? You are you, that's a good start. > Nadim - I note you've rounded-up 4.76 to 4.8, so your preference for > the heavier plate is clear . That was a cheap one ;-). For a heavy displacement, I'd rather have something thicker but for the argumentation sake, I think 4mm is already quite thick and at 8 Kg per m2 that could mean a lot of weight. Could you please tell me/us what the surface we are talking about? I'd go for the 4mm if the percentage of steel for the volume of the boat is the same with a 31'/ 4mm as for a 36/4.76mm. I know that are no free lunches but, there is a chemical product that is used to transform rust into some other compound, could that be used as a primer? Cheers, Nadim. 1580 From: Gregory Ham Date: Fri May 16, 2003 7:29am Subject: Re: Steel choice Hello Nadim I couldn't get your syntax to work on my Unix box. If I type: $units then it prompts me for the units I have and the units I want. That works fine except that it continually repeats the unit question prompts and no key I enter will get the program to end. Do you know how to get the program to quit? I'm not very good with Unix so it may just be a lack of knowledge on my part. Regards Greg 1581 From: pvanderwaart Date: Fri May 16, 2003 7:37am Subject: Re: Steel choice Presumeably, when Mr. Swain made the construction plan, he calculated the thickness needed based on the spacing of the frames and any longitudinals. Then he chose the available thickness that was the best match to the calculated requirement. It seems most natural that he rounded up, but he might have rounded down if it was close. Which is a long way of saying that the specified plate might be heavier than actually required or pretty close to the minimum required. It is not necessarily the exact perfect thickness. I think it would be worth while getting the designer's opinion. As suggested in an earlier post, if the plate is slightly too thin, the result would probably not be an outright failure, but a cosmetic failure of the 'starved dog' type where the plate has bent out of shape between the frames. If you have an engineering background, you could work it out yourself using the information from "Designing for Power and Sail" by Arthur Edmunds, for example. (However, be warned that book has serious problems with editing and layout.) Peter 1582 From: Red Green Date: Fri May 16, 2003 7:28am Subject: Re: Steel choice Colin, Geronimoooooo..... build the 36' with 5mm. Think of the extra leg room you'll enjoy. CHEERS, Danny O' 1583 From: nadim Date: Fri May 16, 2003 7:43am Subject: Re: Steel choice Hi Gregory, $ is the prompt, it should be $prompt_whatever> units. I guess I wrote a typo. $units would echo the evironnement variable units, which is no defined. examples: [nadim@khemir nadim]$ units 1948 units, 71 prefixes, 28 functions You have: (3/16) inch You want: mm * 4.7625 / 0.20997375 You have: ... or density of steel: [nadim@khemir nadim]$ units '8000 kg per m3' 'pound per ft3' * 499.42368 / 0.0020023079 or for the speed of light in inches per hour [nadim@khemir nadim]$ units 'c' 'in per hour' * 4.249027e+13 / 2.35348e-14 at you prompt type: info units for the documentation. Cheers, Nadim 1584 From: sae140 Date: Fri May 16, 2003 10:37am Subject: Blasting Glen wrote: > As you I pondered the idea of buying pre-primed plate to save > the money of having to sand blast everything. Not quite - my principle concern was directed at the difficulty (and mess) of blasting - especially inside the hull. Visions of shovelling tons of used grit whilst wearing breathing apparatus in zero visibility ... then vacuuming out the remainder. Sounds like hell. Also - how do you blast the bottom effectively when the used grit itself keeps falling to the bottom ? Saving money was more of a secondary issue - honest !! A couple on the Wylo site recently posted re: their blasting experience - here are the key details: Having built outside with bare steel, shot-blasting took place after completion of the (35ft) hull. The inside took 2 men about a day and a half and used 2.5 tons of grit. The outside took 6 hours including the steel deck, and used 4 tons of grit. Grit was not re-used as this was thought to blast rust back into the clean surface. The grit cost £100 per ton and the hire of a compressor cost £250 per week for a 270l/min compressor which is about the smallest recommended. So that's 6.5 tons of grit = £650 + (say) £150 for the equipment - that's £800 (c.$1600 CAN), plus the paint, a night in the pub for the folk involved, plus a day off to recover from a bl**dy awful ordeal. Glen - I think your figures speak for themselves (thanks) Paul F. - I agree - $800 (presumably US ?) which is around £500 over here - sounds like a good deal when you consider the alternative ..... Colin 1585 From: robertgm36 Date: Fri May 16, 2003 10:36am Subject: steel The other major factor to keep in mind in deciding to use pre-primed steel or not is how long it will take you to get your hull to the paint stage . We all know it will take longer than we think . I have friends with boats at various stages of build and the preprimed steel after a few years outside even though covered will need a total sandblasting if you want to be sure your epoxy will stick and you get maximum life out of it.I would never cut corners at this stage and not etch every surface. Tank builders etc do not take years to finish a project so the preprimed works for them. Likewise if you are certain you will be at the paint stage in a few months the extra expense for preprimed may be worth it. Any pro sandblaster could give you a quote for your size of boat before you buy steel and this might help the decision. Good luck. -Robert 1586 From: Alex and Kim Christie Date: Fri May 16, 2003 11:16am Subject: Re: Blasting Probably a big reason pre-primed steel has been favoured on this coast (BC) is because boats were being built in residential areas. There is a boat in Courtenay (near us) that is right beside the owner's house in his yard. Sandblasting (which is extremely loud and would bring in the by-law officer quick as a stick) would push the neighbours beyond the limits of their already grudging acceptance! For the record, his boat has been outside for several years now, and only covered on top; hull looks fine, as far as I can tell (I'm nearly certain it's only got primer on it, but I'd better go check on this). Other builders have worked outside and have not had as much luck. The reason could be the quality of pre-prime paint, or the environment, or both combine. I think it depends where you are -- uptown away from the salt air would have a different effect than building near the ocean breezes. Our boat will have pre-primed steel, as we will be right between two other houses. I may make a full cover like Gord's 40, in which case the pre-prime paint will have maximum protection. Blasting sounds like the most professional way to go, certainly, and not overly costly. Brent, on the other hand, had to launch his boat prematurely due to loss of tenure in his rented yard space. The pre-prime stood up to a spell in the salt chuck, and after that he painted it, so he was glad to have that option, I'm sure! Alex 1587 From: Graeme Mitchell Date: Fri May 16, 2003 5:53pm Subject: Re: Steel choice Nadim hah One other thing i forgot to point out with the using of metrics the other day. distances got further away . I lived in Northern Victoria which was 350 miles from Melbourne (capital city ), when they changed to kilometers it was 550 km so it was further away ???. Bugger<<<<<<<<<<<< them metrics. It is much the same as daylight saving having that 1 hour extra of day light damn the curtain fade quicker . Also this is dinkim<<<<<<< ( AUSSIE slang for not B/S ) the bloody government banned imperial tape measures from being sold at hardware stores (or duel tapes having both units of measure ) imagine what it did to some of the older folks strewth they where confused . That law was repealed after about a year and you can still buy duel unit tape measures to this day. Now the day light saving and distanced travelled are some of the things that have been said in Jest . But it is the trouble when buying plans and other items from different countries that do not have the same units of measure as that is used LOCALLY as I have run in to this PROBLEM BEFORE. Graeme 1588 From: robertgm36 Date: Sat May 17, 2003 11:48am Subject: blasting Alex is definitely right re the quality of preprimed steel. It certainly varies. Of course you should sandblast or etch in some way all your welds anyway.Epoxy loves to bite onto a rough etched surface and will come off a smooth surface much sooner.I have heard that some steel suppliers who do their own wheel abrading will put your primer on the steel you order. Might be another way to ensure some quality control if you`re spending that extra money. Like so many areas of this do it yourself business what makes sense for one person may not for another. - Robert 1589 From: John Jones Date: Sun May 18, 2003 9:55pm Subject: Re: Blasting So.... Try waterblasting ... and install a drain hole And "viola" all the feces is washed away. Sooner or later whoosh!!! 1590 From: Stephen Wandling Date: Sun May 18, 2003 10:26pm Subject: Re: Re: Blasting I don't know one thing about waterblasting, but I have been instructed that the epoxy coating must be applied within 4 hours of attaining bright metal. It must also be applied to dry metal. Would this be compatible with waterblasting? 1591 SPAM 1592 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Mon May 19, 2003 1:47am Subject: Re: Steel choice Colin, I asked Brent about steel thicknesses before I started building and this is what he wrote: "4mm plate is great for the 31 footer, I wish we could get it here. It's structurally adequate for a 36 . For long range offshore cruising, I'd prefer 5mm." Regards, Ted 1593 From: Graeme Mitchell Date: Mon May 19, 2003 4:25am Subject: Re: Re: Steel choice Ok What about the 40fter is that 4 mm or 5 mm ???? Graeme Nadim what is .016 converted to metric on your computer conversion please Graeme 1594 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Mon May 19, 2003 5:28am Subject: Re: Steel choice Graeme, I don't know what is best steel thickness for the 40'. Better wait until Brent returns. I do know that the boats raced at the Henley-on- Todd Regatta in Australia are made from old beer cans which may well be 0.016" or 0.4mm thick so that is a thought if you are looking for a lightweight boat. That said having to drink all that beer in order to obtain sufficient cans might be a bit of a chore. Regards, Ted 1595 From: Stephen Wandling Date: Mon May 19, 2003 7:54am Subject: Re: Re: Steel choice 0.016 inches equals 0.4064 millimeters 1596 From: ... Date: Mon May 19, 2003 8:14am Subject: blasting I am not sure about wet blasting,how do you dry the surfaces and more important all the crevices behind parts that do not have continues welds, before applying the epoxy. Ideally all parts that do not have continues welds should have the mating surfaces painted before positioning and welding,one of the advantages of preprimed steel. The reason for applying the epoxy within 4hours is to minimise the oxidisation of the blasted surfaces,the steel will start to oxidise (start to rust) the moment you finish dry blasting. You might get away with wet blasting in a dry warm place but even then as the steel dries rust will form. Try degreasing and washing a piece of plate that has had the mill scale removed or bright steel, it will rust as it dries,even if it is in a warm place. Geoff Pearce 1597 repeat post 1598 From: nadim Date: Mon May 19, 2003 10:20am Subject: Re: Re: Steel choice thanks Stephen, Graeme, it's good if you give a unit when you wnat a coversion. I was wondering 0.016 what? I am a bit curious about the '0.016 '. What does it represent? 1599 From: ... Date: Mon May 19, 2003 10:55am Subject: Email blasting Sorry about that the first send did not appear to work. Geoff 1600 From: Marco Ahrens Date: Mon May 19, 2003 0:12pm Subject: Blasting Hi folks, I see that hydro blasting is being discussed on the site. I have no experience of hydro (water) blasting on yachts but we blasted the main deck on a 800' North sea shuttle tankers I held command on a couple of years ago and I stayed onboard for three years after completion of the job. It seemed to hold up ok, but grit blasting is better in my opinion as it provides a far better surface. Also when hydro blasting an inhibitor should be added to the blast water in order to prevent flash rust prior to coating. I also have observed a combination of grit/hydro blasting with injection of a secret chemical which was later found to be baking soda, this was a complete waste of time as the paint peeled of with in a couple of months The reason for hydro blasting is becoming more common in the commercial marine industry is that is healthier, environment friendly and little cleaning before painting. Not that it is better. Also remember that the main corrosion problem on a steel yacht is from inside, this might be worth keeping when insulating your boat and fitting the interior. On my own 18 year old 45' Roberts ketch the insulation is normal Rockwool which is removable for internal maintenance. On a different subject has anyone tried hot dip galvanizing pre-cut steel before welding the boat together, presume you would have to grind the areas which are to be welded and recoat the welds on completion with organic zinc paint. Any thoughts on this would be appreciated. Best regards Marco on sunny Cyprus 1601 From: Graeme Mitchell Date: Mon May 19, 2003 4:05pm Subject: Re: Re: Steel choice Ted lol They have a beer can regatta in Darwin in June or July ,they seem to have plenty of cans for that event which unlike Henley on Todd is on water. The .016 was for an other project that I was looking at Thanks ted Graeme 1602 From: Graeme Mitchell Date: Mon May 19, 2003 4:23pm Subject: Re: Re: Steel choice Nadim It is thou,s of an inch hence the point .016 damn metrics once a gain lol Graeme 1603 From: Bert Date: Mon May 19, 2003 4:57pm Subject: Re: Thickness of steel 4 mm is about 0.1574803 inches, which is bit more than 1/8". 5 mm is about 0.1968504 inches, which is a bit more than 3/16". 1/4" is about 6.35 mm. My question: isn't "10 guage steel" also a bit more than 1/8"....Tom Colvin specifies 10 gauge for his 42 foot Gazelle.... Bert Eggers...saginaw, mi 1604 From: Glen Date: Mon May 19, 2003 8:19pm Subject: steel choice It would seem that everyone has their own idea of what they are doing and how to accomplish it. I think that is great and I love hearing about all of the ideas that everyone has. I do know for our area of the world being British Columbia that if you live close to the water that rust is a way of life. I worked in a shop for several years and after cutting most metals or getting them prepped for paint if you leave them without some form coating that they will begine to rust overnight. Having said this most people would say then you should be buying pre-primed steel and priming the areas were you have welded to prevent the rust from starting. This is almost impossible as rust forms so fast that there is no chance of catching it all. I also have seen someone who built their 49 foot dream out of pre-primed steel and did not get to finish the hull in the time he wanted and never got to paint it, it will now take several days to blast the entire hull inside and out in order to be ready. I think that everyone needs to set a realistic goal for a time of completion of the hull including paint. In with this goal needs to be a factor of buying pre-primed steel or not and the cost factors involved with their choice taking into account location of hull being built and access to said blasting / painting equipment needed. One of the ultimate factors will be money, as I remember most of us are building our own boats as to save on all the money we think the buliders dont need from us!! I like hearing about all the idea so thanks to all and keep them coming! Glen 1607 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Tue May 20, 2003 3:51am Subject: Re: Thickness of steel Bert, Yes, 10 gauge is slightly thicker than 1/8". 10 gauge sheet is 3.4mm and 1/8" sheet is 3.2mm thick. Hardly noticable in hot rolled sheet. Do you know if Tom Colvin specified cold reduced sheet? Regards, Ted 1608 From: Graeme Mitchell Date: Tue May 20, 2003 4:42am Subject: Re: steel choice A idea that I seen in a welding shop was ZINC sticks that is wiped on a fresh weld while it is still hot for rust proofing on welded areas . They are a commercial item has any one else seen them as I will chase them up if any one else is interested as what there sales pitch is. 1609 From: Alex and Kim Christie Date: Tue May 20, 2003 10:36am Subject: spam again: "easiest way to..." Sorry folks, It looks like we are being deluged with spam again from the fake eboattrade people (someone has harnessed eboat trade's legit website with a kind of redirect process), so I will have to put the same measures in place I used before --- all new members are automatically moderated as soon as they join. I suspect the people who keep sending the "easiest way to buy or sell your boat" messages must make money every time you click on their link, so don't reward them by falling for it! Not much harm in it, but it has nothing to do with the purpose of the group so I am deleting. If any new members are still on moderation and I have missed changing their membership to non-moderation, please e-mail me and I'll change it. Alex 1610 From: prairiemaidca Date: Tue May 20, 2003 0:57pm Subject: Steel prep; Hi All; Has anyone ever used a small sand blaster and worked an area inside the hull then painted it, then when the paint is dry moved on to do another piece?? I was thinking this was what I might try on Prairie Maid's interior. It should allow me to do what I can when I can. As for the outside I'm thinking a pro blast job followed by undercoat sprayed on as soon as the dust settles. Since I'm not in any real hurry this might be the way to go. Any thoughts. I noticed someone asking about the product por-15. I'm curious as well. Anyone with experience?? Their lit.looks good but so do most products on paper. Martin Forster(Prairie Maid) 1611 From: nadim Date: Tue May 20, 2003 2:10pm Subject: Re: steel choice Hi all, The story was about rust. Yes, a bit of metal rusts as soon as you stop blasting it. if water is used, it starts even earlier, so inhibiting agents might be a good idea. While reading the mail I started wondering why we make such a big fuss. The boats we are talking about are between 36-40 ft. Those are small boats. So it 's not all that much to blast and paint (I am trying to be positive here). If the blasting painting is done while we have half shells then I'd recommend build a half shell, blast, paint then do next one. If I understand it right, pre primed steel costs double the price of normal steel. what figures are we talking about here? say for a 36ft. Is the diffrence in money worth the 3 days you are going to balst and paint or not? It's a pity we live so far from each other, because nothing is like help from someone that is going to do the same thing as you and that you are going to help back. it seems that lots live in BC. Maybe some of you could help each other build the boats. Nadim. PS. I had a good laugh about the 0.016 inch. You are not near the end of your 'imperial' troubles. Would be as good to switch to metrics right now. 1612 From: Glen Date: Tue May 20, 2003 5:30pm Subject: Steel prep Thanks to Nadim and Martin I think that both you gentlemen have the right idea! Work within a small area and prime as you go. Sould you have the right area ( large ) enough to prime all at once, go for it. Most of us are going to take several months +- to complete our projects and some rust has to be anticipated even if you have the ability to cover your project. As for steel costs I priced out the difference between pre- primed steel and not, total pre-primed steel costs is approx. 12,000.00 cnd dollars and the un-primed steel is approx. 6,500.00 cnd dollars. This enough steel to build hull, keels, skeg, cabin sides and top, stringers and bulkward for a 40 foot version. I do not have the prices for the 36, sorry. If there were more people at the ready to purchase stage and we all called the same company ( here in B.C. ) we might even get a better deal!! I was also informed that if you have a salvage yard or second hand steel dealer you might want to give him a try. I know of a company about 6 hours away from me that sells salvaged steel 4 X 8 sheets for approx. $ 100.00 cnd but you have to be able to pick it up as they will not deliver. This is also the largest size they have and yes it is not primed. So does the difference in cost justify buying one over the other, I'll let you decide!! :) Glen 1613 From: Jim Phillips Date: Wed May 21, 2003 1:43am Subject: Re: Steel prep G'day There's been some very interesting comments about water blasting, sand blasting, pre-primed steel and un-primed steel. So here's another factor to toss into the discussion: Why not build in aluminium? This is about 3 times the cost of normal steel, ie. about 50% more expensive than pre-primed steel. But the advantage of not worrying about paints, blasting and corrosion may be worth the additional cost. Admittedly, the welding is more difficult, but once the boat is finished, you only have to worry about stray electrical currents and the odd coin in the bilge that may bore a hole through the hull. I think I prefer aluminium. Any comments? Take care, Jim. 1614 From: Paul Faulkner Date: Wed May 21, 2003 8:31am Subject: Re: Steel prep Blasting and priming the inside of a hull a small area at a time? Unless you have a very large stand up compressor with plenty of CFM, you will be spending a VERY LONG time blasting. I have a blaster with a 50 lb pot and a compressor that puts out about 6 cfm at 90 psi. The compressor can't keep up. I have found this useful for blasting welds or VERY SMALL areas, but would not consider using it to blast the entire interior of anything bigger than a small rowboat. Just my two cents. 1615 From: Aaron Edelman Date: Wed May 21, 2003 10:41am Subject: salvaged steel Hi folks, Just a thought, wouldn't you compromise a steel hull by using salvaged 4 x 8 sheets of steel. You will have no assurance that they are of the same metallic composition. I've always heard, to make sure to order ALL the steel you need for your project AT ONE TIME, and to make sure it comes from the same production run, to avoid galvanic corrosion between metals of different levels of nobility. Isn't that the reason for installing zincs? It would be a heck of a job to install a zinc on each plate of steel to insure the integrity of your hull. just a thought.... (no, I am not building at present). Your comments? 1616 From: richytill Date: Wed May 21, 2003 4:05pm Subject: Re: Steel prep On aluminium: for the sake of discussion, here are a few thoughts. For a coastal cruiser where aluminium can be repaired, no problem-- what if you are offshore where there is no adequate shelter and equipment to make repairs? I worked on deep sea repair and we can fix steel anywhere; with simple tools, in brutal conditions. I teach welding--it is possible for the amatuer to master, but more demanding in terms of time, cost and attention to detail. I find steel to be an honest material--it lets you know when it rusts or fatigues. Aluminium can hide its defects quite well--until it fails. rt 1617 From: De Clarke Date: Wed May 21, 2003 4:14pm Subject: Re: Re: Steel prep the steel vs aluminium debate is of great interest to me... can we hear more on this from others with experience of both? I'd like to hear the full range of pro and con... for a start, I don't know how to assess the condition of an aluminium hull, what to look for, etc. with steel you look for rust and then poke the rusty spots to see how deep they are :-) but what do you do to check the condition of an Al hull? the nice thing about Al hulls I have seen is they don't look rusty :-) and the owner/skippers don't seem to spend a lot of time on rust patrol. that might be worth some extra cost... de 1618 From: John Jones Date: Wed May 21, 2003 4:54pm Subject: Re: Re: Steel prep Try to find a " Dillon Mk-4" torch system. Uses 10 lbs/psi oxy and 10 lbs acetelene and with the proper flux aluminium can be welded in not so ideal conditions and is an interesting torch for use on light steel. Works real good. The factory guy came to our meeting and demonstrated it wearing a suit. 1619 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Wed May 21, 2003 5:16pm Subject: Re: Re: Steel prep John, I'm laughing, sorry but that is really funny! I have seen such demonstrations before, and they are impressive, until you have this huge heatsink called a hull attached to the area you are trying to weld. I've done lots of Tig (Tungsten arc, a lot like gas welding) welding on aluminum light poles, molds etc. With a 250 amp welding machine turned all the way up I had to preheat everything to about 400 degrees over a plumbers melting pot furnace to have any chance of welding it. Aluminum takes lots of very concentrated heat to weld on a large structure like a boat. Mig (wire feed)welders work better because they are able to concentrate all the heat in a very small zone. Gary H. Lucas 1620 From: John Jones Date: Wed May 21, 2003 6:05pm Subject: Re: Re: Steel prep Sooooo..... You have'nt tried the Dillon torch eh? So many sceptics so little thyme, when you try this torch, well it's just not like other torches..... so that's why we invited them to the Toronto Dry-dock in late fall. There was an awfull wind and a little rain.... what a feces day! butt, the guy welded aluminium in these shit conditions and the weld was stronger than the metal it was attached to. Funny ??? No I was sceptical too, but it's worth checking out. And not just dismissing it because you don't think it's possible. 1621 From: Don Taylor Date: Wed May 21, 2003 7:48am Subject: Re: Steel prep Jim: What are you going to use for anti-fouling now that TBT is bannned? Don. 1622 From: Don Taylor Date: Tue May 20, 2003 6:33pm Subject: Re: Thickness of steel > sheet. Do you know if Tom Colvin specified cold reduced sheet? No, he does not. I tried it once and had all sorts of warping show up once I started welding. I think that the cold rolling encapsulates all sorts of stresses into the steel that get released when it is heated up by welding. I was very disappointed bacause I ahd to go back to grinding off millscale. Don. 1623 From: nadim Date: Thu May 22, 2003 0:41am Subject: Hull repares, Steel vs Aluminium Hi guys, Let's not drive the reparation thread (which is indeed a very intresting on) like other mailing list. This is origamiboats, smart guys without money. A reparation is just a way to keep on the journey,it doesn't have to be nice looking or definitive. So let's not fight over a torch and look at what alternatives we have (and dismiss them is necessary) Steel: can be welded most everywhere. As long as you have electricity or gaz. If you have an engine in your boat, There are few plans to make welders from old truck generators, I have pdf and links to those interested. Aluminium: - Dillon Mk-4" torch system ( a possibility) more or less dismissed by Gary. If I am not wrong there are aluminium stricks that can be used for emergency repairs (please offer your input) OK that was the long lasting reparations. Now there other ways to repare a hull depending on the size of the reparation - a big clump of closed cell foam - a piece of ply and epoxy glue - a piece of metal and pop rivets - a piece of whatever and screws, add silicon till drenched .... Nadim. 1624 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Thu May 22, 2003 4:43am Subject: Re: Re: Steel prep John, As I said before, I'm sure that the torch actually works. For small work it will do just fine, because you can get the whole piece of metal warm without problem. On large structures though it is very difficult to even get the area of the weld hot, this makes the job far more difficult. Other questions I'd want to know. Was the filler metal used the same as the filler metal used for Tig welding? Was it a special rod they sold with the torch? Some of those special rods are alloys with very poor corrosion resistance, and they can cause electrolysis with the metal they are welded to. Was the claim that the weld was stronger than the parent metal demonstrated by breaking the part, and it broke along side the weld not through it? That may not be an indication that the weld deposit is stronger than the parent metal, it may be an indication the parent metal was weakened during welding. I'm skeptical. Lots of welding shops tell me they never have failures welding 1/8" and 1/4" mild steel with 0.035" mig wire. Those same shops all sent me failed welds on my parts, and insisting that they switch to 0.045" wire solved the problem. So the question remains, what makes the Dillon torch special? Does it somehow overcome the basic thermodynamics that causes large aluminum objects to suck all the heat away from the weld area? Is the heat of the flame as intense as a large Tig welder so it can heat the area so quickly that the weld puddle doesn't have time to lose all its heat? Skeptical, but willing to learn Gary H. Lucas 1625 From: Edward Stone Date: Thu May 22, 2003 5:19am Subject: Aluminium, Steel and a Dillon Torch John, Gary, When I gas welded aluminium the component lost its hardness because it was annealed in the heat affected zone and I ended up with something I could almost fold like a handkerchief and put into my pocket which is not what I wanted at all. I chose to build in steel for several reasons. Although there are many fine boats in aluminum many that I have seen have fatigue cracks in them. The problem of repairing a crack in aluminium plate or sheet is that it is very important to remove the oxide before welding which means cutting back the face of the crack completely often leaving a hole, which is difficult to fill. Cracks that I have seen are repaired by welding or rivetting a patch over them which is OK but spoils the appearance if that is an issue. Regards, Ted 1626 From: Paul Faulkner Date: Thu May 22, 2003 6:37am Subject: Aluminum vs. steel This debate has been hashed out before. I think many metal boat builders weigh the pros and cons of these two materials before they build. I initially intended to build in aluminum, but the cost and difficulty in welding put me off. I now have a nearly complete 29' (not origami) hull in steel. Check out www.metalboatsociety.com for a debate on the merits of aluminum vs steel. There are also many other interesting topics on the site. Back issues of the MBS Quarterly have a several issues long debate on aluminum vs steel. 1627 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Thu May 22, 2003 7:36am Subject: Re: Aluminium, Steel and a Dillon Torch Ted, I really like working in aluminum. I used to make spending money repairing RV hot water heater tanks that split wide open from freezing because they weren't drained. Using TIG I never needed to use any filler plates. The secret to filling a hole in aluminum using TIG is to feed the filler wire really fast. The cold filler wire rapidly chills the weld puddle and keeps it from sagging out on you. With MIG it is trickier because basically have to stop and start the arc to freeze the puddle. MIG is great for building, TIG is great for repairing. Gary H. Lucas 1628 From: nadim Date: Thu May 22, 2003 7:45am Subject: Re: Re: Steel prep > What are you going to use for anti-fouling now that TBT is bannned? I thought It would be intressting for all to see what questions I asked Ecosea and the answer I got. Unfortunately the price was too high for the boat I am thinking about. But Brent's boat are not all that large so the investment could be worth it. I am quite sure it would be possible to get a discount. What's the wetted surface with single or twin keel for Brent's boats? For those who would be interested in building the under water body in CuNi, the price is 7 US$ a kilo for a 90-10 alloy. Density is 9. Nadim. 1629 From: John Jones Date: Thu May 22, 2003 11:41am Subject: Re: Hull repares, Steel vs Aluminium Oh sure .... we've even used a siliconed chunk of ply "nail gunned" into place just to get her home. Whatever works 1630 From: nadim Date: Thu May 22, 2003 0:51pm Subject: Re: Hull repares, Steel vs Aluminium >Whatever works Can't agree more. James Floyed ask me to forward this information: >have you seen this welder? >www.readywelder.com. >It is a portable MIG, powered by two 12 volt marine batteries. I have seen >them demonstrated and I have a buddy who uses his every day and he loves >it. About $500 US dollars. Safety has no price (well 500$). No one answered my question yet! Are there (or are there not) aluminium sticks one can use with a standard arc welder? I am also suprised that no one wants the plans for a very cheap welder that is worked by the boat engine. Colin send these links a few weeks ago: http://www.geocities.com/damonfg/obweld.html http://oak.cats.ohiou.edu/~weinfurt/gaswelder.html http://www.trailhed.com/welding.html http://mywebpages.comcast.net/t.molnar/Obwelder1.htm want to buy one instead? http://www.zena.net/ even more crazy: http://home8.inet.tele.dk/jan_p/index.htm Nadim. 1631 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Thu May 22, 2003 3:45pm Subject: Re: Hull repares, Steel vs Aluminium Nadim, Yes, there are aluminum stick welding rods. I have not welded with one in a long time so they may have changed. The last time I used them they were difficult to use, partly because they burn up about 3 times faster than steel rods. They also spatter like crazy, and the resultant weld was very hard, and brittle. The ReadyWelder is quite a neat idea. Two 12 volt batteries can certainly supply enough power for short term use, and the voltage falls right in the range you want for aluminum welding. One you have to remember though. For aluminum welding with MIG you need Argon gas, which would be a real pain on a boat. If you want to weld steel you usually use C25, a mixture of Argon and 25% CO2. Straight Argon does a very poor job of welding steel. You can also use straight CO2 for welding steel. It spatters a lot more but produces very sound welds. Gary H. Lucas 1632 From: sae140 Date: Fri May 23, 2003 11:29am Subject: engines & generators Could anyone with a built 31 or 36 hull advise me of the height available for use under the cockpit footwell. I'm considering the installation of an up-an-over back-to-front engine installation (poor man's 'V' drive) in that location, to keep the cabin completely clear. If it looks feasible, then I can be getting on with this whilst waiting for the plans and steel to arrive. Thanks. Some years ago there was an article in the august journal Scientific American demonstrating the power of pyramidal stuctures to (amongst other things) sharpen blunt razor blades. This article is still being quoted by some new age 'experts' as 'proof' of forces beyond our comprehension. What many people failed to spot at the time (and since) was that the article was written on April 1st. So - with this in mind, you may care to take a look at MEG - the Motionless Electromagnetic Generator at: http://jnaudin.free.fr/meg/meg.htm If it works, then it would solve the cruising man's engine and fuel supply problems in one hit. Of course it might just be a sophisticated spoof .... A more down-to-earth device for charging your batteries, with more efficiency than shown by Brent in his book (same methods, but different motor) can be found at: http://www.otherpower.com/otherpower_experiments_motor_convert.html As it's a mains motor (with a simple conversion), it hits battery charging voltages at around 80 rpm. At 400 rpm it generates well in excess of 5 amps - sounds good for a towed prop (or your existing prop allowed to rotate ?), and for a low rpm wind generator ? I'm in the process of making a small one - will keep you posted. There are also (free) plans available for making a pancake style alternator which, if scaled down, would be very similar to commercial yachtie generators. Colin 1633 From: put_to_sea Date: Fri May 23, 2003 3:06pm Subject: CuNi hull bottom I have been wondering about the feasibility of using CuNi on the hull bottom only below the water line. As I understand it (and my understanding is always suspect) steel can be welded to CuNi. Of course CuNi is pretty darned expensive but by limiting its use to the underwater portions of the hull maybe it wouldn't be quite so bad. I was thinking of some cost savings that would go along with its use: no bottom paint, no zincs, no sandblasting, no paint or corrosion in the bilge, just weld in copper pipe for through hulls, cleaner bottom, ground the aluminum or steel mast to the copper bottom for lightening protection, there's probably more. I still can't see how all of that would offset the initial cost but it would help close the gap. It still would be pretty tough for us poor guys to swing. Amos 1634 From: nadim Date: Sat May 24, 2003 7:11am Subject: Re: CuNi hull bottom Hi Amos, I have looked very seriously into that and as for a steel or plastic hull there are adavantages and disadvantages. CuNi is very expensive 15-20 times more expensive than steel, the material used for welding is also expensive, welding CuNi is a more serious mater than steel. The mechanical property of CuNi is not as good as steel. the fact that you'd get a hull 10% heavier is also a problem, do you want to take water with you or CuNi? Electrochimical potential of CuNi is -0.25V (quite low) which means you'll have to be carefull when mixing to other metals. I think you are going to get more corrosion problems than a 100% steel hull. the good new is that the problems will be above the waterline.Since you are opting for a mono hull, the waterline you consider should be the heeled one. The idea I have in mind (for the cat I want to build some day) is also a bottom in CuNi and ply/fiber top sides. So you are not the only crazy guy around. If I may suggest something, buy a few square meters of CuNi, play with it ans weld it to form a model (say 1/5 scale). And let us know about you experience. There is CuNi clad steel to buy, that is also very expensive but might be less expensive than building 2 halfs. The expension rate of steel and copper might be diffrent too, I don't know the implication of it (yet) but we must remember that point. Visiting this link might help: http://marine.copper.org/ I think that glueing copper (no CuNi) sheets with polyester would be an order of magnitude cheaper and easier to build. The EcoSea solution is also an alternative. Nadim. 1635 From: sae140 Date: Sat May 24, 2003 8:05am Subject: Re: CuNi hull bottom I've often wondered why thin copper sheet (say, from disused domestic hot water cylinders ?) isn't epoxied onto steel hulls below the water- line only. Might need to be applied a couple of square feet at a time, to make the process manageable - the sheets overlapping fish- scale fashion. As the origami hull starts-off life as a flat sheet itself, there shouldn't be any wrinkling of the copper. In theory, providing there's a layer of epoxy between the steel and the copper, then electrolysis shouldn't be a problem, and you could say goodbye to anti-fouling/ haul-out costs .... But somehow, attaching a more noble metal than steel to the hull feels kinda scary - like what happens if the hull takes a hit from something sharp, which puts the 2 metals in contact ? Mind you - not such a different situation from that if you'd used copper-laced paint ? Colin 1636 From: nadim Date: Sat May 24, 2003 8:33am Subject: Re: Re: CuNi hull bottom Hi Colin, IMO, it's the way to go. it's a borring job but painting a hull is not less borring. I wouldn't use 2nd hand copper sheets without giving it a very thorow cleansing (chemical). Those sheets might have been in contact with chemicals that could inpair the anti fouling. The good thing is that copper is cheap (it's the %$# nickel that is expensive). The corrosion problem should be avoided if the thickness of the glue is enough. As a side effect that layer of glue act as a layer of paint. I think the glue used shouldn't be too hard (read no epoxy). If the two metal are in contact, only the steel around the the contact will transfer (corrode). a sheetead hull must be watched more closely and repaired immediately. That would indicate twin keels for that kind of hull. I am not quite sure about reparations. Copper thickness 0.2 to 0.5mm is more than enough and quite easy to work with. Another added factor to copper hull is speed as they remain _quite_ clean. In Bruce roberts book about metal boat building, there is a chapter on CuNi, you might want to have a look at it. So.Who is building a prototype? Nadim. 1637 From: Graeme Mitchell Date: Sat May 24, 2003 4:45pm Subject: Re: Re: CuNi hull bottom There was a boat built at around the 1900.S to defend the America,S cup it was apparently made out of several dissimilar metals and was a engineering marvel at the time, it was said that it fizzled like soda when it was put in the water it went on to retain the cup as history has it. But it was scraped after about 6 months as how the story goes it was stuffed due to all these multi metal s not getting along. I will find the name of this yacht and post it later I have read about it somewhere. Graeme 1638 From: Graeme Mitchell Date: Sun May 25, 2003 3:12am Subject: Re: Re: CuNi hull bottom OK Take 2 the name of the fizzling boat was Reliance and it was dismantled 2 months after the America,s cup not 6 months as i seemed to remember and the year was 1903 it was described as the most useless boat ever ??????.... That was back in 1903 pre Titanic I am sure there are other boats that now have that honour. Graeme 1639 From: nadim Date: Sun May 25, 2003 9:28am Subject: Re: Re: CuNi hull bottom Hi, I can't agree less, America's cup boats are completely useless, 1903 or 2003. Cheers, Nadim. 1640 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Sun May 25, 2003 10:59am Subject: Re: CuNi hull bottom There is a recent thread on CuNi stick on tiles on the Metal Boat Society's forum. Regards, Ted 1641 From: nadim Date: Sun May 25, 2003 1:38pm Subject: Re: Re: CuNi hull bottom thanks Ted, here is a direct link: http://www.metalboatsociety.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=46&highlight=cuni Was it this thread you meant Ted? Cheers, Nadim 1642 From: yvesmariedetanton Date: Sun May 25, 2003 2:50pm Subject: Building a 63' Cu-Ni sail boat. For your information. I have photos of a 63 footer under construction. Please visit Http://www.tantonyachts.com Click on Drawings;page 9; design #964. 1643 From: sae140 Date: Sun May 25, 2003 8:59pm Subject: Re: CuNi hull bottom I'm sure you're right about using new copper - I just enjoy re- cycling stuff wherever possible. If anyone does decide to go down this route, I'd suggest placing a spacer fabric underneath the copper - such as plasterer's fibreglass scrim - to ensure 0.2 mm or more of glue remains under all of the copper sheet, even when compressed against the hull during curing. I suppose Dow Corning silicone rubber might be a useful adhesive for this application - the stuff used to glue glass fish tanks together. I think it has a 10yrs+ guarantee. Cure time would be lengthy though, as the acetic acid liberated during cure needs to find it's way out of the bond. Same story with adhesives using a volatile solvent base. My money would still be on epoxy - the Rapid Araldite-type (from the Ciba group) which, although not being flexible as such, retains some resistance to shock - unlike the so-called 'precision' (or standard) Araldite which sets brittle, and will shatter if stressed. Whatever you use, needless to say it must be able to withstand being smacked by pot-marker buoys and flotsam, being rubbed against by the odd rope or two, and maybe even the occasional brush with an anchor chain. (i.e. stick it on *good*) Never seen this done before, so perhaps there's something we've overlooked ? Colin 1644 From: Edward Stone Date: Mon May 26, 2003 2:15am Subject: Re: Re: CuNi hull bottom I was referring to this one Nadim. It is about stick on CuNi http://www.metalboatsociety.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=530&sid=07bf27882e30ca96a053730d0e526e50 Regards, Ted 1645 From: pvanderwaart Date: Tue May 27, 2003 8:07am Subject: Re: CuNi hull bottom My research suggests that this is a mixture of the history of two yachts. Defender, designed by NG Herreshoff had a bronze bottom riveted to aluminum topsides. She defended in 1895 and was broken up in 1901. There were problems keeping paint on the topsides, and the aluminum rivets corroded away. The real horror story was the 1901 yacht Independence designed by B.B. Crowninshield. She had nickle-steel frames, bronze and steel plating and an aluminum deck. She had structual failure beginning immediately, and was broken up three months after launch. She sailed and lost a couple races in the defender series, and never defended the cup. 'Traditions and Memories of American Yachting', William P. Stephens. As I remember, there were similar problems with the Statue Of Liberty where the copper sheathing connects to the iron frame. The original constuction used leather for insulation. I'd stick to one metal, myself. Peter 1646 From: nelstomlinson Date: Tue May 27, 2003 10:58am Subject: Re: engines & generators Hi, Colin, I glanced at some of the materials explaining the ``motionless generator''. The idea of vaccuume energy , and the idea of tapping it, aren't new. The idea that it is feasible does seem to be new. I'm not a physicist, and I have difficulty reading some of the math in the papers, so take what I say here with a grain of salt. I believe that the idea of vaccuume energy is a consequence of one of several competing theories (can't remember which!). I think that the way everyone else has dealt with it was by positing that the energy was ``destroyed'' as fast as it was ``created''. I.e., that the energy was an accounting fiction, and not ``real''. This fellow seems to have found another explanation, which makes it real. I'm not really competent to judge his explanation. My guess is that this is not obviously impossible, but rather doubtful. I suppose that if this turns out to be real, it will be strong emperical evidence for theories which include vaccuume energy. It will also be bad news for OPEC. He claims to have a US patent on this nifty novelty. The US patent system is severely broken; they'll grant a patent for any obvious thing. There is, for example, a patent issued to a 7 year old for a http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PT O1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=/netahtml/srchnum.htm &r=1&f=G&l=50&s1='6,368,227'.WKU.&OS=PN/6,368,227&RS=PN/6,368,227 method of swinging (on a playground swing). Except for eternal motion machines, they don't require a working model. This doesn't claim to be an eternal motion machine, so the existence of a patent doesn't imply that this will actually work. If it does work, the inventor will have a monopoly on the method in the US for around 20 years. I predict that this (if real) will be commonly used starting in about 20 years. The author claims to have gotten an article on this published in a peer-reviewed physics journal. That impresses me far more than the patent. That suggests that he may not be a crackpot, or at least that the cracks in his pot haven't let quite all the sense leak out. On the other hand, the letters on his website seem to me to show all the symptoms of crackpottery: claims of grandiose discovery, rejection by by the mainstream, claims that his work is being suppressed ... usw. If it weren't for that publication, I'd dismiss this out of hand. In summary, that second link seems far more likely to be valuable. Nels 1647 From: nelstomlinson Date: Tue May 27, 2003 2:34pm Subject: Re: Designing for boat safety. Hi, Nadim, Sorry about the long delay in replying to your post; we've a new baby (number 3), and life has been turned upside down. About units: we would probably be better off to use natural units, to avoid the metric/standard confusion. In this case, we would probably be best served expressing density using the density of water as 1. That makes the density of steel about 7.9, and of aluminum about 2.6. The closed-cell foam I mentioned has a density of about 0.004. We're agreed that, ideally, we would want the density of our finished boat, in cruising trim, with a large hole in the bottom, to be about 0.8. You pointed out that if we merely give the swamped boat neutral buoyancy (0.98 or so), it will float with decks awash, and that makes self-rescue terribly difficult. That's entirely true, but compare that to the situation with swamped density >1. Even with the decks awash, you have access to whatever was aboard and didn't get washed out. Merely neutral buoyancy is nothing to sneeze at. Some company makes large, inflatable bags (called Yachtsavers, I think?) which one inflates in the cabin when the boat is sinking. I would think that neutral buoyancy plus a couple small airbags would be a very reasonable system. Even if both bags fail, with neutral buoyancy the hull stays at the surface, giving you a chance to do something constructive. With at least one bag inflated, density is <0.9 and life is good (relatively speaking). The great advantages to this would be first that the cost of two smaller bags might be less than the cost of one huge bag (remember, 400 ft^3 for the 40 footer); second that neutral buoyancy and a pair of deflated bags leaves a lot more interior room than would enough foam to give similar positive buoyancy; third that smaller bags(s) leave you more room inside to get to tools, supplies, et cetera in the event you must inflate them; and fourth, even if neither bag inflates, you are still on top of the water, even if just barely. You pointed out that foam in the bilges isn't a good idea, and that seems to be the general consensus. The whole idea is to seal up unused space, so why not just make any bilge volumes we'd contemplate foaming into air tanks? Watertight cleanouts would give you the option of stashing some stuff in them, and let you inspect the inside of the hull. The tanks could be filled with foam, if that seemed appropriate. I haven't gotten around to talking to the fire department yet about this nifty closed cell foam the builders around here are using. I'm still a couple years away from purchasing plans (still have to pay off some student loans), so I'm not in a rush. I'd suggest that anyone who's looking for insulation/floatation look into what builders are spraying into houses in their area, and then talk to their local fire departments about it. I mentioned a Jabsco pump and a PTO. I think that any North American farm boy or fisherman would know what these are, but I should have remembered that some of the folks reading this list aren't in those two groups. PTO is a Power TakeOff. That's an alternate output shaft on a transmission. Usually the PTO can be powered when the transmission is in neutral. So, one can send the engine's entire power to the machine on the PTO. Jabsco is a brand of pumps, available here in the Pacific Northwest. What I had in mind are the flexible impeller models (look here: http://www.twindiscse.com/jabsco/impeller1.shtml and here: http://www.jabsco.com/prodInfoApp/servlet/DisplayI temDetail?itemId=30540-0003&catalogId=Industrial&c ategoryId=JIFLX&typeId=JIFSS ) Now that I look, a better bet might be something like the big contractor's trash pump in this brochure ( http://www.gormanrupp.com/products/man/conmkt/pdfs/up_01790.pdf ). The 6 inch pump, powered by the 42hp Wisconsin diesel, is self priming and can handle 2 5/8 inch solids, at up to 1200 GPM. Something like that, hooked directly to the main engine, would give you some time to get some plywood and epoxy on a hole. The positive floatation, however achieved (i.e., neutral buoyancy and airbags or positive buoyancy without airbags) would of course give even more time. Rebuilding a pump doesn't take much mechanical aptitude, IF you can get the parts. I wouldn't be surprised if you could find a worn out trash pump at a farmer's or contractor's auction, if you took the time to look. Bret's theory about transverse frames is that they are very short, stiff, rigid reinforcements. When a rock or a container or a deadhead slams into your hull, if it hits near instead of directly on a transverse frame, the foreign object and the rigid frame act as the two blades of a shear, and slice through the plate. The long longitudinal frames are considerably springier, so a strike near them may not shear through the plate. In fact, I would hope that the impact could be distributed over a large part of the hull, and that it might take a much more concentrated force to punch a hole in a hull with only longitudinal framing. Obviously, the idea I had, of fastening a bulkhead to the longitudinals, stiffens them and might make things worse instead of better. When we're talking about floatation, we should remember that the first choice is to not let the hole get punched at all. If I've misrepresented Bret's ideas in these last two paragraphs, I hope he'll set me straight. I do still like the idea of putting watertight bulkheads in the ends of the boat, in the parts which are almost entirely above waterline. That, together with enough insulation for Southeast Alaska, would be more than enough floatation up high to give you a second chance if your airbags didn't inflate. The stiffening effect shouldn't be such a problem in this case. I'd suggest accessing them through watertight deck plates (on deck), and using the space for stowing only very light stuff, like Ramen noodles, winter clothes and such, which you won't want at sea. Conventional wisdom holds that it's best to keep weight out of the ends of a boat, anyway. This would give a few cubic feet of floatation at the bow, and many cubic feet at the stern. You could get the same effect a lot cheaper by stuffing those areas in the bow and stern with blue foam board, held in place with cargo nets, but you'd lose the storage space. I think that with a bit of thought, we could get at least to the neutral buoyancy point without adding too much to the cost, and without subtracting too much from the utility, of the boat. I think that watching me pump the boat full of water, and then pump it out again, all without disappearing under the water, would make my wife feel a lot safer. I certainly wouldn't hesitate to cut costs on interior finish to make up for any extra cost in achieving that. Nels 1648 From: Date: Tue May 27, 2003 5:36pm Subject: Re: Re: engines & generators The problem is more likely in manufacturing the device. Quantum physics allows for many effects that appear to defy common sense. However, a quantum event that works at sub-microscopic levels doesn't work as the scale is increased. Thus, while it is quite possible that a quantum event could be harnessed to create something from nothing - the energy available is extremely small. If you try to increase the size of the machine to make something useful, the quantum effect is lost. If you try to make billions of these machine to create something useful, the costs exceed that of burning oil. greg ps: new site - some double and triple dart origami boats: http://www.easysoftwareinc.com/Design/Genoa55.htm 1649 From: nadim Date: Tue May 27, 2003 5:52pm Subject: Re: Re: Designing for boat safety. Hi, > Sorry about the long delay in replying to your post; we've a new baby > (number 3), and life has been turned upside down. Congratulation for the new born baby (and the other two). I now understand why you have such an interrest in safety. > About units: we would probably be better off to use natural units, > .... the density of water as 1. Fine for me as the natural system matches the metric one. > The closed-cell foam I mentioned has a density of about > 0.004. I think you mean 0.04. 0.001239 (a third of the value you give) is the density of air at sea level. > You pointed out that if we merely give the swamped boat neutral > buoyancy (0.98 or so), it will float with decks awash, and that makes > self-rescue terribly difficult. > Merely neutral buoyancy is nothing to sneeze at. I have to strongly disagree with you. With a density of 0.98 you are as good as dead. Try to envision your ship in waves, possibly braking ones. Add curents, which are not only a 2 dimentional phenomenon. That is, they also go downwards. I understand the difficulty in finding one or two extra cubic meter for floatting devices but merely neutral boyancy is simply not good enough. the 0.8 value is what I would consider the dangerous limit and I go for even lower density if possible. Let's put numbers on this. Say you boat displaces 5 tons a boyancy of 0.98 would give you an archemedeus thrust of 100 Kg upwards. Peanuts. A density of 0.8 would give you a ton of thrust upward. > Some company makes large, inflatable bags (called Yachtsavers, I > think?) which one inflates in the cabin when the boat is sinking. I > would think that neutral buoyancy plus a couple small airbags would be > a very reasonable system. Even if both bags fail, with neutral I agree, the solution looks tempting. Its not as good as 'hard' boyancy but a very good complement. I found this on the internet >>Noticed that Yacht Savers went out of business doing this kind of thing. >>Had a couple of well publicized sinkings, despite installation of the >>device. Now, I'd recommend not buying anything. Build it yourself. 2 or three tractor iner tubes and a second hand diving tank take you very far. You must be carefull to attach the devices solidely and that they should not obstruct passage (would be silly to drown because of one of them blocking the way out). If the boat has some positive boyancy, then the same tubes and an hand ump with a long enough pipe would do the job. not as comfortable or high tech but workable, cheap and low tech (low tech is good). I am curious about the price of those yacht savers, does any one have a price list? > The whole idea is to seal up > unused space, so why not just make any bilge volumes we'd contemplate > foaming into air tanks? Watertight cleanouts would give you the > option of stashing some stuff in them, and let you inspect the inside > of the hull. The tanks could be filled with foam, if that > seemed appropriate. The problem is filling with foam. Foam will absorb water defeating its purpose. Making the bilge a serie (of SEPARATED) small watertight tanks is a possibility but I think it's unrealistic. Keeping rust away is even less realistic. I propose my very low tech, very low price, very likely to be the best solution. Ok what we need is a cheap watertight container that will not rust. Sounds like plastic cola bottles fit the description. there are two types of bottles thick ones and thin ones. I'd go for the thin one as they are very easy to form. some silicon glue before you close the bottle and voila! The only problem is keeping them into place with some sort of netting. > Now that I look, a better bet might be something like the big > contractor's trash pump in this brochure ( > http://www.gormanrupp.com/products/man/conmkt/pdfs/up_01790.pdf ). > The 6 inch pump, powered by the 42hp Wisconsin diesel, is self priming > and can handle 2 5/8 inch solids, at up to 1200 GPM. Something like > that, hooked directly to the main engine, would give you some time to > get some plywood and epoxy on a hole. The positive floatation, > however achieved (i.e., neutral buoyancy and airbags or positive > buoyancy without airbags) would of course give even more time. :-) You are dreaming (As I have) I've had a 6 inch pump on my boat (2 in fact) Let's no understress the fact that the pumps must _absolutely_ be self priming (I made the mistake, twice) The intake must be carefully designed so it can't be obstructed by paper or other floatting debris (there are always plenty of them) This is a very serious matter when you install a pump. Now if you get a hole of some serious importance, say a rip 5 cm (2 inches) wide by 60 cm (2 ft (another nice thing with metrics, you don't have to change unit so often)) then your big fat pump will _not_ keep you afloat. If the boat floats, there is much less stress. Reparations can be made under water. Then I wonder if there is need for big pumps. a small electrical pump for everyday use . 2 serious hand pumps,not the phony ones found on 'fine' yachts and a hink or two. On my boat, it was possible to pump water with the engine pump. Nice to empty the bilge only. > The long longitudinal frames are considerably springier, so a strike ... > hull with only longitudinal framing. Obviously, the idea I had, of > fastening a bulkhead to the longitudinals, stiffens them and might > make things worse instead of better. When we're talking about I don't think attaching transversal frames to the longitudinal frames is a bad idea. a boats motion is not only forward on 2 dimentions. if the wave takes up and down and you meet an object on that trajectory, then the longitudinal frames act like transversal frames when moving forward. Anyhow, It take a lot to punch a hole in 4mm steel. My advice is to not over do anything. if you need a tranversal frame to make a watertight bulkhead do it by any mean otherwise don't bother > Conventional wisdom holds that it's best to keep weight > out of the ends of a boat, anyway. I sailed a 30 tri with a danish friends a few weeks ago. I was steering and he went to the bow to do something (forgot what) The boat was incontrolable with the tiler. > This would give a few cubic feet > of floatation at the bow, and many cubic feet at the stern. You could > get the same effect a lot cheaper by stuffing those areas in the bow > and stern with blue foam board, held in place with cargo nets, The idea is simple and effective, I like it. > but you'd lose the storage space. No free lunch on a boat. > I think > that watching me pump the boat full of water, and then pump it out > again, all without disappearing under the water, would make my wife > feel a lot safer. And she would be absolutely right. After 100000 years of evolution, I'd like to see boats being unsinkable (the opposit being plain stupid except if you are a fish) > I certainly wouldn't hesitate to cut costs on > interior finish to make up for any extra cost in achieving that. I don't think there is any price difference between a safe boat and an unsafe one. Let's resume (my opinions): - watertight bulkheads at the ends or floatation device (nicer name for blue foam). About the blue foam, you can use salvage pieces instead for buying new, just put it together with some wire. Are there any health risk in being in a confined volume where blue foam is present? There also big plastic drums to salvage, 5 litters milk or oil containers, .... - Density of 0.8 or less (Not all the foam has to be sprayed, you can spray the minimum and glue blue foam on top to save money, OSRAM VII has no sprayed foam at all, all blue foam, half the price, check Tony birgas web site) - Filling the bilge with PET bottle - some inner tubes and a hand_and_feet pump - No engine pump - 2 hand pumps made of PVC pipe (cheap, effective and easy to build and reparable anywhere in the world). make them in stainless steel and they will survive the boat. - Twin keels - Keep the boat light It seems to me that there is nothing expensive in the list. Cheers, Nadim, looking forward to see your boat afloat. 1650 From: Michael Casling Date: Tue May 27, 2003 6:10pm Subject: Re: Re: Designing for boat safety. I like the logic although it has been argued that this is the wrong thinking for steel boats as they do not get holes. Our boat at 7400 pounds requires about 800 bottles but I have not calculated the volume that would take. There is all kinds of places on the boat that they could be put that is not normally being used. Since I did the calculation I have read Dave Gerrs book The Nature of Boats and it seems I do not need as many. I have spoken with folks who have had their boats sink and they were not very pleased. Others including myself have had a boat roll and fill up with water and float and I much prefer that. Our plastic boat will be getting enough buoyancy to float as soon as I get around to it. On the 21 footer that floated it only required foam under the bunks. The hull and deck were cored. I was surprised at how high it floated and after righting it was easy to bale and tow. It would not right itself with the spinnaker still attached and the hull full of water. A little bit more ballast and it would have come up. I added more ballast later. Michael Casling in Kelowna BC 1651 From: nadim Date: Wed May 28, 2003 0:09am Subject: Re: Re: Designing for boat safety. Hi Michael, Just for the pleasure to argue: > I like the logic although it has been argued that this is the wrong > thinking for steel boats as they do not get holes. Hmmmmm, I am really intrested in knowing who is the genius that has argued that steel boats do not get holed. IMO, building in steel is putting an extra chance on your side. making the boat unsinkable is guranting that the boat will float. I'd rather have a tupperware that floats than a tungsten (which by the way means heavy(tung) stone(sten)) boat that sinks. > Our boat at 7400 > pounds requires about 800 bottles but I have not calculated the volume > that would take. The bottles were meant as one of the floating devices. Foam, inflating bags, ... are also part of the equation. Water tight bulkheads shouldn't be counted as floatation device by the way and not be integrated in any calculation. I considere theme only extra comfort. > I have read Dave Gerrs book The Nature of Boats and it seems > I do not need as many. Could you please tell us what magic formula you read in the book that could change the mathematics of density. The nature of whatnot with a density over 1 is to sink. > I have spoken with folks who have had their boats > sink and they were not very pleased. sinkable = unpleased (or dead) then I extrpolate that unsikable = pleased or at least sleeping well at night. > Others including myself have had a > boat roll and fill up with water and float and I much prefer that. I am glad you are still here to tell us but there is a big diffrence between rolled and holed. 1652 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Wed May 28, 2003 5:18am Subject: Re: Re: Designing for boat safety. Do a search for Cubitainers. Collapsible, rectangular not round, come in several sizes, quite cheap. Gary H. Lucas 1653 From: batsondbelfrey Date: Wed May 28, 2003 5:58am Subject: Re: Designing for boat safety. A comment on overall density of a boat with built in buoyancy: I read that in a storm, the upper layers of water have quite a few air bubbles in them, and the density of this bubble-filled water is a bit less than one. A boat with barely neutral buoyancy in still water might float somewhat below the surface (where there are fewer or no bubbles), assuming that water pressure doesn't compress your foam or bottles to the point where the overall density goes below 1. Also, when using bottles for buoyancy, take into account that water surging inside the hull may damage some bottles. Bottles may go brittle with age, or a few years of just a little bit of motion in a seaway may chafe through some of them. It seems like a good idea to have a healthy reserve. Regards Robert Biegler 1654 From: nelstomlinson Date: Wed May 28, 2003 8:50am Subject: Re: engines & generators Yes, quantum effects don't scale. The macro-scale things where we use them are things like tunnel diodes where smaller is better. But this doesn't seem to be that sort of thing. The vaccuume energy, if there is such a thing, is certainly a quantum phenomenon. The math he's spouting looks like classical physics. I remember Maxwell's equations, space current, Poynting's vector, and so on. Lorentz's gauge I really don't remember. My education was strictly classical, engineering physics. I'm going to try to dig out my dictionary and E&M books and look a bit deeper. I'm curious. This fellow seems to be saying that it's possible to get power from an open circuit, and that that would be obvious if only Lorentz hadn't obscured it by neatening up Maxwell's work, in a foolish quest for symmetry. As I said, it isn't certainly impossible, but I wouldn't put off buying a generator just because I've learned of this. If I manage to make time to learn anything about this, I'll pass it on. Nels 1655 From: Date: Wed May 28, 2003 10:38am Subject: Re: - pictures I'm starting to post some of the pictures we've taken in 20 years of cruising the Pacific and Asia. http://www.easysoftwareinc.com/Design/Pictures.htm Greg Elliott Yacht Lazy Bones 1656 From: nadim Date: Wed May 28, 2003 0:24pm Subject: Re: Re: Designing for boat safety. Hi Robert, > in a storm, the upper layers of water have quite a few air > bubbles in them, and the density of this bubble-filled water is a > bit less than one. You are absolutely right. The same goes for a man over board, in a storm, spray is real danger. it's possible to drawn in spray. advaced life vest incorporate a spray hood. > Bottles may go brittle with age, or a few years of just a little bit of > motion in a seaway may chafe through some of them. And quite right again. I think it will take quite a long time for the bottle to become brittle. The enemy is sun and UV, not to much of that in the bilge. The chafe can also be a problem specialy with the think bottle. I think it would make sense to fix them with foam which itself ads to the floatability. Try to cencentrate the maximum of the floats at the bottom of the boat and attach them properly Keeping the boat light is a good idea, I don't keep a list but: - closed cell mattrases (not lighter bu floats) - a plastic tool box instead for a metal one (doesn't rust either). - a tool set that doesn't weight a ton - no more than the adequate amount of batteries - an engine that doesn't weight too much - etc... add you own Nadim. 1657 From: nadim Date: Wed May 28, 2003 0:27pm Subject: Engine I think it would be ecological and economical to marinize a car engine for a sail boat. I don't know for the american side of the atlantic, but mercedes produces a somal turbo disel engine that is fit in the cars branded 'smart'. I think the output is 25 Kw, more than enough for a 10m boat. What are your experiences? Nadim 1658 From: Date: Wed May 28, 2003 1:41pm Subject: Re: Re: Designing for boat safety. I've found that the best device to prevent sinking is an audible alarm hooked to a float switch in the bilge. Place a solid state siren inside the boat, and another at the mast head. The same sirens can also be used as part of a burglar alarm. A mast head alarm is very handy while you are ashore, if only to alert your neighbors that something is wrong. We have hit may things over the years, including running up on reefs, and none have done more than put a small dent in the steel. By far the most likely cause of sinking is a failed thru hull. An unsinkable small steel cruising boat requires compromises to the point that most sailors and crew will not be happy living in the boat. At best you will be almost guaranteed to be a single hander. After all, isn't a good solution that gets you sailing better than a perfect solution that keeps you at the dock? I would not spend too much time on this issue. There are lots of hazards and risks sailing, of which sinking is only a small part of the picture. Experience, care, and seamanship will go a lot further in keeping you safe than an unsinkable hull. Like the weak link in the chain, it isn't the best feature of your boat that keeps you safe, it is the worst feature that puts you at risk. It has been my experience that rarely does any single failure endanger the yacht. It almost always involves two or more failures that combine in an unexpected way to place you at risk. For example: the boat sunk because you forgot to turn off a thru hull, and didn't bother to replace a rusty hose clamp, and didn't bother to clean the bilge strainer. No single one of these would have sunk the boat, but together it was only a matter of time. greg elliott yacht Lazy Bones 1659 From: sae140 Date: Wed May 28, 2003 1:47pm Subject: Re: Designing for boat safety. Neutral buoyancy is nowhere near good enough for the recovery of a flooded yacht. Exact neutral buoyancy on a sailing boat implies that the mast tip will be just breaking the surface, with your beautiful Origami hull some 30-odd feet below. You need neutral buoyancy 'plus' the weight of the mast and rigging, 'plus' the weight of the hull above the decks, unless the hull is sealed-off like a submarine (which is what it has become, of course), and your port-lights are capable of withstanding some outward pressure. But - if your hull is closed up tight - how do you intend getting the water out ? And - bear in mind that *everything* has seawater swimming around it - including all your electrics .... unless your hull has watertight compartments of course, which are not very practical on small vessels. With the decks upwards clear of the water, you might just stand a chance using manual pumps, given enough time and a kind sea - and providing the hole which caused the flooding has been fixed well. Considering that the hulls discussed on this forum are around 6-9 tons, then I'd suggest you'd need (neutral+2) = 8-11 tons of buoyancy installed to stand any sort of a chance of self-recovery. And that's a lot of plastic bottles. Bearing in mind that about a third of your displacement results from keel ballast, I'd have thought that a method of quickly dumping this ballast in an emergency is highly desirable, and possibly practical providing the ballast is housed in detachable keel bulbs, or torpedoes. The ability to remove such a large proportion of the combined hull weight might also prove useful at other times. However, this flies in the face of Brent's K.I.S.S. approach, so personally I'd resign myself to the idea that steel boats will sink when flooded and do everything humanly possible to prevent their flooding in the first place. Colin "He who waits for all dangers to pass must never put out to sea." 1660 From: nadim Date: Wed May 28, 2003 4:22pm Subject: Re: Re: Designing for boat safety. Hi Colin, On Wednesday 28 May 2003 22:47, sae140 wrote: > Considering that the hulls discussed on this forum are around 6-9 > tons, then I'd suggest you'd need (neutral+2) = 8-11 tons of buoyancy > installed to stand any sort of a chance of self-recovery. Since I am not to build an origami boat, I am missing some information about the boats. you quote 8 tons. Is that the displacement of the origami boat you intend to build? > And that's a lot of plastic bottles. Plastic bottles where just mean as one of the solutions, specificaly for placement into the bilges. The foamming would provide the biggest part of the floatation. > Bearing in mind that about a third of your displacement results from > keel ballast, I'd have thought that a method of quickly dumping this > ballast in an emergency is highly desirable, and possibly practical > providing the ballast is housed in detachable keel bulbs, or > torpedoes. The ability to remove such a large proportion of the > combined hull weight might also prove useful at other times. I have to strongly disagree with you. As much as I understand the logic behind your idea (which I consider right) as much as I don't see any practical solution to implement the idea. You must design a balast that can be instantly release from wherever you are on the boat, whatever time of the day or night and sea conditions. Jamming is no option here. The system still needs to work properly as a keel/ballast system. The system itself, if feasible, would add weight to the boat. I am against the very principle of having to dump a part of the boat to allow the other part to survive. If you dump your ballast and get rolled over, what is going to right you up? in the case of survival, you get a very unsatisfactory sail boat that can't handle any power. Worst is the case where you dump the ballast in haste to just realize that you shouldn't have because the situation wasn't all that bad after all (just compare it with the frightening number of people abandoning a sound ship for a swimming ring (life boat)). My KISS method calls for a boat that doesn't need any high tech solution and that doesn't even need any action from the crew. I do not dismiss your idea because of the logic but because of the involved procedure it requieres to be put into action. Positive boyancy, is not a simple matter but it's, IMO, the most simple and sound solution for boat survival. > "He who waits for all dangers to pass must never put out to sea." I'd appreciate the quote if I was an 18th century english man trying to prove my valor by confronting with danger. That kind of thinking of from another age where loose of life wasn't all that important. I value my crew and own life highly and if there are dangers, then I'll wait. And if danger is always present, then I'll stay at home. the quote is just plain silly. (no offence intended, but you know that hopefully) Positive boyancy, or any other solution for making the safety higher on a ship, is not a matter of waiting for danger to pass but a matter of evaluation of the danger and implementing a solution to eliminate it at the source. It's a positive, dynamic process. You do look on both sides of the road before you cross it, don't you? Cheers, Nadim. 1661 From: Michael Casling Date: Wed May 28, 2003 4:28pm Subject: Floatation I was going to reply to the points posed by Nadim but the computer with the saved message just went up in smoke. In Dave Gerrs book he has a scale for calculating the amount of foam required for half submerged floatation and offers the formula for fiberglass as 1 cubic foot of foam for each 45 pounds of glass. For iron or steel 1 cubic foot for each 32 pounds. lead 1 cubic foot for each 30 pounds. If the engine and keel are 3400 pounds of iron and steel we need 106 cubic feet and if we assume that the rest of the boat is fiberglass ( not counting the wood etc. ) we need another 80 cubic feet. 186 cubic feet total. I have not done an accurate measurement but the free room at the stern, under the cockpit storage, under the quarter berth and under the berths in the pointy end would probably be enough space. None of this space is being used at the moment. Change the foam cushions to air cushions and I think the thing will float, in fact I know it will. Now if the boat were the same volume but built in steel you would require more foam but no more area. I am not knocking steel boats just stating the obvious. I met a guy who had a boat called Snow White 2, I asked him what happened to Snow White 1, got hit by a whale and sank in less than 3 minutes he said. A whale a container, I do not know if that would bang a hole in a steel boat. I have also read accounts of sailors who have survived because there boats floated. I have had the experience, an upside down boat with the hatch boards not in place and leaking lockers is a lot like a holed boat full of water. the only difference I can see is the mast is pointing the wrong way. BC Mike C 1662 From: nadim Date: Wed May 28, 2003 4:38pm Subject: Re: Re: Designing for boat safety. Hi greg, > I've found that the best device to prevent sinking is an audible alarm > hooked to a float switch in the bilge. a very sensible idea but it just makes the symptomes more obvious (which is very good) but it doesn't provide a solution. > By far the most likely cause of sinking is a failed thru hull. then I'd say that no through hull should be placed bellow heeled water line. Why would a throught hull ever need to be placed under the water line?? > An unsinkable small steel cruising boat requires compromises to the > point that most sailors and crew will not be happy living in the boat. How do you come to that conclusion? > At best you will be almost guaranteed to be a single hander. Do you really think that once you have proved to your wife that the boat will safely cary her and her children safely, she would decide to stay at home? > After all, isn't a good solution that gets you sailing better than a > perfect solution that keeps you at the dock? You are twisting the discussion. Is a good solution that gets you dead better than staying at home? (I can twist too ;-) > it isn't the best feature of your boat that keeps you safe, it is > the worst feature that puts you at risk. Agreed. The worst feature for a boat is to be sinkable. > It has been my experience that rarely does any single failure endanger > the yacht. It almost always involves two or more failures that combine > in an unexpected way to place you at risk. For example: the boat sunk > because you forgot to turn off a thru hull, and didn't bother to replace > a rusty hose clamp, and didn't bother to clean the bilge strainer. No > single one of these would have sunk the boat, but together it was only a > matter of time. Right, so eliminating all the sources of potential problem should keep us afloat and happy. For the example you gave, I'd suggest no underwater thru hull, stainless or platic clamp. and a well designed strainer (as I pointed in a previous mail). Note that all the dangers you cite become of much less importance if the boat can't be sunk. Cheers, Nadim. 1663 From: nadim Date: Wed May 28, 2003 4:52pm Subject: Re: Floatation Hi Michael, On Thursday 29 May 2003 01:28, Michael Casling wrote: >In Dave Gerrs book he has a > scale for calculating the amount of foam required for half submerged > floatation and offers the formula for fiberglass as 1 cubic foot of > foam for each 45 pounds of glass. For iron or steel 1 cubic foot for > each 32 pounds. lead 1 cubic foot for each 30 pounds. We are talking of a total density of less than 0.5 here. way to go. > I have not > done an accurate measurement but the free room at the stern, under the > cockpit storage, under the quarter berth and under the berths in the > pointy end would probably be enough space. I like you positive spirit. There is a lot of room in a boat for foam or other artifacts, we just need to think about it. I'd recommend not putting the floatation at the ends but in the bottom of the boat (for monohulls). I may be the only one having that problem but I sleep better when I feel safe. We anchored 100m from a reef, the wind stated to blow hard and the waves forming. we were anchored on double anchors, 40 KG and 80 Kg each with 6 meter of 3/4 chain and 1 1/2 nylon rope. I could have played guitar on the rope for all the tension in it. with all that arsenal I didn't sleep very well that night. Cheers, Nadim 1664 From: Alex and Kim Christie Date: Wed May 28, 2003 6:42pm Subject: Re: - pictures Greg, The new 55 footer you've done with the three chines is interesting -- are there any being built on the BC coast currently? Alex 1665 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Wed May 28, 2003 7:05pm Subject: Re: Floatation One of the neatest photos I have ever seen ( about 15 years ago) was a 40 foot steel boat that had be broadsided by a freighter traveling some 15 or 20 knots. The boat was bent like a banana. The dent in the side was 10 feet wide and 7 feet DEEP! The guy sailed it home without assistance. Gary H. Lucas 1666 From: Date: Wed May 28, 2003 9:33pm Subject: Re: - pictures Hi Alex, We have two 50 foot double dart alloy boats sailing. One 40 foot double dart steel under construction, and one 60 foot triple dart steel under construction. The 55 foot triple dart alloy is in the final design stages, scheduled to begin construction in June 2003. We think origami construction is a great concept, with lots of room for growth. We are pretty excited by the shapes we've been able to generate. I'm back in Canada for awhile, so I'll be keeping the group informed of our progress. We are looking for people wanting to build some new designs. More information is available at: http://www.easysoftwareinc.com/Design/Genoa55.htm greg elliott yacht lazy bones 1667 From: Date: Wed May 28, 2003 11:29pm Subject: Re: Floatation regards the banana boat: We were docked alongside the boat in 1984 at the south end of SF bay. As I recall the owner was French. He built the boat in Oz, after his multi- hull was stolen. He was run down in the North Pacific. He was convinced the collision was deliberate, from a Russian Whaler, as GreenPeace was active in the area at the time. I don't recall the boat name or his name after all these years. The damage was unbelievable. It was his experience that convinced me to sell the FG production yacht I had sailed down the coast from Vancouver and buy a custom steel yacht built in BC, by Ron Pearson. I still have the boat today - the Lazy Bones. It is moored in Malaysia, still in great shape, and Ron is my partner in designing and building origami yachts. Our first origami pattern was designed from the lines of the Lazy Bones. I can't begin to count the number of times the steel construction has saved my life and that of my family in the years we have bumped across the Pacific and SE Asia. My only complaints are that steel does require a fair amount a diligence to maintain, and that the weight of steel limits somewhat the performance and cargo carrying capacity of the boat. This can be overcome somewhat by seamanship. However, it cannot be ignored. This only truly became an issue on one occasion, in which I would have paid any amount of money to be off the boat in a particularly nasty storm, where the performance of the boat was not sufficient under sail to cope with the conditions. We were able to save the vessel by using the engine to provide extra power on the face of some truly frightening breaking seas, and avoid being overwhelmed. We simply could not accelerate fast enough under sail alone, and did not have enough ballast to carry more sail. Whether any other building material would have performed better is unknown. A similar boat to ours in FG was rolled down, ports stove in, with serious damage done to both the vessel and the crew. Our better outcome may simply be a result of the decisions made. They decided to heave to. We decided that the breaking seas were too dangerous for that course of action, and decided to run before it. I did feel very strongly at the time that with a higher performance boat I would not have needed to use the engine. It is probably this experience that most brought home to me that a strong hull can also have drawbacks. You have to keep a careful eye on the weight. As our family grew, we were limited most by the amount we could carry. For those with the budget, alloy may be worth investigating. You can carry quite a bit more for a given size of boat. For us lesser mortals, steel is real. I will close with this observation. Over the years a reliable engine has saved me more times than a strong hull. However, I wouldn't be without either. The few times you need it, a strong hull more than pays for itself. greg elliott yacht lazy bones 1668 From: nadim Date: Thu May 29, 2003 3:14am Subject: Greg's Design Hi greg, Thanks for your input greg. Now you may have noticed that the people on this list are the "down to earth" type. Not many designers around (even Brent is too busy sailing (lucky ...)). So let's stop turning around the honey jar: - You build software (oh what a wondrfull job (I do too :-)) but you design boats for _fun_ (as stated on your web site). - How many of your boats have been build? When were they build? How many in aluminium? - How many still exist? - How much do the plan cost and what sizes are available.? - What steel thickness? metric or imperial? - What kind of framming? - What do you plan contain? - What is the typical build time? - What is the dislacement and dimention of the boats? - What safety feature do your plan include (see remark bellow)? - You sailed extensively in SEA, what features can be found to cope with heat (ie where are the opening, how many of them, ..) - Do you have flush decks design? (which IMHO make no sense at all) Please excuse my inquisitive tone but I have a hundreds questions (I think other do too) and we can save a lot of time by cutting on some useless political corectness. I'd be pleased if other member of the list helped us with their questions. A propos safety: Something caught my eye, something good. In the picture on your web site we can see a (somewhat rusty (see bellow)) hull with steps welded to it. I realy like that feature and it's actualy the first time I see it (read about it in a french book about safety (green nauticus, a great book)). The rusty hull: we now and then restart the discussion about pre primed steel or not, how to blast the hull, what to put on it to avoid rust and so on. You seem to have a lot of experience here, could you please share it with us. You also seem to dislike the amount of maintenance a steel hull implies, could you please tell us how much maintenance is done on your boat? and at what cost? Cheers, Nadim 1669 From: Date: Thu May 29, 2003 3:18am Subject: Re: Re: Designing for boat safety. Hi Nadim, There are many risks to the captain and crew of an unsinkable boat. Having the dinghy motor quit is one of the biggest if the wind and sea carry you away from land and your boat. Weather, shipping, lack of sleep, depression, disease, sea sickness, alcoholism, boredom, stress, fire, loss overboard, falls, knock downs, capsize, equipment failures, etc. etc. Not to mention traffic ashore in strange ports and predators human and otherwise. Add to this human error, laziness, carelessness, inattention, wishful thinking and bad luck. Being in the wrong place at the wrong time does happen. Sailing is inherently risky. You can manage the risk, but you can't eliminate it. It sounds a bit to me like you see sinking as a risk out of proportion to all the others. Sinking is not a big risk is a well built and maintained boat steel boat. That is one of the big attractions of steel. Sinkings do happen, but usually there is only a loss of life when coupled with a storm. Having an unsinkable boat, that is awash in a storm sea will not save you. You and everything not nailed down will be swept out of the hull by the surge. There is more space in a small apartment than there is in a big boat. This lack of room causes stress and makes people unhappy. It is a big reason cruises to end prematurely. It isn't the same as sinking, but the voyage is over just the same. The Lazy Bones fully loaded with crew and stores for 6 months weighs approximately 30,000 lbs. That is a volume of 500 cubic feet to float the boat. It is a huge volume. A cylinder 6 feet across by 30 feet long to fit inside a 39 foot boat. Different boats will give different results, but the general problem is the same. It takes a huge amount of the living space inside of a cruising sailboat to keep the boat afloat. If you fill this with foam or something similar, there will be way less room to live. Your risk of sinking goes down, but your risk from stress goes up. Strange story but true. We had one gal so unhappy with sailing that she scuttled the boat on the way to Sri Lanka. She and her husband were picked up be another boat they were traveling in convoy with. She then went over the side when no one was watching. They searched for her without result. When they got to Sri Lanka she was already there, having been picked out of the water by a passing fishboat. The boat wasn't unsinkable, but no one was lost. If it was unsinkable she probably would have burned it. To make a small steel boat unsinkable and still have enough room to live there is one "practical" solution that I am aware of. Watertight bulkheads dividing the hull into 3 sections. It makes ventilation and access difficult, but if you want to have it, this still leaves enough volume inside the boat to live in. I've seen it done in a 36 footer. Workshop and storage in front. Aft cabin with access thru the cockpit. Engine under the cockpit. Galley, head, convertible settee, and pipe berth(s) in main salon. A bit tight, but workable. A good compromise that still leaves lots of living space. greg elliott yacht lazy bones 1670 From: nadim Date: Thu May 29, 2003 4:02am Subject: Re: Re: Designing for boat safety. Hi Greg, > There are many risks to the captain and crew of an unsinkable boat. > Having the dinghy motor quit is one of the biggest if the wind and sea > carry you away from land and your boat. Weather, shipping, lack of > sleep, depression, disease, sea sickness, alcoholism, boredom, stress, > fire, loss overboard, falls, knock downs, capsize, equipment failures, > etc. etc. Not to mention traffic ashore in strange ports and predators > human and otherwise. it seems to me that those dangers apply to any ship and are not particular to unsinkable boats. I agree with the danger of a dingy. So it should always have other means of propulsion than the engine. > It sounds a bit to me like you see sinking as a risk out of proportion > to all the others. Sinking is not a big risk is a well built and > maintained boat steel boat. You missunderstood me, I do not think that sinking is the biggest risk for a boat., specialy a stell hull. The discussion started with trying to make the boat unsinkable so I concentrated on the subject. The other risk you cite are as real and should also be taken care of and if possible eliminated by design. I'll gladely list my opinion on those dangers. Neverther less, I believe that the very nature of the boat is to carry lives safely over deep water. Isn't it logical to assure that the boat always stay over the water? A 3/4 sunk boat with rig is still sailable and move forward (I haven't tryed but I see no reasons why it couldn't) a sinkable boats moves downwards. > Sinkings do happen, but usually there is only a loss of life when > coupled with a storm. So you mean that the example you gave for the thru hull only happends in stroms. We can not argue with no figures, how do you know that people just sink and die in storms (and how do I know the oposit)? We just know about the survivors and noting about the dead ones. > Having an unsinkable boat, that is awash in a > storm sea will not save you. You and everything not nailed down will be > swept out of the hull by the surge. You seldom propose counter examples. What happends to you in the very same storm if the boat is 3000 meters bellow instead of awash? What happends after the storm? Would you prefer to be in a 1.6 m life boat, a half sunk boat or no boat at all? I just can't help myself reacting to the "Having an unsinkable boat, that is awash in a storm sea will not save you". Lately we have seen quite a lot of multi up side down in the new, some of them in storms, it seems to me that the boat is the very thing that saves the crew. The boat is also what allowed them to be spoted so easily (with the help of an EPBIR too I guess (which I wouldn't carry myself)). > This lack of room causes stress and makes people unhappy. I _completely_ agree with you. this is a most important point. > The Lazy Bones fully loaded with crew and stores for 6 months weighs > approximately 30,000 lbs. That is a volume of 500 cubic feet to float > the boat. It is a huge volume. A cylinder 6 feet across by 30 feet > long to fit inside a 39 foot boat. The discussion was about Brent's boats that are not that heavy. You twist the discussion again with you example. I didn't call for huge cylinder but to make the boat unsinkable. What is the developped suface of 'lazy bone' hull (lets ignore the deck)? What is the surface of the bunks, seats, bulkheads, ...(plase help me fill in with some places that could be used without disturbing the crew's life)? Multiply that surface with 0.75 (to keep the boat high). If that surface was to be covered with foam to create a volume equal to the cylinder, what thickness would it have? what is the beam of the 'lazy bone' and how many percents does the foam thickness represent? If you hull is already isolated, how much isolation do you have today? Cheers, Nadim. 1671 From: ... Date: Thu May 29, 2003 5:24am Subject: designing for boat safety Is it not impossible to provide sufficient buoyancy to keep the hull at a height in the water to enable the hull to be pumped out. If the hull was part submerged,it will roll in the water unless the sea was dead calm. In anything of a sea it will be very difficult to pump out,if not impossible I you have ever been in a boat which has taken in a lot of water you will know that it is very unstable and rolls with every wave and continues to roll as the water in the hull surges in the same direction as the roll. If anyone has tried to bale out a swamped sailing dingy which has buoyancy bags,(which are probably a much larger ratio of buoyancy bag to hull weight)they will know it is not very easy getting the water out. I have not calculated the number of pop bottles that are required just to keep the deck level with the surface of the sea, but I don't think there will be much room for people on board. Who will have to drink all that pop?. Think about where the waterline is that same volume of water has to be displaced. If the buoyancy is just in the bow and stern the hull will still roll. I have been in a friends yacht in that situation,the bilge pump was blocked by all the rubbish that collects in the bilge, I am now very choose whose boat I go to sea in. There is a view developing in the UK that everything must be 100% safe,parents will not let there children go on adventure holidays as it might be dangerous or do the things most of use in this group have done,consequently the kids do not learn to deal with difficult situations and self confidence. If the school dose arrange a few days of adventure and something goes wrong,the school and the teachers ( who have given there own time away from there own family )are threatened with legal action and loss of livelihood, consequently no one is volunteering to do anything more than play football with the kids. They spend all there time in front of the TV and playing computer games which are the substitute for real life. Yes you should do all you can to make you boat as seaworthy as possible but you will never make it 100% safe, if that is what you want do not build a boat and go to play at sea. Geoff 1672 From: ... Date: Thu May 29, 2003 5:48am Subject: designing boats for safety Hi Nadim, I do not mind if another member tells me I am wrong. Boats that are 3/4 sunk do not sail well, if at all,you have lost the buoyancy of the hull which keeps the mast vertical, you have also overlooked the surge of water inside the hull,which accentuates any roll of the hull. Try it with your a toy boat next time you have a bath,I am sure everyone in the group cannot go near water without sailing something. Geoff 1673 From: nadim Date: Thu May 29, 2003 6:03am Subject: Re: designing for boat safety Hi Geoff, It seems you missed the begining of the thread, bottles were proposed as a solution for the bilge only as there is a possibility for the foam to to absob water. I am open to other solutions. That one was practical and cheap. You are right about the difficulty of emptiing a boat fro the water. But that should be compared with not having a boat at all. I would not put the lives of my dear ones in a life boat (not the subber rings anyhow). Now, if the boat is full of water and you can arrange to fix the hole in the hull, the hatches beeing closed properly, it would be possible to pump the water out with a hand pump. The foam (or other device) should be kept as low as possible to ensure a high floatation. It all boils down to this question: Would you rather be in a 3/4 sunk boat that is rolling like hell or outside, without the boat, rolling like hell? In any case, It would be much easier to spot the boat. Cheers, Nadim. 1674 From: Michael Casling Date: Thu May 29, 2003 7:47am Subject: Floatation enthusiasts Digsby Taylor / Tony Bullimore. How many saved lives from the use of floatation do we need. Tony's account was well captured on TV. Digsby wrote an excellent account of having a boat full of water in rough weather. He simply swam away form the boat on a tether until the weather got better. His crew not tethered was lost. I well remember the debate that followed when the yacht club would not let boats with out fixed keels race on overnight races claiming they were not as stable. My point was I would rather be sitting on the hull of a floating boat than be on a boat that was not supposed to roll or sink. The USYRU report on capsizing quickly convinced me that a lot of boats could be sunk easily. I am not trying to change any ones mind just further a good debate. BC Mike C 1675 From: nadim Date: Thu May 29, 2003 8:35am Subject: Re: designing boats for safety Hi Geoff, > I do not mind if another member tells me I am wrong. So do I. I am actualy here for people to tell me I am wrong so I don't have to make the mistake. > Boats that are 3/4 sunk do not sail well, if at all Agreed. I think I said that they are able to sail, not that one can break speed records with them. I appreciate that you and other point out the difficulties but I believe that chance of survival are 2 order of magnitude higher for a crew on a 3/4 sunk boat than on no boat att all. Cheers, Nadim. 1676 From: nadim Date: Thu May 29, 2003 8:57am Subject: Re: Floatation enthusiasts Hi Michael, nice to see an unconditional supporter. I think all of us are floatation enthusiasts as there is no sail without it, but it seems that some of our fellow boat owners think it's difficult to do in their boat or that it brings disadvantages. I hope that with time and figures we can prove that we are right or be proven wrong. Another great danger (greater for the each individual) is man over board. I believe that there is much to do in that area too. We talked about fire not long ago. Here is the name of the book I recommended earlier, it's in french and impossible to get but you might be able to borrow it through the local library in canada. BORG Gérard : Nauticus - Encyclopédie pratique du bateau - Tome 15 : Incidents, naufrages, survie, la sécurité - (Ne pas mourir en mer / La chute par dessus bord / Les causes du naufrage / Comment l'éviter / Sauvetage en mer / La survie, engins, pneumatiques, matériels et techniques Editions MARTIMES ET D'OUTRE-MER / Robert LAFFONT 1979 - Cette encyclopédie (en 15 volumes) est réalisée par un collectif d'auteurs (Alain BOMBARD, André MAURIC, Eric TABARLY etc ...) - Bien illustré par une quantité appréciable de croquis, dessins, photographies et schémas - Relié cartonné cousu au format 17,5 cm sur 24 cm - 318 pages - 27,50 € Cheers, Nadim. 1677 From: pvanderwaart Date: Thu May 29, 2003 8:46am Subject: Re: Designing for boat safety. With respect to the buoyancy of foamy water, the best plan is to stay on board. I heard John Rousmaniere suggest "putting all your eggs in the basket of staying on board." In other words, be obsessive about your tether and harness, and don't be concerned about a flotation device. A big asset is being able to run the boat from below decks and expose yourself to the elements a little as possible. Aside from minimizing risk of going over the side, you are protected to some extent from many of the other hazards on the list such as hypothermia and exposure. Peter 1678 From: Date: Thu May 29, 2003 9:10am Subject: Re: designing for boat safety a 2 liter pop bottle will float about 4.4 pounds. (note: as they submerge they will lose buoyancy at the rate of about 50% per 30 feet, so if they are in the bilge you might only get 4 pounds per bottle. Best to add some extra to my numbers below). This is a about 500 bottles per ton of displacement to float neutral. A 36 foot displacement hull might come in around 10 tons, so maybe 5000 2 liter bottles to float neutral. You might want to build the lockers a bit bigger than normal. Also, the interior structures are usually not designed with sufficient scantlings to support the weight of the boat, so they will need to be beefed up a bit. Otherwise the floatation could rip out the interiors and paste them against the cabin undersides, until the surge can wash them out thru the companionway. A book on wooden boat building can probably provide the scantling number for the wooden structure you need to build inside your steel hull to support the lifting force of the bottles. Look under "wooden hulls". Ok, I'm new. Empty pop bottles is a joke, right? greg elliott yacht lazy bones 1679 From: Date: Thu May 29, 2003 9:42am Subject: Re: Greg's Design Hi Nadim, My information is that the steel for my boat was wheel abraded and primed before building, because building with mill scale in place is a dirty, black business. As I recall, it added a few cents a pound to the cost of the steel. This was 20 years ago, so prices will have changed by now. Best call your local supplier and check the price. Lots of boats have steps welded to the hull. I'd probably place then at the transom. Easier to grab if you accidentally go over the side. However, they also provide access to the boat for unwanted visitors and I wouldn't have them for extended cruising. On the Lazy Bones there is a lifting ring on the trailing edge of the rudder stock, just above the water line. It is a convenient place to grab onto the boat. You can use this area as a step, holding on to the trim tab shaft to climb aboard, and is less obvious to outsiders. However, on two or three occasions we've been sitting naked in the cockpit when a stranger has climbed aboard using this method. The strangest visitor to use this method was a giant monitor lizard. His claws couldn't get a grip on the rudder to climb aboard, but he tried for a couple of hours with one back foot in the lifting ring amd his body wrapped around the trim tab shaft. Wasn't the least bit concerned about us. The lifting ring also makes a convenient place to tie the inflatable in high winds. Inflatables love to fly when tied higher up, and have an uncanny ability to land upside down with the outboard underwater. Tying them short with a second line thru the lifting ring prevents them from getting airborne. g 1680 From: nadim Date: Thu May 29, 2003 10:28am Subject: Re: designing for boat safety > Ok, I'm new. Empty pop bottles is a joke, right? No it is not. But what you missed is that bottles where to be used in the bilge only where foam would absorb water. I dismissed building water tight tanks in the bilge because of the difficulty to make lots of small water tight spaces and the difficulty in protecting them from rust. The rest of the flotation is assured by insulation foam and other floatation devices. Any other idea for the bilge is welcome. Cheers, Nadim. 1681 From: Stephen Wandling Date: Thu May 29, 2003 10:16am Subject: I'll be glad when Brent is back I'm sure Brent will have some comments on 'boat safety'. I think Colin said it best: "He who waits for all dangers to pass must never put out to sea." 1682 From: ... Date: Thu May 29, 2003 11:12am Subject: designing boats for safety Hi Nadim, I do understand the point that was being made about the pop bottles,I hope most people have a sense of humour, I was joking,I had an image of help we are sinking we need all the buoyancy start drinking the pop!. I am not sure if the option of a double bottom has been discussed,this is the most attractive option as it might stop the water coming on board in the first place. I am sure this could be arranged as a number of tanks with inspection panels with the top of the tank providing support for the cabin sole and also forming engine bearers etc,the tanks might have a small amount oil or rust inhibitor in them. This way the buoyancy will be where it will do most good if needed,this has been big ship practice for years. It would not be that difficult to have a sensor in each compartment to warn of leaks also if there was an impact it would be possible to check if the hull was damaged within a few minutes,and which tank to investigate. Best wishes Geoff 1683 From: Date: Thu May 29, 2003 11:33am Subject: Re: designing for boat safety dividing the hull into 3 sections with watertight bulkheads is the only solution I have seen on a small steel boat. 1684 From: sae140 Date: Thu May 29, 2003 0:17pm Subject: Re: designing for boat safety > Since I am not to build an origami boat, I am missing some > information about the boats. you quote 8 tons. Is that the > displacement of the origami boat you intend to build? Depends on availability of steel. I'm having difficulty sourcing 4mm in big sheets. If I can't source soon, then I'll reluctantly go for the 36ft which uses 5mm. This being an Origami boat group, I'm kinda surprised to hear that you're not building one. So what sort of boat are you building ? I've already designed one mechanism for releasing a keel bulb from inside the hull, which doesn't weigh anything significant. I originally designed this for a wooden boat to ensure positive buoyancy. The idea was to provide a last-ditch attempt to keep a flooded boat afloat, i.e. to act as it's own liferaft. It's a life- saver only - no attempt being made to provide for useful sailing ability afterwards. I might file a patent - or I might go sailing instead. > "He who waits for all dangers to pass must never put out to sea." > I'd appreciate the quote if I was an 18th century english man trying > to prove my valor by confronting with danger. That kind of thinking > of from another age where loose of life wasn't all that important. I think the original quote was in regard of waiting for the ideal weather to present itself before casting off - which is kinda pointless really, 'cause weather fronts in these waters change much faster than any boat can sail - so you get what you get when you're out there, and you have to deal with the weather as it arises. "Valor" ?? "confronting with danger " ? I don't read anything 'macho' into that quote, only a wise cautionary reminder that *everyone* who puts out to sea *always* faces the possibility of overwhelming danger. Even today's most experienced mariners accept that this may happen to them one day. That's why there's such a market for EPIRB's, life-jacket's, life-rafts, and all the rest. Trawlermen lose more lives each year than any other single industry. Ironically, most drownings 'at sea' occur on the trip from the boat to the shore by tender. So danger is present even close to shore. > I value my crew and own life highly and if there are dangers, then > I'll wait. And if danger is always present, then I'll stay at home. > the quote is just plain silly. (no offence intended, but you know > that hopefully) I read the quote as simply being a reminder that the sea is a fundamentally dangerous environment and that you put your life (and those of others) at risk each and every time you set sail. The clever bit is to reduce the risk as much as possible beforehand with a sound boat and gear, education, experience and local knowledge. However, the danger is (alas) *always* there - it just doesn't reveal itself much of the time - which is precisely why dozens of innocent 'townies' end up being drowned every single summer along Britain's coast-lines, in what has become known here as "the silly season". Staying at home is always an option. Colin 1685 From: Alex Christie Date: Thu May 29, 2003 0:14pm Subject: Re: Floatation enthusiasts Keeping steel afloat if a vessel is awash is not impossible, but with the foam working hard just to keep the weight of the steel near the surface of the sea, I am not sure if you'd have any useable living space below, would you? The flotation idea would work for a hull made of material lighter than water, however, since the hull skin will be self-supporting and the flotation only needs to take care of the weight of the ballast and stores (water in the water tanks will be neutral, and fuel will be slightly lighter than water). A friend of mine designed and built a 40 foot boat using strip- planked fir with a heavy lamination of fibreglass over top. She designed in considerable hullform stability and kept the displacement light, and even made sure much of the interior woodwork was of light, bouyant wood and cored materials. The result is a vessel with a very strong hull that can float quite high if holed. The forward water tank functions as a crash bulk head, meaning that a huge chunk of the bow could be ripped off below the waterline and the hull would not fill. Something else to consider closely is the fact that any vessel full of water will no longer behave the same as the vessel full of air, largely because hullform stability is no longer part of the overall stability equation (ballast being the other part). I discovered in a personal way how dangerous flooding is when sailing an open boat on windy BC interior lake. The water leaked through the centreboard casing and flooded the boat. It didn't sink, as it was equipped with proper floatation, but the "free surface effect" of the water sloshing around inside the boat wreaked complete havoc with stability, and I had to severely reduce sail in order to prevent the boat from rolling, as well as a lot of hopping around to keep her upright. It was an extremely bad situation as I had young passengers on board who would have been endangered by hypothermia if they went into the water. It took every skill I ever had in sailing, plus the development of some new ones, to return my crew to shore in one piece because I had to balance reducing sail to stay upright with the need to keep big, water-filled slug moving and make it back to the dock. In a bad storm, I could forsee a flooded steel boat rolling many times in this fashion, bringing no comfort or safety to the crew. Maybe for those that want emergency flotation the yachtsaver bags would be the way to go, though an expensive proposition. It is an interesting problem to ponder, and the ultimate decision whether to build in flotation really depends on how confident a person is with the strength of a steel hull. Because the Brent boats typically employ few opening hatches, and those it does have can be sealed up tight, I'd elect to go without the extra flotation myself (the submarine approach). There a remarkable number of brand new very expensive manufactured yachts which still use drop boards for the main hatch and I find this an astounding step backwards in progress, ensuring a hull will fill as fast as possible when rolled or pooped! Alex 1686 From: Date: Thu May 29, 2003 1:28pm Subject: Re: designing for boat safety How to calculate (simplified) if your hull is unsinkable: 1. Take the displacement of the yacht in tons - D. 2. Take the volume of all areas filled with foam or similar material in cubic meters - F D>F you sink. D Date: Thu May 29, 2003 1:40pm Subject: Re: Re: designing for boat safety Another version of the same quote: "He that will not sail 'til all dangers are over must never put out to sea." -Thomas Fuller [Given his era: 1654 - 1734, I suspect 'must' could be translated to the modern 'will'.] I'm reminded of when Adlard Cole's coffee-table-book "Heavy Weather Sailing" came out. A large number of sailing friends that read it scraped their cruising plans and decided that they would never go to sea. I think it is significant that it was published as a "coffee-table-book". 1688 From: nadim Date: Thu May 29, 2003 1:52pm Subject: Re: Re: designing for boat safety Hi Colin, > This being an Origami boat group, I'm kinda surprised to hear that > you're not building one. So what sort of boat are you building ? Right now nothing, I have a build a ship previously and my choice would got to an unsinkable cat when I have the money. I am most interested in building, much more than sailing and the origami method is the one that make most sense to build a boat IMO. I also like the ambiance on this list, no sissies, no designer fuss. Qimple boat, simple people (which I consider myself to be). I think I have something to offer here and I also thin there are things to learn. > The idea was to provide a last-ditch attempt to keep a > flooded boat afloat, i.e. to act as it's own liferaft. It's a life- > saver only Let's no argue about the mechanics of you solution. if it fits you then I am fine. But our goals are similar but have diferent extents. With your system you wish to have a safe life boat (something not attainable with a an off the shelf life-raft). My goal attemps to go further if possible. I'd like to recover from a bad situation (sinked) to a good one (sailing). I must say that I am a bit surprise that the consensus of a steel boat not needing to be made unsinkable is so widely accepted. I see no reason it should be so. > > "He who waits for all dangers to pass must never put out to sea." > "Valor" ?? "confronting with danger " ? We read the quote diffrently, that's all. You sea sailing as an ineherant dangerous activity, I don't. The consensus of not taking the most basic step toward safety is dangerous. Let me put it like this, Does it make sense to go to sea on a sinkable skiff when it can be made unsikable without too much difficulty? > That's why there's such a > market for EPIRB's, life-jacket's, life-rafts, and all the rest. EPBIR and life-rafts are IMO more dangerous than usefull. They give a sentiment of safety without backing it with real solutions. The most dangerous being the life-boat, often imposed to us by law, It's like giving aspirin to someone whith unadapted glasses. Cheers, Nadim. 1689 From: nadim Date: Thu May 29, 2003 1:55pm Subject: Re: designing for boat safety Hi, I realy don't want to flamme anyone, we sometimes get hot but I think it's OK as long as there is a discussion going on, it just proves that we 'burn' for the subject. Now I am a bit desapointed by you response. I thought you'd come back with some figures to prove me wrong :-). Cheers, Nadim. 1690 From: nadim Date: Thu May 29, 2003 1:59pm Subject: Re: Re: designing for boat safety I read the book 3 times. I gave me the envy to sail (I won't bother you on what type of boat :-) Cole simple description is a fantastic call for more sailing, with the knowledge of what can happend and how often it happend to him. I recommend the book for anyone that has not read i yet. Cheers, Nadim. 1691 From: Michael Casling Date: Thu May 29, 2003 2:52pm Subject: Re: I'll be glad when Brent is back I am sure he would have something to say because he has already said it. He thinks talking about floatation is left over logic from plastic and other types of boats and not applicable to steel because of there strength. He has quoted the case of a steel boat being pounded on a reef for days with out holing. I think we all realize that a sailboat is always a compromise and we all place different items at the top of the list. I place safety at the top followed by floatation then sailing performance in conjunction with comfort. I admire and somewhat envy Brent's ability to be able and willing to sail offshore as the mood moves him. Others might admire our ability to run an organic blueberry farm and a herd of sheep. We also sail at least once a week all the while that these discussions are taking place. First in our class at the Blossom Time Regatta. The people you describe about waiting for all dangers to pass are generally not your mainstream sailors. They recognize the dangers and go sailing. It is usually financial and family and time commitments that must pass before we put to sea. Here again it is how we order our priorities. But as I have already said we sail at least once a week and have been doing so since 1979 when we got the boat. I am currently enrolled in the CPS celestial navigation course and once that is complete if time permits the bow will be pointing to Hawaii, and if it is my boat it will have sufficient floatation. I have surfed the big waves in Hawaii, road raced a motorcycle at the open GP level so I have a healthy view of the dangers coupled with self preservation. At 56 I plan on being around for quite a while.I will not be building a steel boat but I am not prepared to disagree out of hand with those that are building steel boats. Quite frankly I think it is a good idea. BC Mike C 1692 From: nadim Date: Thu May 29, 2003 3:26pm Subject: Re: Re: Floatation enthusiasts It all depends of the density of the flooded boat, that's why I have repeatedly written to put most of the floatation in the bilge and asked greg not to take the roof insulation into his account. Let's say you manage to keep 50cm of the boat full of air. That is not a very friendly situation and the risk of hypothermia is high (but lower) but you have the chance of brathing air instead of spray. The weather will calm a day or another, then you have tools, provisions, it will protect you from sun, sea animal, rock bottoms, waves, ..., a (quite) safe life boat (though flooded) a big platform to stand on, one that is more visible than a head or two in the water, You still have the boat and most important 'hope'. People die because they have no hope. Do you think you'll have more hope floating on the boat or without the boat? You also have a possible challenge, repare and survive. What would you do floating around in your life jacket without even a wreck to hold on? I also had the same idea as your friend, using the water tanks as a double hull (among other double hull ideas). My opinion is that is better to have two safety mesures than one. A steel hull with positive boyancy. As noted by another member, you don't need to get a hole in the boat to be flooded. Being wrecked is not a light situation, I have problems understanding why you guys dismiss the positive boyancy and not think about the catastrophy that it would be to float around in open sea. It seems to me I have been answering each and every member of this list and that we have not taken the step that would tell if I am right or wrong. Let's put figures on the problem. Why not choose a boat and make the calculation for the extra foam needed to keep it afloat, say at 70 % of it's normal height. In thousands of years, we have taken the risk of sailing on sinkable boats, the boats designers and user have a huge inertia, it's tough to make any change. I just can't accept putting my beloved lifes at risk just because the consensus is that steel (or other) boats sink when flooded. And I find it staight dangerous to think steel is the ultimate solution because of it's strength. Cheers, Nadim. 1693 From: Graeme Mitchell Date: Thu May 29, 2003 6:05pm Subject: Re: designing for boat safety YEP It,s a joke good one guys that got them going and April 1 has gone my be early for next year. I have just finished my boat be it that it is a little small it is a 500 cubic Lt Westinghouse looks good under sail even has a light that comes on when I open the door. Damn not much room in side as it is full of empty coke bottles, blast them kids for not throwing out the rubbish. 1694 From: Graeme Mitchell Date: Thu May 29, 2003 6:06pm Subject: Re: I'll be glad when Brent is back AMEN I MIGHT START CUSSING SOON 1695 From: Graeme Mitchell Date: Thu May 29, 2003 6:09pm Subject: Re: designing boats for safety Now this is more like it sailing around in a fridge was not much fun after all 1696 From: Graeme Mitchell Date: Thu May 29, 2003 6:36pm Subject: Re: Re: designing for boat safety Steve Yes i was like when Jaws was a new movie it put a lot of people of swimming in the ocean . With Alex,s comments on crash barriers in water tanks in the bow etc . I think that would be a better plan to include some of these features in a Boat when building as a first line defence, as his friend built in place instead of half assed filling lockers with rubbish and hope the hell it saves you . New member I would like to welcome Greg and i have some Question s for him as well 1. Was your boat built in PNG 1697 From: Date: Thu May 29, 2003 7:28pm Subject: Re: Re: designing for boat safety Hi Graeme, Thanks for the welcome. The Lazy Bones was built in good old Coombs BC. g 1698 From: Date: Fri May 30, 2003 9:57am Subject: Re: Re: Floatation enthusiasts I'm sure we all agree that boats should be unsinkable. The question for steel boat owners is whether the costs justify the benefits. For some the costs are not justified. For others they are. Ultimately, this is a personal choice for the boat owner, and so it should be. If someone asks us to make one of our designs unsinkable - we will. We will advise you that there are some negative features as well as positive features, but we firmly believe that every owner has the right to decide for themselves. Our Genoa 55 design for example is an unsinkable design, with fore and aft watertight bulkheads. Personally, I think that of all the hull materials available to build a ballasted yacht, steel is one of the hardest to sink. But by no means impossible. Consider for a minute a Volvo. They are designed (reportedly) to be very safe cars in an accident. However, if you are hit head-on on the highway there is a good chance you may be killed, even in the safest of cars. Even if you do everything right, and make zero mistakes while driving, you can still be killed or maimed. Driving an M1A, at a cost of $100 million (?) each, might allow you to walk away from such an accident, but most of us do not have enough money to buy one. As a result, we settle for something less safe. If we waited until driving was 100% safe before getting in a car, we never would. It is the same for boating. You have a budget. Within that budet we try to balance safety, performance, comfort and appearance to best suit your needs and intended use. Thinking that you are safe or even safer because your yacht is unsinkable is a mistake. False confidence led to the loss of the Titanic. If the belief that you are unsinkable leads you to sail beyond your ability the sea will ultimately claim you, unsinkable or not. No yacht is truly unsinkable. A light weight multihull may be "unsinkable", but if it is run down by a freighter because the watch is asleep large portions of the boat will go to the bottom. I firmly believe that the #1 safetly device available for all yacht owners is seamanship. It was not my intent in this forum to suggest that yachts should not be unsinkable. Rather, that for a ballasted steel yacht on a budget, your money might be better spent on equipment, training, spares, etc. No one can or should make that decision for you. That decision rests with you. greg elliott yacht lazy bones 1699 From: nadim Date: Fri May 30, 2003 0:38pm Subject: Re: Re: Floatation enthusiasts Hi Greg and all others, > I'm sure we all agree that boats should be unsinkable. The question for > steel boat owners is whether the costs justify the benefits. At least! Let's keep this discussion for the end of my mail. I'd like to highlight one or two points where I disagree with you. > For some the costs are not justified. For others they are. Ultimately, > this is a personal choice for the boat owner, and so it should be. I agree with you but I belive that the role of this mailing list is to take up the discussion and make it clear what is possible or not (and within what constrains) even if it was only for the sake of boat design evolution. > Thinking that you are safe or even safer because your yacht is > unsinkable is a mistake. Non sense, one is never 100% safe but whatever step one take to make the boat safer must account for a safer boat otherwise why would we bother building in metal if we are going to be mached down by a freighter anyhow. You give examples of dangers that have nothing to do with the current discussion: 'boyancy'. If this was about any danger we face then I'd be the first one to add to the long (and comprehensive) list you presented us. > False confidence led to the loss of the > Titanic. If the belief that you are unsinkable leads you to sail beyond > your ability the sea will ultimately claim you, unsinkable or not. The titanic had the same design that you propose in your Genoa55, water tight bulkheads. The titanic neither had fully water tight bulkhead nor positive boyancy. Had the titanic been boyant, less lives would have been lost. And we would have avoided a third rate movie. You think the titanic was lost because of too much confidence, I think it partely did but it was certainly lost because of bad design. > It was not my intent in this forum to suggest that yachts should not be > unsinkable. Rather, that for a ballasted steel yacht on a budget, your > money might be better spent on equipment, training, spares, etc. So why not make the calculation? Let's put figures on this problem. I asked you for the figures for your boat but you simply didn't answer. Once we know if it is possible or not to make a steel origami boat boyant enough, then we will know how much it costs. Then each and every one can decide where one's money goes. > No one can or should make that decision for you. That decision rests > with you. Are we going to stop turning around the pot? Please less talk and more figures. I'd have already given them if I had one of brent's plan but I don't. I propose we take one of brent's designs, or one of your designs Greg, an calculate what it takes to make it boyant, that is, not take into account any bulkheads or yacht savers or whatnot. Once we have calculated that (say for a density of 0.6-0,7) then we can take into acount 1 or 2 bulkheads and yachtsavers or other systems like colin's detachable keel. As I already proposed, let's take into acount only the foam (or other sytem) that is located in the lower part of the boat. So what design should use? 31', 36'? Has anyone that is intressted in making his boat unsinkable already bought plan? Other intressting point would be the layout of the furniture and the number of bunks as well as their height. If there is a bulkhead, it might be possible to double it with 15-20 cm of foam (can be cheap blue foam). I am sure there will be lots of ideas, emerging from the discussion, for where to put the foam or how to build a lighter furniture. After re-re-reading my mail, it seems that I am THE floatation enthusiast and I am goign up in the rpms. Of course no offence intended to anyone. I occured to me that mankind can buils submarines and batyscaphs but not able to make all boat unsinklable. Cheers, Nadim. 1700 From: Alex Christie Date: Fri May 30, 2003 2:10pm Subject: wrapping up the floatation thread Dear group, Speaking as moderator, I think it is time to wrap up the floatation issue (before it sinks:-), and I think we've already concluded that the level of safety preparedness is largely a matter of personal choice, guided by experience. There are a diversity of approaches, ranging all the way from foaming, yachtsaver, and watertight bulkheads. Beyond those steps, there are few other options, other than staying ashore. The main question Nadim was looking to answer is, I believe, "what does it take to keep one of these boats afloat if flooded?" I asked Brent about it once, and he had the numbers for thickness of foam you'd need to keep the thing afloat. So, when he returns this summer he may be able to address that question, or if anyone else has this information at hand they are welcome to post it. Onto the next questions! Alex 1701 From: nadim Date: Fri May 30, 2003 2:30pm Subject: Re: wrapping up the floatation thread Hi Alex, I agree with the contents of your mail at one exception. Why wait for brent to come back? I though the spirit of this mailing list was to show that one can handle oneself. Brent surely has the figures you talk about but what would have interested me was the discussion about how to do it. Discussion that has already started with Colin's idea for example. I think any one of us can within 5 mn find out how many cm of foam are needed (Greg's cylinder) but the interesting part is where to place it, what other solutions than foam, how to save weight, etc... I don't think it is time to wrapp the floatation thread but to start it. Cheers, Nadim. 1702 From: Paul Faulkner Date: Fri May 30, 2003 2:49pm Subject: Re: wrapping up the floatation thread I'm with Alex. 1703 From: nadim Date: Fri May 30, 2003 2:41pm Subject: Re: wrapping up the floatation thread The question is not about being with Alex or being with me. This is not a kindergarden fight. I'll continue the thread if there is interest and all those that want to join are very welcome wether they agree with my opinion or not. Just hit the delete button when you see a message from that thread as I do when I am not interested in a thread. Cheers, Nadim. 1704 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Fri May 30, 2003 3:23pm Subject: Re: wrapping up the floatation thread This list sometimes goes days or weeks with no posts. Why on earth would you ask to end what is obviously a very popular subject that is not the least bit off topic? Gary H. Lucas 1705 From: nadim Date: Fri May 30, 2003 3:42pm Subject: Re: wrapping up the floatation thread Hi Gary, I'll try to answer. Well, my tone has gone up steadily in the last mails and I think Alex just want to keep the peace on this list. I didn't mean to offend anyone (but I certainly mean to get them a bit hot), and I apologize if I did. As I wrote before I am going up in the rpms and that is because I have the feeliing the discussion is stagnating and we never get to the point. Safety is an important feature for a boat and there are many ways to improve it. As you all have seen, the subject intrests me. I think I can offer something here and I think I can learn from the other mailing list members. I refuse fatality. Period. Dying at sea is not acceptable, it might not be completely avoidable, but I'll sure do my best to live long and I wish all the member of this list do as well. If surviving is a matter of buying steel instead of plastic then I'll do it, if it's a matter of having 2 m3 more foam then I'll do that too. Cheers, Nadim. 1706 From: Date: Fri May 30, 2003 4:07pm Subject: I'd rather be sailing Thanks Alex, I'm new to the group so perhaps I should introduce myself. I've been boating for more than 40 years. Power, sail, racing, cruising, mono, multi, windsurfers, hydroplanes. Almost 20 of that cruising offshore. Nearly 15 years offshore cruising in a steel-hulled ballasted yacht with my wife and children. Cruised extensively Mexico, Hawaii, Palmyra, Samoa, Tonga, Fiji, New Caledonia, Australia, PNG, Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, Borneo. Sailing is my passion. I know some of you out there share the same dreams I had 20+ years ago, but haven't figured out how to make your dreams a reality. Origami boat building is a great solution to this problem. That is what I am here to talk about. How did I do it? Step # 1 - Set a date in your mind by which you will be sitting in the sun on your boat in Mexico, cold cerveza in hand. Step # 2 - Do not move that date for any reason. Make no excuses in your mind to move the date. Move mountains before you move that date. Step # 3 - On that date you will wake up in Mexico, in the sun, on your boat, cold beer in hand, and it will not be a dream. It will be reality. It really is that simple. Do not believe what you read in the yachting magazines. The longer you leave it, the less likely you are to ever go. Cruisers are not old retired people. There is almost no one in their 60's or 70's cruising. They stay at home close to the doctor's office and hospital. Cruisers are energetic people in their 30's, 40's and 50's who want to get out and see the world. regards, Greg yacht Lazy Bones ps: Using the figures supplied previously one can calculate the thickness of foam required, by measuring the area of the pattern for your boat. However, this is misleading because you can't simply spray the inside of the hull to a uniform thickness. For this reason I have not supplied the figure. 1707 From: Stephen Wandling Date: Fri May 30, 2003 4:12pm Subject: Re: wrapping up the floatation thread Thanks Alex. 1708 From: Graeme Mitchell Date: Fri May 30, 2003 6:36pm Subject: Re: wrapping up the floatation thread Alex Let it go I took offence to the attack,s on Greg and his life,s experience e.g being a programer that is all , not nice I will settle down now , We need people like him in our group with positive idea,s and experience there is a lot of information in books but is it as good as real life . But lets keep it positive not attacking , I do not know what others have done or can not do , but if they have a good idea let it happen . To any one that took offence to any thing that I said I apologise lets move a head keep the floatation thing going in a positive manner not attacking. Now for my 20 cents worth (NOTICE METRICS USED ) built in flotation there was some power boats built in Australia with deflated air bags on the both sides of the boat running full length that could be inflated in an emergency they where out of the way in pods on the side of the boat during normal times and only used during and emergency that would keep the boat in a upright position with the boat full of water . I will see if I can find a picture and post it Regards Graeme 1709 From: Stephen Wandling Date: Fri May 30, 2003 6:55pm Subject: Re: wrapping up the floatation thread Graeme, I value people who have experience and pass that experience along to others on this group. What I don't value are those who have some pet theories and send dozens of emails trying to get others to think like them. I have been on lots of groups and these sorts of mini flame wars have ruined several of them. I vote we keep it practical. Say your piece and then back off. I think Alex does a great job on this group and I commend him for taking action for which he will undoubtedly get flak. Stephen 1710 From: Graeme Mitchell Date: Fri May 30, 2003 7:04pm Subject: Re: wrapping up the floatation thread Steve Yes I do not want a flaming war just boats I can get war a home with out trying ,our saying a thing lol As for Alex keep up the good work .I was not giving flak at all and i am sorry if it seems like that PEACE DUDES Graeme 1711 From: Alex and Kim Christie Date: Sat May 31, 2003 0:14am Subject: Alex's protocols of moderation Per Gary's comments, I will let everyone on the group here know how my protocol regarding discussions, and how it relates specifically to the current subject thread: If you look at the archives of all the messages ever posted in this group, you'll see that I rarely step in to a discussion with any intent to steer it, but will do so if I sense that it is on the verge of teetering out of control a la Cruising World list. I do this for the survival of the group, and have learned this from real-life experiences moderating discussions with large groups of people who have radicially divergent, if not completely opposite, views. Without moderation a group can blow itself apart in very short order. The impersonal nature of the internet medium seems to make misunderstandings turn into flamings, so I will on occasion grab the bull by the horns and ask that the discussion participants make their points --- especially if the thread starts getting lost, or bogged down in emotion. Often people will have forgotten what the original issue was, especially if things start to get personal, and this is about the most diplomatic way I know of avoiding conflict --- and I do know the difference between conflict and healthy debate. If a thread starts wandering, or the temperature begins to rise, I will usually try to summarize what each party is saying, and try to nudge people to clarify exactly what they are looking for, or what they mean. If this doesn't naturally bring closure to the thread in its own time, then I'll make further prompts in an attempt to move on, which is exactly what I did in this particular case regarding floatiation. The reason I asked that we "wrap up" the discussion was merely to bring everyone back into focus --- not to end the discussion or stifle debate. I thought that the difference between asking people to "wrap things up" versus instantly ending it was obvious, but evidently not. If this was not clear, then this Canadian has to go back to diplomacy school:-) I am reminded of my brother's tour of duty in Cyprus as a UN peacekeeper -- I should ask him to be part-time moderator on our group! As an aside, please note that this is a world-wide group, and many of our members speak languages other than English as their mother tongue. As an English speaking person who was once immersed in a Hindi-speaking environment for three months, and a French speaking environment for one year, I know of the challenge of writing and speaking in another language. If possible, try to look at the overall picture of what a person is saying rather than reacting to specific words which may appear to be misplaced or misused --- cuing on certain "hot" words is the usual cause of most flame wars. Regards, and happy posting, Alex 1712 From: nadim Date: Sat May 31, 2003 1:49am Subject: Re: Alex's protocols of moderation Hi Alex, The words 'wrap up' did suggest you wanted this to end the tread quickly, at first, but I have seen you moderate this list before that's why I opened the discussion with you (I wouldn't have wasted my time with a brainless moderator). Your diplomacy is fine. I feel that you were right about the discussion going out of track. I tried to bring the subject back onto track a few times but I miserably failed. You are also right about cultural background, I am used to argue, fight and be right and if I am not right I love to be _proven_ wrong. To me fighting, screaming, arguing is not negative and I don't hate my conterpart for that; it's just another process. Heated debates, like the one we had, can turn bad or very good. I feel no harm was done but you rightfully wanted to point to the 'very good' direction. You migh like to know that I received a single private mail reminding me you were THE moderator and when you say stop it means STOP and if I continued I'd be BANNED from the list. I answered the mail to be polite but I know you'll me directly if necessary. Next mail, from the same person, told me that this was an origami boat discussion and that there was no intresst in general questions like the current one and that I should go somewhere else. Very plesant indeed. I have noticed that what make the most dammage to a thread is 'hot shots', someone comes in a discussion between two member and takes part without an ground or explaination. It's a very human behavior but a nice catalysator for flamming wars. If any member feels I am too tough on him or have been rude, please feel free to mail me directly. I have noticed that 'flamming war' (if needed but hopefully not) can be run privately leaving the mailling list cooler. I'd also like to remember my fellow list members that one is not forced to be on all threads. Now I'll go on answering Greg. Cheers, Nadim. 1713 From: nadim Date: Sat May 31, 2003 2:00am Subject: Re: I'd rather be sailing Hi Greg, > How did I do it? > Step # 1 - Set a date in your mind by which you will be sitting in the > sun on your boat in Mexico, cold cerveza in hand. I think that what you say is very difficult to believe for most because it sounds too simplistic but I have to vouch for you, this is exactly how I build my boat. It might not work for everybody but it's a good strategy Greg, you and I have had a bad start and I take the responsibility for it. It's impossible for newcomers to know the psychology of all the members and some might have a non standard one :-). I should have been nicer with a new commer. The question I asked about your designs came from a genuine interest and I am still interested in getting answers. > Using the figures supplied previously one can calculate the > thickness of foam required, by measuring the area of the pattern for > your boat. However, this is misleading because you can't simply spray > the inside of the hull to a uniform thickness. For this reason I have > not supplied the figure. I'll take it back to the 'designing for boats safety' thread if it's OK with you. Cheers, Nadim. 1714 From: nadim Date: Sat May 31, 2003 2:21am Subject: Re: designing boats for safety Hi Greg, > Using the figures supplied previously one can calculate the > thickness of foam required, by measuring the area of the pattern for > your boat. However, this is misleading because you can't simply spray > the inside of the hull to a uniform thickness. For this reason I have > not supplied the figure. You have an intressting point here, it is difficult to have an accurate thickness of foam and I think it is important to plan for safety margins? Let me make my question more precise and explain why I asked it. In a previous mail you wrote that having extra floatation devices might make the living quarters too small and that it had negative psychological effects. I agreed with you. I just wanted to get a figure on how much smaller the quarters would be. Mesuring the psychological effect is out of my leage but mesuring the reduction of living volume (in cm lost in the beam) would be an intresting figure. If the reduction in width is too great, I'd wouldn't give up the idea put try to distribute the extra foam around the boat. It's also interesting to know how much it would cost. I would have like to use your boat has example because it's not a fantasy and you have access to the figures needed. Would you like to present the figures or should I make the calculation for a hypotetical boat? Cheers, Nadim. 1715 From: Leif Thomsen Date: Sat May 31, 2003 2:21am Subject: Re: Alex's protocols of moderation Hi Alex, Thanks for Your last post about moderator protocoll and Your remark about other languages than English! I have Swedish/Danish as my mother language but can read/write English fairly good but not good enough to participate in advanced discussions. Thats why its encouraging to read Your post about all non English viewer of this list, and I am sure thera are a lot of them. So - please keep the language straight and easy for all of us with difficulties with these advanced English expressions and local words. I think the list is a very good place to share experiances and learn more, both for new builders and also between more experianced builders. I have myself up till now built 3 steel yachts, 20, 31 and 39 feet. My project right now is a 50 feet steel, junk rigged yacht. I came across Brents book a Year ago and find his method and ideas really interesting. Many of the ideas is useful for steel yachts in generally and not only origami boats. I have a friend interested in Brents 36, so perhaps we will start this project soon. Another very good forum of knowledge I have found is the "Metal Boat Society", another good Canadian initiative I think. Keep the list alive - thera are a lot of interested readers! Regards, Leif Thomsen 1716 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Sat May 31, 2003 2:33am Subject: Hullform software Some years ago I bought some hullform software from Peter Rye at www.hullform.com. I bought it to fair the lines of some plans/offsets I was considering to use. That version has been updated but the old version 6 is now available free. Some of you might find it useful in calculating the hydrostatics of a particular design. You may even be interested in purchasing the latest version. Regards, Ted 1717 From: nadim Date: Sat May 31, 2003 2:52am Subject: Re: Alex's protocols of moderation Hi Leif, > I have a friend interested in Brents 36, so perhaps we > will start this project soon. First Swedish Swain boat, that would be a great opportunity to look at one. If your friends needs a pair of arms for a few days, I'd be glad to help. BTW is there a list of the location of Brent's boat? If you pass by Lund, I'd be glad to take a cup of coffee with you or we could go to Malmö look at the boats. I like you ecological house project. Cheers, Nadim. 1718 From: batsondbelfrey Date: Sat May 31, 2003 5:26am Subject: Re: designing boats for safety Here is a suggestion for deriving a ball park figure (insert other numbers if you disagree with mine). Let's assume that the hull skin makes up half of the structural weight of the boat (the other half being bulkheads, rig and underwater appendages). Let's assume that for every ton of structure we have another ton of ballast and a ton of payload. The density of steel is about 8 tons per cubic metre. Just to (barely) float the skin we would need another 7 times the thickness of steel, if we can neglect the weight of the foam. Make it 10 times to have a bit of reserve, seeing that the boat should not float with the mast tip barely breaking the surface. Then take into account that the total weight is 6 times the skin weight (or three times the weight of structural parts), and we end up with a layer of foam 60 times as thick as the thickness of the hull, neglecting the volume of ballast (justifiable, given that ballast is usually lead with a density of 11 or so, if I remember correctly) and payload. If you assume that the payload has neutral buoyancy overall, you only need 40 times the skin thickness. If you assume an average payload density of 2, you need foam 50 times as thick as the skin. For 5 mm steel that would be 20 - 30 cm foam, for 3 mm steel 12 - 18 cm. Rather more than I would have expected. Perhaps some of the foam should go into the ends. That would enforce some payload discipline and keep the ends light, as they should be (in Wooden Boat there was an article about a boat nearly lost when it failed to tack just upwind of a reef because it had too much weight in the ends; with the weight redistributed, the boat tacked just fine). Or make some of your bouyancy be some seriously big fenders that you keep in really secure storage in the ends. Regards Robert Biegler 1719 From: sae140 Date: Sat May 31, 2003 5:31am Subject: Flotation/ moderation an' stuff I get my posts a couple of days late, so the following might no longer be relevant, but I'll post it anyway ..... Here's my take on this issue. I'm all for valuing and respecting the views of others - or at least trying to. In my opinion, fresh ideas, even controversial ones, are always worth airing - but they need to be more-or-less relevant to the principal theme of the group onto which they're posted. If they're not, then perhaps they ought to be taken to a more appropriate site, with a more appreciative audience - or if it's a really BIG issue, mightn't there be a case to start a new site for the sole purpose of airing that particular topic ? As an example, I made reference recently to a MEG generator. This topic has *nothing whatsoever* to do with Origami design or construction, and I was pleased to see that it received a couple of constructive posts, and then hit the dust. Making reference to this topic seemed within the bounds of what might be considered reasonable fodder on almost any boating chat site (if not, then I'm sure someone will tell me). However, had a heated debate ensued, generating a lengthy thread, then I'd have suggested discussing this off-forum, or taking it to another site. Having said this, I do have a certain sympathy with Nadim's efforts. He's clearly woken-up a half-sleeping group with some considerable force(!) - but Nadim - your topic does have that unmistakable taste of armchair theorising about it and, especially as you have said that you're not going to build an Origami hull yourself - or a boat of any kind in the near future - you can hardly expect many on this group to be sympathetic to your cause ! My unsolicited advice is to take this issue - of which you're clearly passionate - to a more appropriate site to chew over, such as BoatDesign. Alternatively, with the courage of your convictions you could simply implement your ideas, then come back and tell us how you got on. I for one would be most interested to hear the results. In closing, I'd like to make a comment about site moderation. > I also like the ambiance on this list, no sissies, no designer > fuss. Qimple boat, simple people (which I consider myself to be .... Well Nadim, I'm not sure about the sissie stuff, or being simple (these words have subtle nuances in different countries), but I'd like to focus on the 'ambiance' of this list - the nature of which I also like. Q. How do you think this agreeable ambiance has happened - by chance ? No way. It has evolved over many, many months in direct consequence of the moderator's attitude and personality, and from the self-selection of those who have chosen to contribute and then chosen to stay. If you scan through the posts archives you will note that in the past one or two people have come here to argue their respective viewpoints ad nauseam, and have then simply disappeared never to be heard from again. Those that have remained appear to me to be tolerant, non-zealous, respectful of other's views, and share the air-waves with good- naturedness and humour. It is this very ambiance of the site which encourages me to stay. Site moderation can be a tough job - Peter (from BoatDesign) and Alex are both good at this, and rarely intervene or censure - unlike one unnamed individual who rules 'his' site with a rod of iron: argue just once, and you're barred for life ! So c'mon - let's respect Alex's request to wrap-up the Flotation thread ... (and by 'wrap-up' - I mean to agree to disagree, then put this particular book back on the shelf (so to speak) - no doubt to be taken down and opened up on another day). Salaam aleikum Colin 1720 From: nadim Date: Sat May 31, 2003 5:56am Subject: Re: Re: designing boats for safety Hi Robert, I would have prefered to take a real example with real figures. Never the less, the example is here and I'd like to add the following:. > For 5 mm > steel that would be 20 - 30 cm foam, for 3 mm steel 12 - 18 cm. > Rather more than I would have expected. If you calculation where for a real boat, I'd also find that rather big. Add to that that the foam should be place low, that would imply that the foam would be even thicker in the lower parts of the boat. The only solution would be to have it build as an integrated part of the furniture, the floor, ... > Perhaps some of the foam should go into the ends. Bad idea as the ends of the boat are quite high and the flotation present there will be effective only when the boat's deck is aflush water (which is still better than 1000m under) > That would > enforce some payload discipline and keep the ends light, as they > should be (in Wooden Boat there was an article about a boat nearly > lost when it failed to tack just upwind of a reef because it had too > much weight in the ends; with the weight redistributed, the boat > tacked just fine). I gave the example of a Trident 30', a plastic boat, when my co-sailor when to the bow, the boat was completely unsteerable. > Or make some of your bouyancy be some seriously > big fenders that you keep in really secure storage in the ends. I don't like the idea of mobile flotation device. I'd like the boat to be staticaly boyant. But as an extra help, the idea is good. Cheers, Nadim. 1721 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Sat May 31, 2003 6:59am Subject: Unsinkable Boats ETAP a Belgiam company has made over 6,000 unsinkable yachts which are certified as such by the French Merchant Marine. I cannot get their web page to work but the USA dealer's page, www.etap-usa.com, works. ETAP use a thick foam sandwich between double fiberglass hulls to obtain the required buoyancy. There may be some ideas there. Regards, Ted 1722 From: nadim Date: Sat May 31, 2003 7:10am Subject: Re: Unsinkable Boats Thanks ted, The page worked fine for me, there is an intressted picture of a flooded boat with 2 guys standing on it. Nadim. 1723 From: johm gorham Date: Sat May 31, 2003 9:06am Subject: f you and your spam Iam spending so much time erasing this shit 1724 From: johm gorham Date: Sat May 31, 2003 9:09am Subject: Re: Re: designing for boat safety Please take me off you list.i am cruising.My budget cannnot afford to keep erasing these messages..Thanks 1725 From: Date: Sat May 31, 2003 10:02am Subject: Re: Alex's protocols of moderation Looks like we've woken a few people up! First, I'd like to say thank you to all the people in this group. It has certainly been a lively discussion and I consider it a great welcome. I have a commercial interest in origami boats, and thus a conflict of interests to some degree. If I wasn't willing to take a few on the chin I'd never have joined the group. As they say, all press is good, even when its bad! I might make one suggestion to help Alex out, then I'll turn it back to Alex for some direction. When making a post, if you write your piece complete, from beginning to end it has the look of a discussion. If you write your comments in the middle of someone else's email it has the look of debate or argument. I think - other opinions welcome here - that groups in general make faster progress when engaged in discussion. Debate and argument lend themselves too quickly to politics and egos, and the point of the discussion can be lost. When you have a losing argument, you can still win a debate, simply by making the other person look foolish. Politicians use this technique all the time. It is quite simple to select a single sentence from almost any email and find fault with it. I could do it with just about any email I have read here in this group, but why would I do it? I'm not here to prove anyone right or wrong. I'm here to motivate people to get out sailing. To help you overcome the obstacles in your path, in the hope that in doing so some of you might consider our designs. When you take someone's email as a whole, the entire picture as it were, not just a couple of brush strokes, then you are talking to the idea the person is trying to get across, not how they wrote it. Language is at best an imperfect tool of communication, and we shouldn't be looking at the brush stokes. Let's look at the bigger picture - the idea each writer is trying to make. So, I'd like to propose that we post replies and ideas in whole, and not within the body of other people's posting. Sure, sometimes it is necessary to reference a previous email. It is a simple matter to cut and past the occasional quote when required, but this should be done with caution because you risk being misunderstood. In general, if replies are written start to finish in a block I think we will find that the topics move much quicker. This proposal is not made without some experience in email. In business I've written thousands of emails. I find it is really tough to write email without it appearing to have a hidden meaning. Email is a new medium and it is still evolving. I find one of the quickest ways to kill a deal and get someone's hackles up is to pick apart their email with my own comments and criticisms. thanks again, Greg ps: I have answers, including the numbers, for the questions that have been asked on floatation. I have no objections to posting them, to the degree they will not be misleading. If I don't answer questions right away it is usually because some background information must be presented before the answer will make sense. The modern sailing yacht is an evolution of a design going back over 100 years, built up over many years of practical experience, of what works and what doesn't. Many of the compromises made in designing a yacht only make sense in light of that practical experience, so to explain why something on a yacht is the way it is, it is necessary to explain the experiences that led to each design decision. When looking at a yacht, you must keep in mind that a yacht is simply a machine to keep you alive while crossing over water. You must look at this machine as a whole before the components will make sense. I'm reminded of the story of Jack London. He had a boat built - the Snark - that was based on his own design ideas. He selected the best bow from one boat, the best stern from another, and the best rig from yet another. The boat was a disaster. If all the parts of a boat do not work together as a whole to produce a complete machine, you will not have a good boat. It is very possible to take an average bow, and average stern, and in fact an average everything, and come up with a great boat. However, it is even easier to take the best bow, the best stern, and in fact the best of everything and come up with a very bad boat. Perfection is the enemy of Good. 1726 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Sat May 31, 2003 10:14am Subject: Re: Unsinkable Boats Life is full of compromises isn't it? You can have a lightweight unsinkable boat that can burn like a candle and be crushed by almost anything it touches that isn't water. Or you can have a boat that can take a broadside from a freighter, or run over a reef, but it'll be slower and it could still sink like a rock. The guys out cruising have flipped the coin and are living with it. Gary H. Lucas 1727 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Sat May 31, 2003 10:17am Subject: Re: Alex's protocols of moderation I have to say that a reply interspersed with the original post is very annoying. It doesn't read nearly as well as a couple of good thought out paragraphs. Gary H. Lucas 1728 From: jeff_halp Date: Sat May 31, 2003 10:38am Subject: Re: designing boats for safety I have been a lurker and some time contibuter to this forum almost from its inception and have been amazed at the wide range of ideas that have gotten floated here. I have seen widely ranging discussions on some wild topics but one thing that has generally impressed me is that these discussions have generally remained comparatively gentile without Alex having to step in and ask for a return to a civil decorum. I respect Alex's request for decorum. I also respect the request for more specific information about the practicallity of providing positive floatation for a specific boat. Hopefully this will be specific enough. To start with a graphic image of how much floatation would be required to keep a boat afloat, I suggest using a closed cell foam, which would be one of the more efficient methods of providing flotation since it does not absorb water and it does not have spaces that fill with water like the gaps between bottles. Depending on the particular closed cell foam, the density of the foam is appoximately 3 to 6% of the density of water. So in order to float a boat you would need to fill the boat with enough foam to equal the volume of the boat that is in the water plus 3% to 6% to accomodate the difference in volume between the foam and the water. In graphic terms it would mean filling the entire volume of the boat with foam to perhaps 8 inches to a foot above the waterline (to accommodate the volumes of the keels and rudder which can't be filled). Obviously that approach is a bad idea but it gives an easily visualizeable sense of what is involved in providing 'full floatation'. If we take a more specific example, and since I do not have a set of drawings for an Oragami boat, I will use a design of my own, which is an 18,500 lb, 40 footer. To begin with this fully loaded this boat would displace roughly 290 cu ft of water and would require roughly 300 cu/ft of foam to carry the full weight. Of course, the foam does not have to carry the full weight of the boat. Even of we look at the worst case scenario there are certain weights that foam would not have to carry. These would include: Water in the tanks: Fresh water is lighter than seawater but then there is the weight of the tank which I am assuming will wipe out any floatation derived from this difference in density. This particular design carries roughly 160 gallons of fresh water so we can subtract roughly 1400 lbs for the water tank weight. Waste holding tank: 35 gallons which will weigh roughly 300 lbs. Fuel in tanks: This design carries roughly 53 gallons of diesel fuel which would weigh roughly 450 lbs which would result in less than 10 lbs of floatation which is not enough to float the 29 lb aluminum tank that is being used in this design. Wooden interior components: This design has a variety of interior furnishings that were intended to be constructed in mahogany and fir marine plywood with mahogany trim. Combined the wooden elements of this design equal roughly 29 cubic feet of material. Using 50 lbs per cubic foot as an average weight between species of fir, mahogany, and the teak faced cabin sole that means that the interior will weigh something on the order of 1,450 lbs. and will contribute roughly 400 lbs of floatation. Cushions, life jackets and other than lighter than water components that might float free and therefore not add to the weight of the boat that needs to be buoyed by the floatation of the boat: I come up with roughly 400 lbs of these miscellaneous items. There may be other elements that would contribute to floatation or have neutral buoyancy but they don't come to mind. (The boat in question is actually a cold molded cedar hull with kevlar outer skins so there would be approximately 480 lbs of buoyancy from the hull as well) So if we go back to the vessel in question, starting with the fully loaded weight of 18,500 lbs and subtracting the 4,000 lbs of items listed above, we come up with the need for 14,500 in floatation. (The boat in question is actually a cold-molded cedar hull with kevlar outer skins so there would be approximately 480 lbs of buoyancy from the hull as well but since you are considering steel hulls ) If we further subtract the 400 lbs of floatation contributed by the interior wooden components then we need roughly 14,100 lbs of floatation or roughly 220 cubic feet of foam. Seen in profile, this particular design has an profile area of 192 square feet. This profile area does not include the area of the keel or rudder, and stops 6" below the bridge deck since I assume that we want to keep the bridge deck above water to prevent downflooding. In loose terms just for the purposes of visualization, then you would need thickness of 1'-2" of foam or 7" on each side of the boat. Of course that would really cut down on the interior volume tremendously and so it is unlikely that the foam would be distributed in that manner. Instead, some of the foam would be distributed on the underside of bunk flats, countertops, and concealed faced bulkheads. Assuming a nominal 1 1/2" thickness for the foam used in that manner I come up with roughly 26 cubic feet of foam installed in that manner. and leaves us needing to find room to stash roughly 194 cubic feet of foam. There is approximately 432 square feet of skin area again not including the area of the keel or rudder, and stopping roughly 6" below the bridge deck. This corresponds to somewhere between an 3/4" to 1" of low density closed cell foam per square foot of skin area, or more realistically 1 1/2" of foam for those areas not in the bilge or occupied by faming materials. That is a lot of volume to take out of a boat but not so terrible if you really fear sinking to the extent that Nadim has expressed. A few more points here. This is a comparatively light weight design for a 40 foot offshore boat. Rendered in steel and of a similar concept this design would probably be closer to 24,000 to 28,000 lbs in weight. Given that tankage and interior build out would be similar, and skin area would not increase all that much the foam would probably need to be closer to 2 to 2.5 inches to float a steel hulled boat, still not terrible if that is where your priorities lie. Lastly, going back to the title of this string, "designing boats for safety" you would not be building this boat in steel. Once again confirming what 'the numbers'would suggest, a recent Naval Academy study showed that the greatest impact and abrasion resistance for a given weight or cost of construction is acheived by specific composite laminates. The highest impact resistance per dollar and also by weight was actually achieved by a lay of a matless laminate of biaxial fiberglass over a high density foam core. When abrasion was factored in adding kevlar outer laminates produced the best results from impact and abrasion. Because of its high weight per volume, and I know you guys hate to hear this steel, did not fair as well. As I have said here before, if you are paying retail prices for materials and you are actually including a reasonable rate of pay toward the value of your labor, composite construction gets very competitive. While Origami construction does save a time in lofting and producing the hull, much of this time is offset by the additional time involved in spiling all of the interior components involved in a Origami boat rather than laying them out off of patterns as would be done in a cold molded boat. So back to Nadim, if you say that sinking is not an option then I would suggest that you consider building a composite hull with kevlar outer skins and a high density foam or a cold molded cedar core. Respectfully, Jeff 1729 From: burr.halpern@a... Date: Sat May 31, 2003 10:58am Subject: Re: Re: designing boats for safety One more point about my last post, the Vinylester resin found to produce the highest impact resistance is the same material used in motorcyle and military helmits where the highest possible impact resistance is really needed. It is also non-flamable and resistant to very high temperatures. As it turns out, although this material is a little more expensive than conventional polyester resins, it is used in so much higher quantities than polyester that it actually is reasonably priced and would not add appreciably to the cost of a project such as we are discussing. Respectfully, Jeff 1730 From: Peter Thompson Date: Sat May 31, 2003 11:04am Subject: RE: wrapping up the floatation thread Hi folks, All those who haven't had their fill of the floatation discussion are welcome to continue it on the boatbuilding.community discussion forums at http://boatbuilding.com/cgi-bin/designtalk.cgi Cheers, peter 1731 From: sae140 Date: Sat May 31, 2003 11:24am Subject: Paint Having talked with Ted Stone on the phone a couple of evenings ago, my attention has been drawn to painting matters, especially primers. I've done a quick web search today for info on steel primers, and the amount of choice is overwhelming ... so ... which paint to go for ? Ted is using a zinc-rich primer, which is also favoured by Brent. In his book B.S. relates some bad experiences when acid-based primers were used. OK so far - but just when I think that zinc-rich is the way to go, I read that Brent has also blasted back to white metal and applied epoxy-tar (without zinc primer) with very successful results (i.e. OK for 17+ years). Then there's Zinc Phosphate, Zinc Chromate, Zinc Silicate - sometimes with an epoxy base, which are all used as steel primers in corrosive environments. These appear less expensive than straight zinc, but would this saving be a false economy ? And then there's aluminium primer, chorinated rubber, chlorinated zinc phosphate ... how's a person supposed to make an informed decision with so much choice about, and with each company trying it's best to flog you their product ? As I understand it, using a zinc-rich primer offers the next best form of protection to that of galvanising, with all the others providing second-best options. And just as I've got that sorted-out, I read on "The Zinc Rich Primer Info Page" http://www.epoxyproducts.com/zinc.html that if any of the various layers of protection are to be omitted, it should be the zinc-rich primer layer ..... Aaaargh !!! If anyone else has plotted a course through this particular minefield, would you mind sharing the info ?? Thanks. Colin [a.k.a. "Confused of Boston"] 1732 From: Date: Sat May 31, 2003 1:22pm Subject: Re: Re: designing boats for safety To Jeff's well research and well thought out work I'd like to add this example in steel: WARNING. Do not use these number to build an "unsinkable" hull. They are a very rough estimate done off the top of my head. Apologies to all. I have included this final work as a courtesy to Nadim and any of the group wishing to do their own calculations. An origami 36ft aft cockpit steel yacht is going to be about 10 tons displacement. I don't have Brent's figures, but this should be close. Cruising boats are often overloaded - especially when restocking for an extended passage - waterlines are repainted higher pretty regularly. So if you are going to be cruising, you have to allow for this in your calculations. Isn't overloading dangerous? You bet, but so is running out of fuel, food, and water. Or having no spares or tools in case of breakdown. When you are cruising you buy stores when you can find them and carry the weight until you need them, or many places will not be available to you. You can allow for overloading when cruising by careful loading. Place all heavy objects as low as possible amidships to helps stiffen it up, so the sails can carry the extra weight. We can't put the floatation down low - that is where you need to leave room to put the heavy stores if you plan on extended passage making. Where can we put it? If you have been on an extended cruise you know you can't put it in the lockers, they are jammed to overflowing, and probably everywhere else as well. We could put it in the ends, but how much would we need? From my previous figures about 330 cubic feet. Jeff is quite right that we can subtract the buoyancy of the items on the inside. At the same time you may need to add in the weight of stores, spares, tools, etc, and leave a reserve. I'd likely error on the side of safety and assume that the interior at best will be neutral. A detailed calculation would be required before you could rely on this. So say 300 cu ft, reserve unknown. How much room would this take in the ends? A V berth might be (5x3)x6x6 = 4x6x6 = 150 cubic feet, including the locker under. So, filling the V berth with foam, from keel to deck will get us half way there. How about a quarterberth at the other end. Maybe 3x6x4 = 75 cubic feet including the lockers under, or 150 cubic feet for both. So, if we fill the V berth and quarterberths with foam, including the lockers under, the yacht may be in the ball park to float. Since the crew is not going to like this solution, one alternative is to replace the foam with watertight bulkheads, though it is hard to do in this size of boat. Another alternative, you could put the foam in a wedge along the hull sides. Thinnest at the waterline, thickest just under the decks. How big a wedge? 150 cubic feet a side/30 foot waterline = 5 cubic feet/4 foot freeboard, say 1.25 feet average thickness. This is not going to make the crew happy either. Your interior space dimensions will have shrunk considerably. Your 36 boat on the outside will be more like a 25-30 foot boat on the inside. A reverse Tardis. This is the cost of adding foam. Not the price of the foam itself (which isn't cheap), but rather having paid to build a 36 foot boat, you end up with one on the inside that is closer to a 25-30 foot boat. The difference in price between a 36 footer and a 30 footer is considerable. This is why it is rarely done on a ballasted boat. Not that it hasn't been tried, just that it hasn't on balance been found to be a cost effective solution. note: you may be able to improve on these figures by moving some foam around but not a whole lot. Another alternative is to make the boat beamier, but this can introduce capsize and other problems. greg elliott yacht lazy bones 1733 From: Date: Sat May 31, 2003 1:50pm Subject: Re: Paint Zinc rich coatings are popular above the waterline. There is some thought that they may contribute to blistering under the water. From my experience the important points are: 1. A super clean sand blast in dry weather using the correct grit, with the first application of paint airless sprayed as quickly as possible. 2. A paint system from a name brand company that will stand behind the paint if it fails. 3. More coats of paint rather than less. Paint ages, and while two coats might last 5 years it won't last 20. 5 coats might go 20. Some of those should probably be high build. In all painting on steel the #1 key to success is getting the steel absolutely clean, with sufficient "tooth" to make the paint stick. Any spec of rust, grit, etc under the paint at eventually it will fail at that point. The problem with paint systems is that they tend to be expensive. You can save a lot with a "home grown" paint system, but you really need to know what you are doing. There is still a lot of Voodoo in painting. It is usually worth the extra $$ to go with a reputable system just in case. Generally I try and put a high build mastic type epoxy on first underwater, followed by multiple layers of coal tar epoxy, but that has a lot to do with what is available in the areas I sail. Paint can be applied in this fashion: epoxy on steel or epoxy vinyl on steel, epoxy of vinyl rubber on steel, vinyl, epoxy or rubber. For price on a homegrown system you might check in Everet. They used to have a lot of surplus paints years back. The US navy at one time used an epoxy we called Green Death. You could beat it with a hammer and it wouldn't crack. Took forever to sand blast off. International 201, 207 or 217 maybe. If I could start from scratch with that stuff I would take a long look at it. Paint has a really bad habit of failing on the deck where ever you drop something on it. The Green Death didn't have that problem. (It was a high build green primer). My boat was originally painted with (I think) Silver Primacon (International) underwater which held up quite well. Later Devoe, which was OK, but not as damage resistant. Vinyl Tar is good for repairs between blasts under the water (hull must be dry to apply, but it dries within the tide and sticks to less than perfect steel (for about 1 year). greg elliott yacht lazy bones 1734 From: Stephen Wandling Date: Sat May 31, 2003 2:17pm Subject: Re: Paint Thanks to Greg for the great report. Just a couple of comments from the notes I have taken here over the years: Regarding "as quickly as possible" below, I am informed that you have to coat within 4 hours of achieving white metal in normal conditions, or you risk surface rust starting. I have also been informed that a second coat of epoxy should go on when the first coat is just tacky. Apparently there are compounds that you can apply later if the first coat dries, that will 'soften' it appropriately, but I have heard mixed comments on this. As an old US Navy guy I can remember the chipping hammer and red lead paint as being ubiquitous. I don't remember "green death" though, and would like to know if there is a more technical name and/or if it is still available. I did find the following on a naval site when I was searching: First the paint is chipped away from any rust spots with a chipping hammer and a wire brush. After that a coat of red colored rust inhibitor known as 'red death' is applied. After that a coat of green called 'green death' is applied. After they are dry a coat of paint is applied to match the color scheme of the vessel. 1735 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Sat May 31, 2003 2:18pm Subject: Re: Paint Colin, Greg et al, I am using Zinga a Belgian zinc primer on our Brent 36' mainly because I have good experience of it, in industrial use in a previous existence. Better the devil you know than the devil you don't. Provided the substrate is clean, rough enough and totally degreased then it is easy to apply in all sorts of conditions and very effective. We have only done the interior so far. I haven't chosen the topcoats yet. If the topcoats are tough enough not to be broken, and some seem to be, then I should think that one does not need a zinc primer only good adhesion to the substrate. I guess my choosing a zinc primer is in expectation that the application of the topcoats may be less than perfect. Regards, Ted 1736 From: Date: Sat May 31, 2003 3:15pm Subject: Re: Paint I think some epoxies are OK to recoat when hard, others not. I'm talking here about epoxy on epoxy. I would not trust to repaint a shiny epoxy like coal tar when hard, but having said that I've painted over old coal tar inside the boat with mastic high build without any concern. Below the water you have to be super careful. Above the waterline it is so much easier to make paint stick. Normally the manufacturer spec sheet gives good details on this, and is where I start with any paint. If they say the steel must be 3.0 clean, believe them. When trying to put a vinyl bottom paint on epoxy the epoxy should not be tacky, but should mark with the thumb nail. You do have to be careful here. I've had vinyl bottom paints with so much solvent in them that they peeled the soft epoxy right off - you can imagine the disaster this is. After the epoxies have been out in the sun for awhile they chalk, and a good water blast to remove the chalk seems to be adequate. I'm talking above the waterline here. 4 hours after blasting is probably just a number. The sooner the better. It depends on the atmospheric conditions, which are not typically very dry on the coast. Blast, air gun the hull in case the blast kicked up some dirt, airless the first coat. After that you can use a roller if it saves a few $$. You have to be a little careful with rollers, they can trap pockets of air if the paint sets up too quick. There is no problem that I am aware of in blasting and painting in sections, as long as you are careful on the overlaps. There is a bit of waste obviously doing this, but on a big boat it may be required. The grit is very important. If someone uses beach sand you will have to repaint within a year or two. Worth doing some research on this topic so you know if the guy on the blaster is doing the job you need. Some epoxies dry faster than others. Generally I have seen that the slower drying epoxies are softer but stick better (the high build mastics) while the faster drying epoxies (coal tar) are harder but more demanding. Coal tar is general thought to be less susceptible to osmosis than the softer epoxies. Steel hull can get osmosis between the steel and the paint. You may want to research this question. I'm not sure if the jury is back on the causes. I've had people say to use epoxy directly on the steel underwater. Other say put on a high build first, then follow with coal tar. I suspect it all comes down to preparation. The first system will require the steel to be cleaner than the second. Coal tar is cheap so it is attractive in that respect. This is the voodoo area. Keeping paint on steel underwater is probably one of the least understood aspects of steel boat construction - or should I say the thing that is not understood is this - why does the paint only stick if the steel is sand blasted? Grinders above water for paint repairs are OK. Underwater they fail more often than they succeed. There are not a substitute for blasting. Acid etch? I've had no success there. Probably because it attracts moisture. I think the green death might have been International 201, but it has been a long time. I do remember one green death steel boat hitting a concrete dock in Hawaii. The hull rang like a bell, and we couldn't find a mark on the paint. That really opened my eyes, because normally that would peel the paint down to the steel. That boat was painted with green death right on blasted steel - the owner built the boat in a small yard in Everet, which is how I heard you could get the paint there - this was 1987 so who can say now. Unfortunately, all the wooden boats in Hawaii were painted with the same stuff because it was so cheap. $25 US/ 5 gal. They had survived for years on oil based paints. Within a couple of years they were all gone from dry rot, the epoxy had sealed the wood to the point where no moisture could escape. The Green Death. g. 1737 From: Date: Sun Jun 1, 2003 7:12am Subject: Re: Re: Paint Hi Ted, The Lazy Bones was wheel abraded and primed with weldable primer. I didn't do the welding, but as I recall Ron told me he kept a can of weldable primer at hand during the welding, and touched up the primer as welding progressed. Using this technique the Lazy Bones did not need to be blasted inside after construction. The existing primer was left in place. She was foamed from the second stringer upwards, and epoxied over the primer downwards. The foam on primer has worked well for 20 years - no maintenance required. I cut back inspection areas in the foam every couple of years just to make sure everything is OK. I have overcoated the paint in the bilges a couple of times as the paint has aged. Except for some small problem areas like the shower sump in the head no maintenance has been required. A word of caution about wood. Wood, steel and salt do not mix. Where practical, I would use SS tabs to hold any wood away from the steel, especially near the bilges. Otherwise, I have found that a thick layer of caulking between any steel and wood limits any problems. Paint the steel, paint the wood, then when dry assemble with lots of caulking in between. Outside the Bones was blasted and painted normally. I try and keep some 1 part paint handy for touch ups because it is convenient. It is much easier to repair paint if you can get some primer on the damaged area immediately. Using 2 part paint for a touch up is extra work, and usually results in waste, meaning it is less likely to get done before the damaged area has rusted. Once rusted the grinder must come out, which is even less likely. The only wood I have outside is for seats in the cockpit and stern section. Steel is hard and cold to sit on. Cushions blow overboard regularly. Some wood strategically placed in the cockpit can make a huge difference. I have a 2x12 across the pushpit as a seating area in the tropics. Sitting low in the cockpit out of the breeze can be too hot. Everyone sits up on the coamings, which makes a piece of wood on the coamings a good idea. A permanent awning over the cockpit, that can be left in place while sailing completes the picture. I built our awning out of PVC pipe and shade cloth 10 years ago, and it is still going strong. Thick walled PVC is a handy building material and it holds up well in the tropics. The advantage of shade cloth is that you can see the sails through it, and the wind will pass thru in storms - it doesn't flap. However, it doesn't stop the rain so it can't be used as a rain catcher. In the tropics a permanent awning over the cockpit is a mandatory piece of survival gear. It must be permanent. Not something you take down while sailing. It will improve your enjoyment of the boat 1000%. You can sit outside all day long and not worry about sunburn. Magic. regards, Greg. 1738 From: robertgm36 Date: Sun Jun 1, 2003 5:13pm Subject: paint The reason paint will stick infinitely better after sandblasting is the steel surface in this case, same principal with glass , has been made into a microscopic surface of pits with jagged not smooth edges. Wheel abrading is more smooth and works fine on the inside of your boat but is unlikely to last as long outside . The paint gets under these jagged edges and is trapped .If you have ever tried to clean fingerprints off sandblasted glass you will know it is next to impossible . Only further etching with sand seems to work. This is the desirable effect we want on steel with paint. The advice about checking what is being blasted on your boat is very important.Never let anyone use re-cycled sand on your boat . Only use clean new grit.Sandblasting is so intense the surface is heated enough for particles to stick .Would you want salt stuck to your bare steel from beach sand or who knows what from used grit? International paints are still available, not sure about the green stuff mentioned. The Metal Boat Society most recent two newsletters has excellent articles on this subject. Robert 1739 From: Date: Sun Jun 1, 2003 5:26pm Subject: Re: paint Hi Robert, I agree with you re: blasting versus wheel abraded. The Bones was designed to go around the world for the lowest cost, in a 10 year timeframe. Everything was designed with this in mind, just like a car. Thus, we saved some costs by not blasting inside. However, plans changed and we are happy to say that the boat has doubled the original designed life cycle with no sign that it won't go another 20. regards, Greg 1740 From: universalcatt Date: Sat May 31, 2003 9:34am Subject: some questions... hello, im new here had some questions concerning origami steel boats 1]whats the range of cost to build your own 36 footer? materials wise. 2}Could somebody with no experience building with steel handle the job? Lots of welding? 2} how old is the oldest origamiboat around, and how is it doing? what problems have shown up? thanks 1741 From: Date: Mon Jun 2, 2003 10:07am Subject: Re: some questions... 1. The materials required to build an origami steel boat are not significantly different than building by conventional techniques. 2. The lofting, cutting and welding required to make an origami boat is significantly less than conventional techniques, which is the attraction of the process. Importantly, origami construction requires considerably less skill to achieve a pleasing boat shape than building by conventional means, making it suitable for amateur construction. Conventional metal boat construction is a highly skilled process, not well suited to amateur construction. Steel welding is not difficult with some practice. Boat welding requires the addition of a bit of patience and attention to detail, to minimize distortion. The equipment is not expensive and a perfectly acceptable boat can be built in the open air with a minimum of equipment. 3. I know of origami boats in excess of 20 years old still going strong. I know of no special problems with the technique. With regular maintenance the lifetime of a steel hull can be expected to exceed by a considerable degree the lifetime of the engine, sails, rigging, etc. under even the most extreme conditions. greg elliott yacht Lazy Bones 1742 From: nelstomlinson Date: Mon Jun 2, 2003 11:09am Subject: Re: wrapping up the floatation thread Hi, Alex, I think that I may have started this mess in the first place: I noticed that enough foam to keep me warm in a worst case winter would just about float the boat when swamped. I wondered if anyone else had thought about it, and away we went. To help avoid turning this into a positive floatation list, I'll propose the following: anyone who is interested in discussing the TECHNICAL aspects of achieving positive floatation in origami and other boats can send their thoughts to this email address: origamiboats at member dot fsf dot org. I'll read them, and forward them (within a few days) to anyone else who has sent in email to that address. I'm not sure how much there is left to say, but I'll keep this up as long as the burden stays managable. Again, the assumption is that you accept that positive floatation is an interesting idea; the discussion on this proposed email list is to be about HOW. Nels 1743 From: sae140 Date: Tue Jun 3, 2003 0:18am Subject: Re: some questions... 1]whats the range of cost to build your own 36 footer? materials wise. There are some very rough costings in the posts archives. As Greg suggests, the cost of the materials for an origami-build is not so very different from using conventional techniques. The real saving comes about not from the materials themselves, but from the time saved from not having to loft-out and construct frames, from the absence of fairing, and from the reduced amount of hull welding involved. The actual cost will depend on where in the world you're based, availability of steel, and your skills as a scrounger .... Blasting and paint can be surprisingly expensive, so don't overlook these when costing. 2}Could somebody with no experience building with steel handle the job? Lots of welding? I'm in the same situation, so feel well-qualified to answer this. Those who are competent welders will tell you that it's easy with practice - but so will musicians and plasterers. It's fairly easy to stick metal together with a welder, but I'd suggest you make lots of test pieces first, and destructively test 'em to check for penetration and slag *before* you consider starting a boat build. Control of the weld pool is essential, and it can take a long time to master this. I'm still working on it. Lots of people claim to be able to weld, but can't. My local garage employs several. There have been reports on this forum of welds cracking when the sheets have been pulled together. That concerns me, for it suggests that the metal has been stuck together, but not welded. There's a difference. I wouldn't buy a second-hand steel boat (of any kind of construction) unless I was happy about the weld quality, and *** appearance means nothing ***. The only way to know if you have the aptitude for welding is to try it, and maybe take a basics course at a local college. If, like me, you've no previous experience of steel fabrication, I'd suggest you find someone who's building in this material, and help out for a couple of days. You could trade a couple of hours welding tuition in exchange for your time. You'll also find out first-hand just how noisy and dirty working with steel can be (relevant if you have neighbours), and just how heavy steel plate is, and the techniques used for moving this stuff around. Can come as a surprise if you're only used to working with wood and plastic. Wear protective footwear as well as eye protection, and be kind to your back. Colin 1744 From: prairiemaidca Date: Tue Jun 3, 2003 0:42pm Subject: I think I can I think I can.... Hi All: On the subject of who can build one and who can't. I'm a firm believer that there are two kinds of people in the world. Those that talk about something and those that actually make it happen. I went the route of taking a course in basic welding and cutting from a high school in Edmonton on weekends. I think the instructor thought that I was nut's once he understood the enormity of the project that I wished to undertake. I happen to have a neighbour who is a very skilled pro welder and more than willing to help with any welding questions I can dream up. I also am very lucky to have a best friend who owns a large machine shop and is very supportive of the boat project. I keep telling everyone that I wasn't a welder when I started but by the time all is said and done I'll be fairly good at most aspects of basic welding of mild and stainless steel. My friend gave me some good advise when I got started and that was to build some of the items that you might need for the project. Eg. a good cutting table with a large vice on it. A dolly for the welder so you can move it around easier. By making some of these types of things before you actually try to build a boat you will gain some practice and incite into wether you really want to tackle a project of this size. I'm now at the stage of putting the cabin and pilot house roofs on so Prairie Maid is really starting to look like a boat. I've tried to meet with as many owners/builders as I can and I personally believe that it is the best thing you can do prior to and while building. Not an easy chore out here in Alberta. Their insight and experience is something that even the best naval design teams sometimes lack. I like to ask the owner what would you change if you were doing it over again and it's amazing the little tips you can pick up from those that have gone before. Well enough rambling and more boat building.. Martin and Betty(Prairie Maid) 1745 From: Date: Tue Jun 3, 2003 4:45pm Subject: Re: Paint a dumb question, will coal tar harden in an airless sprayer? if left for 2 days before repaint? Thanks, John 1746 From: Date: Tue Jun 3, 2003 11:17pm Subject: Re: Paint ho, ho, ho. At first it sounded like you might be pulling our legs. Why would anyone leave paint in the sprayer for 2 days? However, it you are asking this in earnest it means you are probably only familiar with 1 part paints. Coal tar is a generic name for coal tar epoxy. The term "epoxy" does not mean that the paint is some sort of a glue. The term epoxy means the paint is a 2 part paint. One part is "coal tar" and the other is a hardener. (there are lots of variations). The hardener takes the place of the air (or moisture) in the chemical reaction that hardens the paint. Until mixed they normally won't harden, thus can be stored even in the tropics for quite awhile. When using epoxies it is typical to mix the paint, wait about 30 minutes for the chemical reaction to get going, and then apply the paint. If you don't wait, you risk that the paint will never harden - especially true if the paint is old. I normally wait a bit longer with older paint just in case. However, if you wait too long the paint will get too thick to use. You can thin the paint, but caution is required because thinners can weaken the paint. The advantage of epoxies is that they harden predictably even when applied very thick. A thick layer of paint tends to provides better protection against corrosion (to a point) than a thin layer. (every paint has an optimum thickness - different for different paints). Depending on the temperature and type of paint, once mixed, you may have about 1-4 hours "pot life". Beyond that any unused paint can only be thrown away. You absolutely cannot pour the unused paint back in the tin after it has been mixed, it will contaminate the unmixed paint!! Airless sprayers have air in them -- they just don't use air to deliver the paint. The term "airless" means the sprayer uses a high pressure mechanical pump to "push" the paint out through the nozzle. Sort of like a very fast squirt gun. If you don't run solvent through the sprayer after use, it will probably be the last time you use the sprayer. Conventional sprayers use compressed air to "suck" the paint out through the nozzle. The same principle as used in a carburetor to mix air and gasoline. These sprayers are better suited to 1 part paints that dry with air. They don't like thick paint (epoxies can be quite thick) and they might trap air in the paint, leaving an avenue for corrosion or osmosis. hope this helps. greg 1747 From: Date: Tue Jun 3, 2003 11:40pm Subject: Re: Paint ps: be sure to re-mix the paint after waiting 30 minutes, g 1748 From: T.H. & V.D. Cain Date: Wed Jun 4, 2003 0:00am Subject: RE: Paint John, it all depends on the word 'epoxy' and if you are talking coal-tar epoxy the answer is yes and it's goodbye to the pressure line+filters+pump seals, and maybe some other parts in the gun. Coal Tar exists in a non epoxy form as well. I have used J87 Aluminium (epoxy) in a hot climate and that is a sobering experience. A great coating system, but if the temp. is up, one needs to put on the skates, because after being stationary for something like 10 minutes in 30+ deg., it will start to cure in the line first (6mm ID), then everywhere else, and then it's out with the wallet. I lose about 0.8litres after the supply pot is empty under the Graco. Some of this you can recover to use in air-atomised (thinned) or by brush. Terry 1749 From: T.H. & V.D. Cain Date: Wed Jun 4, 2003 0:19am Subject: RE: Paint John, one thing I forgot when declaring disaster on the coal tar epoxy --- if you live in a very cool place and the equipment is likewise very cool --- below 10 deg. C --- then the stuff will not cure at all. Some high-builds will cure in a few days at these low temps. , but the Tar Epoxies I have used (and still use) will hold in the freezer without drama for one or two days. That's what comes of me living in God's own country where it rarely gets below 13 deg. C anytime. Terry 1750 From: Edward Stone Date: Wed Jun 4, 2003 1:28am Subject: Re: Paint Greg, Terry and all, I have been offered some old 2 part epoxy paint which according to the data sheet has a 1 year shelf life. I phoned the manufacturers (Sigma) for advice and they said that if I got the batch number then they could tell me the date of manufacture. What I am wondering is; how does old age affect the unmixed paint? Obviously there is not a sudden cut off point but what can one expect the paint to do and what is the downside risk of buying old paint. Regards, Ted 1751 From: Date: Wed Jun 4, 2003 9:28am Subject: Re: Re: Paint Hi Ted We were getting US Navy "surplus" epoxy for $1/gal instead of (then) $35/gal. After the paint went over date, the Navy didn't use it. The only obvious problem was that the paint needed to be left mixed in the pot longer before use. Otherwise it never hardened up, which can be an expensive disaster. Many other people were using the same paint with reasonable results, so I was not worried. There are many different types of epoxies with different characteristics. I have found the "failed to kick" problem common in other epoxies as they age, but I would not feel confident enough to say it is true for all epoxies. Maybe the shelf life isn't critical for the paint, or maybe it is. Maybe it simply makes the paint hard to mix. Or maybe it makes the paint weak or prone to failure. The total age is probably not as important as the multiplier. How many times older than the shelf life is the paint? 10% is probably no big deal if the paint was kept cool. If the paint was not kept cool, or is 2-3 times older than the shelf life you might have a challenge. Trying a sample might be instructive. Even then there is no guarantee. Maybe your results will be "good enough", just not a good as the manufacturer intended. I would worry less about a paint used for overcoating and above the waterline. For freshly blasted steel, especially below the waterline, I would recommend going with a reputable manufacturer and a known system, unless I had received good reports from others about the specific paint, and my other costs were in line with the paint costs. Lots of time we haven't had a blast available. In those cases a cheap paint lasts just as long, and sometimes longer, than an expensive paint. I have found that inside the hull a 1 part bitumastic is every bit as good as a 2 part high tech epoxy, at a fraction of the cost. In some ways the bitumastics are better, because they don't require the same care and preparation, and they have a bit of "give". One of the problems with epoxies is that they can "shrink" over time - over years, and pull away from the job, especially inside tight corners. While probably not universally true, the faster the epoxy sets, the harder the paint, the more it seems likely to shrink. The bitumastics stay a bit soft, so they are not suitable for high wear areas. I've also had better success for repairs below the waterline with the bitumastic than with vinyl tar. These paints appear very similar, and I had assumed they were, however the bitumastic seems to stick better underwater. Maybe it is just a difference between manufacturers. Vinyl tar is usually easier to get. I know in Fiji, where there was no blasting available, the freighters were using bitumastic below the waterline, then antifouling. There is something to be said for some of the older 1 part paint systems when traveling in out of the way areas. Some of the newer 2 part systems last a lot longer when properly applied, but require a level of preparation that cannot be achieved anywhere outside of a well supplied shipyard. If a 1 part is cheaper, easier to apply, and requires less prep to get a good result, I find the maintenance gets done on a more regular basis. That may just be me, however. greg 1752 From: sae140 Date: Wed Jun 4, 2003 10:39am Subject: Paint I've been unravelling some of the voodoo (nice term, Greg) surrounding paint, and the picture that is emerging is that steel can be protected by paint in 2 distinctly different ways. The most common mode is by providing a physical barrier: to deny moisture and oxygen from gaining access to the steel's surface. The physical properties of the paint are determined by whatever vehicle is used, and whatever ingredients are added to that vehicle. As no single layer of paint is considered 100% impervious to water, many layers of paint are therefore recommended. The other mode is one of electro-chemical protection, such as the zinc-rich primer system which Ted mentioned recently: http://www.zingacanada.com Zinc-rich (and aluminium-rich) primers protect steel in a totally different way from other paints. They are not 'just' metallic primers, but a paint-on galvanising system, which works by setting up a galvanic cell whenever the steel surface becomes exposed. As with hot-dip galavanising, some of the zinc then migrates to cover and protect the exposed steel. One problem reported with an overcoated zinc-rich primer system is that the zinc migrates from underneath the over-coating leaving a void, and the protective zinc deposits generated by galvanic action are in the form of crystals, *not* metallic zinc. These crystals, together with the void which surrounds them, combine to form the blisters which Greg mentioned in a recent post. It is for this reason that although zinc-rich primers are considered as life-time primers above the water-line, many experts recommend that they are not used for bottom paint. (If they are, then I'd recommend periodic inspection and touching-up). Now to expose some of the voodoo. http://www.zrcworldwide.com/whatszrc.htm confirms what I'd suspected: that zinc and aluminium-rich primers create conductive paint layers (they have to - for that's how they work). No conduction = no electro-chemical protection. And that requires a suitable vehicle to be used. Commonly-used volatile thinners, drying oils, epoxy etc., will leave micron-thick layers of insulation between metallic particles, and metallic primers so formulated can only ever provide physical protection. (This may also be the case with the numerous epoxy-based zinc salts (oxides, phosphates, silicates etc) on the market, where apparent choice *may* be bogus - but more research is needed here, for there's clearly a lot more to paint chemistry than meets the eye ...) I've already tested some 'standard zinc' and aluminum-primed paint surfaces, and found them to be non-conducting - so they can only be providing physical protection, and I might equally well have applied non-metallic paint instead. I'm thinking that some of the confusion lies in the term 'zinc-rich primer' - for this paint is far more than that. "Cold-galvanising" is a much better description, imho. Apologises for boring those who already knew this stuff.. Colin 1753 From: Date: Wed Jun 4, 2003 11:53am Subject: Re: Paint Hi Colin, Underwater, steel corrodes very slowly as long as the zincs are kept up, even in the tropics. The Bones it doesn't rust underwater. We have 70 lbs of zinc, which normally lasts about 5 years. The barnacles grow just fine, and are almost impossible to remove. Underneath the steel is clean and bright. Cut off flush just above the steel they make a pretty good barrier coat on which to apply bottom paint!! If anyone could make a paint that sticks to steel anything like a barnacle, they would corner the market. I wouldn't spend to much time on zinc paint underwater. Your anodes are a lot easier and cheaper to replace than paint. I would spend the time to research electrolysis, especially as it relates to the electrical system in your boat. The only problem we have ever seen is a bit of electrolysis right at the waterline, small black circles with a bit of carbon in the center. We have only had a few of these, always after staying in a "hot" harbor. I recall reading an engineering review in Australia. They were having a problem with iron bridges corroding very quickly, after they had been in place without drama for nearly 100 years. The problem was traced to power lines buried in the ground, up to 1/2 mile away, dissolving the iron. Our previous boat was FG. I plugged into shore power, and a month later went over the side to clean the bum. Our shaft zinc (new) was black and almost gone, because "for safety" reasons the boat was grounded to shore power. We were "protecting" someone with 120 volts leaking into the harbor next to us. Pago Pago is notorious for this problem. One FG boat had its bronze thru hull fall off after 6 months, and another steel boat we sailed with (factory built) had all its zincs eaten in the same period, and the hit pitted thru. One of our friends borrowed the Bones for a year, and ended up buying an older steel boat (Cajun) in Malaysia. Unfortunately the hull had developed electrolysis, and ultimately the rudder failed and they lost the boat. I recall them telling me about the difference between the Bones and Cajun. On one with the grinder, you grind and grind, and after awhile you can see a mark in the steel. In the other the grinder cut thru the steel like butter. One of the simplest tests for a steel boat is to measure the voltage between your hull and a piece of mild steel in the water beside the boat. Something like a 1/2 volt negative (on the boat) and you are fine. The following is my opinion only. The reader should do their own research. One of the biggest problems I know of for Alloy and Steel boats is negative grounds to the hull, usually via the engine. Isolate your electrical system from the hull. (just look at the negative terminal on your car battery for an idea why you want to do this.) It can be hard. Our master switch on the engine disconnects the negative side of the battery from the engine, rather than the positive as in most FG boats. I have a theory that the reason lightning strikes are so damaging is that many boats have no way to disconnect the negative side of their electrical system from their grounding system. When lightning strikes, even when everything is turned off and all the breakers open, the negative is still connected. The lightning travels up this path, from your grounding system, to the battery, and then to all your electronics, blowing diodes and transistors which are particularly prone to failure from reverse emf. We have been in hundreds of electrical storms over the years. We have had many "near misses" over the years, with boats less than 100 feet from us hit and their electrical systems destroyed. We have even had people come over to the boat, asking if we are damaged, because they are convinced they saw the lightning hit us. I firmly believe that this is one of the major advantages of a metal hull and a properly isolated electrical system when cruising in the tropics. A good percentage of boats have their cruising plans destroyed by lightning strikes. We have spent many a time hiding inside our "Faraday Cage" while the storm raged outside. If you have never been in electrical storm in the tropics they can be a real eye opener. The lighting at the center of a large thunderstorm can be unbelievable. Sort of looks like a medieval picture, like a fantastically huge finger of god reaching down from the sky to snuff you out of existence, drilling the surface of the ocean immediately under the center of the storm, every few seconds as the storm moves along. Touch wood we have never had any damage from electrical storms. One of the funniest (not really) devices is the "lightning protector". Looks like a fuller brush. More commonly called the "lightning attractor". Ok, I'm off topic. Just throwing out some ideas. greg 1754 From: Richard Till Date: Wed Jun 4, 2003 3:11pm Subject: Re: Re: Paint Ted, Brent put me on to a military surplus place in Washinton State where I picked up 20 gallons of Mare Island Epoxy. I was originally looking for an ICI product but it was all gone when I went to pick it up in the US. Not wanting to come home empty handed I took a gamble with the Mare Island product -- it has proven to be a good product so far. It was 3 years passed the expiry date when I applied it and is working very well. This is a 1:1 mix and the trick is to thoroughly pre-mix each componet before mixing the 2 components together. Keep it warm before you start mixing so that it can link. This is the toughest paint I have ever come accross (used on warships I believe). Richard Till (36' steel, floating and fitting-out, Sechelt, British Columbia). Have fun . . . rt 1755 From: Graeme Mitchell Date: Wed Jun 4, 2003 6:17pm Subject: Suggestion for anti-virus software Hi all I am member of some other groups ,there has been a lot of viruses being sent out in these groups , so far origami boats has been free of them as there is no attachments sent with messages. But for any one without virus protection here is a site for a chance to stop this. As it would seem that there are some people without protection . By the calls for help after opening these attachments Graeme P.S Also I have a converter for imperial to metric and lots of other units of measure some of which I have never heard of ?? If any one wants it email me direct and I will send it to you. Paint discussion is GOOD value. It's a free program and they claim it will always remain free for private use. You can get it at http://freeav.com/ 1756 From: T.H. & V.D. Cain Date: Thu Jun 5, 2003 1:14am Subject: RE: Re: Paint Ted, Greg., and all, A lot of shelf life notation in paint is about product having been opened and exposed to any amount of unknown contamination, as well as protecting the vendor and manufacturer against consequential damage claims --- the world was once a lot more simple! My experience with old epoxies in paint bases has been generally as per the feedback so far re your query. If epoxy components are not in the paint form, they appear to have extremely long shelf lives, provided that the containers are neutral in their purpose. I have resins --- laminating weights, potting types, and also adhesive weights --- and their respective hardeners which are 15 years old, and these still function very much as they did when freshly marketed --- these samples are in glass containers. I also have the same resins (same age) held in tin-plated steel cans which are now unusable, and me not being a chemist, I just know that the tins did it! In every case I relate, I am talking about containers properly sealed and stored in a temperature range of 10 to 40 deg. C --- not for all of their life though, having moved the whole project some 1600 km North about 10 years ago to a place where it seems to be 22 to 32 much of the time. When epoxies are mixed with other things to produce paint products, the life picture seems to change according to the mixture. I have Tarcol (a coloured tar epoxy ) which is 15 years old and it appears to work and perform as well as ever. Tarcol was a "Pioneer" product --- now Sigma has the formula and the sales. Now with Jotun products, I found that 5 year old J87 heavily invested with aluminium flakes (remember this word flakes), would not mix or look or spray the same as new product and in fact I have put 10litres of this stuff to one side as it was for critical areas of the hull and the risk was too great. That 10l may well go on the roof of our house!!!!! So it is perhaps not an easy query to reply to with confidence --- however, if tar epoxy is the subject, I'd say that in days gone by, there never was a use-by date, and the material properly mixed, will probably perform to spec.. In fact, there is no expiry date on the containers of any of the paints I use for marine application --- just the batch number to meet ISO9000 series requirements on traceability. There is, of course, a reference to the MSDS and application data sheet, and these usually have the protective clause or wording. One thing seems to be common with the mixing processes of the tar epoxies. It is the time cycle between the initial mix of the A&B (after thorough power mixing of the base+pigments+X ---- the hardener is usually a single component), and the mandatory re-mix of the combination prior to use --- my stuff specified 10 to 15 minutes of resting before re-mix. On the matter of cold galvanising, I originally thought that the aluminium component of the J87 was involved in this way --- not so --- according to the agents. They tell me that the aluminium flakes cause a major lengthening of the moisture permeation path and that is all they do. In other words, the flakes overlap each other in the epoxy matrix and make the 200 micron coat behave like a 500 micron coat, it is that simple. One other point emerged in discussions with some commercial operators --- if the hull is zinc primed, it is no bad thing to let it weather somewhat before water blasting and overcoating. Apparently this stems from the leaching away of zinc salts on the surface of the hull --- I have also been told that if the blast grade was good enough, there can be microscopic rust points on the profile of the zinc primer which are welcome in the surface-tolerant epoxy overcoating system. That seems to line-up well with Gilbert Klingel's story about the need to use the right blast abrasive and pressure/velocity, the job is about an anchoring profile, not about a nice clean surface. J87 is available with or without aluminium loading, but for a hull, the aluminium is always specified to go on to the priming coat with which it is compatible. For shipping, that is Barrier - a Jotun organic zinc which is the only organic or in-organic zinc coat (very thin coat <50 microns), which is specified for underwater use in the Jotun system. In my case, time will tell about the underwater zinc holding primer on the blasted surface. 1757 From: ironfire1776 Date: Thu Jun 5, 2003 5:09am Subject: Re: Suggestion for anti-virus software Hi All, I have been "lurking" here for some time, have read everything. Up till now haven't had anything to add to the truly significant knowlege here. ('Will explain my interest in steel boats sometime later.) But just typed this up for a horse rescue group (who's technical knowege is on a somewhat lower level than this group's so please forgive it sounds a little simplistic). Chris As promised- Especially if you are on cable, which is really a network, you should be behind a firewall. If you do not already have one I recommend Zone Alarm- www.zonelabs.com Zone Alarm can prevent most of the major hacker type problems. It makes your computer "invisible" to other computers looking for weak spot. Also it prevents any program from communicating on the internet without your permission. Zone Alarm creates a list of programs as they ask for permission to access the internet, each time a new program tries to access the internet you will get a little window with the choice of "yes", or "no" with the option of Zone Alarm remembering your choice (most of the time you will want it to remember). Some programs will also ask for "server rights", or "do you want suchandsuch.exe to act as a server". Other than SMTP email programs (outlook) most of us need no server programs. If a program is a server, it will do what it is asked to do by other computers on the net (like upload information if it can). If you don't know the program that is asking to access the internet or act as a server, there is a real good chance that you don't need it- deny access (without checking the remember box) and see what if anything doesn't work. (Note: Very few if any of your programs (except outlook express) need "server rights", in the programs list block all programs from acting as a server- and then only allow if you cannot get them to work otherwise. Even Zone Alarm itself asks for server rights, but works just fine without.) There is much info available on their web site. ZoneAlarm will send you a warning flag every time another computer tries to get into yours and Zone blocks it- this happens so often you will quickly check the box "don't show this again". Of course you need some kind of Anti-virus, I use Norton, and know little about the others. An antivirus program is only able to deal with viruses that it has info on, frequent updates of the "virus definitions" (7 to 15 days recommended) are a must. Now there is "Spyware", Spyware are programs that send info to another computer (web sight) about all sorts of things, most generally your web surfing habits, but they can send much more than that. Some spyware can report every keystroke you make (like your passwords, credit card numbers, etc.). Usually you acquire spyware by trickery- you download a free program, click on a banner on a web page, or something similar. Spyware is well handled by "Spybot-Search and Destroy"- http://security.kolla.de/ Like anti virus, "Spybot-Search and Destroy", should be updated regularly. Spybot provides a great deal of info on web hazards (a whole lot more that I will). Both the basic zone alarm and Spybot are free (and very good). But by it's nature, this is not real simple software, so I recommend that you read directions, etc. carefully. Another very useful (and free) program is "Eraser" http://www.tolvanen.com/eraser/ With eraser, you can create a list of cache folders, files, whatever, and every time you run eraser those files will be erased beyond recovery (some care is a good idea- it will gladly erase you system files too if that's what you ask it to do). For those who just can't handle the complexity of the antivirus / anti spyware programs, there are a couple of things you can do simply that vastly increase your security. (But I still consider ZoneAlarm almost a "must".) The vast majority of hacker utilized "holes" and viruses, etc. are designed for the worlds most popular software -Microsoft. Unless you have some compelling reason to do so, don't use Internet Explorer or Outlook Express. (yes, I know EVERYBODY uses IE and Outlook- well almost). BUT there are other internet browsers, and some of us think they are better than IE. There is Mozilla (free) which is an "open source" (meaning that anyone who wants to can help refine/design it) closely related to Netscape. Yes, there is still a Netscape (free also). These can be downloaded and installed or installed directly from the web. Both are "full service" browsers (and pretty big) and arguably as good as IE (seems they do load a little slower on starting). There are many more, but beyond my experience. I use Firebird (formally Phoenix) which is a stripped down Mozilla, very small and fast, which gives you the option to "build your own browser" by adding just those features you want. Just about everything is modifiable. I am thrilled with Firebird, but it's probably best left for those who consider themselves advanced computer users. For the timid, Netscape is the sensible choice. http://www.mozilla.org/ http://home.netscape.com/download/index.html?cp=djudowone http://www.mozilla.org/projects/phoenix For most, there is no good reason to use any POP/SMTP email (snet, earthlink, aol ["AO Hell" in tech-speak: Don't get me wrong, us pro computer repair types LOVE aol and lighting storms.] First, your email address is bound to your internet provider, if you want to change providers, your address changes too. But the real danger is that you download your mail before you read it.And if a virus does slip in, it will send itself to all your friends listed in your address book (with your name on it-well they used to be friends). I'm sure there are advantages to that (POP) for businesses and the like that I don't know about, but for the average email artist I can see no use. Get (and most of you already have) a web-based email box (Yahoo, Hotmail, Lycos, etc.) and use it. Most of these give you the ability to scan attachments before you download them, and can open many kinds of attachments right on the web. You only download what you want to save, and after it has been scanned for diseases. AND you can easily access your mail from anybody's computer, anywhere. (If you used my computer's Outlook to get your mail, I would be able to retrieve your logon/password even if you deleted the account afterwards.) Free tip- Old computer? short on disk space? send your extra stuff to your yahoo mailbox- Yahoo lets you save 4MB, not enough? open another Yahoo ID and mailbox- (wicked but legal). Lastly- don't use the "Remember your Logon/Password on This Computer" feature- probably no real great danger here, but why make invasion any easier? Peace and ponies, Chris 1758 From: Aaron Edelman Date: Thu Jun 5, 2003 7:38am Subject: Paint/Expansion of steel Hi, Just a question. How much does a (say) 40' steel boat expand (in length) due to increase in temperature, when it travels from Alaska (in the winter), to the tropics. If one looks at the expansion slots on both ends of steel bridges, which might be somewhere of 6" - 12" wide on each end of an average length bridge, it would appear that a 40' vessel might increase in length 1/4" -1/2". How does this (if so) affect the various paints and antifouling? How does the expansion affect a teak deck over steel, since wood definitely does not have the same expansion rate as steel? Thank you for your input. Ron 1759 From: Glen Date: Thu Jun 5, 2003 9:01am Subject: 40 Foot plans for sale Good day to all. I have for sale the plans to the 40 foot version. I still believe in the oragami construction and will build by boat with this style we have decided that we are going to build something a little bigger as we will be having two-in-law-crew-members joining us for our trek around the world! The plans are complete and have not been used. I did change some of the layout in regards to where I wanted things below deck but this does not change any of the lines and they are just my ideas. I still plan on being part of the group and will put in my two or three cents worth !! If anyone is interested please e-mail me, I am asking $ 400.00 for them which is a savings of $ 100.00 !!!! Glen 1760 From: nelstomlinson Date: Thu Jun 5, 2003 10:01am Subject: Re: Paint/Expansion of steel A quick google search turned up the number 12(10^-6)/degree C (the units would be meters/(meter degree C)), for mild steel. It was on this page, which looks interesting: http://www.ass da.asn.au/austenit.html So, as a first approximation, a 40 footer would lengthen (40)12(10^-6) feet for each degree Celsius increase in temperature. It would expand (in all dimensions!) 12 parts in a million for each degree C increase. Going from a water temperature of 30C (someplace REALLY hot, I'd guess) to 0C (maybe the face of the Columbia Glacier) would shrink the boat by 360.0 parts in a million, or 0.0144 feet, or almost 3/16 of an inch. Going from a hull temperature of 90C (on the beach, in the sun, somewhere REALLY hot) to a hull temperature of -50C (on the banks of the Yukon River) would shrink the hull by 1680.0 parts in a million, or 0.0672 feet, or about 13/16 of an inch. I've seen paint flake off a car door in Fairbanks, at -70F (-57C). Then there was that fellow who took a steel boat through the NW passage. Didn't he leave his boat on the beach over the winter? I gather that he didn't lose any paint. It probably never got any colder than -40CF, there on the coast, but that's colder than most boaters want to tolerate. My guess would be that paint applied in the tropics won't flake off due to differing rates of thermal expansion in any weather you'll find along the Gulf coast of Alaska. I could be wrong: it can hit -20F (-29C) in Anchorage. Anyplace the ocean doesn't freeze over, and the boat is in the water, you probably won't have to worry. Hope this helps, Nels 1761 From: sae140 Date: Thu Jun 5, 2003 10:49am Subject: Electrolysis Thought I'd make this one a new thread, 'cause protecting the fruits of your labours from the elements must be a worth-while discussion !! Greg - just to clarify my spending time researching the paint thing. I was faced with a barrage of "use XYZ - it's the best" or "the Acme paint system protects longer" type of stuff, and needed to make some sense of these claims. I'm new to steel, and until now I've viewed paint as being goo that's applied to wooden window-frames and doors to pretty 'em up - protection was very much a secondary issue. With steel, I can see that these priorities are reversed, and now I've some basic understanding of how paints systems work, and the pro's and con's of using (for example) zinc-rich paint underwater. Personally, I wouldn't - but now I know 'why' it's considered ill-advised. My post was simply to pass this info on, in the spirit of sharing information with others who may be similarly plagued with a constant need to understand 'how things work', rather than rely on well- intentioned recommendations. Zinga (and equivalents) sound to me like brilliant products to use just about everywhere *except underwater*, where it seems you take a calculated risk. Ok - electrolysis. 70lbs of zinc in 5 years seems an awful lot .... ? In contrast: Nick Skeates (Wylo II) has had his boat continuously in the water for over 20 years (much of this time in the tropics), without any anodes attached. His construction employs similar metals below the waterline (mild steel shaft and prop etc.), and he reports only one set of rudder pintles replaced, and prop shaft corrosion repaired but once (built up with weld metal), during this time. All-in-all, I think that's much less maintenance than one would expect with a more conventional installation. Tom Colvin (based in Florida) stated back in 1996 that he's not been fitting anodes for over 30 years ! He achieves this by ensuring that the hull never forms part of the electrical system, by insulating the engine from the hull, by electrically insulating the shaft from the hull, by painting the propeller, and avoiding direct hull contact with dissimilar metals. My intention is to adopt Nick's 'no dissimilar metal' strategy together with Tom's insulation techniques, with a view to also dispensing with zincs (but nevertheless fit a couple to begin with, just to see if they're needed). I've no problem with attaching zincs for 'belt and braces' insurance, but as a 'fix' for a problem which could be avoided at source doesn't fit well with me. However, I've spotted one theoretical 'whoopsee' with the "no anode fitted" approach: if you should anchor for extended periods (like months), then the anchor and it's chain will eventually lose the zinc galvanising to the tiny area of exposed steel at the rudder pintles and prop shaft (electrolysis might hopefully be minimal in view of the distance) - unless of course the bow roller, hawse pipe and anchor locker are electrically insulated from the hull. Creating such insulation isn't impossible, but might prove more trouble than it's worth. Of course this could be avoided by simply anchoring with string , which seems to be favoured on your side of the pond ... Regards Colin BTW - cement sticks to steel as good as any barnacle. BTW2 - I've just realised why my steel c.h. radiators corrode-out right next to their connection with brass fittings and copper pipe !! 1762 From: put_to_sea Date: Thu Jun 5, 2003 4:28pm Subject: Re: Electrolysis Do you suppose it would be possible to use Ultra High Molecular Weight (UHMW) plastic on both parts of the pintles and on the propshaft to eliminate the exposed steel at those points? I have no idea how you might fasten the UHMW to the steel though. Best regards, Amos 1763 From: Date: Thu Jun 5, 2003 5:03pm Subject: Re: Electrolysis Hi Colin, I'd be cautious about adopting any "no anode" approach. No matter how careful you are, if you are in a "hot" harbor your boat is at risk. What is true for metal bridges is true for metal boats. The error doesn't have to be you. I put the anchor over the side in one place and had it come up in a week later, black, with the galv. gone. A zinc bolted to the anchor stock helps. I recall hearing that the original iron sailing hulls would last a long almost forever when they were first introduced. When boats and harbors were electrified, they started to fail very quickly. Anodes were the solution. This might just be a story, maybe not. The problem with electrolysis is that it is mostly invisible. The metal demineralizes and weakens without showing much evidence, and then fails. Blades fall off propellers, rudder shafts snap. I am pretty sure that electrolysis can kill metal boats much faster than rust. I'm not talking about surface damage, but damage to the internal structure of the metal. Think of rust as damage from the surface inwards, and electrolysis as damage from the inside outwards. You may go years with electrolysis and never know it. You might have a 4 times safely factor in a conservative design, meaning that the boat can lose 75% of its strength before it will fail under maximum loads. Then one day in storm conditions, at sea far away from help you have a catastrophic failure because electrolysis has weakened the boat by 75%, and it cannot cope with the storm forces. Or just something simple like a blade falling off the propeller on your way up the Red Sea, but potentially just as serious. There is a popular book on marine electrical systems, and unfortunately the name escapes me at the moment. It is head and shoulders better than any other I have read, so if anyone else out there can provide a name please sing out. The book explains very clearly the challenges involved in protecting a boat, tables for calculating the correct size of anodes, how and why to insulate your electrical system, shorepower, etc, etc. There is even a section on electrocution of swimmers in the water. There are "purists" in the boating industry. Controversy generates publicity, which generates sales. I recall some famous sailors/authors that advocated no engines in the boat. I have also heard from others that it is not uncommon to hear these same sailors/authors on the radio asking for a tow into harbor when the wind dies. There is a cost to being a purist. If you are building a boat without any dissimilar metals you will likely increase costs and/or decrease reliability. I would put in the best materials for the price, with an eye to avoiding/isolating dissimilar metals, not eliminating them. I've never replaced/repaired a shaft or rudder pintles. The shaft is monel, the rudder pins monel, and the prop bronze. The are no marks on the shaft, no marks on the rudder pins and the prop shows no pink, and no sharp edges. 70 lbs of zinc lasts about 5 years. Then you have about 50% left and it is time for replacement. I think I pay about $2/lb for the big anodes, the ones they weld on fishboats, so maybe $30/year. Cheap insurance. In any case, I would install anodes. Even if every piece of the boat is mild steel, you still have electricity on board and the possibility of other boats around you. If the anodes are never used, great. If they are, great. If you don't have them and some beaten up tuna boat anchors alongside leaking power into the water, not great. The strategy I adopted for anodes is this: Our original anodes were welded on. However, replacing welded anodes requires a welder, and damages the paint. We ended up welding 3/4" SS bolts to the hull to attach the anodes. No everyone likes this solution, because you need to make sure the bolts are tight or you risk losing the electrical connection. No connection, false sense of security. Bolt onto a hole in the steel strap on the zinc, not onto the zinc itself. I put a big wrench on the nuts and tighten them until they cut deeply into the metal strap. When leaving a metal boat for an expended period more than a few boats hang zincs over the size on a heavy wire, clamped to the stanchions or a reliable point on the hull. One of the boats beside me in Malaysia was painted under the waterline with Zinca after a blast. Lots of $$, and the owner didn't bother to coat over the Zinca. They had been told no paint was required, the zinca was just as good as bottom paint. Saw the same boat two years later, and the owner was planning to reblast and repaint. They were not happy. I guess what I am trying to say is that there is no "magic bullet". Preparation is the key to success, and then most paint systems will give a good result. Any paint system that is significantly different than conventional systems should be approached with caution and researched carefully. The "best" paint is usually the paint that is best know in the local area, that the most people have had the most success with, for the best price We often use Jotun because it is 1/2 the price of International in Malaysia/Thailand. International might be slightly better, but not 2 times better, so most people use Jotun in that area. Hope this isn't too confusing. greg 1764 From: Date: Thu Jun 5, 2003 5:12pm Subject: Re: 40 Foot plans for sale Hi Glen, If you have not selected a pattern, we can adapt just about any set of lines to an origami pattern. We 2 - 50 foot designs currently sailing, a 60 footer under construction, and a 55 footer under commission. You may find our triple dart patterns open up a number of shapes and designs not previously available. http://www.easysoftwareinc.com/Design/Genoa55.htm thanks, Greg 1765 From: Luis Barros Date: Tue Jun 3, 2003 7:44am Subject: C-Flex What's the best material to build a boat, C-Flex or plywood-fiber/epoxy? Thank You Luis Barros NJ 1766 From: Luis Barros Date: Mon Jun 2, 2003 2:51pm Subject: C-flex construction I built a plywood boat before and now I'm thinking in building another one using c-flex, it's c-flex good material to build a boat? Its better the plywood/fiber-epoxy? Thank You Luis Barros Riverside New Jersey, USA 1767 From: schwartzritter13 Date: Tue Jun 3, 2003 6:36am Subject: Flatbottom sailing skiff I am a welder interested in building a flat-bottom sailing skiff of steel. I found plans for an aluminum working skiff in an old welding projects book. Can anyone offer me advice on how to use steel and rig for sail? 1769 From: burr.halpern@a... Date: Thu Jun 5, 2003 7:18pm Subject: Re: C-Flex C-flex is a pretty dated material for building a oneoff. It produces an unneccessarily heavy hull (and weight in and of itself does nothing good for a sailboat) and does not produce as sturdy a hull some alternative methods. In recent Naval Academy test results, a high density foam cored vinylester resin/no mat fiberglass laminate was shown to have the highest puncture resistance per pound and by dollar. This could be further enhansed by adding Kevlar to the outer laminates at a higher cost. If properly constructed, fiberglass sheathed epoxy saturated cold molded plywood (which is not the same as sheet plywood) is thought to offer the longest durabilty and greatest stiffness per pound and dollar. Jeff 1770 From: richytill Date: Fri Jun 6, 2003 10:31am Subject: Re: Electrolysis I bored out the UHMW bushings for the pintles and left the outer surface rough and hairy just as it came out of the hole saw. The rough surface allowed for bonding with Sikaflex (Belzona Rubber etc.) Seems like a good fit. rt 1771 From: nelstomlinson Date: Fri Jun 6, 2003 11:11am Subject: Re: C-Flex I'm sure that the Naval Academy did good science, but I'm not sure their results are very relevant to the backyard builder. Is the ``high density foam cored vinylester resin/no mat fiberglass laminate'' well suited to backyard conditions? C-flex is not terribly unsuited to that, and that's about the only good thing you can say about it. I helped build a c-flex hull around '79, in a boatbuilding class. The hull we built has been well maintained, and is still in the water and in use today. The nature of the material is such that you wind up with a very resin-rich laminate, and, as Mr. Halpern says, an unnecessarily heavy hull. On the other hand, the material is accessible to the amateur, and the work goes quickly, as fiberglass goes. You do pay a premium for the convenience, as I recall. The fancy, foam cored, high-technology approach too often requires the sort of equipment and quality control measures which are doable in a factory setting, and not really doable in your backyard. It's quite possible that the Naval Academy would have gotten very different results if they had had the midshipmen's mothers make up the test samples in their garages, in their spare time. I'm sure that steel would look very poorly on a strength-to-weight basis, compared to the Naval Academy's winner. On a strength-to-cost basis, if you add in the builder's equipment costs, steel might look a bit better. If you were comparing homebuilt samples of the materials, I think it's a safe bet that a dozen sheets of steel would give better consistency than a dozen sheets of home-assembled laminate. My point is that what's best for a factory which will amortize enormous equipment costs over hundreds or even thousands of hulls may not be at all good for an amateur who will build exactly one hull. Another question would be: ``After how many years will the material retain its integrity?''. Steel, IF protected from rust and electrolysis, will probably outlast me. We may not know all the problems which could attack the laminate, nor how to protect it from all of them. Furthermore, the plastics in the laminate may age even if protected. I think, if you had your heart set on NOT building a metal boat, that plywood covered with epoxy and glass might be a good alternative to metal for an amateur. The folks on the Badger owner builders group might be a better bunch than us to ask this question of. Mr. Barros, you will find them here: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BadgerOwnerBuilders/ Hope this helps, Nels 1772 From: Alex and Kim Christie Date: Fri Jun 6, 2003 11:20am Subject: origami skiffs Here is a fellow employing a kind of origami-style technique to build plywood skiffs. I believe Glen-L has an outboard skiff using this technique as well, yielding compound curves in the bow sections, and hard chine sections aft. http://www.liteboats.com/ Alex 1773 From: Date: Fri Jun 6, 2003 2:36pm Subject: Re: Re: C-Flex I think Nels has made some very good points. The origami technique is well suited to amateur construction because it can give perfectly acceptable results without the need for fabrication facilities and techniques not normally available to the amateur builder. If a composite structure yields the best strength to cost, should we not be seeing composite freighters, tankers, and aircraft carriers? If I was commissioning a ship and the yard said "we can do it stronger, lighter, and cheaper in composite", why would I go with steel? Commercial interests would go the cheaper route to yield increased profits. Warships would go with composites if only for the stealth value. Since they all seem to be built in steel, with alloy superstructures on performance warships, maybe there is something more to the story. Think of the dump trucks you see on the road. Locally they have all replaced the steel boxes with alloy boxes. This is to reduce weight, save on fuel and increase the effective load of the truck. The same thing can be done with boats, and left unpainted the life cycle costs of alloy are not significantly greater than steel. One of our 50 footers was actually build out of alloy dump truck beds. The owner was able to get an order of 3/8 dump truck beds, which he used to build the boat hull. Actually, it was a great choice because they use 5000 series marine alloys in the dump trucks. The Genoa 55 will use the same material. Think of that. A hull strong enough to be used in the bed of a dump truck. How many FG boats can make that claim? If you have ever watched a dump truck being loaded with boulders you know the beating the material takes. It isn't a whole lot different dropping tons of boulders inside a dump truck box than running your yacht up on the bricks. When we start seeing composite dump truck boxes I'll be more believing. The ability to take the ground and survive is critical in an offshore yacht. No matter how careful you are, eventually it happens. If you sail in coral, it happens a lot quicker and more often. If your boat cannot survive coral, it isn't a great cruising boat for the tropics. Rudders are like coral magnets. There is nothing quite like the sound of the rudder being pounded on a coral head at anchor to ruin your sleep. The force of a swell picking you up and dropping the rudder on a coral head is fantastic. Shakes the fillings out of your teeth. The Bones rings like a huge church bell with you inside. Bong, Bong, Bong. Design your rudder to take the full weight of the boat, because eventually it will have to. greg elliott yacht lazy bones 1774 From: pvanderwaart Date: Fri Jun 6, 2003 3:34pm Subject: Re: C-Flex I don't have any experience with C-flex, so I can't speak about that, but I do have experience with questions, and I do have opinions about them. Questions always arise in a context, and on a forum like this we often have to guess at the context of the question when we formulate an answer. In this case, we don't know anything about the asker's skills with different materials, or his comfort level with boats made of various materials, etc. So, "Is C-flex a good way to build a boat?" may be comparing C-Flex to all boat-building materials, or to all amateur boat-building methods, or it may be what seems to be the best fiberglass option. It is not easy for an amateur to build a round-bottom, fiberglass boat. C-flex is one way. Wood cores, e.g. stip planking, are another. (The question of what is a fiberglass-covered wood boat, and what is a wood-cored fiberglass boat can be left to another day.) Finally, as an aside, I would not that many designers would consider that steel construction leads to an unnecessarily heavy boat in the below 40' sizes. Making that complaint about C-flex on this forum seems to me a little bit of the pot calling the kettle black. Peter 1775 From: Date: Fri Jun 6, 2003 6:41pm Subject: what is the right size of boat for me? I hope the group will not mind if I put forward a few opinions. There are no wrong answers on this topic. My purpose is to help you get going and decide what size of boat to build. What is the right size of boat for me? An opinion for displacement monohulls only. Intended use - offshore cruising. Mixed male/female crew. There can be a wide variation in the amount of room available in any two different boats of the same length. I find that a better measurement when choosing a boat is displacement - which can be seen as the ability to carry weight (people, gear, food, water, fuel, spares, etc). Boats designed for the dock are typically short and beamy to minimize dock fees and maximize accommodations. Boats designed for offshore are typically long and narrow to maximize performance. It is not unusual to find a 40-45 foot dock boat with the same interior space as a 50 foot offshore boat. Boats with the same interior space will tend to have similar displacements, regardless of length (there are lots of exceptions). You will find that costs are often more closely related to displacement than length. There is obviously some increase in costs to build at 50 over 45 simply because the boat is longer. However, a 20 ton boat requires a certain strength of gear to match, regardless if the boat is 45 or 50 feet long. Also, there are design tricks to make boats longer to raise the selling price, without actually making the boat any bigger. For extended offshore cruising I recommend you choose a boat in the range of 4-8 tons of displacement per person. To me 2 tons per person is like driving a camper van. Easy to learn, and good for weekending and summer holidays. 4 tons per person is like living in an average sized motorhome/caravan. Easy to handle with practice, but a bit cramped after a 6 months. 8 tons per person is like driving the big stern pusher motorhomes - the full sized diesel bus conversions. Almost as comfortable as living in a house, but also requires more experience to handle. The choice of crew will affect these numbers. A hardened male crew can survive on a yacht that will result in instant divorce for a married couple. Also, over the years the size of boats out cruising has increased with the increased use of short handed gear such as roller furling. When we first started 39 feet was one of the biggest boats in the fleet - now we are one of the smallest. It could well be that over the next few years 8 tons per person will be considered small. greg elliott yacht lazy bones 1776 From: Michael Casling Date: Fri Jun 6, 2003 8:15pm Subject: Re: Re: C-Flex So the dump truck boxes are built of alloy and the chassis is made of steel and a surboard is made of foam and plastic and a Formula 1 car is made of composites and the plane that flew around the world non stop is made of composites and our stock trailer is steel and my next boat will be alloy and the next one plywood and I already have an inflatable and a plastic boat. So what was your point? You design boats for alloy and steel? Your conclusion for a building material is based on what they make trucks out of? And your next post suggests a boat requiring 4 tons per person when an 8000 pound boat will easily carry two people anywhere they want to go. I guess the Hiscocks were not aware of that fact when they first went sailing. This being an Origami site with a lot of good discussion I really do not want to press the issue too much as alloy and steel seem to be the best suited for that approach. I will agree that the original question about C Flex was posted on the wrong board, just like the floatation discussion. If a power boat builder still held true to the heavier is better they would be out of business as Bayliner and others have proven them wrong wrong wrong. The same thing happened to the auto industry. Remember when tanks were the desired form of transportation. I can not agree that heavy is better, I will agree that the origami method has a lot of appeal and though it produces a heavier boat it is not excessive. You point about rudders is well taken but the aversion for thin water to test the strength may require more input. When I was about 16 I think I could be described as an amateur with respect to foam and plastic having never touched the stuff. Yet when my buddy and I decided to take up surfing we were able to shape a piece of foam and cover it with cloth and resin and glue a skeg on, and go surfing the following week. The boards lasted a long time. BC Mike C 1777 From: Date: Sat Jun 7, 2003 2:20am Subject: Re: Re: C-Flex Hi Mike, Some people confuse weight with displacement. You will recall I wrote: >> I find that a better measurement when choosing a boat is displacement - which can be seen as the ability to carry weight (people, gear, food, water, fuel, spares, etc). << Weight in a ballasted yacht is never to be wished for, except as ballast. Heavier is definitely not better. The ability to take on weight in the form of fresh water, fuel, people, gear, stores and spares without compromising the handling and safety of the boat is what I am talking about. Many of the pioneers in modern offshore cruising were exceptional people. You will recall I wrote: >> When we first started 39 feet was one of the biggest boats in the fleet - now we are one of the smallest. It could well be that over the next few years 8 tons per person will be considered small. << People that live in houses take for granted many of the simple pleasures. The simple pleasures that disappear when you go cruising aboard a yacht. These are the big ones: 1. fresh water. 2. refrigeration/freezer. 3. electricity. Go to the tropics and tell your next ex-wife that for the next year the only shower she is going to get will be in salt water, or standing outside when it rains. No cold drinks, no ice, and no fans at night when it is hot and she can't sleep. No fresh food, no frozen food. Every meal out of a can unless you catch some fish and she doesn't get seasick from the smell. Now tell her that she can have the comforts of home because you have a boat that can carry the weight. Who is going to go cruising and who is going to stay home? You will recall I wrote: >> The choice of crew will affect these numbers. A hardened male crew can survive on a yacht that will result in instant divorce for a married couple. << There are people that can sail under conditions that will demoralize and break most of us over time. These people are exceptional and the Hiscocks are certainly among them. They are the people we read about because they are the exceptions. Stories about average people don't sell very well. As you recall I wrote: >> There are no wrong answers on this topic. << Please you not cut up my email and include it as part of your own. It is confusing and misleading the way your email is written. A reader could easily be misled to think I wrote statements that were in fact written by yourself. Why not write something that can stand on its own? Why piggy-back on my work? Tell us what you consider to be the correct size of yacht for yourself and why. Then, calculate the answer using the number of people, duration of trip, and the gear you want to take. Calculate the supplies and spare, and allow sufficient reserve. Then calculate the weight and come up with the minimum displacement of yacht likely to be able to carry this load safely. I think you will find the results an eye opener. I've done some of the work for you in the PS. If you get stuck I'm here to help out. regards greg ps: From the GVRD: The average person in the Greater Vancouver Regional District uses approximately 340 liters of water per day around the home." This would be 44,000 lbs of water for a couple on a trip from Vancouver to Hawaii, with very little reserve. You cannot fit 44,000 lbs of fresh water safely in the typical 8,000 lb yacht. Thus, you need to ration. Lubbers can find water rationing a BIG shock when they move aboard. The amount of water they use ashore compared to the amount available afloat. In the tropics the minimum requirement is 4 liters per person per day for drinking alone. Cooking and washing say another 4 liters per day per person. Most people will need practice to maintain these numbers if they use fresh water for anything other than drinking. A 1 month passage for 2 people, with 50% reserve is 1600 lbs of water. Adding 1600 lbs of water to an 8000 lb boat will be close to the limit for the boat, with no reserve capacity to carry people, gear, stores, or spares. So, we cannot allow bathing or washing in fresh. Use the juice from your canned food to do the cooking. Select the correct canned food to match any dry foods being eaten. To take that boat from Vancouver to Hawaii you cannot use fresh water except for drinking. Cut back to 800 lbs of water (80 gallons) which is probably close to the size of FW tanks anyway. Pray for rain and make sure you have a good rain catcher. The list goes on and on of things you would like to have, but can only have if your boat can carry the weight. Refrigerator, freezer, generator, tv, video player, tools, spares, more tools, more spares, paint, glue, clothing, medicine. Towels. You can never have too many towels aboard a boat. Food. radios, binoculars, GPS, charts, computer and electronic charts, knotlog, sounder, compass and spare. Spare GPS or sextant for those of us that learned to use one and still have the tables and almanac. Extra house battery. solar panels. fenders, lifejackets, flares, horn. Floodlight, ladder, pole. books, books, and more books. Rope, chain, anchors, line, sails, sails and more sails. Sewing machine. liferaft. more spares. How about a spare outboard engine and spare dinghy. You've just spent all this time getting out to the islands, and your dinghy is lost. How are you going to get to shore. Your dinghy engine quits and all you have is an inflatable. You can't row these against the wind or tide, what are you going to do? Go to the store? You can' t because the nearest store is 3 months round trip. Your trip to the South Pacific that you have spend planning all these years is ruined. How about a SCUBA compressor, tanks and other diving gear for 2 people. You came all this way out to the islands and want to go diving, but can't fill your tanks without a compressor. Your anchor fouls at 90 feet. How are you going to get it without SCUBA gear. Are you going to break off your $1000 anchor and chain and leave it behind? Do you have enough spares anchors to do this? I picked up a really nice 40 lb Bruce and 500 feet of 3/8 chain one night in the Great Barrier Reef. We were anchored for the night, a squall came in and popped our anchor. I had a heck of a time getting the anchor up as we drifted merrily through the coral in the pitch blackness. When it came aboard there was a complete anchor and chain wrapped around my anchor. It had fouled us when I set the anchor, as a result we broke free during the squall. Getting back to the anchorage in the dark, thru the coral is another story. One of my sailing buddies has a great story about spare anchors. He was on a Moorings Charter in the Caribbean, and every morning they call in on the radio to see if anyone needs anything. On the third morning one of the boats called in to say they needed some more of "those anchor things". They had been anchoring faithfully every night just like they were instructed, and in the morning letting go the bitter end and sailing away. When they got the instructions on how to anchor, no one told them to bring the anchor up afterwards. I am assured this is a true story. I just can't see how the anchor got from the Caribbean to Oz. A Cyclone is on the way. Do you have sufficient spare anchors, chain and warps to hold the boat, or will it be lost? Do you have sufficient fuel to motor 500-1000 miles? Fuel saved us from a cyclone that claimed 2 other yachts between New Caledonia and Australia. We were becalmed as the cyclone was forming up. There was no weather warning. We motored out from under it, just because the ocean didn't feel right to me. I can't describe it except to say that when I looked out on the ocean after the wind died the hair stood up on the back of my neck. I had a real strong feeling we were in deep KimChee. I didn't turn the engine off for 5 days, arriving with 5 liters of fuel to spare, shaken but not stirred. We were so lucky on that one. Only having 5 liters of fuel reserve served as a warning. While in Oz I added another 150 liters of fuel tanks and another 200 liters of water tanks. 1778 From: Date: Sat Jun 7, 2003 9:45am Subject: Hi Alex, many thanks for the welcome and words of support. I am familiar with the Silva Bay school. After a series of co-incidences I ended up taking some letters of introduction for the school to Brunei, Island of Borneo. The school at the time was interested in teaching boat building in Brunei. I never heard back, but I attributed this to the fact that I was off on another adventure. We would be very happy to get together with you and review the designs and look at some of the boats. Jean Marc is always out sailing in his boat, and almost impossible to find. Harvey's boat is in the Comox area, and last year we sailed over to Lasquiti to see Carl's boat under construction. I think this would spark your interest if we could repeat it. I'm currently in N. Vancouver, but relocating to Lake Cowichan to begin construction of the Genoa 55. We are expanding to accommodate this rather massive boat and plan to have the plate in place mid July, all things going to plan. This is quite a project for us, and for the origami concept in general. Our triple dart designs - I've take to using the word dart in place of chine because I think it better describes the construction. The triple dart boats are designed somewhat differently than our previous boats. When we introduced the triple dart, we did away with the traditional 10 station method of boat design. Starting from the frames outward made no sense on these boats, so we stopped doing it. Instead, we start from the skin inward, laying out the hull the way we want it to appear. We image this in 3-D and rotate it looking for any "hidden surprises". Hard points, hollows, etc. If we find any, we adjust the lines and try again. I'm not talking about knuckles around the darts. These and all the other lines are automatically faired by the computer. What we find is that when we design a hull it can look fantastic from just about every angle, but if you rotate the hull, from one particular point of view it might look a little strange. Normally you might never see this problem, until one day you walk by the boat on the hard, or the boat is heeled over at a particular angle, or you hang your head over the railing at a particular angle. We don't want those surprises in the hull. We don't want anyone to say "yes, it is a bit rough, but look at how quickly it went together". We want you to say "yes, that is a sweet looking boat, and I can't believe how quickly it went together". After this process is completed, and we are satisfied with the shape we "slice" the hull to put in the 10 stations and waterline automatically, and run all the standard design numbers against the hull to make sure it will work the way we want. If not, we adjust the lines and darts and try again from the beginning until we finally get a hull that will do the job. At that point the design is plotted and folded in paper to make sure it looks good and to catch any silly mistakes. The cabin, cockpit, rudder and keel are added to suite the owners requirements. Everything is again rotated in 3-D and adjustments made until we are happy. General interior layouts can be added to suit the owners tastes, and the boat is ready for building. As you can see, even computerized the design of these boats is a time consuming process. We do not charge for this time when we build custom designs, we build them to an agreed price. We recoup our costs by selling your custom design to other builders as stock plans. To anyone considering doing their own designs in with paper and scissors, my advice is simply this. Don't use the results to build a boat. We built thousands of paper models before we computerized and they all had the same problem. A boat that folds fair in paper at 1/24 can look terrible full sized in metal. The problem is that at full size you want to be within about 1/8" to keep everything looking fair and smooth. Working at 1/24 this works out to be about the width of a human hair. You cannot achieve this with paper and scissors. Thus, when you build you boat at full scale, it will look rough, no matter how careful you are in the building. Even the smallest change in a pattern affects the whole boat. The process of designing hulls from the patterns inward to the hulls is complicated enough that we were never able to solve the problem. Instead we model the boats from the finished boat back to the patterns. In effect we "unzip" a finished hull along the darts, to get the patterns. There is no guess work in this part of the process. If you are going to spend thousands of dollars and quite a bit of your own time to build a boat, start out with a the most accurate pattern you can get. Then, the only variable in the building is the time and care you take. You will not be limited by the accuracy of the patterns. If you have a boat in paper that you like, we can computerize the hull and generate a pattern that will be accurate at full scale. This can be single, double, triple, or more darts as you desire. V hull or flat, makes no difference. We can check the numbers, and show you on the computer what the boat will look like from every angle, before you spend a $ on metal. If anyone has any further questions I'd be happy to answer them. I will be taking advantage of Alex's kind offer in the next few days to post more information on our designs and prices. thanks again, Greg Elliott Easy Software Inc. 1990 Casano Drive North Vancouver, BC Canada V7J 2R2 tel: (604) 987-0050 fax:(253) 550-6928 email: greg@e... 1779 From: prairiemaidca Date: Sat Jun 7, 2003 2:22pm Subject: Paint Hi All: I'm following the paint talk with much intrest. It would seem that metal boats and paint will always bring up many opinions about what and what not to use. I'm very curious about the bitumastic type of paint. Can someone give me the names of some suppliers and is bitumastic a brand name or is it a type of paint? Thanks Martin (Prairie Maid) 1780 From: Date: Sat Jun 7, 2003 6:36pm Subject: Re: Paint Hi Martin I believe "bitumastic" is a one part coal tar. From checking on the Internet it looks like lots of companies supply "bitumastic". The paint I used was from Labuan. It was thick, black, sticky and labeled "bitumastic". It was for the oil industry, to protect steel underwater. The paint remained slightly pliable when cured. Sort of like road tar. It definitely was not hard like coal tar epoxy. I should qualify my remarks about bitumastic. I did not use this paint on blasted steel. It was used to recoat and repair over top of epoxy inside the hull, and for temporary repairs under the waterline. Keep in mind this work was done in 30+C weather. In colder weather the bitumastic may not set fast enough to be used between tides, or may give different results all together. My reason for using the bitumastic was to find a cheap, simple, easy to use system to maintain the paint where blasting was not an option, and where it was difficult to get the steel perfectly clean. I was very happy with the results. On less than perfect surfaces I will continue to use bitumastic rather than an epoxy because it is easier to use and seems to last longer. I believe that this is because a pliable paint can give a bit, while a hard paint will crack, due to expansion of the rust. Bitumastic bleeds thru, so it is not suitable for overcoating with a color coat. On blasted steel I would go with an epoxy paint system. hope this helps. If anyone has more information on one part coal tar, and the contrast with coal tar epoxies, I would appreciate learning more as well. Greg 1781 From: Date: Sat Jun 7, 2003 10:40pm Subject: Re: Paint http://www.paintideas.com/glossary.asp?wordid=249 Bitumastic A protective coating made primarily for waterproofing. A coal tar or asphalt based coating material usually used in thick films. g 1782 From: Stephen Wandling Date: Sat Jun 7, 2003 10:53pm Subject: Re: Paint Here in BC they use a black, tar like substance on the tow boats. The name I know is "Ace of Spades". Is that in the bitumastic family? 1783 SPAM 1784 From: jonhackett44 Date: Sun Jun 8, 2003 9:58pm Subject: Stern tube material Hey gang, Getting ready to install a diesel. Is there a preferred stern tube material? I'm leaning toward two inch, schedule 80 pipe, milled to accept a standard two inch cutlass bearing. Any thoughts? Also, I noticed in the "plans" for my 36 footer, a half inch by two inch "breastbone" extending from the bottom of the anchor well, along the centerline, to an unknown point. Does anyone know how far aft this extends on a twin keeler? Thanks Jon 1785 From: T.H. & V.D. Cain Date: Mon Jun 9, 2003 1:24am Subject: RE: Paint The single pack bitumastic material appears in Oz as underbody coating for vehicles, sometimes called sound deadening paint, sometimes called Duraseal. This material is a challenge to apply in an even film, nearly impossible to control the thickness as it is sort-of stringy and likes to be warmed before application. For its intended uses, this feature is not an issue. This material will shrink over a very long period as the volatiles and plasticisers permeate out of the dried coating. No idea how this feature behaves in wet environments. Some car and truck dealers will arrange this coating on a new vehicle at extra cost. To put it on older units requires a major cleaning preparation, but not abrasive blasting of course. Re my previous comments on the life of epoxies: The data sheet for the resins not in the paint mix says:- Shelf Life: UNLIMITED. (source --- Estikos epoxy systems manual) A paint chemist is really the person to comment on the time before expiry questions. The variables between the mixes and types of amine, amine-adduct, polyamide, etc. and the pigmentation or thickeners used is likely to be well beyond us users without that knowledge. Terry 1786 From: Date: Mon Jun 9, 2003 8:40am Subject: Re: Paint Thanks Tony, There was an Oz registered vessel, Chimbu that sat for many years for sale after the owner died. It was painted inside with a black lumpy paint that sounds very much like what you are describing. I inspected the boat a few years back and the bilges were in better shape than the exterior paint. The problem for me has always been what to paint over less than perfect steel. It is often said that steel boats rust from the inside out. For me the reason is that it is impractical to blast inside a finished boat, thus it is impossible to get the steel clean enough to use on of the high tech and high priced epoxies with any degree of success. I can be a real heart breaker to spend a week lying in the bilges in 30+ temperatures, chipping and scraping, then spend a good bit of the cruising kitty on paint, only to see it start to fail in short order. My "solution" was to use low tech, cheap bitumastic. Something that is not sold as a "marine" paint, rather as a paint used to protect something else like sewer pipes, oil rigs, automobiles, etc. Yacht = $$, so if you can find a paint sold to another industry you might just get a break on price. It is ugly looking stuff, but down in the bilges that is not a drama. Ugly as it might be, it looks a whole lot better than rust. If someone else has a "solution" the problem of yachts rusting from the inside out I suspect everyone would like to hear. I know I would certainly appreciate any advice that might be out there. Even the very best epoxy applied to blasted steel eventually can/will fail, and I find the bilges the hardest place to repair. greg ps: I have received email suggesting that "bitumastic" is often not "bitumastic". True bitumastic has been banned in many application because it is toxic. As a result, many companies have come out with non-toxic formulas, but still use the name "bitumastic" because the old formulas worked so well. This reminds me of a conversation I once had with a yard manager in San Diego. He told me they didn't start seeing pox on FG yachts until the EPA in the US mandated they change the formula to reduce toxicity. I wonder if this isn't a problem with modern paints. Many of the older, toxic formulas worked quite well and are certainly cheap when you can find them. Red Lead for example. The newer formulas many not be toxic, but they aren't cheap. In general I have found that the higher tech the paint, the cleaner you need to get the steel before painting, and the more care required during painting. I'm waiting for the paint can that says: Steel must be rusty, dirty and oily before application. After all, if the steel looked good, why would I be painting it? 1787 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Mon Jun 9, 2003 11:42am Subject: Re: Paint When I was a lad on the farm we used bituminous paint on machinery, steel gates, inside rusting galvanised water tanks and on corrugatd iron roofs. It sticks to and seals almost anything. To repair rusted corrugated iron roofs we used hessian over the holes painting before and after with the bituminous paint to seal it. We used a small long handled broom to paint roofs with, softening the hard paint with diesel or paraffin before using it again. Small rust holes in water tanks were sealed with a pointed stick hammered in the holes from inside and then painted with the bitumen. I have an old tin of CRODA HYDROCARBONS bituminous paint in my shed now, we use it for the garden gate and nail heads in wooden fences. It is classed as safe for potable water. Regards, Ted 1788 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Mon Jun 9, 2003 0:09pm Subject: Re: Electrolysis Greg, The popular book on marine electrical systems you referred to might be "Boat owner's Mechanical and Electrical Manual" by Nigel Calder ISBN 0-7136-4291-2. It is an excellent book. Regards, Ted 1789 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Mon Jun 9, 2003 0:26pm Subject: Re: Stern tube material Jon, Some people think 2" Schedule 80 is fine some think it should be a heavier machine tube. I have bought Sched 80 for mine. Brent in his book says that the tube will go oval when it is welded and to sand the cutlass bearing to fit. I wrote to Brent last year about the stem bar. Here is my mail and his reply: "Brent, Some of the drawings show a 2" x ½" stem bar. Some don't. Do you recommend a stem bar and an internal vertical central keel bar on the bilge keel version. Regards, Ted Ted I reccommend a 2X1/2 inch stem bar on all my boats from the bottom of the anchor well to about a foot below the waterline, the impact zone if you hita dock too hard .There is no need to,and no advatage to taking it further down. Brent Swain" Hope this is of use to you Jon. Regards, Ted 1790 From: Date: Mon Jun 9, 2003 1:50pm Subject: Re: Re: Electrolysis That's the one, thanks Ted! I recommend owners and builder read the book. Electrolysis is not difficult to prevent, and extremely expensive if you don't. Greg ps: To me, author's that promote metal boats without anodes are similar to author's that promote boats without engines. If you are skillful, have the right boat, and keep it in the right location, with some luck you might be able to succeed. However, for the average owner, anodes and engines are important safety devices. Controversy generates publicity, which sells books. These authors have a conflict of interests in promoting extreme positions. The problem is that as they gain popularity their readers can be led into danger. I recall a few years back we met an inexperienced couple with two small children, in a small boat, about to set out from Asia across the mid Pacific. They were planning to go right through the middle of Cyclone Alley, at a very bad time of year, and wait for wind, just because a pair of popular authors had done it that way. This was an extremely hazardous plan for these people, but they did not have the experience to recognize the risks. They did not have anything close to the skill level of the authors, and had a very high chance of meeting with mishap if they followed this course of action. They were actually very surprised to hear how dangerous their proposed passage was. What the authors had not explained was that because they did not have an engine or radar, they could not take the safer northern route, because this was through an area of calms and fog. Rather they had presented their route as the being best way to go, minimizing the risks. We knew some experienced sailors that were planning to make the same passage, but by the safer route, and were able to connect them up. Both these boats had motors, and at least one had radar, and they had a successful, and importantly, uneventful passage from Asia to North America. Keep in mind when reading personal stories from popular boating authors about their way being the right way or the only way. Many of these authors are exceptional, they sell books as a result, and what works for them doesn't always work for everyone. I see that the City of San Diego is placing anodes on their water system. And have a specification for bitumastic. http://www.sannet.gov/mwwd/general/cwpspecs/pdf/15025.pdf 1791 From: aklove2u Date: Mon Jun 9, 2003 2:07pm Subject: Paint Just to add to the already long list of paint and what paints to use. For the below mentioned reasons I'm choosing to go with Wasser paint out of Kent, WA. 1. They are a single component moisture cure urethane. no need to worry about ratios and pot life. 2. They can be applied to a moist substrate, which I have tested and found to be true. 3. They can be applied at temperatures below freezing as long as the paint is 5 degrees warmer that the dew point. Which is easy to figure just build a simple hydrometer. 4. There is no outer recoat timeframe 5. The are as tenacious as can be. As tests I've applied it to loose rust, slag, loose dirt on plate, smoke residue from welding and various other things incl. my self and the garden hose. besides the paint on myself I've not been able to get any of the other test patches to come off after over 1 year. 6. They are reasonable priced with 1 gal. zinc primer being about 55 U.S. dollars. And most of the high build and topside paint running about 50-70 U.S. dollars a gallon. 7. They have been used to paint alaskan ferrys and the golden gate bridge. Both of which live in extreme environs and are under heavy use daily. I believe there web address is wasser.com or wasserindustries.com Greg 1792 From: johm gorham Date: Mon Jun 9, 2003 4:19pm Subject: Re: Re: Electrolysis Hello,Iam sitting inLa paz.Paying mucho bucks to erace this spam.Please take me off your list...jon 1793 From: Gord Schnell Date: Mon Jun 9, 2003 11:03pm Subject: Re: Re: Stern tube material Did Brent recommend the 2"x1/2" stem bar if the bow already had an internal 1/4" doubler plate? What is an internal vertical central keel bar? Gord 1794 From: Gord Schnell Date: Mon Jun 9, 2003 11:07pm Subject: Re: Stern tube material I'm just at this point now...installing a stern tube. Am I correct in assuming that the 2"x sched.80 stern tube pipe is Stainless Steel? This could be hard to find at the local scrap dealer. Gord 1795 From: sae140 Date: Tue Jun 10, 2003 1:33pm Subject: Re: Paint In the context of the ongoing discussion regarding bitumastic paint, I'd add that 'bitumastic' paint appears to be a wide generic term and many grades of paint are sold under this name. Shortly after the war (in the 50's) this was one of the few paints readily available for the painting of exterior domestic metal work such as guttering, downpipes and gates. From memory, some grades of this paint suffered from alligator cracking if applied too thickly, and without allowing the extended drying time which is required between coats. Some bleeding of tar was also common in the summer when thick paint became exposed to direct sunlight. It was messy stuff to apply, would knacker your brushes, and was a bitch if you got some in your hair. But it protected steel well - even when applied to a dirty surface. Would thin with almost any distillate - white spirit, turps, paraffin, diesel, petrol etc. In the UK, there's a range of products sold under the "Aquaseal" brand name, mostly designed for water-proofing of roofing, creating damp-proof membranes, and similar applications. I have found this stuff useful for protecting steel, but it's not in the same league as bitumastic products. The one advantage over bitumastic is that Aquaseal is an emulsion, and as such can be applied directly to wet surfaces - indeed it can be thinned with water. When dry however, it becomes impervious to water, and can only be removed with white spirit or similar solvent. This too, is a bitch if it gets into your hair - so wear a hat if applying any of these products. If it should get into your hair - then cut the stuff out. **Never** be tempted to use petro-chem solvents around your face - I did once (when young and cavalier), and got a splash in my eyes. Blind for 24 hrs. 'nuff said. In his book "Steel Boatbuilding" (Vol 2, p.120/1), Tom Colvin makes reference to cement washes and the use of bitumastic cement in the treatment of bilge areas. A couple of years back I asked him about this 'bitumastic cement', only to find that he now uses latex cement instead - so I still don't know exactly what this 'bitumastic cement' stuff is ..... The following is Tom's reply, which I attach here as it may be useful to others: The bitumous compound that we used to use was put on at about 170° F and today would probably cause the safety board to require all kinds of precautions. Instead I use the cement, but rather than mix with water use liquid latex in lieu of water. This is the same type of latex that is used to mix up the grout used in swimming pool deck tiles. The first coat is brushable and about the consistency as thick cream. The next coating(s) are trowelled on and sand is mixed with the latex and cement. The reason for the latex is that it has better adhesion and will not shrink during the cure. On new steel, just cement and water will work but any shock loads are apt to fracture the feather edges and allow water to seep under. On pitted surfaces I do clean by wire brush, cold chisels, etc to remove all loose rust and scale. I then coat with a preparation such as OSPHO that converts rust into iron. Then the cement as above. I recently surveyed a vessel I built in the early 1960's and she has had a hard life not only in the Arctic but she also spent over 10 years in the tropics before completing her circumnavigation. All areas that were cemented in were still sound and only one frame bay below the shower showed any corrosion at the join of the cement and steel. Her cement mix was with water. I started using latex about 14 years ago as my whole house has a tile floor and happened to observe an unwashed bucket after several months exposed to the elements and full of water. NO separation and No creep. I do not believe in sand blasting the interiors of vessels because of health hazards and the mess it makes. I am aware of all the equipment available to offset the former but as a small builder cannot afford the purchase. As to the latter, there is no cure. A wheel barrow is a good example of how cement will adhere as well as preserve the metal. Most of mine have rusted from the outside in. Inasmuch as I believe in the "lifts and belt theory" I do the best as I can in preparing the metal and in doing so have no worry that my pants will fall down but still recognize that the zipper might fail and I will be referred to as an exhibitionist. With kindest regards, Tom Colvin Hope this is of interest to the debate, Colin 1796 From: sae140 Date: Tue Jun 10, 2003 3:02pm Subject: Re: Electrolysis What an extraordinary departure from truth ! Neither of the people I mentioned in a recent post 'promote' an anode-free philosophy. One - Nick Skeates - doesn't even write books (!) The other - Tom Colvin - simply mentions his own anode-free approach in passing - one single line of text within 450 pages - which hardly represents a promotion of an extreme position in order to sell a book, as you claim. Colin. 1797 From: brentswain38 Date: Tue Jun 10, 2003 3:23pm Subject: Re: Brent's Location? I just arrived back on the west coast of Vancouver island from Tonga .I once tried to write cruising stories , but they all came out technical , so I wrote a technical book to get a place tom put all that stuff . What did I learn on this trip? The bigger the furling drum, the easier it is to furl a jib in strong winds . The reason that Lavac tells you to put the head pump above the bottom of the bowl is that if the diaphragm rots out , air leaks into the head instead of water leaking out. An acrylic sail cover on a furling jib makes it a lot tougher jib .Stay away from Kiribati. Brent Swain 1798 From: brentswain38 Date: Tue Jun 10, 2003 3:43pm Subject: Re: bow roller (book vs. Plans) I started out with 6 inch wide bow rollers, but couldn't stow a couple of 55 lb delta anchors side by side on it. I changed my bow roller for an 8 inch wide one, a job that took less than an hour once the roller was made. I can now stow two 55 lb deltas side by side on the wider bow roller. Go for the wider one with an 8 by 8 inch base. Brent Swain 1799 From: Date: Tue Jun 10, 2003 6:48pm Subject: Re: Re: Electrolysis Hey Colin! The email you quoted was written in reply to Ted in reference to Nigel Calder's excellent book. My point was simple. Rely more on authoritative works like Calder's and similar to make decisions. Author's that write popular sailing books are not always the best source of information and they should not be regarded as gospel. Not every day my writing gets called extraordinary! regards, Greg ps: I don't think I referenced anything you have written. I don't recall mentioning Nick Skeates or Tom Colvin. I wouldn't claim authors were promoting extreme positions to sell books. Rather, that they have a conflict of interests in doing so. Like newspapers, we hear a certain type of story not so much because the writers promote it, but because we buy it. 1800 From: Goodnatured Date: Tue Jun 10, 2003 11:26pm Subject: Origami Approach for Semi-Displacement Hulls Much of the discussion here has been related to the origami design and construction of long distant, displacement, steel hulls. I am interested in Pacific-Northwest coastal cruising (maybe with a winter in the Baja thrown in!) on a semi-displacement type hull so that somewhat higher speeds are available to cover the large distances involved. I'd like to start a thread to solicit input from the members of this list about the suitability of using origami design and construction techniques for such a vessel. To provide a starting point I will describe "my ideal semi-displacement coastal cruiser" although clearly there are other types/looks of boat that would be classed as semi-displacement. Purpose: Spring, summer and fall cruising from Puget Sound to southern Alaska for a couple. Typically 3-6 weeks at a time. Can reprovision, take on water and fuel at least every two weeks and more often when underway north/south. 300Nm min range. Occasionally 4 people for a week at a time. Usage: At anchor every night. Occasionally ten hour days at cruising speeds of 10-11 knots but mostly 4-6 hours per day at ten knots. While underway is fun, we most enjoy the anchorages and exploring by dinghy ... so we want to make our way faster than displacement hull speeds would allow. Size: Displacement of 12,000 - 16,000 lbs (fully loaded including crew) would hopefully allow us to carry enough provisions, fuel and water to meet the stated purpose. Also, money is not unlimited so the lighter the better. Waterline line length of 32-36 feet (which implies cruising at speed-length ratios of 1.8 to 1.9) and beam of 10.5 to 12 ft. A proper design would have to determine the exact numbers but let's start the discussion here. Shape My preferred look is reminiscent of west coast workboats. Plumb bow and fine entry will maximize waterline length and reduce pounding when heading into a seaway. Wider and flatter stern than a displacement hull, with transom slightly underwater - an underwater body appropriate to operating at these higher speed-length ratios. Pilot house, flush decks forward (to maximize interior space), walkout to swim platform on stern. Material Unfortunately I think that steel would be too heavy so I assume that aluminum is the material to be used. Engine Single diesel engine that can provide power needed to cruise at elevated speed-length ratios but also can be throttled back to long distance hull speed operation without problems. Keel Protection for the prop and rudder would come from a central keel. I also really like the idea of twin keels in addition to the central keel. This would allow the vessel to be beached for cleaning and frequent underbody checks. I would also expect them to provide additional passive roll dampening at cruising speed and especially at anchor (where we spend more time than underway!). So ... the initial questions are: 1. Is the origami design and construction approach appropriate for such a vessel? 2. Would there be much cost saving (to build hull, deck and superstructure ie. the aluminum intensive construction part) with an origami approach? 3. These days conventional aluminum developed plate on frame welded construction can take advantage of CNC cutting to reduce costs - does this significantly reduce the cost differential between the two approaches and am I likely to find a builder who would pass on the cost savings to me? 4. Are twin keels appropriate for semi-displacement boats? 5. Pat Bray suggests that twin keels reduce the wave making resistance by partially canceling the stern wave and giving a flatter wake (http://www.brayyachtdesign.bc.ca/html/twinkeels.html). Is this also true at speed-length ratios approaching 2.0? 5. Are there any designers who are applying origami techniques to semi-displacement hulls or would I be breaking new ground? I'm sure there will be more questions as the discussion unfolds. Doug Chapman Saltspring Island, BC Canada 1801 From: sae140 Date: Wed Jun 11, 2003 1:45am Subject: Re: Electrolysis Greg. Re: The email I quoted. As you well know, you are of course correct regarding the thread itself. However - please show me any reference within the thread you quote to an author promoting the idea of metal boats without anodes. This is very clearly a back-reference to an earlier post I made regarding 2 individuals who have successfully lived without anodes for decades. Unlike yourself, I am neither promoting nor rubbishing this idea. Greg, yet again (1,2) you are twisting facts in order to "make points" or win the ensuing arguments which in turn arise only because of your initial dogmatic approach. Which is a pity, for you're clearly a person with much first-hand experience which I believe is of interest to many. Incidently, when I wrote "extraordinary departure from truth" I was trying to politely point out that by twisting facts, yet another of your posts lacks integrity. And I say "politely", for I have no wish to start a flame war ... It is not so much the points you make (content), so much as the way you make them (process), which I am criticising. Regards Colin (1) > From the GVRD: The average person in the Greater Vancouver Regional District uses approximately 340 liters of water per day around the home." > This would be 44,000 lbs of water for a couple on a trip from Vancouver to Hawaii, with very little reserve. C'mon Greg ... this is a blatantly dishonest use of statistics, and using such figures doesn't add *anything* to your argument, for "... around the home" means just that: flush toilets, baths, washing machines, hosepipes, lawn-sprinklers, washing the car etc. - none of which exist on the sort of boats you're describing. (2) " To anyone considering doing their own designs in with paper and scissors, my advice is simply this. Don't use the results to build a boat. We built thousands of paper models before we computerized and they all had the same problem. A boat that folds fair in paper at 1/24 can look terrible full sized in metal." But you're selecting a size which suits your argument, which is in turn based largely on the size used ..... Circularity. A common but discredited rhetorical device. Build your model at 1/12 instead, enlarge any doubtful areas using a photocopier in order to take measurements, and it's a different story. 1802 From: T.H. & V.D. Cain Date: Wed Jun 11, 2003 2:28am Subject: RE: Paint Greg., I just had to respond to this one, especially the last line !!! What a good line ! Perhaps you should register that theme before some hi-tech outfit uses it to sell something. I also had a conversation in similar vein with a paint rep. who was looking at our Adams 40 when it was in the early stages of adding to the basic black hull. We had put on a holding primer (no abrasive blasting at that stage) of Zinc Chromate - Yellow, and it was intact and doing the job nicely. He looked at the hull and remarked "That's off the market now --- too toxic for general use" . I said " But it works doesn't it?" "Many things that work and last are no longer available" was his reply. Now we all? realise that as knowledge of consequential effects increases, we have to cease using some products in the interest of preservation of the species and its environment. What I would like is someone to reassure me that this was in fact the real issue, and not a drive to increase consumption of a recent product. If the real issue was the debris and its distribution or persistence in the environment when we blasted the hull to that lovely marcasite finish before zinc priming, then we could take the necessary steps to control that process. Instead, what happens is that the material is banned in the interest of the greater good. I guess that that is the safest way. Terry 1803 From: Red Green Date: Wed Jun 11, 2003 7:29am Subject: Re: Re: Brent's Location? Welcome back Brent. Sounds like the trip was very informative for you. Good to be home for a bit though, Eh? Look forward to hearing more from you at origamiboats disscussion central. Regards, Danny O' 1804 From: Michael Casling Date: Wed Jun 11, 2003 8:13am Subject: Re: Re: C-Flex Greg, I guess I touched a hot button with my reference to aluminum in trucks and your choice of building material, and I do not question you for defending your postition. You have experience and knowledge which are nice assetts. What would help is if you could present that with out trying to make the listener appear to be a moron. Also you raise so many points in one message that you appear to want to bury the reader with info and ideas. I can not and will not address all the issues you have raised in one e-mail. But to hilight a couple of the points you raised. ( Confusing weight with displacement ). Tough accusation against someone who has quite a few years of boating. I will stick with David Gerr's book on the subject and my own knowledge and be comfortable with that. ( Piggy back on your designs ) Furthest thing from my mind. ( Draw my own boat ) Did that 21 years ago it is 36 feet LOA 30 feet LWL 11 feet beam, 11000 pound displacement, 5' 9 " draft 4000 pound ballast, 50 foot mast keel stepped 14 foot boom. ( Water, 44000 pounds of water required from Vancouver to Hawaii. You wrote it ) Maybe a statement to the effect. " Have you given consideration to the amount of water required ? " Now isn't that a bit more user friendly? Would you like to know the amount of water we use in South East Kelowna where 96 percent of it goes on the ground? ( Cut up e-mail ) I aggree that a dividing line would have helped. ( Your next ex wife ) What an unfortunate choice of words. Sounds personel doesn't it? Almost implies that I already have one or more ex wives already, and if I do not follow your advice I will have another ex wife. Again, you wrote it. It all started with a question on C flex that Jeff answered in a fine manner. Michael Casling in Kelowna BC 1805 From: kwing175 Date: Wed Jun 11, 2003 9:01am Subject: Design Comparisons Group, This link, http://www.image-ination.com/sailcalc.html, provides comparison of several design ratios between approx. 1,100 sailboats. If someone supplies the required data for the Brent Swain designs comparisons to similar vessels could be made. The data required is LOA,LWL,Beam,Dsiplacement and Sail area. Regards, Keith 1806 From: Edward Stone Date: Wed Jun 11, 2003 1:26pm Subject: Re: Re: Stern tube material Gord, I don't know about the ¼" doubler plate. Brent is back now and may be able to help when he has got this far in the messages. An internal vertical central keel bar is like a stem bar but is along the inside of the bottom of the boat. Regards, Ted 1807 From: Edward Stone Date: Wed Jun 11, 2003 1:33pm Subject: Re: Re: Brent's Location? Welcome back Brent. What was wrong at Kiribati? Regards, Ted 1808 From: Gord Schnell Date: Wed Jun 11, 2003 9:20pm Subject: Re: Re: Stern tube material OK Ted. Purpose of the central keel bar is? Gord 1809 From: Edward Stone Date: Thu Jun 12, 2003 1:16am Subject: Re: Re: Stern tube material Gord, The vertical central keel bar is part of the frame on framed boats the same as longitudinal stringers and chine bars. Some boats have them and some don't. I think I got the name from " Elements of Boat Strength" by Dave Gerr ISBN 0-7136-5287-X Regards, Ted 1810 From: Gord Schnell Date: Thu Jun 12, 2003 4:40pm Subject: Re: Re: Stern tube material Thanks Ted. I'll research that. To the best of my knowledge, origami boats don't employ them. Gord 1811 From: Date: Thu Jun 12, 2003 4:46pm Subject: Re: Paint Hi Terry I've told that joke so many times over the years that the wife and kids have threatened to do me bodily harm if they ever hear it again. Luckily I have a new group of victims. I can't remember where I stole it from. A stand-up comedy routine years ago I think. Sounds like your paint rep confirms the problem. Unfortunately "health issues" are a tempting way to get rid of the competition, without necessarily being any better or safer. Margarine killed butter, and now butter is better. Until the next ad campaign. I have heard, but not confirmed, that all toxic bottom paint is to be banned by 2010 by international treaty. Followed to conclusion the only thing you will be allowed to paint on steel will be water. But it will be distilled for purity, irradiated for safety, and lemon fresh. Guaranteed more effective than plain water alone. greg 1812 From: Date: Thu Jun 12, 2003 6:07pm Subject: Re: Re: Electrolysis Hi Colin, The motion of a metal boat thru the water, or tidal currents moving past a metal boat at a mooring will induce electricity in the hull. Without protection, this will lead to electrolysis, with the damage most pronounced at the ends. The rudder, being close to one end on most boats is very susceptible to this damage, and is at risk to fail catastrophically on an unprotected metal boat that sails long enough. This failure is more likely to occur when the boat is offshore in high seas or storm conditions. The loss of steering at this time may lead to motion in the yacht beyond its stability limits and result in the yacht being overwhelmed. If the yacht survives, the crew has the uncertain prospect of rigging a temporary rudder, or being rescued and scuttling the abandoned yacht to remove a hazard to navigation. The pragmatic sailor realizes that anodes provide a lost cost, simple and effective solution to protect against electrolysis. Any metal yacht that has been left unprotected must be viewed with the utmost suspicion for offshore use. There are many causes of electrolysis and aspects to protection beyond anodes, and I urge anyone building, owning, buying or sailing a metal boat to consult an authoritative reference for better information. Do not take my word on this subject. The question of whether metal yachts need to be protected is not an issue that I will debate. To me there is no question on this issue -- to promote unprotected metal yachts is at best uninformed, at worst a menace to public safety. I believe this group would be better served by discussing the causes of electrolysis and how to protect against them. regards, greg. 1813 From: Date: Thu Jun 12, 2003 6:18pm Subject: Re: Re: C-Flex Hi Mike, I've got no axe to grind with you. If you throw stones why complain if a few bounce back? Lets put that behind us and talk about your design. I am interested in your boat. From your writing it sounds like you have drawn it up and not yet built it. Maybe if we talk about it a bit and review what you have done it will spark an interest in building? Yes? regards, Greg 1814 From: Date: Fri Jun 13, 2003 9:47am Subject: New 50 foot design We are looking for people interested in building/owning a new 50 foot design. The boat will be center cockpit, twin keel, shoal draft, skeg rudder, 3-dart origami suitable for construction in alloy or steel. The boat is planned to be a scaled version of the Darwin 60, with a modern rig and house. We have not finalized the boat and will work with builders/owners to suit. Our target price is $750 for the plans and license, which includes patterns for all the major components - hull, keels, rudder, deck and house. For further information please contact: Greg Elliott Easy Software Inc. 1990 Casano Drive North Vancouver, BC Canada V7J 2R2 tel: (604) 987-0050 fax:(253) 550-6928 email: X50@e... 1815 From: Date: Fri Jun 13, 2003 9:52am Subject: New 50 foot design see attached some 2-dart 50's http://www.easysoftwareinc.com/Design/JM50/JM50.htm http://www.easysoftwareinc.com/Design/Harvey50/Harvey50.htm 1816 From: Date: Fri Jun 13, 2003 11:37am Subject: tips and tricks One idea I find useful when attaching hoses and there is not enough room to put on two hose clamps: Normally, you should put two hose clamps on any plumbing fittings. I have never seen a stainless hose clamp that didn't fail eventually, except when stored in the parts bin. Also, how may times have you bought a "stainless" hose clamp only to find out the screw wasn't stainless? It isn't enough that it says stainless, now it must say "all stainless". A small pencil magnet carried at all times is a must for a yacht builder/owner when shopping. When there is not enough room on the barb for two hose clamps the solution I have used is very heavy fishing line. Lash this first around the hose, using a stick to keep the tension without cutting your hands, and every few wraps tuck the line under itself to lock the lashing. Place the hose clamp over to protect the lashing. Depending on the weight of fishing line, and the tension you apply, the fishing line will hold the hose better than the hose clamp. The hose clamp is more to protect the line from abrasion, and as a backup. Don't tighten the fishing line to the point where it cuts through the rubber hose! In a pinch at sea and your spares run out, the fishing line alone will do the job and keep you from sinking. I first used this trick for just that reason. I had lots of hose clamps, but none left the right size, and lots of water to deal with. Be ready to improvise while cruising, because it can be difficult to find "store bought" parts. Don't assume you can't fix something just because you don't have the parts. With time, patience and persistence you can do the impossible. Greg Elliott 1817 From: Date: Fri Jun 13, 2003 0:03pm Subject: tips and tricks Cleaning the anchor chain: Ok, this has absolutely nothing to do with origami boats, which is why I'm writing it. In SE Asia we get a grey/blue sticky gooey clay, due to the silt brought down the rivers in the rainy season. I've seen people spend the better part of the morning trying to wash it off the chain - myself included. One yacht lashed two mops together, bristle to bristle to scrub the chain in the water. Looked good, but lots of work, and didn't clean inside the links very well. One trick passed along to me works quite well and is very simple. Have a heavy wooden club on deck. A broken oar works well. Bash the chain ahead of the rollers while it is under tension. Most of the mud will fall off with the first blow. It isn't perfect, but it is quick. I am advised by the developer of this technique it was a result of his frustration with the mud, and in a fit of anger he discovered the solution. If it would only work on the outboard. Greg Elliott 1818 From: nadim Date: Fri Jun 13, 2003 2:56pm Subject: Re: tips and tricks On Friday 13 June 2003 20:37, info@e... wrote: http://www.autospeed.co.nz/cms/article.html?&A=1596 http://plastics.newageindustries.com/oetiker.asp http://plastics.newageindustries.com/kwikclmp.asp http://www.iboats.com/products/7/2951_seachoice_plastic_hose_clamps.html Any other _dangerous_ way to knot 'heavy fishing line' in your repertory? Good you have a clamp over it. Check Hasley book of knots #364. Cheers, Nadim. 1819 From: Michael Casling Date: Fri Jun 13, 2003 4:22pm Subject: Re: Re: C-Flex Sounds reasonable. I have not chosen this site to discuss my design ideas because my ideas are some what at odds with the groups basic tenet. I participate with the group because we share an enthusiasm for boating and there are a lot of good ideas here. If there is interest I do not mind sharing my thoughts but I will tell you up front that my ideas are for a lighter displacement boat not built of aluminum or steel. The boat from my design ideas was built about 21 years ago and I assume still sailing in Auckland NZ. Regards BC Mike C Michael Casling 1820 From: Date: Fri Jun 13, 2003 4:48pm Subject: Re: Re: C-Flex Hi Mike What was the boat built in? 5 tons 36 feet sounds like racing. Might be possible in an alloy origami - just a guess at this point. Might be interesting to the group to see if it can be done. You could end up expanding the appeal of the process. Any reason the boat wouldn't work in alloy? g. 1821 From: Date: Fri Jun 13, 2003 5:01pm Subject: Re: tips and tricks Hi Nadim, You lock the lashing as you go to keep it in tension. In close quarters it is hard to keep 360 degree tension on the lashing. You finish the lashing conventionally. I have never seen any of the parts you have listed in any third world port. It is hard enough to get SS clamps while out cruising. Most of them are plated steel, when you can find them. The old style looped wire with a nut and bolt is still a common hose clamp in many places. The only product you list that I have seen outside of mass production applications is the quik clamp or seachoice clamp. I couldn't see trusting the boat to one of those. Here is what the web site you provided has to say: This product has been discontinued. It is no longer available for purchase. http://www.iboats.com/mall/index.cgi?prod_id=2951 regards Greg 1823 From: nadim Date: Sat Jun 14, 2003 1:34am Subject: Re: tips and tricks Hi Greg, > You lock the lashing as you go to keep it in tension. In close quarters > it is hard to keep 360 degree tension on the lashing. You finish the > lashing conventionally. Don't even bother to talk yourself out of this. The solution you propose is ridiculous, you backup a lashing with a clamp that you doomed youself to fail sometime. Your locking system is dangerous right through. Lashing a hose is possible and it can be as good as a clamp but the way you do it is wrong. You find it strange to have a non SS screw on clamps without understanding why it is so and then instead of proposing to protect it from corrosion, with grease or silicon or pain or even the wifes nail polish, you just discard them. Your sentence above is non sense: 1/ What in the name of god is is "360° tension"? Can you do 180° tension and miss the other 180°? 2/Knots are 100% right or 200% wrong! If they are done in close quarter where you can't be sure they will have the right tension then don't do it. I'd also recommend to see that no connection neeeds to be done in close quarter, that should be done by design. 3/ "finish the lashing conventionally". Heavy gauge monofilment nylon fishing line is nothing conventional. > I have never seen any of the parts you have listed in any third world > port. It is hard enough to get SS clamps while out cruising. Most of > them are plated steel, when you can find them. The old style looped > wire with a nut and bolt is still a common hose clamp in many places. Lots of bull! I lived several years in south east asia and traveled there extensively (I also own a boat there). You find most things you want inclusive 100% SS clamps and plastic clamps. Any chinese hardware shop will fix it for you, for a price and if you wait till they get it for you. In any case one can build a SS clamp (nothing is impossible you said) or learn to make knots. If one opts for platic clamps, they cost much less than SS clamps, weight almost nothing and can be stored forever, list all your fittings and buy 4 or 5 clamps for each and then an emergency kit with mixed sizes, then go sailing 50 years. An since we are in the tip and tricks section, if possible attach the clamps (those you have for reparation) close to where you will use them instead for having them the tool box. > Here is what the web site you provided has to say: > This product has been discontinued. It is no longer available for > purchase. http://www.iboats.com/mall/index.cgi?prod_id=2951 The web site_S_ I listed where to give example about other clamps that you didn't even bother to discuss as they didn't fit your story. I listed 4 sited, I can list another 20 that would carry the same type clamps. Again your are twisting the conversation to make it look as if your system is right an other don't even exist. Do you want to bet Greg? Send me a piece of hose lashed in the way you described, once I've opened it, I'll send it back to you lashed properly with the right kind of twine and locking and you undo it. Do you want another system that is simpler an more fail proof? - carry a half rigid SS wire - when you need to clamp something, take a piece of it, middle it - put it on the part you want to clamp - twist once - coild each end on its own side - be carefull to coil in oposit direction - take both ends in a plier and twist 4 or 5 times - bend the twisted end on itself to avoid injuring your fingers on it (tape it if necessary) - if you feel the ends are to far from each other, coild them back (doubling the coil) toward the middle. No SS wire available where you are? Galvanized wire will do or even steel wire, be sure to protect them (the galved one too) properly from corrosion and it will hold very long. Cheers, Nadim. 1824 From: sae140 Date: Sat Jun 14, 2003 4:53am Subject: Re: Electrolysis So Greg - more bluff and bluster. You have ignored my last post completely, merely using it as a platform from which to deliver yet another long-winded lecture to the group. > The question of whether metal yachts need to be protected is not an > issue that I will debate. To me there is no question on this issue -- > to promote unprotected metal yachts is at best uninformed, at worst > a menace to public safety. But who is debating ? And who is promoting ? No-one that I'm aware of. This tirade is of your own making. I have been waiting for you to bring the classic safety issue into your discourse. This is a technique well-favoured by politicians when introducing repressive legislation, as any other viewpoints or opinions then become automatically polarised into the 'unsafe' (= 'irresponsible') camp. > I believe this group would be better served by discussing the > causes of electrolysis and how to protect against them. But are you sure you know what is generally meant by "discussing" Greg ? You appear to have adopted the role of group 'expert', whose knowledge and opinions are far superior to those of anyone else. You have both a hectoring style of communication [for those who do not have English as a mother-tongue, Hector (sometimes spelt with a 'k') was a Trojan hero from Greek mythology who was an annoying bully and blusterer], and appear to feel the need to dominate almost *every* post, as if this were your own personal website. This is not my interpretation of what is generally meant by group "discussion". These comments are not intended as a form of personal unpleasantness, but rather as a caution that your domineering style of communication may well be inhibiting others from posting onto this site. As you are fairly new to this group, there may be something that you haven't fully appreciated yet. Although this group's focus is primarily on the origami technique of building boat hulls, for many members I believe there is a deeper philosophy involved. Again, I shall make this distinction in terms of 'content' and 'process'. The 'content' here being one of a faster method for the construction of a boat hull. The 'process' however, being one of challenging perceived wisdom and conventional practice, and retaining a healthy scepticism of so-called authoratitive sources such as those to which you refer. Perhaps this is where the misunderstanding lies. My apologises to anyone who has become bored rigid by this exchange, to whom I promise that this will be my last post on this particular thread. Regards Colin 1825 From: Alex Christie Date: Sat Jun 14, 2003 4:27pm Subject: moderation time again... Hey folks, As moderator, I think it might be a good idea to lay out a few ground rules here in order to keep the peace. As this is a shared space, please address your posts to the group, because each message goes to all of us. Pointed remarks to a single person mean very little to group as a whole, and only start flame wars. If you want to address someone specifically about something, e- mail them off-list where it won't clog up our inbox. Remember that this forum is about the boats, not a gladiator's arena! On a board like this finger-pointing and shredding of other's opinions is verboten/interdit/forbidden, for obvious reasons. Line-by-line analysis and picking apart of what someone has said in their previous post is also not very effective. The cut and pasted pieces of text are no longer in context of their original message, so it makes little or no sense. It also tends to make the person doing this like a harsh school teacher with the red pen correcting a student's work, then showing it to the class. This does not promote group peace. Sometimes only the author themselves can decode who said what, and in one post someone mistook what a person was saying because they had a shred of someone else's post at the bottom of their e-mail! I personally don't read snipped, clipped and pasted messages; they make my head hurt! Lastly, please refrain from cussing (swearing), as well as even mildly "hot" or inflamatory remarks. It does no good and departs from the friendly spirit of sharing of different ideas that this group is known for. I have not had to put anyone's postings on the pending/approval system, but I will do so for anyone who appears to ignore my plea for calm and gentlemanly discourse...got it? Peace be upon you, Alex Christie (moderator) 1826 From: Glen Date: Sun Jun 15, 2003 1:18am Subject: Silence ? And now silence falls on the oragami web site. I believe that everyone who joined this site did so because they had ideas they wanted to share or find out more information about the ones they didn't. I enjoy all the posts and topics, discussion is good. Whether it be right or wrong for you is up to you to decide! Keeping in mind that there are many ways to get from point A - B. One idea that works for me you may not like and think that it is the dumbest idea you ever heard of....if we all thought alike what a boring world this would be!!! I think that attacking of ideas is not healthy to the web site nor to the person who posts the idea. Think of how you would feel being new to the site and reading some of the recent posts....would you want to ask your question if you were unsure ?! I have always understood and felt that the boating community always was a little closer than any other group of people, always willing to help a fellow boater in need...somehow that feeling is lost when logging on to the site. I agree with Alex that our posts need to be straight forward and to the point in simple english! Everyone of us in this group are at different levels of experience in regards to building a boat right down to time on the water. We should be sharing ideas and helping one another. My two cents worth! Glen 1827 From: jim_both Date: Sun Jun 15, 2003 1:55am Subject: Mast-aft Sail rig I found a website the describes a sailing rig for monohull(twin- keeler?): http://www.runningtideyachts.com/monohull/ This is a very different rig and I was wondering anybody had any thought about this, have these ideas been discredited or verified? Also, a website that describes what look like Origami boatbuilding in Aluminium: http://www.reducostall.com/index.htm 1828 From: Gord Schnell Date: Sun Jun 15, 2003 9:46am Subject: Re: moderation time again... Thank you, Alex. It is getting very tiresome. Gord 1829 From: Date: Sun Jun 15, 2003 11:01am Subject: Re: Mast-aft Sail rig The mast aft, raked forward configuration can make it easier to tack the headsails, allow for larger headsails, and allow for a smaller or no main to be carried. However, having the mast raked forward tensions the backstays while slacking the headstay. Due to the increased mechanical advantage, the closer the mast is placed to one end of the boat, the tighter the stays on that end, the slacker the stays on the other end. You can demonstrate this effect with the washtub bass musical instrument. The closer the stick is placed to the string, the less force you need to apply to the head of the stick to reach the high notes. It is generally thought that tightening the headstays improves windward performance. As a result, raking the mast aft has been more popular. On older wooden designs this was often quite pronounced. As modern gear has made tightening the stays simpler, and hull strength has increased to take the loads, masts have tended to be more vertical. I don't have a reference in front of me. As I recall 3-5 degrees aft rake is now typical, more for appearance than anything. My personal opinion is this: Inshore day-sailing on a reach and a good breeze, we often skip the main, which I believe the mast aft configuration recognizes. For offshore work I find a mainsail and boom is very necessary. Lots of times we use the main, sheeted tight, reefed flat to control the roll on the vessel, while the headsail drives us downwind. Generally for offshore, to control the motion of the boat, the main is first sail I put up, and the last sail I take down. Upwind, the main has two important functions over and above the obvious sail area. It increased the drive of the boat by trimming the headsail(s), and can significantly reduce the drag of the mast. A bare pole is not an efficient foil, and adds more drag than a pole with main. Thus, motoring upwind with the main up can significantly increase your speed, even though the main is amidships and provides little or no drive. I would expect the rig in question to be good for shorthanded work, and would be suitable for coastal cruising. There could be some loss of performance upwind. While cruising we always try to sail off the wind. However, the wind somehow always knows this and regularly changes to thwart our plans. As a result, even cruising boats should try to make sure they have good upwind performance. There would - perhaps - be less options available to control the motion of the vessel in question if conditions got severe. This last point would depend on the sail inventory and the crew. Controlling the motion of a vessel offshore is one of the most important factors in keeping yourself out of trouble. Every vessel has a limit beyond which you will find yourself with serious problems. As conditions worsen, it becomes increasingly difficult to keep the vessel within this range of motion. There are lots of different ways to accomplish this, and everyone has a favorite that works for them. For me, in extreme conditions, a sail on a stay can start vibrating to the point where I have been concerned for the rig. I find that a reefed main does not do this. I always leave a small reefed main up, even hove to, and as conditions worsen the vessel heels, exposing the hull to the breaking seas rather than the cabin. Obviously if the sail threatens the rig you have to act, but otherwise I would leave a small sail up at all times. Unless there was a threat to the vessel, I would leave the reefed main to shred before I would risk working on the deck to take it down. We were in radio contact with a vessel that passed through a hurricane off Mexico, and they were debating taking down the reefed main. The fear in their voices was plainly evident, and they were panicking, thinking they needed to do something. The vessel was riding as well as could be expected under the conditions, hove to, and they were dry inside. Uncomfortable and in fear for their lives to be sure, on their first trip offshore. Our recommendation (solicited) was to make no changes so long as the vessel was not in danger. Why risk going on deck and being injured or swept away because of worry about the sail. Also, dropping the sail might have changed the motion of the boat to the point where they were at risk. Sometimes the only thing left to do is pack the quarter berth with pillows and get some sleep. We heard later the vessel survived and had even made the papers. The previous was not meant to be used as anything more than a guide. You need to test your vessel and yourself in increasingly more difficult conditions, learn what works best for you, and apply this experience when sailing offshore. Get out in a winter storm and practice, practice, practice in the relative safely of your local waters before you go offshore. Heave to, try a drogue, rig warps. Sail with only a headsail, sail with only a main. Race your boat, no matter how slow. On handicap you may do very well, and you will learn a lot about your boat and your skills thru competition. Find out what works for you. For offshore my preference would be a cutter rig with both headsails on furlers. In areas of extreme weather I might go with hanked sails rather than furlers. The main in lazy jacks and reefing lines led aft can help eliminate deck work in heavy weather. I have seen a number boats that incorporate the main sail bag in the lazy jacks which appears to work quite well. The lazy jacks keep the bag in place when sailing. Drop the main, the lazy jacks gather the sail, close the bag, and you are done. Extreme rigs and extreme designs I would leave for coastal work, simply because they have not been sufficiently proven. Traveling with a wife and family I am not willing to take the same risks as I would on my own. However, every new design needs a champion. Progress cannot be made without risk, and yachting by nature is a calculated risk. If a rig interests you, it is worthy of examination. As always, this is a personal preference. There are lots of different rigs, and they all have advantages and disadvantages. If it was otherwise, we would all be sailing the same boat. Except for fundamental safety issues there are a wide range of choices available to yacht designers and builders, allowing the yacht to be personalized to suit the owner. Hope this helps, Greg 1830 From: Date: Sun Jun 15, 2003 1:50pm Subject: metal boats and HF radio A great advantage of a metal hulled boat is the ease with which one can rig and install a very effective HF radio. I would be happy to discuss the details with anyone interested in installing HF capability on their boat. Note: the next section contains information that may not comply with your local laws and regulations. It is your responsibility to check with your local authorities before operating a radio. I DO NOT condone illegal radio operation. HF radios are not expensive. HAM radio's can be converted to all-band HF for offshore work, with just a few minutes work. Many radio suppliers will do it for free if the radio is for an offshore yacht. This can be a very practical alternative to an expensive (and often very limited) marine SSB. Most of the cursing boats we know have converted HAM radios in place of marine SSB. What about a license? In an emergency it is perfectly legal to operate without a license. The marine radio license (VHF/SSB ) you can get for a small fee from the government and is probably a good idea because some countries have taken to prosecuting sailors when they return home for operating outside the country without one. $25,000+ so be forewarned. It is sometimes the cruiser that you got into an argument with that turns you in. For most offshore cruising yachts, the amateur license (HAM) is the one you should have. The amateur bands are widely used by cruising sailors, to keep in daily contact with fellow cruisers and to receive weather, health, and safety traffic. You can make telephone calls of a non-commercial nature with the cooperation of a shore amateur and a phone patch. However, it is hard to arrange, and distortion makes it hard for non-radio people to understand you.. The big step up these days for yachts is email. With the installation of a computer and modem, email is available worldwide to the cruising sailor via Pactor. We use email onboard the boat now almost exclusively to keep in contact with folks back home. Non-commercial traffic is free via Winlink and business traffic can be passed for a small fee via Sailmail and similar services. For those people without email, you can fax them via the Internet using email from the boat. Also, with the recent changes to the US regulations, a US license is open to anyone, and is not at all difficult to pass. For those not willing to go that far, there are countries in the world that do not report licenses, so call signs like HP___ are common pirate calls. Everyone knows the story that you got your license going through the Panama Canal is false, but cannot be checked. I recommend you take the test before going cruising. The old regulations were extremely difficult. One of the best known radio networks in SE Asia was run for years on a pirate license. Every year the pirate operator held a US license exam school at his house, and many of us got our licenses there, and every year he failed. It wasn't like he wasn't trying - and it did make for a great party. However, with the new regulations, we were all very pleased to hear that an era has come to an end. He has his license and the net has became legal. If he can did it, so can you. I consider the HF radio a "must have" safety device for offshore yachts. Two boats we sailed with were lost without a word, and remain a mystery to this day. They did not have HF radios, and at least for the peace of mind of loved ones ashore it would be a comfort to have some idea what happened to them. It was months before anyone realized they were missing. Normally we have a daily radio sched at sea, so people know very quickly if something is wrong and help might be required. Yachts have been saved, crews rescued, and even a murder/piracy solved as a result of HAM radio. HF radio is not expensive or complicated and the license is now easy to obtain. You can easily rig a very effective radio in a metal boat, and you will have a very important safety device and a great way to keep in contact with friends and family. Greg Elliott 1831 From: Stephen Wandling Date: Sun Jun 15, 2003 3:14pm Subject: Generators & Welders I am getting my stalled steel boat project back in motion, but have hit a bump. My current site, where I have my boat in a shed, had a yard welder in a nearby shed as part of my rental. I have just been informed that due to conflicts between the businesses there, there is now no power to the welder and it looks like none can be arranged. I have a steel boat builder coming to work on the boat at the end of June. I also own an AC buzzbox, and was wondering if anyone had any advice about the size of generator that is recommended to run this welder. I generally understand that you need a source of 220 V. and 50 Amps. I guess another option might be to rent an engine driven welder. Has anyone had experience with one of these in the Vancouver Lower Mainland? My boat is in Richmond right now. So, if any of you have any advice or maybe even have a welder or generator that I could rent, I would be eager to hear about it. I estimate that the welding could be completed in 2 to 3 weeks. Stephen 1832 From: Glen Date: Sun Jun 15, 2003 3:22pm Subject: HF Radios I am guessing that by HF you mean High Frequency ( may be I missed that part ) could the HF and SSB talk to each other or are they too far apart? What is the most common out there? I know most people have a CB radio set to cannel 16 and a VHF. So would we talking about now having three radios....CB, VHF, and SSB or HF? HHHHmmmmmm which to choose from.....HELP! O.K. I'm interested how does one make a HAM radio an HF radio....and take it slow it's fathers day and I'm trying not to think to much! Happy Fathers Day to all the fathers Glen 1833 From: islands502000 Date: Sun Jun 15, 2003 3:23pm Subject: checking in It has been a while since I have posted a line of thought. As I have been reading, I felt it time to jump back in. We are all boat lovers, and builders, some in the process, some not, but the point is we are shareing Ideas. As a former Steel boat owner, of much larger dimetions then any proposed on this site. I can tell you maintance is the key to longivity, along with good building pratices. No vessel can stand the test of time and ocean, without a good design.I belive that Bret has a good design theroy, simple to build. And if fitted out to suit you personal needs will last a long time. And anyone considering a steel, or alloy hull should do their homework, and understand the strenths, weaknes, of the material of choise. Along whith these thought I shall shut my mouth, sit back and read. Good boating to all Islands 1834 From: islands502000 Date: Sun Jun 15, 2003 3:32pm Subject: Re: Generators & Welders Steven, You might consider a engine driven welder/ geneator combo, your BuzzBox would require at least a 10kw gen set, the coast of a used one is almost the cost of renting, or at least here in my area of the sothern left coast. I do see very offten ad's for older Lincon 250 amp welders for less then $1,000, with leads and attecments, and some of the newer units also, either are good machines, that can do ac/dc welding, + or - in either mood, you professinal welder can best advise you on what he likes to use, personaly I like a DC - machine. also knowen as reversed polarity. Islands 1835 From: edmdgd Date: Sun Jun 15, 2003 3:58pm Subject: Re: metal boats and HF radio Greg, Thanks for your recent discussion on the suitability of HF radio for offshore communications. I am contemplating the purchase of a steel sail boat. My previous experiences have all been fiberglass boats and all had HF radio aboard. The installations of the radios were all accomplished by myself. Installation of the ground plain was made with copper foil tape run on the centerline from bow to stern and then to the antenna tuner. The foil tape was fiberglassed over. This system worked fine for my fiberglass vessels, my question is regarding an effective ground plain for a steel boat. What is the best way to accomplish this. 1836 SPAM 1837 From: Date: Sun Jun 15, 2003 5:06pm Subject: Re: HF Radios Hi Glen, My apologies for the jargon. I am going to simplify the information I provide here - so please realize this is not gospel. radio frequency (MHz) .5 - 1.5 AM broadcast radio 1.5 - 25 HAM, marine SSB, shortwave - (HF) 25 - 50 HAM, CB 50 - 80 TV 80 - 110 FM broadcast radio 110+ marine FM (VHF) UHF TV Think of your AM radio. 1000 on the AM dial is around the middle of the dial. That is 1.0 on the above scale. Think of your FM radio. 100 on the FM dial is around the middle of the dial. That is 100 on the above scale. In general, the higher the frequency, the better sound you can get, but the shorter distance the signal will travel. So, an FM broadcast radio has better sound than the AM radio, but at night you might hear WXYZ Texas on the AM radio, but you will never hear texas on the FM radio. VHF is what most people call a marine FM radio, because it operates in the Very High Frequency range. The basic operation is similar to your FM broadcast radio, except the frequency is slightly higher. VHF marine radios are line of sight - you can only talk if the antenna on your radio can physically see the antenna on the radio you are talking to. Because of the curvature of the earth, this limits VHF marine communications to less than 30 miles under normal conditions (placing shore stations on mountains increases the range), and for practical purposes 10 miles is more typical. HF is short for High Frequency, and it includes HAM, marine SSB, and Shortwave. The amazing thing about HF radio is that is not line of sight. The earths atmosphere, combined with the effects of the sun, reflects HF radio waves back to the earth, like a fantastically large mirror. As a result, a very low powered HF radio transmission can travel around the world depending on the frequency, time of day, and solar activity. For yachts this is wonderful news, because it means you can install a low power radio on your boat, and by selecting the correct frequency for the time of day you can contact just about any place on earth. It isn't quite as easy or as wonderful as I have just said, but that is the theory, and many times it will work. For practical purposes, a cruising yacht will have a 100 watt HAM - 20 amps. With this radio in the morning you can probably talk reliably to all the boats within 500 miles. With this radio in the afternoon you can no longer hear the boats within 500 miles, but you will be able to talk to HAM operators as far away as 5000 miles. In the evening you will hear both the boats within 500 miles, and as far away as 5000 miles. You will often be able talk to HAM operators as far as 10,000 miles away. These are generalizations, so please you hammies out there don't jump on me, just post the corrections. Also, there are gaps in the distances, at different times of day, so that is why HAM form networks. You might be able to hear A, but not B. B can hear A, but not you. So traffic is passed by relaying messages across the net to fill in the gaps. With a dozen people on the net you can quite quickly fill in an area as big as 1/8-1/4 the globe. So you can see the benefits of networks, which is why they are popular with HAMs. The problem with CB is that it is at the top of the effective HF range. Sometimes it can go a long ways, but not reliably. The problem with AM broadcast is that it is at the bottom of the range. Sometimes it can go a long ways, but not reliably. The best frequencies for long distance communication are in the range of 6-20Mhz (millions of cycles per second). The beauty of a HAM radio, is that because the HAM bands overlap shortwave, marine SSB, and CB, your HAM radio with a slight change will work as a shortwave radio, a marine SSB, and a very high powered CB radio. One radio replaces 3 radios. Your Marine VHF radio is the exception. This radio is in a different frequency range than HF, and channel 16 is the standard "guard" or listening channel for offshore. If a freighter is on your course, call him on channel 16 on the VHF. Also, your hand held ship-shore radio is the same VHF radio. They are handy for the crew ashore, to call in if they are late, or to get a ride out in the dinghy. The hand-helds are usually good for about 3-5 miles. There are guard and emergency channels on HF as well. These are disaster reporting type channels - MAYDAY channels and for obvious reasons you should learn these channels and the procedures. They are intended to call for help over a much wider area than your VHF radio. If you call MAYDAY on your VHF radio, the best you can hope for is to reach someone within 30 miles. If you call MAYDAY on your CB radio the best you can hope for is to reach someone within 100 miles, but usually a lot less. If you call MAYDAY on your HF radio, you may be hear around the world. Typically the range will be closer to 1000-5000 miles, but still a big improvement. What is SSB? Single Side Band. SSB is a modified form of AM, that boosts the power of the transmission by increasing the "information" part of the signal, while reducing the "carrier" part of the signal. If you have every heard a radio where everyone sounds like Donald Duck, you have heard SSB. It takes a few minutes for your ears to adjust, but afterwards everyone sounds normal. Are HAM radios SSB? Most types of radio transmission were first invented by amateur operators (HAMs). They were later adapted to commercial use. HAM radios can act like most other radios because the HAMs did it first. SSB is available on HAM radios as both USB and LSB, while commercial SSB radios typically only provide USB. (Upper Side Band, Lower Side band). You can hear and talk to any SSB radio on a HAM rig. They can only hear and talk to you if you choose. In the preceding I am talking about a HAM rig that has been modified for offshore use. A standard HAM rig is by regulation crippled so that it will only broadcast in the amateur bands. This is simply a regulation. It is not a limitation of the radio itself. Hope this helps. Think seriously about becoming a HAM radio operator if you are going offshore. It will be one of the best investments you can make. You will get to know tons of other yachts long before you ever meet them. Most people have no idea of what a HAM radio can do, except HAMs were normally the guy with glasses at the end of the street, and every time he turned the rig on the TV went wild. Regards, Greg 1838 From: Date: Sun Jun 15, 2003 5:30pm Subject: Re: Re: metal boats and HF radio The beauty of a steel vessel is that the boat itself is the ground. Repeat exactly what you did with the FG yacht, but run the ground for the tuner to the closest reliable grounding point on the hull. The shorter the better. There is no need to run copper in the hull. A wide ground strip is better than a wire at HF frequencies, but I've seen wire used if it is short enough, You can use any reasonable conductor if copper makes you nervous. There is nothing magic about copper, except it is a good conductor, and resists corrosion. I do recommend antenna switches to disconnect the rig in a storm. Also, check your rig before installation for continuity between the power ground and the antenna ground. Most VHF radios do not have continuity, but many HAM rigs do. I have not checked marine SSB's. The reason I mention this is because if there is continuity, then your power ground is connected to the hull via the antenna ground, and you have a possible path for electrolysis. If you can find a HF rig that does not have this problem, or can be modified, it would be my recommended choice. Heavy, short power leads to the radio and you should be right. regards, Greg 1839 From: Keith Green Date: Mon Jun 16, 2003 6:50am Subject: Re: Generators & Welders I live in Surrey. I don't think that welder will be much good to your boatbuilder. Those little buzz boxes are really only good for small stuff. There are only a few rods on the market which work on an AC-only machine, as well. The larger gen-set type welders you can rent (come on their own trailer) are really good. I used one a few years back for a coule of days. Really smooth arc and easy to use. Lots of rental places around so I would check out some prices over the phone before getting one. Most welding rods are designed for use with DC power only. 1840 From: nadim Date: Sun Jun 15, 2003 3:24am Subject: Re: Silence ? Hi Glen and other, Silence? Please no. Sure there have been disagreement on the list lately, I do make waves sometimes, Greg has been doind waves (not bad for a new comer), all the active members will eventualy do it. I find it very healthy to not hide behind some pseudo civilized political correctness. I find it normal to attack ideas, try to prove them wrong, not as a sport but when something feels wrong I can't keep silent. When I propose an idea, I don't want sympathy only. I expect some fellow members to twist it, bend it, break it. If it breaks, it was bad and I am more greatfull for someone proving me wrong (that might save my life some day) then someone supporting me. This list has a certain dynamic, cool sometimes, stormy at other, it's like being out at sea. We impersonate the ideas we propose so we have to accept some challenge. Now , I 'd rather have quiet discussions but silencing a discussion never makes it quiet, it only upsets and hides the situation. With all the desagrement I have had with other members of this list, There is still not a single one I dislike or I wouldn't help if I could. my 2 cents. Nadim. 1841 From: nadim Date: Sun Jun 15, 2003 6:42am Subject: Re: Mast-aft Sail rig On Sunday 15 June 2003 10:55, jim_both wrote: > I found a website the describes a sailing rig for monohull(twin- > keeler?): > http://www.runningtideyachts.com/monohull/ > This is a very different rig and I was wondering anybody had any > thought about this, have these ideas been discredited or verified? The designer has been chasing that idea for a few years now. there was an article on boat design.net called "Revisiting tha mast aft ...' the drawingg were for a cat then. I don't have any link but I have the document (readable in IE only) and I'll send it to any one intressted. I haven't seen any boat build with that system but I am very curious about the results. I like the idea to be able to roll the main sail. and it is much cheaper (and simple) than a boom or mast furler and possible to build oneself.. > Also, a website that describes what look like Origami boatbuilding in > Aluminium: > http://www.reducostall.com/index.htm It a frameless (real frame less if you don't count the bulkheads and furniture) design. They build in masive aluminium. It's apity there web site doesn show more of the boats. For the little storry, look at what they call a family sail boat (sainte-marie). The boat looks sleek but the inmarsat B 1.2 meters cupola looks, well, ridiculous. (and its more expensive than one of brents boat!) Cheers, Nadim. 1842 From: Date: Mon Jun 16, 2003 5:19pm Subject: Re: Re: metal boats and HF radio There is no better ground plane than a steel boat. Gord 1843 From: Michael Casling Date: Mon Jun 16, 2003 8:52pm Subject: Re: Silence ? I aggree with Nadim. I felt there was too much silence when there should have been input. I needed to respond to Greg and I do not regret doing so. We are still talking and probably will continue to do so. I waited five days before responding so that my response would be more calmed and reasoned. I think Colin heavy oil felt the same way. However, as I have said before this is a site for origami boats of steel and aluminum, and I will respect that and the views of the moderator and fellow boaters. BC Mike C 1844 From: Stephen Wandling Date: Mon Jun 16, 2003 9:05pm Subject: Silence is your choice There is absolutely nothing that the moderator Alex has said that imposes silence. He simply restated the standard ground rules that most of the members here support. If members follow those guidelines, then they can have whatever discussions they want. Can we please move away from the politics and resume discussions? 1845 From: Graeme Mitchell Date: Tue Jun 17, 2003 0:42am Subject: Re: Silence is your choice Well lets keep it positive not negative I have a saying >>>>>>>"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion even if they are wrong " AND YOUR WRONG" JUST >>>>>>>>>>>>> KIDDING GUYS Regards Graeme 1846 From: evanmoonjunk Date: Tue Jun 17, 2003 11:53am Subject: Re: Stern tube material Hi Jon, here is a little more info from my experience. Quite a few people have used sch.40 stainless as that is the most common size in the scrap yards. Disadvantage is that it distorts easier when welding and is also harder to match cutlass bearings and stuffing boxes. Sch 80 is better, less distortion and you can get both ends machined to fit. Sch 80 stainless is much harder to find in scrap yards but is possible. I built a 36' a number of years ago for a fellow that used to run a small floating dry dock in Nanaimo and did a lot of repair work on fish boats. He said that all the steel comercial boats used sch 80 mild steel for the stern tube and never had a problem. There is a fellow here in Nanaimo that is currently building another design steel boat and installed a mild steel stern tube I think it was sch80 or more. It was a special type but I don't recall what at the moment. This guy has built previous steel boats and is knowledgable. This might be a bit late for you but might help others. All for now...Evan 1847 From: brentswain38 Date: Tue Jun 17, 2003 6:00pm Subject: Re: Generators & Welders I've used almost exclusively AC buzzboxes and have never felt the need for anything else. The engine driven ones are extremely expensive to run and offer no real advantages. Brent Swain 1848 From: Gord Schnell Date: Tue Jun 17, 2003 8:46pm Subject: Re: Re: Generators & Welders All the welding (including SS) was done on my 40' with a "buzz-box". Gord 1849 From: Gord Schnell Date: Tue Jun 17, 2003 8:50pm Subject: Re: Re: Stern tube material That special tubing was probably Shelby Tubing. It is seamless extruded and annealed. Gord 1850 From: Alan Smith Date: Wed Jun 18, 2003 8:09pm Subject: Re: Re: metal boats and HF radio Actually, a metal boat of the size we are takling about is too small to be a good radio ground at HF frequencies. The idea is to electronically couple your signal out to the surrounding sea water. Only then do you have a good size ground plane. A metal just hull makes this much easier to do. There should be no trouble keeping the DC power ground separate from the radio ground. The radio system should incorporate a "DC block" using capacitors to isolate any DC from the hull. If you remember your basic electronics, a capacitor will act as an open circuit to DC current while allowing AC signals, which includes radio frequencies, to pass. Also, it's just as easy to install an HF radio on a fiberglass boat. Simply use an antenna that does not require a ground. See my article in the upcoming issue of Ocean Navigator to find out how. Al 1851 From: Date: Thu Jun 19, 2003 0:54am Subject: metal boats and HF radio An article that deals with many aspects of grounding and electrolysis, and provides a design for a DC block as might be required to isolate your power ground from your radio antenna ground. http://www.sailmail.com/grounds.htm 1852 From: Date: Thu Jun 19, 2003 11:07am Subject: galvanized or stainless Most production boats employ quite a bit of stainless steel (SS), and people have come to see this as being "nautical". I would recommend that cruising yachts approach SS with caution. The problem with SS is that it is apt to fail without warning. SS is great for wear points. Thus, places that are apt to be damaged by anchors, lines, blocks, fittings, etc are well served by the installation of SS wear points. However, SS is subject to work hardening and various forms of corrosion. The nature of SS can make it difficult to spot these problem until the part fails catastrophically. SS is only really stainless in the presence of air (oxygen). Thus, underwater you are likely to get better service from materials such as monel. Bearings and seals can cause pitting in SS shafts, leading to failures in salt water pumps, prop shafts, and rudder shafts. One problem we have found almost universal is with the salt water pump on the engine. Eventually the pump starts leaking a few drops of water every time it stops or starts, and damages engine mounts, engine beds, or other gear. Frequent and ineffective rebuilding often results. A solution we have found is to solder/braze a brass pipe nipple to the bottom drain hole in the pump the next time you rebuild it. Attach a clear plastic hose to the pipe nipple after the pump is installed, and lead the hose to the salt water sump. This will avoid costly damage to the engine or surrounding area. The clear plastic hose allows you to sight a failed seal. You do still need to check the pump regularly for major leaks, lest the absence of water damage causes you to sink the boat. Above water, be careful to watch for any "unfair loads" placed on SS parts (or any parts for that manner). Rigging and turnbuckles for example must be protected with universal type joints at all connections, to prevent side loads from causing failures. We sailed with a boat that came over one day to ask why their headstay might be getting lose. We were all pretty green and made all the wrong guesses. The next day their headstay parted, and except for the wire luff in the headsail the rig would have come down. The top end fitting on their headstay had been installed without a universal. It could rotate fore and aft, but not athwart-ships. The side loads on the stay eventually caused it to fail. They had gone up the rig to inspect the wire, and everything looked fine. What had happened was that the inner lay of the 1/19 wire had parted first, and was hidden by the outer lay. The wire was slowly twisting and lengthening. Any time two pieces of SS come together there is the potential for crevice corrosion, as oxygen is restricted from the joint. Swaged fitting are particularly prone to failure in the tropics, but there are many other potential problems. Study the causes of crevice corrosion, because it can be a killer. In the tropics many boats find Norseman or Staylock style fittings more reliable than swaged fittings. These are typically assembled with marine sealant on the inside to prevent the entry of brine into the fitting. There is some evidence that the accumulation of brine in swaged fittings is a source of failure in the bottom end fittings. These trap salt water while sailing, and as the water evaporates, the brine concentrates until it reaches a point at which it reacts corrosively with the SS, leading rapidly to failure. In the tropics and semi-tropical regions, there are often long periods of dry weather for the brine to concentrate through evaporation. There are various grades of SS, and manufacturing techniques that can reduce crevice corrosion. Paint and other protective coatings is not really a solution to SS. Coatings effectively shut of the oxygen, effectively turning the SS into steel. The protection you receive is then no better than the coating applied. Many people do employ SS with great success. However, there are also many failures. Any time you see SS wire with a broken strand, or any weeping areas on SS, this should serve as a red flag. However, many boats also report failures without any warning at all. SS failures on lifelines can lead to loss of life, and are a good reason to consider solid rails. Offshore we have an unbreakable rule. No one goes up the companionway without a harness clipped to the boat. We tells guest to regard the ocean as molten lava. Falling into the ocean from a boat under sail you have about the same chance of survival. Except for the headstays our rigging is galvanized. We oil the wire annually with boiled linseed oil. Other people report success with lanolin, though I was less satisfied. Our wire has lasted 20 years, though I am planning to replace the wire next season. The quality of wire and the quality of maintenance can affect this greatly. Before you select galvanized rigging, check that you have the right wire for the job. Galvanized rigging is rougher than SS rigging, so it can be hard on sails. The threads especially. We use soft 1/2" black, drip irrigation tubing, slit vertically, over the shrouds to prevent chafe. On the headstays we use SS rigging, to minimize chafe, and because we have hanked sails. Bronze hanks make quick work of galvanizing. We have had 2 SS turnbuckles explode from crevice corrosion. The corrosion had started inside the barrel, along the threads, and resulted in a hairline fault in the turnbuckles that was all but invisible to the naked eye. Dye penetrant might have spotted the problem, but I didn't. At the time I still thought SS meant indestructible. Our turnbuckles are now all galvanized, even on the SS headstays. I have never had cause to worry about them. I also use linseed oil on them. Over time they eventually can become rusty, especially where they are apt to immersion while sailing. Occasionally the rust advances to the point where a turnbuckle can only be removed with a hacksaw. Invariably the rust has not penetrated the turnbuckle the way crevice corrosion can, and the steel inside is still perfect. This is not a recommendation to leave rusty parts in use, rather to point out that rust and crevice corrosion can act differently. A few taps on a rusty galvanized turnbuckle with a chipping hammer can quickly reveal how far the rust has traveled. This approach does not work on SS. Many cruising boats are reporting that for insurance purposes they are now required to re-rig every 7-8 years. In SS this can be an expensive proposition. There can be significant savings for a cruising boat to rig in galvanized. Our original 500 foot spool of galvanized wire was $75. In SS the spool of wire was over $1000, without considering the cost of end fittings. I would expect a good grade of galvanized wire and turnbuckles to last 10 years with annual maintenance, and in many cases longer. The advantage of galvanized besides cost, is that it rarely fails without warning. You will see rust on the wire or fittings, and streaks on the deck or hull, long before the part fails. If you ignore these warning, and continue to use the part, whose fault is it if it fails. The galvanized part told you it was time to replace it. Unfortunately, SS parts do not always supply that warning. One idea cruising boats might consider, is to do the original outfitting in galvanized. After you return from offshore, replace your now old galvanized rigging with SS. For local cruising SS is perfectly adequate for most people, especially if the rig is kept clean with fresh water or rain, and will in many cases increase the resale value. However, while cruising I think there is a peace of mind to be gained from galvanized. It isn't for everyone, but it should at least be considered. It isn't often on a boat that you get a chance to save money and increase safety at the same time. Greg Elliott 1853 From: Alex Christie Date: Thu Jun 19, 2003 11:48pm Subject: Re: galvanized or stainless I've owned a few fiberglass boats from the 1970's and I've always noticed that the stainless fittings "looked good", but were very weak. The implications of having weak fittings while sailing near- shore are bad enough, but I shudder to think what would happen offshore with the same weak rig! I think manufacturers also paid very little attention to side-loading of their fittings --- they just wanted to get that boat off the showroom floor and into the hapless new owner's hands as fast as possible. Brent advocates using galvanized rigging on his boats, and the price difference between that and SS is really huge. I have seen one boat using SS wire on selected parts of their rigging, then going galvanized for most other parts which aren't subject to chafe from sails. In this way, they could keep a very sharp eye out on the one ss bit, and replace as needed. Is there anyone who has done this who would like to comment on this? Which part of the rig did you employ stainless, and which galvanized? Alex 1854 From: Date: Fri Jun 20, 2003 8:23am Subject: Re: Re: galvanized or stainless I have received email from a couple of people regarding the rigging on the 50 foot alloys boats we designed. In some of the pictures you will notice these boats are rigged with galvanized. The galvanized and unpainted alloy look very similar, not out of place at all. http://www.easysoftwareinc.com/Design/JM50/JM50.htm http://www.easysoftwareinc.com/Design/Harvey50/Harvey50.htm I would also be interested to hear from other people and their experiences with SS and/or galvanized. The subject of galvanized and SS usually generates quite a bit of discussion among cruising sailors at sunset at the anchorages, and I am always keen to learn more. One of the SS turnbuckles that failed on our boat was at the forward end of the lifeline while I was making a sail change on the foredeck, leaning back against the lifeline, which has given me an appreciation of the dangers. I had no idea at the time that SS was prone to those kind of failures, and it could quite easily have proven to be my last lesson. There isn't any sailor out there that knows so much about cruising and sailing that he or she cannot learn more from the experiences of others. That is certainly true for me. Information in books seems to only take you so far, and is quite often contradictory. A lot of the time I don't know what to believe when I read something, every expert saying something different. Most sailors realize after awhile that the subject is so large that no one is an expert, only specialists and technicians. Most of the people we have met cruising were just like us. Spent their lives in debt wondering what it was all about, and were lucky enough and determined enough to get to go sailing. There are very few millionaire cruisers. Their boats are there, crews at the ready. The owners fly in for a couple of weeks a year, but they are hardly cruising. We may think the way to go cruising is to make a lot of money, but it seems like the people that go down that road are rarely willing to leave the money behind once they have it. Most of us have a good idea of what works for us, simply because that is what we know. At sundown in the anchorages we usually gather for refreshments after a hard day of book reading and routine maintenance, to swap lies about our sailing prowess, the huge volume of fish that we catch, and how irresistible we are to the opposite sex. True legends in our own minds. Eventually the conversations turns to what works for others, because for a cruising sailor that knowledge can make the difference between success and failure. There is no lack of opinion in these discussions and in the end we all learn a great deal. thanks Alex for your continued great work! 1855 From: Richard Till Date: Fri Jun 20, 2003 10:43am Subject: Re: Re: galvanized or stainless Alex, 316 ss is about 15% weaker than 302/304 ss. People are always surprised when ss bolts shear off so easily--it's simple: they are weaker. rt 1856 From: mistamarbles Date: Sat Jun 21, 2003 10:57am Subject: swain bareboat charter Hi, I'm interested in the Brent Swain designs, and am looking to try one out the end of this august for 7-10 days. Ideally bound for desolation sound. But Vancouver east coast vancouver Island ok too. Thanks Peter 1857 From: brentswain38 Date: Sat Jun 21, 2003 0:26pm Subject: Re: galvanized or stainless A friend bought enogh galvanized high tensile 1x7 wire at a scrapyard to rig a 36 footer for $25CDN. For less money I'd rather have a 2 year old galvanized rig than a 20 year old stainless rig. For galvanized wire, the bigger the strands the greater resistance to corrosion, which makes 1x7 high tensile the best. Coastal cruising , galvanized rigging will last a lifetime. Offshore it will rust eventually if not painted. The last rig I put on my boat, I painted with epoxy tar, wrapped it with hockey tape , then painted it with another coat or two of epoxy tar, and put black split plastic pipe over it. I feel it's good for a lifetime. Having worked on brake press for many years I had plenty of opportunity to compare stainless with other steels . Structurally stainless is extremely prone to metal fatigue and too unreliable for rigging the offshore cruiser.It's main attraction is it's decorative value , a priority one can't afford to indulge in when rigging a yacht for offshore work. If a stainless rig has to be replaced every few years because of the risk of metal fatigue, something most good surveyors recomend on offshore boats, then the corrosion resistance becones a moot point.A galvanized rig will outlast it in terms of reliable ,useful life. Stories of healthy looking stainless failing without warning are very common amoung off shore cruisers. One client, with a lot of offshore experience and lots of money ,told me he was going for galvanized rigging because he wanted to be able to simply look at the rig and see what shape it was in, something you can do with galvanized rigging, but not with stainless. Brent Swain 1858 From: freebc7 Date: Sun Jun 22, 2003 8:58am Subject: Junk rigs Does anyone have information on junk rigs used on Swain boats? Is it true that a jug rig is easier for a solo sailer to handle? Thanks, Pam 1859 From: M. Fletcher Date: Sun Jun 22, 2003 11:49am Subject: Re: Junk rigs Here's the link to the junk rig group. Lots on experience and info there. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/junkrig/ Mary 1860 From: crzylarry Date: Tue Jun 24, 2003 8:40pm Subject: New Member Greetings every1. Im not new to boating but Aits been a really long time away from the water. Im getting back into the hobbie and enjoy this site. All of this boat building is crazy. You guys/gals impress me too much to put into words. Thanks for the 3-D renderings. They are really nice. If anyone is in Eastern Coastal North Carolina hit me up. Im going back to go boating the second week of July from Los Angeles. Enjoy the w 1861 From: Glen Date: Wed Jun 25, 2003 7:45am Subject: The "BUG" O.K. I now know that I am very ill and need many days at sea to cure my ills. We went ( the whole family ) went sailing with friends of ours on Monday. The weather was fantastic, the winds were good and company out of this world. The whole family is now hooked on sailing just as bad as I am!! So much so that the wife has told me to post a message that while we are building our dream that we need to have something a little smaller to go out and play with. So if anyone on or close to Vancouver Island hears or knows of a good deal on a small boat somewhere in the 27ft range, sailboat that is!! Cheap is good free is better!!!!!!!! I am not against having to work on her if the deal is good! Please e-mail and let me know! Thank to all Glen 1862 From: kingsknight4life Date: Wed Jun 25, 2003 8:25pm Subject: Railings? Hi, everyone. I finally decided to do something about my sailing "itch" and bought a boat. I wrestled with the idea of building a Swain boat for a yr. but come to realize that right now it isn't feasible for me and they command to high a price for me to buy a used one. anyway, I like the solid railings on his boat. the wire ones seemd flimsy to me. Can i put steel life lines/railings on a fibreglass boat? thanks Rowland 1863 From: pvanderwaart Date: Thu Jun 26, 2003 5:50am Subject: Re: Railings? A gentleman in my club replaced the usual wire lifelines on his Tartan 34 with SS tubing. The motivation was some incapacity on the part of his wife, I believe. It looked pretty good, but I don't have any details of how it was done. Basically, it was like having the bow pulpit extended to the stern pulpit. Ask around your local marine tradesmen (riggers, etc) for who makes custom pulpits in your area. Peter 1865 From: Alex Christie Date: Sun Jun 29, 2003 1:00am Subject: origami yachts get good use Well, I've had a revelation: I saw something today at down at the local Comox government wharf that brought a smile to my face. As I wandered the docks checking on the origami fleet in the bright sunshine of an almost tropical day, I found that of nearly ALL the boats tied up at the Comox wharf, only three sailboats were actually attended by their owners. And these three boats were of origami construction. Odd coincedence? The folks on MOONRAVEN, a 36 foot Swain-design, had her on the grid, waiting for a rising tide to float her off, probably after painting the bottom. Someone else was aboard the 50 foot aluminum PANGEA (Greg's design), and despite my attempts at not appearing to look through their portlights as I walked by (a dockside courtesy I learned from my days living aboard) , the fellow in the cabin seemed to happily acknowledge my prescence with a nod and a smile. On the 36 foot Swain aft-cabin version SILAS CROSBY, the owners were enjoying a sizzling barbecue on the aft rail. Everyone looked happy and content to be on their respective origami boats. My impression was that all other boats at the dock, power and sail, were empty, devoid of life. I don't think it is solely the fact that these boats were constructed using the origami technique which makes them get used, but it does seem that the common thread among these three very different yachts is that they have been built to conform exactly to the owners' individual tastes and dreams. These boats are true servants to their owners, not the other way around. The owners in no way have to fit themselves into someone else's vision of what a proper boat should be, and their boats fit their needs with little compromise to contend with beyond the fact that any boat needs maintenance and attention. Customization seems to me the key to getting the boat you want, keeping it, and enjoying it. This possibly answers the question that always comes to mind when I see acres of sailboats unused and afloat at marinas everywhere. Just like clothing, you tend to wear the ones that fit, and the rest stay on their hangers. Alex 1866 From: edmdgd Date: Sun Jun 29, 2003 1:42pm Subject: Steel Boat Purchase Hello to the Group, I have always in the past owned Fiberglass boats. I am contemplating a long term cruise with a new vessel preferably of steel (new to me that is). As some of the boats that I am looking at are out of the country I am a little wary of the process. May I ask your opinions on what to look for. Is sounding necessary?. What does sounding cost?. Is repair on an Origami (frameless) as easy to repair in out of the way places as the framed boat design. How is metal condition under sprayed foam evaluated?. Am I correct in assuming that the compass in my binoculars will no longer act appropiately?. Hand bearing compass same problem?. I am sure I have many more areas of concern but maybe your answers will cover them. Thank You Gerad 1867 From: Date: Tue Jul 1, 2003 6:45am Subject: new 50 foot design status The following post is a follow-up to those people interested in our new 50 foot design. I am also emailing interested parties directly. If you did not receive a copy of this email directly, and would like to be included on our mailing list, please let me know at x50@e.... Hi to all, My apologies for not getting back to everyone sooner. We've been busy getting the site ready to start the Genoa 55, and I only got back into town this weekend. In between building forms, shoveling dirt and welding rebar, Ron and I have had been discussing the shape the new boat will take. As you might imagine everyone has slightly different requirements, and we want to try and match as many different people as possible. We've been experimenting with a couple of new software ideas to let us create origami hulls. We plan to capture aspects of both the Darwin and the Genoa into a new designs. Once we see that this will work to our satisfaction, we will bring forward the new design for your review. We have received quite a few letters about the new 50 foot design, as well as the 55 and 60 foot designs, so it looks like there is a lot of interest out there in larger origami style boats. If I missed replying to anyone over the last few weeks as I've been moving back and forth please let me know. With the volume of spam I get daily sometimes mail gets deleted by mistake. We have reports that the Darwin is going to be featured in an upcoming magazine. Once this is confirmed I will provide further details. We are still awaiting surveys from some people. If you would like a say in the new design please drop me a line. All information will be kept confidential. Each new design we create has taught us quite a bit about the origami process, how to optimize the patterns, and create new shapes. We want to continue this in the x50, which is why your input is important to us. regards Greg 1868 From: emearg88 Date: Wed Jul 2, 2003 0:29am Subject: Re: Railings? Hi Rowland I had galvanised metal railings on a previous boat. They were top and intermediate rails of about 3/4 inch galvanised steel welded to stanchions, pullpit and pushpit. They certainly gave you a feeling of security, but at the cost of weight and appearance - they were very visible. I never really liked them, but my wife loved them. Similarly yachtie friends hated them and 'lubbers loved them. Wire lifelines are much stronger than they look, but some are concerned that if one fell really heavily they could act like a cheese-cutter. Hence some offshore boats have replaced wire lifelines with 1/2 inch vectran or spectra cored braid. (The exotic core is needed to minimise stretch). Another approach by a local powerboat was to laminate the top rail from 1/8 inch timber. Looks a million dollars. Fair winds Graeme 1869 From: emearg88 Date: Wed Jul 2, 2003 0:40am Subject: Re: tips and tricks I can confirm that Gregs chain bashing technique works quite well although it is essential that the chain be under at least moderate tension. An improvement on the technique, provided you are not in a rush, not off a lee shore, and can take your time is as follows. 1. Bash the chain then wait five minutes, 2. Haul in ten feet of chain then stop hauling, 3. Bash the chain and wait another five minutes, 4. Repeat process untill all chain is aboard. Bashing gets rid of big globs of mud and the waiting allows a lot of the loose slime to wash off. Bashing works for a maximum of about ten feet of chain so it must be repeated. Fair winds Graeme 1870 From: Date: Wed Jul 2, 2003 6:21am Subject: Re: Re: tips and tricks Thanks Graeme. Chain bashing was invented by Preston Moore aboard Monella, and now Gitana II. 1872 From: John Jones Date: Wed Jul 2, 2003 10:59pm Subject: Re: Re: tips and tricks A phire hose powered by the main engine werks okay too. 1873 From: Date: Fri Jul 4, 2003 9:21am Subject: computer designed origami Earlier I wrote an article that mentioned the limitations of designing origami yachts in paper. This article expands on this discussion. Over the years we have created hundreds if not thousands of origami boats in paper. Early on we realized that paper model were not a reliable way to built full sized boats. When designing a boat, you want to be able to control aspects of the design such as length, beam, waterline, displacement, sheer and overall shape. The lines of the boat. These all work together to create a suitable hull. If you take a piece of paper, and cut darts into it, this will fold up into a shape that with some practice will resemble a boat. However, you will have little control over the dimensions of the boat you have created. Unless you solve the geometry behind the process, you will have to measure the results, and adjust the paper repeatedly to try and get close to your intended design. It is simple to measure the piece of paper, but the problem is that the piece of paper when folded is not the boat you originally drew. If you are like us you will find that adding a small amount to increased the depth of the hull will also change the beam, so then you must move the chine, which changes the sheer, and then after it is all done, you end up with a knuckle at the chine end points. So you change the dart to remove the knuckle, which changes the beam and the sheer and the depth of the hull, and you are back where you started. As you increase the number of darts to make the hull rounder amidships, the problem become increasingly more complicated. Our process is different. We take the line drawings, use the computer to lay in the darts fair to the hull (hard to do by eye), and then calculate the patterns to solve this shape. We work from the hull outwards to predict the pattern. Working with paper you are forced to do a great deal of trial and error, working inwards from the paper to try and guess the hull. Computer designed origami is a great advancement in the process of designing origami boats, as it allows for a high degree of precision and predictability in the final shape. It has allowed us a great deal of freedom to experiment, and every new design we have done has incorporated new features that we never dreamed of in paper. Computer designed origami is simply a continuation of the design process for all yachts. At one time yachts were designed first by building models, and then construction the lines. The limitations of this method eventually led to this process being reversed, and the lines being drawn first. Computers were then introduced to aid in drawing the lines. We have simply adapted this process to origami. The origami process itself has a great future for amateur and professional construction. For the amateur it allows construction of fair and smooth hulls without the high degree of skill required for traditional metal boat construction. For the professional builder it allows for one-off custom construction at a price competitive with mass production yachts. The origami shape itself is a great boat shape. The tortured bows and sterns provide strength and rigidly that you cannot achieve in traditional metal boat construction without significant framing. The chined midsection provides roll damping, tracking and strengthening of the structure, without the appearance of chines. Multi-chined origami allows you to create a metal boat without the "slab sided" appearance common in metal boat construction, and provides strengthening points to attach rub rails and twin keels. There is considerable room for improvement and advancement of the origami process through the introduction of computers. I have no doubt that somewhere out there is a budding young designer that will eventually make our designs look crude by comparison. It is only to be expected, because we have only scratched the surface of what is possible. I expect there will come a time when the majority of custom metal boats will be constructed using the origami process, and builders will wonder in amazement why it was ever done any other way. Is there still room for paper designs? You bet. I would not be doing origami boats today except for the magic moment that occurred when I folded up my first paper model and realized the potential of the process. If you have never folded up a model, do one before the end of this day because this is the first step. Every boat begins when you stop thinking about building, and start building. Building a paper model is the first origami boat you will build. It will not be the last. Once you have taken paper models as far as you can go, and want to see how this compares with computer assisted designs, please let us know and we will be happy to discuss this further. Greg Elliott Easy Software Inc. 1990 Casano Drive North Vancouver, BC Canada V7J 2R2 tel: (604) 987-0050 fax:(253) 550-6928 web: www.easysoftwareinc.com email: greg@e... 1874 From: brentswain38 Date: Fri Jul 4, 2003 5:20pm Subject: Re: computer designed origami I've always began the design for origami boats by designing a hard chine hull on paper in the traditional way with the chines running the full length of the hull, then building a model . This lets me do all the calculations in the traditional way. I then take the patterns off the model, cut the bottom pattern in half, and attach the bow and stern to eliminate the chines there . This doesn't change the area of the sections below the waterline in any significant way.Computers make this job a lot easier, but computers can't match the experiences of hundreds of boats built to a given design and their evolution.Eventually there will be computer designed boats oput there with the same track record behind them , but evolution of the design will depend on their designer's open mindedness in improving them. If you look at a round bilge fibreglass boat you'll see that amidships there is very little flare or curve between the sheerline and the waterline amidships . On multichine hulls there is almost aleays a chine out of the water there.Thus multichine origami boats are usually far less asthetically pleasing than a single chine hull as on a single chine hull the chines are entirely below the waterline. Even with origami techniques, a multichine hull is a lot more work than a single chine hull and the pitfalls are greater.Having built several multichine hulls I see no real advantage to them, certainly not enough to justify the extra hassle . Rub strakes are OK on an aluminium boat, but on a steel boat they are a maintenance headache. Unless they are stainless( Much easdier to do with plasma cutters, ) or flame sprayed. It's impossible to keep paint from chipping off them.Friends with rubstrakes say there is more work trying to keep paint on them than the rest of the hull put together.Flat surfaces are much easier to maintain. The same maintenance problem would happen with chines above the waterline without the rubstrakes. Brent Swain 1875 From: brentswain38 Date: Fri Jul 4, 2003 5:29pm Subject: Re: Steel Boat Purchase You can determine the condition of steel under spray foam by dragging your fingernails over the foam . Where it has separated, it will sound hollow. That is where you should look for corrosion. If the hull has been thoroughly painted before foaming, there should be no problem . Avoid any hull which has been foamed over bare steel or primer. Ultrasound equipment can tell you the thickness of a hull from the outside. Repairing origami boats is no harder than any other type of metal boat, altho the liklihood of the being dammaged enough to need repair is extremely remote. Yor compass in your binoculars or handbearing compass will be useless . A steering compass can be adequately adjusted. Brent Swain 1876 From: Date: Sat Jul 5, 2003 3:55pm Subject: Re: Re: computer designed origami Brent's technique is very similar to what we do, except that we build the 3-D model on the computer while he builds a 3-D physical model. This appears to confirm that Brent discovered, as did we, that working with paper patterns is not a reliable way to build an origami boat. Rather, you need a 3-D model of the boat first, from which to produce the patterns. To us the beauty of computer models is that they can be readily changed to experiment with different ideas. Everyone seems to want a different boat, and the computer let us make changes to the model rapidly in real- time working with the customer. We can build a 1/2 dozen different models, trying new ideas, until everyone is happy with the result. As a bonus, once the model is produced, all measurements are available directly from the computer to a high degree of precision and reliability. I'll try and outline some of the design issues we faced for those that might be interested in designing their own origami boats. Brent is addressing a different segment of the origami market than we are, and there is little if any overlap in our designs. Yet we have only explored a small fraction of the possibilities open to origami, and new designs will certainly expand the appeal of the process. Imagine if you will a traditional single chine boat with the chine running fair from bow to stern. Replace the bow and stern with an origami section, but leave the middle section of the boat unchanged. Now run a batten flush along the bow and sterns through the chine endpoints in the middle section. You will find that the chine in the middle section is no longer fair to the bow and stern. Typically the chine will be inboard of the batten, and the hull will have the appearance of "knuckles" at the chine endpoints. The reason for this is that the origami bows and sterns take a different line than traditional chine bows and sterns. While this is normally hidden underwater, when the boat is heeled, or on the hard, the eye sees this as less than appealing. If the eye can see it, so can the water. We redraw the chine so that it fair with the origami bows and sterns. We use the computer to lay a batten flush along the bows and stern of the origami hull, then redraw the chine amidships so that it is now fair. The difference may be only a matter of inches, but the eye is remarkably sensitive to anything not fair and it doesn't take much turbulence to affect performance. We use the computer to 3-D model the origami boat as it will appear when finished. The chine endpoints are selected to deliver the shape we want for the intended service of the boat, based on other successful designs of the past. The 3-chine design allows us to closely model both chine and round bilge boats, opening up a wide range of successful designs from which we can choose. Our designs are typically in the 40-60 foot range, and a single chine boat in that size has large panels between the chines. Multi-chines provide additional strengthening for larger boats, reduce the size of the flat spans and reduce the appearance of flat topsides. In smaller boat sizes there is less benefit with multi-chine construction because the panels are that much smaller. Once the chine endpoints are chosen, the computer draws the origami bows and sterns, and then fairs the chines amidships to match the ends. The computer sections the resulting hull, and the traditional calculations are performed to confirm that the resulting hull matches the customer's requirements. During this process keels, rudder, decks and cabins are also added to suit. At that point the metal work is ready to be patterned. The computer equivalent of a piece of paper is laid over all the surfaces - hulls, keels, rudders, decks, cabins, etc. and unfolded into flat patterns. The computer ensures all measurements are accurate and offsets are produced to transfer the patterns to physical sheets of metal. NC cutting could be used at this point, except for inaccuracies that might result from joining smaller sheets into larger sheets. We can also produce full sized patterns as required. Every design is unique and to us there is no "best" answer. Fiberglass production boats are often shaped the way they are as a result of difficulties in removing more complex shapes from the mold. Tumblehome was common in the past, and remains in wooden and metal designs, but has all but disappeared from fiberglass construction because of the cost and complexity of split molds. I have sailed with and without a rub strake, and for cruising my personal preference is for a strong rub strake extending out beyond the rest of the hull. Having been slammed against concrete docks by wind and waves and seen the damage that results from 3rd world boats dragging down your hull with bolts and nails protruding from their gunwales, I consider this only prudent. Other people have had other experiences, and will have different answers to these problems. Yacht clubs are few and far between while cruising. Officials love to make you come alongside concrete ship's docks rather than risk getting wet in your dinghy and local fishermen routinely come alongside without bumpers to sell you fish or bum cigarettes. You can't be on deck 24 hrs a day and eventually damage will result. The rub strake serves to localize damage to an area designed to take the punishment and simplify maintenance. On smaller boats a rub rail at the sheer can suffice, but on larger boats it is not adequate. The rail is too high up to protect the topsides from the most common causes of damage. Our goal is to prevent and limit the damage rather than have to repair it. We find on a triple chine design it is straight forward to place all chines below the waterline, except the upper chine which is hidden behind the rub strake. The upper chine serves to strengthen larger boats and together with the rub strake it serves to produce the illusion of a round hull. The middle chine on our designs is in a similar position to the chine on a single chine origami boat and serves the same purpose. The lower chine provides additional hull shape and stiffening to take twin keels. Again, this was done to allow larger boats to be developed in origami. This can be seen in more detail by looking at the Darwin 60. http://www.easysoftwareinc.com/Design/Darwin60/Darwin60.htm 1877 From: prairiemaidca Date: Sun Jul 6, 2003 9:35am Subject: Pilot house roof Hi All; It's a cool wet day out here on the prairie so before I head out to the boat shed I thought I'd post a Question. I've got the cabin roof on and now I'm starting the front window panels and roof of the pilot house. With the main sheeting system being attached to the pilot house roof, is it necessary to reinforce the roof to accomodate the loads from the main??? Martin and Betty (Prairie Maid) 1878 From: berzerker76 Date: Mon Jul 7, 2003 7:04pm Subject: Steel types for origami boats Hi there. I am new to this group and the building style interests me greatly. I was perusing the needed components for the swain 36 and I noticed that the type of steel was not designated. Is it your average 1010? 1018? Just something I was wondering about so I could start to work up a price list for what I will need. I am referring to the outer hull skin if I did not make that clear. Thank you in advance for any advice you have on the subject Russyl Neumann 1880 no message body 1881 From: jalborey Date: Wed Jul 9, 2003 0:14pm Subject: Re: Steel types for origami boats Hi, Russyl Depending where are you located, steel grades receive different denominations. As far as I know, in Canada and USA the steel mostly used is normal construction grade, aka A-36. Here in Europa steel grades are known under completly different names, and at least in Spain, boating authorities require the use of one of several standarized low carbon naval steel grades. Regards, Jesús 1882 From: brentswain38 Date: Wed Jul 9, 2003 2:30pm Subject: Re: computer designed origami People who build interiors in stock fibreglass boats tell me that there is aften a difference of three inches frome one side of the hull to the other. And they say they worry about the symetry of origami boats . The finer the cut on the ends of the chine on an origami hull is the less the hump will be. Another trick is to score halfway throug the plate in a line 6 inches or so ahead of the end of the chine before pulling the hull together to let the hull plate give a little bit there. Some hump is unavoidable. The computer doesn't take into acount the stiffness of the plate ahead of the chine, so what the computer says will be fair and what the reality of working with stiff plate will create can be quite different.The computer assumes zero resistance from the plate ahead of the chine. Brent Swain 1883 From: brentswain38 Date: Wed Jul 9, 2003 3:07pm Subject: Re: Pilot house roof No reinforcing of the roof is neccessary. You'd break your sheets long before you reached a fraction the strength of the roof . Stainless plates under the padeyes will reduce maintenance, especially if they are large enough to protect the area where the blocks might chip paint off. Brent Swain 1884 From: brentswain38 Date: Wed Jul 9, 2003 3:10pm Subject: Re: Steel types for origami boats Standard A36 mild steel is all you need. I was once moored off a shipyard in Auckland where the foreman said all their attempts at specially steels were a waste of time and had no real advantage over mild steel. Brent Swain 1885 From: Michael Casling Date: Wed Jul 9, 2003 3:40pm Subject: Re: Re: Steel types for origami boats Did you park next to Steel Yachts on the Tamaki River? The owner who died about two years ago had a really nice dark green 36 foot steel sailboat. BC Mike C 1886 From: robertgm36 Date: Wed Jul 9, 2003 8:10pm Subject: Metal Boat Gathering - Aug 9/10 A few steel boat owners , myself included , are having an informal gathering,happening,make it what you want social event Aug 9/10 in Bellingham Wash. This will take place in Fairhaven at or near Iota Metalworks . Two steel boats are under construction near here. So far three steel boats are confirmed to sail in and my 36 ft Swain will be there . One of the boats coming is Junk rigged and ready to depart for the Panama and Europe.Would be great to have some more origami boats present.There is free anchorage in this area of Bellingham Bay and free tie-up for six or so boats if you do some rafting . There is a suitable beach here for twin keelers . I may park mine there for the weekend .This is a chance to see boats being built , see boats that are built , take photos ,ask questions , share experiences generally have a good time.If you are a boat junky like me I never get tired of looking at and talking about boats . Bring your partner, kids , friends ,most of all bring your boat for everyone to look at. It is free and a potluck barbecue is planned Sat night.If you want more info ie. directions please email me direct- robertgm77@e... 1887 From: farmulation Date: Thu Jul 10, 2003 10:00pm Subject: too much email Alex I edited my meb'ship on the homepage to the "don't send me any more email" mode and nothing has changed. I'm not getting to the mail, it's taking up my time just managing it and I want that time for other things. If making this change in my meb'ship status is not in your bailiwick, please suggest to whom I can appeal John McWilliams 1888 From: joe_klir Date: Fri Jul 11, 2003 4:42am Subject: Just Joined Hi, Last two days I have spend reading all messages and looking at all posted photos.Fascinating stuff-congratulations.All this fits with my plans for my early retirement.With couple of friends we will build steel boats for serious blu water cruising,none of the gin- palace nonsence.This will be semi-commercial project,for each member we will build two boats,one we will keep the secon sell in the required stage of construction and fitting out.We are located in UK, but will be bulding hulls and interior in the Czech republic,as labour costs are lower and our associates need the work.The boats will be put into water either in france or Uk. We would gratly appreciate any input and comments and woud like hear from anybody building boat in UK or Europe Best Regards Joe 1889 From: rafaccad Date: Fri Jul 11, 2003 8:35am Subject: Re: Just Joined I joined the group about two months ago, but this is my first post. What is the difference in displecement, both steel and aluminum, for the 40 foot Swain design? I also want to know how much tankage is possible in the bilge keel design? Regards. Rafael. 1890 From: Gerad Duffin Date: Sun Jul 13, 2003 7:42pm Subject: Welding course for Steel boat Fabrication A question for the group please In order to repair and fabricate additions and to able to accomplish this by one's self it will be necessary to be proficient at welding. Our local technical school is offering the following courses. Which course would be most applicable. 1 GMAW Gas Tungsten Arc Welding 2 Gas Metal Arc Welding 3 Metal Arc, Oxy & Flux Core 4 Shielded Metal Arc & Pipe Thanks for all your help Gerad 1891 From: brentswain38 Date: Tue Jul 15, 2003 1:23pm Subject: Re: Welding course for Steel boat Fabrication Number three looks like the most relevant. Tell the instructor you want to learn stick welding to build a boat. Much of your couse will involve long hours of burning rod, so you might just as well be building something useful with the time such as anchors, anchorwinch, cleats handrails , hatches , etc. Maybe tou could involve other students in your projects. Brent swain 1892 From: Joe Earsley Date: Thu Jul 17, 2003 8:47am Subject: silas crosby plan Hi Alex, Is there any way to get the owners of the Silas Crosby to post a sketch of their floor plan? I am curious about engine placement, engine access, engine removal, cockpit drains, aft cabin access etc. I plan on purchasing plans for the 40 foot from Brent this fall and purchasing metal in the spring. Thanks! Joe Earsley Anchorage, Alaska 1893 From: sae140 Date: Fri Jul 18, 2003 4:34am Subject: Invite If you're interested in coastal cruising/ long distance voyaging on a minimum-expenditure basis (regardless of the make or type of boat or rig), then you're cordially invited to join a new group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/LowCostVoyaging Regards Colin 1894 From: Date: Fri Jul 18, 2003 7:42am Subject: computer designed origami We have been modeling origami hulls on computers since the mid 1980's and use the latest 3-D computer design tools. I have been working with computers for 30+ years, with a degree in mathematics and computer science. Previous to my years cruising I was the senior designer on two of the largest computer networks in BC, and while sailing I wrote a number of commercial computer packages, many of which are actively sold today. Our computer models are accurate, as confirmed by the boats built to the patterns. Probably the single most challenging problem we have worked on was to fair the chine ends into the hull. To us, a hump at the chine ends detracts from the beauty and performance of the boat, which is why we have devoted so much time to getting rid of it. Increasing the number of chines in an origami hull has simplified fairing the chine ends. In section, every origami hull is round in the ends and flat amidships. This transition, from round to flat and back to round, is a challenge to keep fair. As the number of chines is increased, the closer the shape of the amidships section can come to the shape of the round ends, making it simpler to fair the chine ends. For an idea of how we have been able to control the shape of the chines: http://www.easysoftwareinc.com/Design/Pictur5.jpg Multi-chines can also expand the interior volume for the boat. The most efficient use of material for the maximum interior volume is a circle. The more chines you add, the closer the hull can come to a circle in section, affording the most interior volume for the least material. For us, the increase in useable space pays for the increased cost of multi-chine construction. This last point should not be overlooked. Multi-chine construction is not just about appearance and strengthening larger boats. Space is at a premium inside a boat, and multi-chine construction allows you to maximize this space for the minimum amount of material. For a reasonably small increase in time and welding up front, you gain space that remains with you for the life of the boat. 1895 From: Gary Date: Fri Jul 18, 2003 11:10am Subject: Painting After a hull is sandblasted owners on Van Isle have been using a zinc primer before the tar goes on. A question has been raised as to whether this would create electrolysis in combination with sea water and affecting the hull. The supplier informed me this would only happen with an aluminum hull. Any added info would be appreciated. Thanks 1896 From: philippe peltier Date: Sun Jul 20, 2003 10:54am Subject: CAD/CAM ? I was wondering which CAD/CAM tool was able to develop an origami hull ? I heard about touchcad, but are tehte other tools ? 1897 From: vinnie_barberino2000 Date: Mon Jul 21, 2003 3:05pm Subject: New to group Hello all!I have been looking at building a steel boat for some time now. I have a plywood 1/4 tonner which is past its use by date , having been thrashed around the buoys for to long and my need to see the world has overpowered my desire to scream at crew on wednesday nights.I think I have looked at nearly every site i can find in regards to a design most suitable for us and keep returning here.I've looked at steel for the 31 footer , I cannot get a sheet long enough here in New Zealand ,question is can I join two ? The longest sheet is 20ft x 8ft (bugger).Cheers. Vinnie Auckland 1898 From: johan_de_bruin1 Date: Mon Jul 21, 2003 7:12pm Subject: Cruising Costs An open question to anybody: How much does it take to cruise per month? More importantly, where do some folks get their money from? (I'm not talking about managing your finances) I know the questions are very wide, and every boat has a different 'agenda', and likewise do their owners, lifestyle et al. So, if I may direct a question at Brent, as the "father" of this technique we all seem to endorse: How do you fund yourself when you're obviously sailing for 6 months at a time? Thanks Johan 1899 From: Date: Tue Jul 22, 2003 8:07am Subject: Re: New to group Plates can be butt welded to create larger sheets. Coil steel might be available, which can be cut to any length, and might be more economical. As the coil is unwound the metal can retain a "side", so flip the metal for opposite sides of the boat. Otherwise you might get a "hungry dog" effect on one side of the boat. Our larger patterns are all butt welded. Alloy normally comes in 8x20 sheets and must be butt welded to create a larger sheet. Even our 40 foot pattern in steel requires butt welding. Two large corners are cut off the 8x40 sheets and butt welded near the center to provide more beam than is possible from two 8 foot sheets. 1900 From: Joe Earsley Date: Tue Jul 22, 2003 8:24am Subject: RE: Cruising Costs Check out a recent article on cruising costs that was in Cruising World. Maybe 2 or 3 months back.... 1901 From: put_to_sea Date: Tue Jul 22, 2003 10:11am Subject: Loops in anchor cable Brent's book discusses the advantages of using galvanised wire rope instead of an all chain anchor rode. This makes a lot of sense to me but how do you attach a snubber to the wire rope. If I remember correctly, Brent says to put a loop in the wire. I am having a hard time picturing how this is done without weakening the wire. Anyone have any suggestions? Brent, are you out there? Best regards, Amos 1902 From: Gary Date: Tue Jul 22, 2003 10:12am Subject: Aluminum Mast Hello: I have found a 47' aluminum mast on an old derelect sail boat that looks stucturally ok and I will replace all rigging. Question is how to restore the surface of the mast as the paint is off and pealing the length of the mast. Have thought of pressure wash, light sandblast or stainless disk. After the paint should the mast be left bare or painted and/or somehow treated. Thanks for any help... Gary 1903 From: vinnie_barberino2000 Date: Tue Jul 22, 2003 1:46pm Subject: Re: New to group Greg thanks for the reply , my steel supplier came back to me yesterday arvo and told me the largest sheet we can use is 27ft so not too bad . Damn now im wondering about the 36 ft ,,,, 1904 From: brentswain38 Date: Tue Jul 22, 2003 2:21pm Subject: Re: Cruising Costs The easiest way to deal with money is to learn how to get along without it.I have no car to support, no wives or ex's,no children ( that I'm aware of) I don't drink( Unless it's homemade on rare occasions) , don't smoke, no longer chase women and they don't chase me . As I'm extremely allergic to cigarette smoke, the restaurants and bars of southern lattitudes make themselves off limits to me. Friends who live the land life ask me how I'm able to go cruising. If you take the money they spend on a car, moorage( in 19 years I've never paid to tie to a dock)apartment rent, shop rent, booze, cigarettes, etc, you have a lot of money. When my niece (who had traveled through Europe and loved it ) turned 16 she was thinking about buying a car . I told her that the average cost of a car in BC was the cost of a return ticcket to Baja and $300 dollars spending money every month she said "I never thought of it that way". Few peole ever do. With the only expenses I have while cruising being food , diesel and a bit of paint , I spend less money cruising the South Pacific than I do staying home.Can some game , buy a couple of bags of brown rice ($25 for 50 lbs, )and dried bean soup mix , Dry some blackberry and salmonberry leaves for tea,blackberries, catch a few fish, and use your diesel only when absolutly neccessary, and cruising is real cheap.I just bought a gallon of oil based paint for my decks in a secondhand place for $3.Books and plans cover my expenses well ,low as they are. Allen and Sharrie Farell on the China Cloud were collecting old age pension only. They said people living ashore were practically starving on that much money ,while they were putting money in the bank. Brent Swain 1905 SPAM 1906 From: John Jones Date: Tue Jul 22, 2003 8:34pm Subject: Re: Re: New to group Keep look'n around ... I did, and I found a supplier that would supply 40' and 50' lengths, 8' & 10' wide... they'll even cut it to a specified shape. "Is there a RUSSEL METALS in New Zealand?" John 1907 From: John Jones Date: Tue Jul 22, 2003 8:45pm Subject: Re: Re: Cruising Costs Hey Brent If you wanna make yer own "BOOZE" I can send you a few recipes.... John 1908 From: John Jones Date: Tue Jul 22, 2003 9:13pm Subject: Twin bildge keels sssooooooo???? Do we put lead ballast in the bildge keels or leave 'em M T ? Also The plans call for "3-5X8 sheets of 3/16" for the transom.... why?? 1909 From: vinnie_barberino2000 Date: Tue Jul 22, 2003 9:45pm Subject: Re: New to group No Russell metals down here unfortunatly, however I have put out a few emails to suppliers down here so we see what happens, keep you posted. 1910 From: Date: Wed Jul 23, 2003 1:28am Subject: Re: Aluminum Mast The standard preparation for an alloy mast is usually to blast with plastic beads and then paint with LP, but it can be big $$. I would not use any abrasive/blasting/grinding to clean the mast. Alloy is too soft for that sort of treatment. I was able to lift the peeling paint on my mast with a stainless scraper and some patience. An electric "hair dryer" style heater might help soften the paint, but may prove useless because alloy conducts heat so efficiently. Care should be used not to apply too much heat. I would not use a propane torch or similar to soften paint on any alloy mast. Pure aluminum is soft, so alloy is tempered during manufacturing, which more than doubles the strength of the material. Heating the alloy above about 400F can remove this temper, and with it more than 1/2 the strength of the mast. For this reason care must be taken when welding fittings on an alloy mast. A chemical paint stripper might work, or it might mark the alloy, so test a small area first. I haven't tried this, because my mast was still in place, but it might be a low cost alternative if the mast is out of the boat. I have found that paint removers can dissolve even thick high build epoxy, so I was reluctant to use them aloft, where they might drip on the deck. It has been my experience that above water, alloy only corrodes when it is painted, or in contact with another metal. Left unpainted the mast will turn a dull gray but no further maintenance should be required. Painting is more for appearance on alloy than for protection. A mast can be anodized to keep it looking bright as an alternative to paint, but again this might be big $$. Before stepping the mast, roll a piece of flexible, high strength foam into a tube, and slide it up inside the mast. This will deaden the noise of the wires and halyards inside the mast when you roll at an anchorage. If you don't do this, the noise of wires and halyards slapping inside an alloy mast can make sleep almost impossible. Alloy is a great material for masts because it is extremely light weight for its strength. This is important for a cruising boat, as weight aloft is not to be desired in a sailboat. As a rule of thumb, every extra pound aloft must be balanced by an extra 10 pounds of ballast in the keel. For a cruising boat this means that saving just 50 pounds in weight in a mast can allow a reduction of 500 pounds in the amount of ballast required. This 550 total pounds can be replaced with stores or gear, without increasing the displacement of the boat. For example: When building your boat, if you know you are installing an alloy stick, then calculate the weight saving as compared to the original design. You may be able to safely leave 10 times this weight out of the ballast. Instead, install a water tank in the bilge to hold the same total weight of water. In our example, saving 50 pounds aloft could allow you to add enough drinking water for 2 people for an extra month (550 pounds = 250 liters @ 4 liters/day per person = 31 days for 2 people). This additional month of fresh water may make remote destinations available that might otherwise be beyond your reach, which may justify the extra cost of an alloy stick. note: The preceding was an example of what is possible. Always check with your designer before modifying the ballast in a yacht, as proper ballasting is critical to the safety of a yacht. 1911 From: Date: Wed Jul 23, 2003 8:51am Subject: Re: Cruising Costs The cost of cruising depends a lot on where you are cruising, your boat, your ability to maintain the boat, and of course your lifestyle. Budget 10-20% of the value of your boat annually for maintenance and depreciation. You might not spend that much each year, but if you cruise long enough, you will have to start replacing gear such as sails and engines. Breakdowns do occur and it helps a lot if you have money set aside to deal with the unexpected. Your ability to maintain the boat yourself can greatly influence these numbers. Lots of areas of the world require that you pay for moorage. If you spend your time in harbor, this can really add up. Also, when you are in harbor, you have lots of opportunity to shop and eat in restaurants. Passage making is harder on the boat than sitting at anchor. Breakdowns and wear and tear can be expensive to repair if you need to start flying in parts. One of the sure ways to break a boat is to try and make a passage to a schedule. Take your time, and move with the weather. In the tropics the "seasons" change every 6 months, so that is usually when you make passages. If you rush, or move before the weather, it almost always takes longer and costs a lot more. By far the least expensive alternative while cruising is to anchor out in some uninhabited islands, and forage for your food as much as possible. It is an interesting experience and challenge for most people, used to catching their food at the supermarket with small bits of plastic as bait. One suggestion I would make is to make a small rental property and property manager part of your cruising plans. We did this and the tenants paid off the property the first 10 years we were sailing, and from then on it has provided us an income. Even a modest income goes a long ways when you are anchored out at the islands, as the longer you stay, the more money you have in the cruising kitty when you return to harbor. If you need a new sail, you can easily calculate how many months to stay out at the islands before you will have enough money. In SE Asia for a family of 4 we budget about $1500 per month for the boat and living expenses and live quite well. This is only a small fraction of what it costs us to live in a house in Canada. I find living in "civilization" much like being on a treadmill, where you need to keep running just to stay in one place. Cruising gives you an opportunity to break this cycle. 1912 From: Michael Casling Date: Wed Jul 23, 2003 9:20am Subject: Re: Cruising Costs Two good answers sofar from Brent and Jeff. Exact dollar amounts are hard to come by but one American said it cost him $2000- month which is probably a reasonable number, far less than the affluent and a bit more than the thrifty. $300,000- at 8% $400,000- at 6% or $500,000- at 5% or some means of providing an income while you are sailing. Rental, royalties, writing assignments, rich inlaws etc. The classic paradox is having the $$$ but not the time, or having the time but not the $$$. I think any thrifty minded sailor has got to know how to fix a lot of stuff. Michael Casling 1913 From: Michael Casling Date: Wed Jul 23, 2003 9:34am Subject: Re: New to group Is Steel Yachts still there on the Tamaki River? You would think they would know what steel is available. If you get a bigger boat you can have more crew to yell at and a bigger bar tab. There are lots of old Farr and Birdsell 35 footers at reasonable prices. The old owner of Steel Yachts had a really nice dark green steel boat around 36 feet. It is called Marimba 2. He died a couple of years ago. Michael Casling 1914 From: Olav Lindkjoelen Date: Wed Jul 23, 2003 11:10am Subject: Re: Cruising Costs Hi, I want to go cruising whenever I like to too. I do have a plan for the income part, and also partly for the boating stuff. It will not happen for a few years yet though, but I will get there. I guess you can call me ambitious, but I plan on doing it through Network Marketing. I am in a Network Marketing business that teach people to get out of debt, start their own home business and grow a residual business income. I know this sounds like the usual marketing blah blah some of you have probably heard before though, but I talk to people like you and me on our team every week who are there allready, who have been in this business for 1-2 years. They are debt free, have a full time residual income coming in every month, their income is going up even if they would choose to take a 3 month or half a year vacation. And the best thing about it is that you can do business from anywhere in the world, and probably even write off some of you cruicing expences on your taxes because you can do occational business with people as you go aswell as contact other people around the world that are on your team or elsewhere in the business. I WANT to do it, and I WILL do it within the next few years. I just refuse to give up on my dream, and I KNOW that I can make it. I have even started studying boat plans, and what is required to build a boat that can take 2 adults and 4 children cruising for a length of time. I have looked at Bruce Roberts website, and also some others. I have looked at the pictures on this groupsite, and must admit that it looks quite simple putting together a boat using the origami technique. Has any motoryachts been put together using this technique? Olav! 1915 From: vinnie_barberino2000 Date: Wed Jul 23, 2003 1:57pm Subject: Re: New to group McMullen and Wing are there now I think ,I grew up beside that river just up by the older of the two bridges on the Pakuranga side.You have a good point Michael regarding good cheap boats but I want to build to my requirements.I want to change the subject here now , we have a very weak dollar so the bigger flasher overseas yachts get refits done here between November till around March .The stuff that gets thrown away makes me cry , however all to my benefit.So there is another reason why I want to build , my garage is splitting !!. I have everything from near new sails ,anchors , fittings,ropes,etc I cant believe what they throw out. Cheers Vinnie 1916 From: brentswain38 Date: Wed Jul 23, 2003 2:08pm Subject: Re: Loops in anchor cable I put an eye splice every 50 feet , then shackle the 50 ft lengths together . I use stainless wire with copper nicopress sleeves , as 7X19 stainless wire is quite cheap in used boaters equipment stores . This lets me attach a rope snubber wherever there is an eye .A large float also acts as a snubber as does a litre of lead cast in an empty paint can with a 3/8th inch stainless rod loop cast in the top. 1 litre=30 lbs of lead. Brent Swain 1917 From: brentswain38 Date: Wed Jul 23, 2003 2:11pm Subject: Re: Cruising Costs Cruising World costs seem to be based on the assumption one is a well programmed urban consumer zombie. One needs only to read the marine catalogues they read to see where their money goes. Brent Swain 1918 From: Michael Casling Date: Wed Jul 23, 2003 2:12pm Subject: Re: Re: New to group Yere that's the name of the place. My brother used to have his boat parked there, used to get a lot of sludge growth on the bottom. I am from Blockhouse Bay, played for Suburbs, went to school with Dave Giddens the sailmaker. Bo Birdsell did a design for me back in 82, the boat is called Tarara. That would be rich yankees that have the excess pieces. Meanwhile up here in BC Canada there are lots of people that know about welding and steel boats. Brent has lots of ideas for doing it yourself if steel is your choice and a lot of his ideas could be applied to glass or wood boats too. I still prefer some of the glass on wood boats but the steel has a lot going for it if you have the skills for welding. Good luck, Michael Casling 1919 From: brentswain38 Date: Wed Jul 23, 2003 2:16pm Subject: Re: New to group I have had 40 ft sheets of steel in a single length.I've never had to flip a plate and never had a hungry dog effect in the 32 steel hulls I've put together. The conic ends of an origami boat make that almost impossible there . I'm glad someone else is handling the much bigger boats in aluminium.I've no interest in doing them Brent swain 1920 From: brentswain38 Date: Wed Jul 23, 2003 2:22pm Subject: Re: Painting I had zinc primer on my entire hull before I epoxy tarred her, and have had no serious problem in 19 years altho I've had some tiny blisters below the waterline .I don't know if thats because of the zinc or from thinner entrapment. While I wouldn't make any effort to remove the zinc, if I had a freshly sandblasted hull. I probably wouldn't use zinc below the waterline.I'd definitley use it above the waterline. Brent Swain 1921 From: vinnie_barberino2000 Date: Wed Jul 23, 2003 3:16pm Subject: Re: New to group Yes sludge a major problem ! Twin keels makes it easy , no booking for the ramp I can beach her and scrub her bum when I want. I will keep my eye out for TARARA.I have looked at a few H28's but very slow and GRP not for me up in the islands too much coral! But they are a beautiful boat and plenty have been offshore. Cheers 1922 From: vinnie_barberino2000 Date: Wed Jul 23, 2003 3:30pm Subject: Re: Painting I have used in the past an etching primer called PA10 on bare metal it is a vinyl based product i think , then an aluminum base high build anti corrosive primer (below the water line only).These were ofor my steel keel,on my plywood hull yacht, and it was a product from epiglass.It seems fine , bit expensive thou. Vinnie Auckland 1923 From: vinnie_barberino2000 Date: Wed Jul 23, 2003 4:15pm Subject: Re: New to group Brent I will wait till I get your book then i will make a decision on size of vessel, I get concerned cause I am tall,I can get 4mm in decent sizes.I am sick of fiberglass and I hate fairing hulls and aluminum is for dingys. Vinnie Auckland 1924 From: Jim Phillips Date: Thu Jul 24, 2003 4:21am Subject: Brent's book Brent, Enough!!! There's been so many interesting ideas coming from you lately that I need to read your book. How do I go about buying it from Australia? Keep those ideas coming! Jim. 1925 From: Date: Thu Jul 24, 2003 8:14am Subject: Re: Cruising Costs The $1500 we budget monthly is CDN. $1000 USD. We generally watch the $$ (who doesn't), but we could spend a lot less in a pinch. Keep in mind that SE Asia where we cruise is quite economical. I recall reading once that the cost of beer is a good indicator of the general living costs in an area, and I have found it mostly reliable. Duty free Langkawi, where we normally re-supply, beer is about $.50 US in the local restaurants. Dinner for a family of 4, about $5-10 US in a local restaurant. However, this can quickly go up if you eat in spots that cater to tourists. Tourist Phuket, about 130 miles away by boat, is roughly double the price of Langkawi. We normally eat out a lot in SE Asia as the food prices in the local restaurants are little different than the cost of buying the food at the market. If you pick a spot that has lots of local people, it is a good bet the food will be good, and you won't get sick. SE Asia has little hawkers stalls in the streets everywhere, where a meal will cost about $.50 US per person. Everyone eats there. The only time I have really gotten sick was eating in a fancy restaurant that catered to tourists. If there are no local people eating in the restaurant, ask yourself why not. It doesn't matter to a tourist restaurant if you get sick, as there are new tourists every day. A restaurant that caters to local people will quickly go out of business if the local people start getting sick, so they are generally much safer places in which to eat. 1926 From: prairiemaidca Date: Thu Jul 24, 2003 9:20am Subject: Weight?? Hi All: This question is probably not one that is asked very often by those lucky enough to be building close to the salt but out here on the prairie's It's something of intrest to me. What is the aprox. weight of the average 36ft pilot house, fin keel. Not the displacement. I can go back and start calculating based on the amount of steel that I've used etc. but I was wondering if anyone has actually weighed one while it was empty any waiting to go to the water. On another note when the big paint debate was on I decided to contact the Wasser co. and get their lit. on the products that they sell. Well not only did I recieve all the info. but I had a personel visit from the Van. based Salesman(an avid boater) out here to our place to see the boat project and give his (Co.) ideas for a paint plan. All this at my invitaion and with no pressure to buy anything. Very interesting products. One other question. When joining two pieces of threaded SS steel together what is the best product to use to stop the threads from becoming permenantly joined? Martin and Betty (Prairie Maid) 1927 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Thu Jul 24, 2003 10:01am Subject: Re: Weight?? Funny thing about that. A boat displaces an amount of water that weighs exactly the same as the boat. Gary H. Lucas 1928 From: put_to_sea Date: Thu Jul 24, 2003 10:56am Subject: Re: Weight?? Maybe the weight Martin and Betty are wondering about is something I was also thinking about. The weight I was interested in was the hull weight with no interior, water, fuel, or other stores. This is just so I have a rough idea how much stuff I can load in without the boat turning into a real slug. Along those same lines, what would be the maximimum loaded displacement (weight) one should shoot for? 1929 From: nelstomlinson Date: Thu Jul 24, 2003 0:46pm Subject: antisieze When assembling engines, usw, we usually use antisieze to make sure that things will come apart. A quick google shows: http://www.mrosolutions.com/piantsz.htm#sol1000 Food grade, specifically mentions stainless steel. http://www.mrosolutions.com/piantsz.htm#sol2000 A ``Premium copper-graphite'' blend. That sounds scary, when you think about electrolysis. http://www.mrosolutions.com/piantsz.htm#sol2600 This one has nickel and graphite. Might be better for stainless in salt water than the copper-graphite? Then there's http://www.mrosolutions.com/piantsz.htm#sol2500 which is metal free. The problem with any of these is that if they get washed out by salt water, you're right back where you started, modulo any electrolysis they might have caused. You should be able to find several varieties of antisieze at any auto parts store. I would think that something like brick grease (or anhydrous lanolin?) with lots of zinc powder stirred in, would be pretty good. Even if (or maybe when) the grease gets washed away, the zinc might help. Nels 1930 From: vinnie_barberino2000 Date: Thu Jul 24, 2003 1:31pm Subject: Re: antisieze I have seen a chromium based product before in a car parts store here . I figure stainless is a high chromium metal so no allergic reaction should form.It was definetly an antisieze type product.Apart from that I didnt research it. 1931 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Thu Jul 24, 2003 3:56pm Subject: Re: antisieze If the ss threads are pipe threads then PTFE pipe thread tape should do the trick. Might do the trick with other threads as well. You could google for a technical reply from one of the anti-seize paste people such as Loctite and ask for the best product for your application. The other point is that a tub of the stuff might last you several lifetimes so a free sample or asking at the maintenance department at a nearby food factory, abbatoir or similar might be needed. Regards, Ted 1932 From: Richard Till Date: Thu Jul 24, 2003 4:30pm Subject: Re: antisieze What about Tefgel, rt 1933 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Thu Jul 24, 2003 6:18pm Subject: Re: Weight?? Stainless steel fasteners are a real problem because of galling. The metal welds to itself so easily it is unbelievable. I build machinery for the greenhouse using aluminum and stainless fasteners. The rule is NEVER put stainless together without a lubricant, not even finger tight. I can't tell you how many times we've cut finger tight bolts off that seized. That said, my preferred lubricant is blue Locktite thread locker. I have never had a seized thread with Loctite, and they don't vibrate loose either. In the presence of moisture Loctite seals the threads and keeps the water out . No crevice corrosion and much reduced electrolysis in aluminum. We have had real problems with stainless pipe threads weeping a drip every few minutes using all kinds of Teflon tape and pipe dope. Even had a seized 2" pipe thread put on hand tight dry. The threads were all buggered when we go it apart, and the device with the threads cost $400. Blue Loctite sealed the damaged threads with no leaks, and we could still take it apart. Note that Red Loctite requires 400 degrees F to break it loose. Also don't use Loctite on plastic threads. Gary H. Lucas 1934 From: keith green Date: Thu Jul 24, 2003 8:19pm Subject: Re: antisieze The J.Walther Co. sells some stuff they call "Rock and Roll". It's an anti- seize high-temp compund that is ceramic-based. I use it when shrinking together gear-reducer components and for threads that require anti-seize. It is not water-soluble. keith 1935 From: Phillip Allen Date: Fri Jul 25, 2003 2:45am Subject: Re: Weight?? scanned your post in a hurry...stainless "bearing" surfaces must be of dissimilar stainless not to gall, which brings up the possibility of galvanic corrosion...any more thoughts? 1936 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Fri Jul 25, 2003 5:12am Subject: Re: Weight?? Bearing surfaces of any material need to be dissimilar to work well. Years ago I worked at a company that used gear pumps to pump molten polystyrene. The bearings were lubed by the polystyrene. The shafts were common shafting grade steel, and the bearings were outer races from roller bearings, very hard. The worked great as long as the weep holes were putting out a nice white strand of polystyrene. When the strand started turning dark you knew you had contamination in the bearing. When it turned black they usually seized a couple of hours later. I think if you want stainless on stainless bushings you'd want say a 316 SS shaft and 440 SS (hard) bushing. I don't think that the two grades are far apart enough on the galvanic scale to really be a big problem that way, especially if kept reasonably well lubed. Gary H. Lucas 1937 From: Date: Fri Jul 25, 2003 8:17am Subject: Re: Weight?? When floating on its waterline, the weight of a boat will (approximately) equal its designed displacement. The displacement for a yacht is calculated from the shape of the hull, not by actually weighing the boat. The designer adds up all the weights of the materials to build the boat, plus supplies and stores for the boat's intended service, and adjust the shape of the hull so that the displacement and weights are equal. Normally, a boat would be designed to float above its waterlines when empty (weigh less than its designed displacement) and be on its lines when built as designed and loaded for its intended service. A 36 foot cruising yacht in steel might average around 10 tons (22400 lbs loaded), but this can vary widely. The boat should weigh less than this when empty, to allow for supplies and stores. Building a boat stronger (heavier) than it is designed with the idea that this will make it safer can reduce the amount of stores and supplies the boat can carry and lead to overloading, reducing the overall safety of the boat. 1938 From: prairiemaidca Date: Fri Jul 25, 2003 8:59am Subject: Weight Hi All: I guess I stated the weight thing wrong. What we would like to have an Idea of is the weight of the empty boat, no fuel,water,supplies, anchor,spare paint etc.. We will need to have a rough weight for when it is trailered to the sea.. As a trucker it's what we refer to as the weight of the rig verses the Gross weight. Martin and Betty (Prairie Maid).. 1939 From: Glen Date: Fri Jul 25, 2003 9:30am Subject: looking for a book Does anyone have a copy of HEAVY WEATHER SAILING by ALARD COLE??? Looking to purchase one but I can't seem to find one anywhere. 1940 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Fri Jul 25, 2003 10:39am Subject: Re: Weight If you use the design displacement you can't go wrong. That would be the maximum weight, loaded that the boat was designed for. The carrying capacity will never be a huge percentage of the displacement, so the actual weight won't be a lot less. If the truck can carry the design displacement you are good to go. Gary H. Lucas 1941 From: Ted Stone Date: Fri Jul 25, 2003 10:42am Subject: Re: looking for a book Glen, You can get Heavy Weather Sailing ~Peter Bruce, Adlard Coles Adlard Coles Nautical at Amazon Books Regards, Ted 1942 From: Michael Casling Date: Fri Jul 25, 2003 2:15pm Subject: Re: Weight Your request for the weight of the boat made perfect sense to me. You want to know how much it will way so you can arrange for transportation because you are inland and the name ( Prairie Maid ) provides a solid clue. It does sound as if you are going to have to calculate all the materials to date or actually weigh it at the weigh scale. To save someone reminding me I realise that the weight of the trailer and tow vehicle should be known in advance. Michael Casling 1943 From: vinnie_barberino2000 Date: Fri Jul 25, 2003 2:53pm Subject: 26 footer Hello all, Can anyone tell me a little bit about the 26ft'r , abilitys,disabilitys,,material list, Headroom? Much appreiciated if you can. Vinnie Auckland 1944 From: vinnie_barberino2000 Date: Fri Jul 25, 2003 5:57pm Subject: Anchor light http://h28.org.nz/Technical/Anchor_light.htm Also some other good ideas on the site. 1945 From: vinnie_barberino2000 Date: Fri Jul 25, 2003 9:00pm Subject: Antisieze http://www.users.bigpond.com/jim.chambers/Tef_gel.htm Just what the doctor ordered. 1946 From: Date: Sat Jul 26, 2003 8:15am Subject: Re: Cruising Costs Earlier I mentioned foraging as a means of reducing cruising costs. I'd like to expand on that topic. Crusing yachts do not have a great reputation in some areas. Cruisers are usually not permitted to work in foreign countries, or if they do work, it is illegal. As a result, cruising yachts can run short of cash, and foraging becomes a necessity. Very few areas of the world are truly unihabited. As a result, foraging on land can quickly become theft. Many of the stories of theft from yachts we have heard over the years stem not from local people, but from yachtsmen stealing from other yacths. Most tropical regions are heavily covered in jungles, and very little of what we would recognize as food grows readily near the floor of the jungle. Fruit trees and root crops, when you find them, are as often as not in clearings that have been cleared and planted by subsistence farmers. When you take fruit from trees on an "unihabited" island you may well be stealing food some some of the poorest people on earth. Even palm trees, in many areas were planted as plantations at one time, and are still "harvested" from time to time by the local people. More than a few cruisers, running short of supplies, have cut down palm trees to harvest the "heat of palm", killing the tree that has taken years to grow in the process. If you are planning to cruise to a tropical islands and "live off the land" you should reconsider. Fishing around the islands can be often be very productive, but can require fuel. Coconuts are relatively common, and eaten with fish can provide a balanced diet, but they do require quite a bit of work to harvest and after a few months of fish and coconuts you may find meals less than interesting. Gardening in the tropics is usually not productive for a cruiser because of the lead time, and predation by insects. Don't get me wrong - people do garden with success, just that they are also very dedicated. A mix of staples such as 100 lbs of rice, 100 lbs of flour, 100 lbs of sugar and 100 lbs of beans would take you months and months of hard work to grow in a tropical garden, yet can be purchased for very few dollars in most stores worldwide, and can form the backbone of your cruising diet. Supplemented with fishing, coconuts, and a supply of canned food, with greens readily available by sprouting the beans, cooking on a BBQ with driftwood gathered from the beach, you can live very inexpensively in the islands. 1947 From: rhko Date: Sat Jul 26, 2003 9:36am Subject: Re: Digest Number 541, looking for a book Go to http://www.addall.com/ and search for your book by title or author. Wide availability and low prices, often lower than same books on ebay. Works for me. 1948 From: dylanwinter2001 Date: Sun Jul 27, 2003 2:41pm Subject: UK builders I have just completed a stitch and glue 18 footer not want to build something steel, small and capable of crossing atlantic say spray 22/27 -- tom thumb 22 or 24 traying to track down a UK home builder who can tell me why I should think carefully before starting out on this particular path dylan winter www.dylanwinter.co.uk 1949 From: pvanderwaart Date: Mon Jul 28, 2003 9:58am Subject: Re: UK builders See the Spark 24 at www.tantonyachts.com. (Look in catalog and drawings.) Not an origami design, but one of the most likely-looking small steel yachts. Tanton would be happy to advise about seaworthiness for a transatlatic passage. Peter 1950 From: John Jones Date: Mon Jul 28, 2003 10:12am Subject: Re: Re: UK builders TWIN KEELS!!!! Do they deserve added ballast or not? If so how much lead do I need?, If not may they be fuel tanks? Anyone? John 1951 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Mon Jul 28, 2003 10:37am Subject: Re: Twin bildge keels John, Brent, in his message No 1018 Aug 29 2002, said that you put the same amount of lead ballast in a bilge keeler as in a single keeler. In the 36' that is 4500# total or 2250# in each keel. I don't know about the transom. In my 36' plans it is cut from the main hull sheets. If you type 'bilge keels' in the search window at the top of this page there is quite a lot there. Regards, Ted 1952 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Mon Jul 28, 2003 11:23am Subject: Re: UK builders Dylan, There are several issues: 1 Some regard steel boats of that size as being too small to be satisfactory in that the weight of the hull material is heavy in relation to the cruising displacement leaving less for the crew and their requirements, which of course would be quite a lot in an Atlantic crossing. 2 I recently asked a friend, who had returned last year from a solo Atlantic round trip in a 26' glass fibre boat if he would change anything. "Get a bigger boat" he said. It was not so much carrying capacity but that short sailing boats go slower and at times, bobbing up and down on the briny, he wanted a faster boat. 3 Bruce Roberts boats, like the ones you mentioned, are not origami boats as such and so you might get more views about them on the Metal Boat Society's Forum. www.metalboatsociety.com Several members are building or have built his boats and have expressed views on them there. I am building a 36' Brent Swain design in the UK. Regards, Ted 1953 From: dylan winter 07712 186 250 Date: Mon Jul 28, 2003 0:47pm Subject: Re: Re: UK builders Ted, where are you I am near Oxford dylan 1954 From: Don Taylor Date: Mon Jul 28, 2003 7:10pm Subject: Scrounging for stainless detailing- how to judge quality Inspired by a comment by Brent that he could buy scrap stainless for $1.50 (US or Cdn?) per pound I visited our local scrap yard and was offered stainless for Cdn$2.00 per pound. Close enough. But, how to tell if this ss is worth having? A piece of pipe was marked as 304L, so I bought that. The rest was anonymous. Is there any way to judge what it is? Should I care for deck detailing? Thanks, Don. 1955 From: John Jones Date: Mon Jul 28, 2003 8:50pm Subject: Re: Re: Twin bildge keels Thank's kindly John 1956 From: John Jones Date: Mon Jul 28, 2003 9:03pm Subject: Re: Scrounging for stainless detailing- how to judge quality Are you "Nelvana" Don Taylor?, from west Toronto?????? 1957 From: Gord Schnell Date: Tue Jul 29, 2003 7:23am Subject: Re: Scrounging for stainless detailing- how to judge quality I have been buying SS from J.G. Enterprises in Delta (Vancouver) for $1 a pound. 316 is much preferred over 304 for its anti-rusting characteristics. 304 can rust badly in some saltwater conditions. Gord 1958 From: ... Date: Tue Jul 29, 2003 8:30am Subject: [origami boats] Scrounging for stainless detailing- how to judge quality Don, when you buy SS take a magnet with you,with this you can sort out the semi stainless which is magnetic and it will rust,this might be ok for some internal fittings engine parts etc. The best SS is the non magnetic material higher nickel content, if there are no markings on it use the magnet. That what I do, funny thing scrap yards seem much the same all over the world. Geoff Cheshire England 1959 From: Date: Tue Jul 29, 2003 0:08pm Subject: Re: [origami boats] Scrounging for stainless detailing- how to judge quality A small pencil magnet that you can carry at all times in your pocket or on your key ring is a handy tool when boat building or cruising. At the scrap yard, chandlery, or the hardware store it provides a quick check of "stainless" parts. 300 series SS is not magnetic, and is what you are looking for. The food industry uses 400 series (magnetic) SS quite commonly, so it is possible/likely that some of the SS you find in a scrap yard may not be suitable for marine use. In a pinch I once used some 400 series 6 mm SS bolts to fasten a part inside, under the companionway. The heads fell off within a few years, the bolts having corroded through out of sight within the wooden bulkhead. I suspect salt water occasionally leaking down the companionway was the culprit. Outwardly the bolts showed no corrosion until the day they failed. I have a diving knife made from 400 stainless. It takes a very good edge, but must be washed in fresh after every dive, or it corrodes badly. The same with SS cutlery. To save water we wash in salt whenever possible. SS knives corrode quickly on the sharpened edge when washed in salt water, and I have had SS knives break apart under the wooden handle over time when repeatedly washed in salt. For an explanation of 304L, and other grades of SS, you might visit this site: http://www.spiusa.com/Ref001/austenitic.html g 1960 From: joe_klir Date: Tue Jul 29, 2003 0:44pm Subject: Bullshit Hi All, Myself and my associates have been monitoring this group for couple of weeks.Thhere is very usefull stuff here,however,lately the discussion is moving towards unproductive academic bullshit.We should be concetrating on improving our knowledge of steel boat construction,cost engineering to bring the cost down,improving safety and creating real value for serious cruising community. We are at present conducting a study of bringing to the market very cost effective boats based on Brents ideas and design.We are planning to offer boats at verious stages of completion and interior fitting out. Comments are invited on the following subjects (1)Introduction of water-tight bulkheads (2)multi-fuel heating (3)marinizing peugeot engines(our little Project) (4)Affordable generators-marinising general use generators (5)Alternative source of energy-solar and wind,floating wave generators (6)Simplification of interior fitting-out Any comments and suggestions would be appreciated Joe 1961 From: richytill Date: Tue Jul 29, 2003 0:47pm Subject: Re: [origami boats] Scrounging for stainless detailing- how to judge quality It might be worth noting that in the 300 series ss, 304 is around 15% stronger than 316. rt 1962 From: richytill Date: Tue Jul 29, 2003 0:55pm Subject: Re: Bullshit Joe, I have just tested a VW rabbit engine that I hooked up to a Borg Warner Velvet drive in a 36'. It took a bit of time and there are a few adjustments to make. I have limmited time but less money so a new engine was out of the question--as usual I cant resist experimenting. So, what specifically are you planning for the Peugot? rt 1963 From: joe klir Date: Tue Jul 29, 2003 1:13pm Subject: Re: Re: Bullshit HI,We are planning to marinise peugeot diesel engines from 205 and 405 cars for ur own projects and offer feww units to interested parties at very reasonable costs JK 1964 From: keith green Date: Tue Jul 29, 2003 6:55pm Subject: Re: Re: [origami boats] Scrounging for stainless detailing- how to judge quality I've had to machine some of this stuff. There are at least 4 grades of 304. The common ones you find in the scrapyards and such are the plain 304 and 304L. The 'L' means "low carbon". The plain 304 is harder, stronger and work-hardens more readily and to a higher degree than the 304L. I would say the 304L is what you should use for fittings. Bolts and such are commonly 316 I think. 316 also comes in an "L" designation. In my Machinery's Handbook there is data on the comonest of stainless's (40 or 50 of them). I see none designated for anything like deck fittings. Closest I see there is 301. It has high strength and ductility, work- hardens. Used on railroad cars, trailer bodies, aircraft structurals, fasteners, automobile wheelcovers and trim, pole hardware. The book says the "L" is an extra-low carbon modification of the 304 especially suitable for welding. Seems the welding causes carbon to precipitate from the alloy when welded. The 300 series ss's are termed 'austenitic'. Some of the 400's are 'ferritic' and some are 'martensitic'. These are metallurgical terms referring mostly to the crystal structure of the cooled metal. Austenitic ss's are the ones that don't generally corrode too easily. Ferritic ones, as the name suggests would have a higher percentage of iron and will rust. Matensitic ones, I suspect, are the harder and more heat-resistant grades. There are specific heat-resistant grades in the 500 series as well, but those are pretty speciallized. Be aware, too, that stainless steels can still corrode, though they don't always rust. Hope this helps some. keith 1966 From: Gord Schnell Date: Tue Jul 29, 2003 11:31pm Subject: Re: Re: Bullshit I have chosen a 1.6L VW turbo diesel and married it to a 2.91:1 Borg Warner Velvet Drive. Had to custom the bellhousing. Runs nice and rated at 68 HP Gord 1967 From: Gord Schnell Date: Tue Jul 29, 2003 11:33pm Subject: Re: Re: Bullshit Don't bother to marinize it. Use the skeg or keel as your raditator, run an antifreeze coolant mix and dump the exhaust into a vertical saltwater cooling tower and out the transom. Gord 1968 From: mynode Date: Wed Jul 30, 2003 2:48am Subject: 26 footer I'm looking for info on the 26 footer. Specs, some drawings or pictures perhaps. Anyone built one? -Mark 1969 From: vinnie_barberino2000 Date: Wed Jul 30, 2003 1:27am Subject: 26vs31 I would still like anyone with a 26 to give me a brief rundown on it, I am weighing that and the 31 up against each other.It would be nice to go down to the marina and view the differences but unfortunatly I am on the other side of the world.Any help will be much appreciated. Regards Steve 1970 From: put_to_sea Date: Wed Jul 30, 2003 10:16am Subject: Re: 26 footer You probably already saw it, but there is one in the photos section in the "Black Hull" folder. Amos 1971 From: put_to_sea Date: Wed Jul 30, 2003 11:32am Subject: vertical saltwater cooling tower Gord, would you care to elaborate a bit on the "vertical saltwater cooling tower"? Amos 1972 From: John Jones Date: Wed Jul 30, 2003 0:44pm Subject: Re: Re: 26 footer Look on the Origamiboats web site under "files or photos" and read the book to get the big picture.... it's easy 1973 From: Alex Christie Date: Wed Jul 30, 2003 0:52pm Subject: Re: 26 footer The photo album "Dove 3" has photos of the steel 26 footer that Winston Bushnell took through the NW Passage through above the arctic circle. It is a centreboard version, and evidently performed quite well. There were three crew on that voyage, and the trip was done in two seasons, I think. I think the smaller size, coupled with the centreboard option made it very easy to slip the vessel over very shallow bars, underwater ice ledges, and any kind of thin water, plus they were able to skid the boat out of the water at season's end, if I recall correctly. The main difference between the sizes doesn't appear to be a question of seaworthiness, but rather one of carrying capacity (fuel, water, food), and determining how much you personally need (though there are basic amounts required, some do with less). Watermakers could make up for reduced water tankage, however, and some people do more motoring than others, depending on how you cope with long calm periods. Brent's own boat is a 31, and quite sufficient for him, and certainly people have undertaken long distance voyages in much smaller vessels. Be that as it may, the 36 footer appears to be the most popular size built, I think because it is simultaneously small enough to be easily built and handled, yet large enough to really tank up with food, water and fuel for long offshore passages. For coastal sailing, the 26 footer would be ideal, but it doesn't mean it can't go offshore or Trans-Atlantic. Alex 1974 From: richytill Date: Wed Jul 30, 2003 0:54pm Subject: Re: Bullshit Curious about the cooling tower--how does it work? rt 1975 From: vinnie_barberino2000 Date: Wed Jul 30, 2003 1:37pm Subject: Re: 26 footer Cheers Guys, I am waiting for "The Origami Bible" to arrive on my doorstep,then I will be on a similar wavelength after reading it. Steve 1976 From: mark_schlichting11 Date: Wed Jul 30, 2003 11:30pm Subject: Re: looking for a book I've got a copy of Heavy Weather Sailing by K. Adlard Coles, published by John de Graff, but sorry, you can't have it. We found it in a used book store - two of the best ones to check regularly for marine books are Gallowglass Books in Duncan (gallow@i...), and Compass Rose in Sidney, BC. Mark S. Costa Vida, Shearwater BC 1977 From: mark_schlichting11 Date: Wed Jul 30, 2003 11:50pm Subject: Re: Weight Hello Martin and Betty, Another suggestion is to call the guy who launched our boat and at least a few other(likely many other) Brent Swain 36'ers. His name is Bill at All-Tow on the Island at 250-758-7511. He probably won't mind giving you some advice on the subject because A. he is a good guy, and B. because he probably won't have the time or the interest in coming to pick you up himself. Anyhow, if he can't remember what hauling a BS 36 specifically, he can probably refer to his log book for July 31, 1999 because that's when he launched us in Cowichan Bay. Two weeks prior to that he handled another 36' named Kobella for Ron Orser. Glad to hear you have progressed to the stage that you are thinking about the migration to the sea. Good Luck! Mark S Costa Vida Shearwater, BC 1978 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Thu Jul 31, 2003 4:08am Subject: Re: Scrounging for stainless detailing- how to judge quality Don, As several have advised stainless steel is classified as either austenitic, ferritic or martensitic. The one we are mostly interested in is austenitic 300 series. Usually preferred and readily available is either the low carbon 304L or 316L. The tensile strength according to my pipe and tube brochure is 70,000 psi for both of them. The difference is that the 316L has a higher nickel content and includes some molybdenum. It tends to be used where the finish is important. I cannot tell the difference in a scrap piece. In a scrap yard if the stainless is part of a welded structure then it is probably one of the 300 series. That said it could be one of those suitable for high temp duty such as 321 or 310 or even one of the Inconel 600 series although this might be easy to ascertain by the heat discolouration. I wouldn't use one of the high temp types for deck fittings. One needs a low carbon steel to avoid cracking. Some auto exhaust parts are made from ferritic stainless which is difficult to weld. So the probably the only way of telling the stainless type in a scrap yard is by finding out about its previous life. One then comes to welding it. My 309 rods, which I use with a DC welder, allow me to weld 304L to 316L to mild steel. The next thing is post-welding treatment. Stainless steel gets its no-rust properties from the chrome oxide that forms on its surface. If that is not present then it is in a reactive state and may corrode. Cutting, grinding and welding, destroys the chrome oxide surface. The stainless needs to be passivated after these operations to bring it back to its non-reactive state. Examples of this not being done are, all too often stainless steel water tanks where the welding has burned the chrome out leaving a chrome-depleted surface. Sometimes this is made worse by the use of anti-spatter oil, which increases the carbon content of the heat affected zone. A chrome oxide surface does not form; the tank is put into service; no air can get to the welded area to enable the chrome oxide to form and it eventually corrodes through. In industry the welded area is usually pickled and passivated using acid emersion tanks and sprays to assist the forming of the chrome oxide. I have bought some pickling paste to put on the heat-affected area around my stainless welds. That and polishing after and leaving in the dry for a while seems to work. I wouldn't make a stainless tank because I do not have the facilities to passivate it. A2 fasteners are 304 A4 fasteners are 316 Regards, Ted 1979 From: Date: Thu Jul 31, 2003 4:50am Subject: Re: Re: looking for a book suggest that you try www.abebooks.com would appear that there are quite a few available your end of the world, also check spelling of author alard / adlard? regards 1980 From: Don Taylor Date: Thu Jul 31, 2003 5:18am Subject: Re: Scrounging for stainless detailing- passivating Ted, and others, Many thanks for the good advice. Your paragraph on post-welding brings up an issue with some welding that I had done professionally a few years ago. I wanted two hawse holes for the anchor chains. I had two rings of solid ss (they said it was 304, but maybe it was 304L) fabricated at a machine shop and arranged for a local welder to weld them into place. The result was an ugly, massively over-welded mess on my bows. I later learnt that the welder was a structural welder who had never welded ss before. He boasted about how many rods he had used and how it would never come apart. I then compounded his mess by aggressively grinding the welds to try to make them look acceptable. It took days and several disks. The ss weldment seemed to be made of diamond grit! I did not realise that there are ss only disks, and then I used a common steel wire brush in the grinder to try to polish the stainless steel. A week later the hawse holes were covered in rust bloom- I am in Ontario, Canada, so this was just from the rain. I wirebrushed again, a week later the same result result. For some reason I decided to switch to using those grit impregnated nylon disks made by 3M for use in the auto body refinishing, and I used some phosphoric acid wash on the ss. A week later, it was still rusty, but it was not so bad. I repeated this for 3-4 more week-ends until the rust bloom stopped appearing. It is now 5 years, the boat has been in warm salt water for two of those years, and the hawse rings are still clean. I have not touched them in that time. Sorry for the long story, my question is: Did I inadvertantlly manage to passivate the ss? If so, then it really is not that difficult, and the 3M disks gave a nice brushed-steel finish. If I had not managed to wirebrush so much common steel into the surface of the stainless then it would have been a real quick job. Thanks, Don. 1981 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Thu Jul 31, 2003 5:51am Subject: Re: Re: Scrounging for stainless detailing- passivating Don, I don't believe you managed to embed any mild steel by brushing. What really happened is the welder used a LOT of heat on your parts. The surface material was changed by the heat to a greater depth than would normally occur. You eventually ground through it to the material below. I welded up some bow rails for my boat once using nice tiny tig welds on polished 316 stainless. The area rusted about a 1/2" out on either side of every weld. I had just polished off the blue color from the heat. I wound up actually using an abrasive wheel, then a finer abrasive, then polishing, and it didn't rust again. I understand that you can get the same results without all the grinding by passivating with an acid, but I've never seen anyone actually do it. Most small boat hardware is electro-polished. It's like electroplating in reverse, a little material gets removed. Sharp edges and bumps lose more material so the surface finish improves. I am familiar with this because I built a setup for a lab customer to do this. They were making parts for high purity crystal growing. It still requires acid passivating though to keep it from rusting. Gary H. Lucas 1982 From: Gord Schnell Date: Thu Jul 31, 2003 7:04am Subject: Re: vertical saltwater cooling tower The tower is really just a water muffler that is mounted partially below the waterline or filled by pump. Exhaust from the engine manifold is piped up above the waterline (with a siphon-break) and inserted midway up the tower - below the water level. The tower outlet is near the top and piped out the transom (or wherever). The exhaust is cooled by the saltwater and both are carried out of the tower to sea, Gord 1983 From: Stephen Wandling Date: Thu Jul 31, 2003 10:52am Subject: Re: Re: looking for a book You can get Heavy Weather Sailing for US$5 and up at Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/search-handle-form/103-1737079-3923810 This information was posted earlier 1984 From: mynode Date: Thu Jul 31, 2003 3:32pm Subject: Stiffness, shape, and scalability My experments with little bits of paper and cardboard and have fostered a few questions about material stiffness, added stiffeners and scalability. It seems to me that differences in stiffness could change the distribution of the folding stress throughout the hull. This would in turn effect the strain distribution and therefore the final shape. How accurately does the cardboard model reflect the final dimentions of the completed hull? Does material stiffness effect the final shape? Does an aluminum boat wind up with different final dimentions than a steel one built to the same template? How about the effect of added stiffeners? Is it possible to vary the shape with stringers? If so, how might these effects be accounted for in a scale model? Thanks, - Mark 1985 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Thu Jul 31, 2003 3:52pm Subject: Re: Stiffness, shape, and scalability Mark, I bought a set of Brent's plans for the 31'. I then tried to model it in Rhino3D. It looked as if it was all conical sections. That did not prove to be true. There is some compound curve forced into the bow and stern when the boat is pulled together. This means your cardboard model will not accurately reflect a steel boat, and an aluminum one is likely to be different as well. I tried to adjust the shapes to get true conical surfaces, but so far I have not managed it without some kinks. That doesn't mean it can't be done, it may be more a measure of my modeling skills, I don't do surfaces much. Gary H. Lucas 1986 From: John Foster Date: Thu Jul 31, 2003 8:19pm Subject: abebooks.com for finding new and used books Looking at http://www.abebooks.com/ and entering the search I found 222 different copies available from book sellers all over the world. You just can't beat the search capabilities of http://www.abebooks.com/ for rare, hard to find, out of print books, both nw and used. Have a nice day John 1987 From: Date: Thu Jul 31, 2003 4:28pm Subject: cutting glass I have patio doors that say that they've been hardened. A search of the web did not produce much although I found one place that said hardened glass cannot be cut. I'm thinking that a diamond concrete blade will cut it with alot of water. Has anybody done this, I need the glass for portholes. John 1988 From: vinnie_barberino2000 Date: Thu Jul 31, 2003 9:56pm Subject: Re: cutting glass Mate that is what I call dedication, cutting up the patio doors !! Whats the Mrs gonna say? She hasnt just recently said to you like mine has "its that &%$#EN boat or ME!"? Good on you Mate. Steve. 1989 From: The Christies Date: Thu Jul 31, 2003 10:52pm Subject: Re: cutting glass If you try to cut tempered glass, it will shatter into tiny pieces the moment that blade touches the edge. I have just installed the glass recycled from used patio doors in my new deck railing system, and was told by the glass shop here in BC that indeed you cannot cut the tempered (hardened) glass that these doors are made of. For most of the deck railings I was able to use standard patio glass sizes, but for the one smaller piece I needed the glass company cut the glass to the required size, then sent it out to be tempered ($51 for a 44" wide by 34" high piece). For your port-holes you will need to have your glass cut to shape, then sent out for tempering. You may want to check to see if you can get it done in safety glass, which is a lamination of two pieces of glass with plastic in between. Alex 1990 From: mynode Date: Fri Aug 1, 2003 1:38am Subject: Re: Stiffness, shape, and scalability Gary, After thinking about this for a while I believe I've figured out what's going on. Your Rhino model would work if you rolled the bends in the plate before you welded it up. Doing so would eliminate the residual stresses imposed by the folding process. Brent's templates compensate for the strains caused by the residual stresses throughout the plate. In fact, I bet one could get a slightly different template shape just by changing location of the come-along attachment points. I wonder how much nipping and tucking Brent had to do to arrive at his final templates? How great were the differences between your models and the templates? To develop a perfect template on a computer would require a rather sophisticated cad program capable of performing stress/strain analysis. I'm hoping to figure our a way to accurately model a hull in a smaller (and cheaper) scale as the shape I have in mind would be rather sensitive to the stiffness of the material and additions like sheer clamps and stringers. I'm considering a hull about the size and shape as that of a Transat 650 boat. - Mark 1991 From: burr.halpern@a... Date: Fri Aug 1, 2003 3:40am Subject: Re: cutting glass Actually, tempered glass is not suitable for portlights. As noted when scratched tempered glass turns to little pieces. For portlights you are looking for Lexan or for laminated safety glass which is what is used in car windshields but not in car side windows. Jeff 1992 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Fri Aug 1, 2003 4:18am Subject: Re: Just Joined Joe, If you are going to sell a new boat in the European Union you should be aware of this legislation before you go further: Council Directive 94/25/EC on the approximation of laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to Recreational Craft The Recreational Craft Directive 94/25/EC is a directive based on the new and global approach, and sets essential requirements for the design and construction of recreational craft. Recreational craft are defined as "any craft intended for sport or leisure purposes, regardless of the type or the means of propulsion, with a hull length of 2.5 to 24 meters, measured according to the appropriate harmonized standards'. The Directive applies to pleasure craft, partially completed boats and loose and assembled components. The Directive entered into application as from 16 June 1996 and became fully applicable as from 16 June 1998. Manufacturers and importers may no longer place pleasure craft and components on the market which do not comply with the essential reauirements of the directive. In addition to the technical requirements recreational craft have to comply with, the Directive imposes the manufacturer to keep a technical file of all relevant data, to officially state the conformity of his product in a Declaration of Conformity, to affix the CE Marking on it and to inform the users about safe use/maintenance through a builder's plate and an owner's manual. Regards, Ted 1993 From: ... Date: Fri Aug 1, 2003 9:12am Subject: Re Joined the group two weeks ago Hi Joe, As you intend to build Brent's designs commercially for sale,I hope you have asked and got an agreement with Brent allowing you to do this,otherwise you will be infringing his copyright. When a designer sells plans he usually gives permission to build one boat from the plans, if an additional boat is built he has the right to ask for a payment for each boat built,this would cover a group of friends building boats for there own use. If his designs are being built commercially it is necessary to have an agreement with the designer covering the use of his name and agreeing payments for all boats built. I do not know what Brent would wish to do but I would think that as he has very little income he might wish to have some return for all his efforts, as after his ocean cruising he will be needing to replace some of the gear on his yacht. Whilst this is a group who share ideas and designs of there boats and equipment for other members use it dose not give anyone the right to produce them commercially. After joining the group two weeks ago you appear to be an expert on this type of construction and have decide what should be discussed and what you consider to be bullshit,I thought that Alex who very rarely intervenes was the moderator of the group,I hope that one of the older members of the group will correct me if I have misunderstood the objectives, I thought that anyone could put forward ideas for discussion even if they might be considered by some as unproductive academic bullshit. Sometimes from what you call bullshit something dose emerge or make use think about an issue that might have been overlooked it would be interesting if you might tell use what you consider comes under that heading. It would appear that you wish the group to only discuss the things that are of interest to you and relevant to your commercial enterprise,ie, the 6 items you have outlined, which appears like a brief you might give to a designer you were commissioning to design and develop the improvements you wish to incorporate into the products that you intend building for sale. If you wish the group to help it might have been more tactful to ask if they might help rather than to refer to discussions as bullshit, I was not aware that you had yet made any contribution to the group apart from criticize. Having been in the group for some time I have found all the knowledge and experience of the people who are building or already have built a yacht very interesting and invaluable I lean something new every week. Perhaps you might like to tell the group of your knowledge and experience designing and building steel boat hulls,yachts,ships and converting vehicle engines for marine and other uses. Do you have a ship yard or an engineering company with the design facilities to design the hulls and the developed shape of the plates, which will also construct the yachts, what are you building at present. Geoff Cheshire England 1994 From: joe klir Date: Fri Aug 1, 2003 9:58am Subject: Re: Re Joined the group two weeks ago Hi Geoff, First of all I would like to apologise for being misunderstood or sounding arogant.Our project,involving origami boatbuilding approach is in the planning stage and,if we go ahead we will definitely pay Brett his fees for each boat we build. We have noted the various issues being discussed,especially the high cost of engines and generators,and we will share our experience in this area with the group.We are working on marinising the Peugeot engines and generators and the cost models look very atractive. Soonest we have tested both products,we will post all details . We are not a pure commercial enterprise,but we thought that some members of this group could benefit from our efforts,especially if the do not have the facilities or expertise to do so. We have build two boats,using the frameless approach for multichine hull and one round chine in aluminium. Our comment"Bullshit",maybe not wery politically correct,was not directed towards the general discussion,but directed to the unpoductive arguments about steel hulls and the term was introduced by Brett himself.. Best Regards Joe 1995 From: Alex Christie Date: Fri Aug 1, 2003 10:41am Subject: language issues... Hi all, Just a gentle reminder that while this forum respects all opinions, I do cringe whenever someone uses what most would consider strong or "pointed" language; the internet communication medium seems to magnify it beyond its original intent. Probably alot to do with the fact that these conversations are between people who have never met, and so have no idea of the character of the person writing to put their message into a personal, subjective context. So, while some of the language is similar to what I also use around the house (especially when discussing yet another silly move by our local, regional or provincial government), it is risky to use here. Call me paranoid, but for the sake of the good health and longevity of the group, please imagine that you are addressing something like the UN Council when you post, and adjust your language appropriately. I don't mean that you need to be stiff and formal -- just edit the swearwords out of your posts! Yer friendly moderator, Alex 1996 From: ... Date: Fri Aug 1, 2003 11:22am Subject: Joe's project Hi Joe, There was some discussion on the use of vehicle diesel engines I cannot see that there is any reason not to use them,why did you decide to use the Peugeot engines?. The round chine hull you built in aluminium was that built by the origami method? What design did you use and what length was it, was it one of Brent's? Did you have any problems welding the aluminium? Where are you building in the UK. Best wishes Geoff Cheshire 1997 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Fri Aug 1, 2003 3:51pm Subject: Re: Re: Stiffness, shape, and scalability Mark, My model didn't have any stress or strain to worry about. A shape derived from pure conic or cylindrical sections does not distort the material if it is relatively thin compared to its size. Unroll a ventilation square to round transition, or any other sheetmetal construction. The pieces will lie perfectly flat again because no compound curvature was introduced anywhere. Brent's boats actually have compound curvature forced into them by the come-alongs once the edges are restrained. If you were to unfold a Brent boat the sheet would no longer lie flat, it would be permanently cup shaped. Anyone with a Brent boat can verify this. If the boat were a true conical shape you could lay a straight on the bow area with one end at the end of the chine. Sweeping the other end along the rail and down the bow towards the keel the straight edge would lie on the hull the whole time. That is not the case, there is a couple of inches of curvature there. This makes it very hard to reverse engineer with a computer. I am sure Brent did some trimming on the first boats to get the shape as pleasing as it is. I sailed on one of his 36' and sitting there at the dock the hull is so smooth you'd swear it was fiberglass out of a mold. The boats that Don from info@e... builds do not require distortion of the metal either. So the actual boat if accurately cut out will be extremely close to the original computer model. Close enough that all interior details could be designed and built, and would fit with minimal trim work. That in fact was my original goal. I think the interior of home built boats are mostly poorly done. After crawling through dozens of boats at a recent show I've concluded that most commercial boat interiors are poorly done as well. Some highly respected names like Island Packet had some real whopper goofs in their interiors. I attribute this to 2D paper design, where it is extremely difficult to visualize WHERE the hull really is in relation to your interior. The home builder get this huge empty, odd-shaped cavern to fill with bunks, cabinets, heads etc. He starts building at one end, and when he gets to the other end, whoops, a two inch difference at the other end would have made this fit! Too late, we'll have to live with it. With Rhino 3d I get to look at it from every angle, even ones impossible on a real boat. I can put in an appropriately scaled figure, and be sure I will actually fit in that space without my head cocked over to avoid hitting the overhead. My feet will have room. With the boat heeled at 30 degrees that handhold overhead will still be reachable as I stand on the floor. And last but not least. I could build all the interior components, well before starting the hull. This way I wouldn't have a huge hulk sitting around waiting and rusting for the detail work to get done. Gary H. Lucas 1998 From: robertgm36 Date: Fri Aug 1, 2003 6:55pm Subject: 36 twin keel for sale 36 ft Swain pilothouse , aft cabin ,v-berth plus can sleep three more. Head,holding tank up forward ,diesel heater,two burner propane stove with oven,big ice box and plenty of storage throughout. 50 HP Isuzu , borg-warner trans , cutter rigged ,new mainsail ,various other sails,extra motor with top end redone same model as in boat. New steel mast with fittings welded on . The boat is currently rigged with a mast and galvanized wire and can be used just fine as is. I was on the road to improving everything and a family situation forces this sale . She was just hauled and has a fresh coat of epoxy on the bottom and topsides plus four coats of bottom paint. This boat will be at the metal boat gathering in Bellingham Aug 9/10. Asking $ 38,000.00 US obo ,all serious offers considered. Email me direct for more details. Robert 1999 From: Date: Sat Aug 2, 2003 5:39am Subject: Re: cutting glass thanks for the reply: is laminated safety glass cutable? John 2000 From: mynode Date: Sat Aug 2, 2003 4:47pm Subject: Re: cutting glass Laminated glass can be cut by conventionl methods, but it is a bit trickier than cutting regular plate or sheet glass and mistakes are a lot more expensive. The edges tend to be fragile because each layer of glass is thin so it's very easy to chip a run in it when you are working with it. Another option might be wire glass (plate glass with wire mesh embedded in it). It's not that common anymore because it is no longer approved for use in doors or tub/shower enclosures (around here anyway). It is easier to cut than laminated glass and much less expensive, but like laminated glass it stays together when broken. Given the small sizes you are looking for, you might find some salvaged wire glass at a glass shop for cheap. - Mark 2001 From: Date: Sun Aug 3, 2003 0:26am Subject: Re: Re: cutting glass Hi Mark, how would I cut up large flat truck windshields that are laminated safety glass? Could I use the diamond abrasive concrete saw and dribble water for a lubricant? Thanks, John 2002 From: mynode Date: Tue Aug 5, 2003 1:48am Subject: Re: cutting glass Hi John, You could try a diamond saw, but I'm not optomistic. If you do, use a lot of water to keep the glass cool. Glassworkers (I used to be one) rarely use saws because they're slow and much less reliable than a glass cutter. On the other hand, it takes practice to develop enough skill with a glass cutter to get consistent results, especially with laminated glass. Laminated glass has to be scored and snapped on both sides then gently flexed until a razor blade can be worked in to cut the plastic sheet. This means that a curved cut must be made as a series of short straight cuts. Alcohol will help soften the plastic. Once cut you can gently round the edges off with a wet sander. If you want to try a glass cutter email me and I can give you some more tips. Good Luck! - Mark mynode@y... 2003 From: sae140 Date: Tue Aug 5, 2003 5:05am Subject: Re: cutting glass For portlights, would ordinary thick glass (as used in shop windows etc) be out of the question ? I've no idea what thickness it is - hopefully 10mm plus. I have been considering the idea of using rear side windows from an estate car (or similar) for the wheelhouse, with removable storm- shutters. Don't know how sensible this is. Still thinking about it. Colin 2004 From: joe_klir Date: Wed Aug 6, 2003 9:46am Subject: Re: Bullshit Hi,thank you very much,just completed drawings for the conversion,new marine diesel costs here inUK about £6,000,we got ex Peugeot 205 for £250,recon rebuild will cost about £500,so the economic looks good Regards Joe 2005 SPAM 2006 From: Brian Date: Thu Aug 7, 2003 9:27pm Subject: Deck Beam Production What would be easier to produce 19 deck beams of 5/16"X5"with heat and bending or plasma cut from plate ? Brian inland BC for now 2007 From: T.H. & V.D. Cain Date: Fri Aug 8, 2003 3:16am Subject: RE: Deck Beam Production Have you considered beams produced by a cold-rolled-on-edge process? This method is quite effective and the result is superior to most processes with the bonus of some cold-working of the steel. The machine is called a "section rolls" in Australia, however, the best machines appear to be Swedish in origin (Roundo). Larger metalworking (boilermaking/fabricating) shops will usually have either the horizontal or vertical rolls machines and a 'phone call will get you some action. Rolling bar or hollow sections (FMS or RHS) needs the builder to specify the rise over the span, or to draw a pattern radius on the floor. Regards, Terry 2008 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Fri Aug 8, 2003 6:59am Subject: Re: Deck Beam Production Brian, For the slight curve needed for deck beams you could do this with a hammer and an anvil. You simply hammer on side along one edge and that edge will become the top of your deck beam. The metal expands slightly with each hammer blow and the metal starts to curve. I recommended this to someone else here building an aluminum boat and he reported that it took somewhat longer than I predicted but that it wasn't nearly the job he expected. Set up a couple of supports for the strip on either side of the anvil. If you have someone to feed the strip along as you hammer it is much easier to do. Wear ear protection! Gary H. Lucas 2009 From: Stephen Wandling Date: Fri Aug 8, 2003 10:28am Subject: Re: Deck Beam Production I have watched both Brent and Evan Shaler bend deck beams and their method is very simple and quick. Even I can do it, though not as quickly as they do. You need something with two horizontal edges that are about 8 to 10 inches apart. I used a piece of 10" wide "I" beam laid flat. You place the flat bar, on edge, spanning between your two edges, and smack it with a sledge hammer in mid span. Slide it over until the 'smacked' point is over one of the support edges and smack it in the middle again. Repeat. After doing a few, you will probably be able to do one in a couple of minutes. Once you get one that fits fairly well you can use it for a pattern. As I'm sure the plans show, you actually overbend the beams just slightly, as they are installed after the cabin top is plated. You tack one end and push them up and keep tacking as you move to the other end. Just to be clear, this method is different than the one mentioned below, where you are making the upper edge of each beam thinner by hammering on it and expanding the metal. 2010 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Fri Aug 8, 2003 0:39pm Subject: Re: Deck Beam Production Brian, 5/16" x 5" are rather deep for deck beams. They will reduce headroom somewhat. What type of boat are you building? Regards, Ted 2011 From: John Jones Date: Fri Aug 8, 2003 1:31pm Subject: Grade of Steele for the Hull I really hate it when I go to make a purchase for something as straight forward as steel and someone throws in a couple of curves. I told them that "mild steel" would do but was told that mild steel may not bend as desired when needed and a grade "44W" would be better. Should I be concerned or am I just looking too hard? JOHN 2012 From: T.H. & V.D. Cain Date: Sat Aug 9, 2003 3:24am Subject: RE: Re: Deck Beam Production Brian, As Ted says, the beam depth is significant --- a large-ish vessel. On the assumption that your design calls for 5" on the centreline, I would think the "hammer and tap" method is an unlikely candidate, which is why I suggested the section rolls. On the other hand, if only part of the apparent cross-section of the beams is 5", there could be options to fabricate the beams from more easily handled flat bar sizes. In this latter case, I was thinking about the knee sections at the ends. Regards, Terry 2013 From: Date: Sat Aug 9, 2003 9:54am Subject: pictures Construction of the Genoa 55 is underway. The first side has been folded and tacked. Here are some recent pictures. http://www.easysoftwareinc.com/Design/Genoa55/G55_Construction/G55_construction.htm 2014 From: Claude Poitras Date: Sat Aug 9, 2003 10:55am Subject: RE: pictures How thick is the aluminium Hull plates? 2015 From: Brian Date: Sat Aug 9, 2003 11:35am Subject: Re: Deck Beam Production I'm building a 55 foot flush deck buehler designed Diesel Swan.Its a full dislpacement power boat that although not origimi is simple in design. Brian 2016 From: John Jones Date: Sat Aug 9, 2003 3:17pm Subject: Gewrew Brent Okay so I e-mailed Brent direct and "Yahoo" said he no longer has an e-mail address.... Help!!! John 2017 From: Stephen Wandling Date: Sat Aug 9, 2003 3:21pm Subject: Re: Gewrew Brent Brent's current address is brentswain38@h... 2018 From: The Christies Date: Sat Aug 9, 2003 5:06pm Subject: Re: Gewrew Brent Brent's Yahoo address ends with "yahoo.ca" (brentswain38@y...)-- I don't know if you used "yahoo.com" ending, but this might make a difference, possibly not. He got his Yahoo address more recently because it offers more storage (6 mb vs 2mb for Hotmail), so it should (theoretically) be working. Try again with the ".ca" ending and see if it goes through. Failing that, his brentswain38@h... works too. Alex 2019 From: Date: Sun Aug 10, 2003 0:43pm Subject: Re: pictures The hull plate is 3/8" - alloy 5086 H116 2020 From: jonhackett44 Date: Sun Aug 10, 2003 6:09pm Subject: Lead Hey Gang, Udecided on the quickest, easiest lead pouring/melting method. I have salvaged wheel weights. Any thoughts? 36' Bilge keeler Jon 2021 From: Stephen Wandling Date: Sun Aug 10, 2003 7:34pm Subject: Re: Lead What do you think of the method that Brent shows in his book? I intend to use this method. I'm pretty freaked about lead vapour and the potential poisoning so I am not keen on hauling a container of molten lead into the boat. Stephen 2022 From: Gord Schnell Date: Sun Aug 10, 2003 8:25pm Subject: Re: Lead Jon I have a lead pot I used to melt and pour 50 lb. billets. Works great with "tiger torch or Briquettes and an air blower. It is SS, has a 2" gate valve for dumping the molten lead and is mounted on a stand. Let me know if your interested. Gord 2023 From: Stephen Wandling Date: Sun Aug 10, 2003 8:37pm Subject: Re: Lead Gord, I assume this pot would be adaptable to feeding right into the keel, ala Brent's drawing? If so, I would be interested. Stephen 2024 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Mon Aug 11, 2003 1:56am Subject: Re: Deck Beam Production Brian, I agree with Terry, first choice would be flat bar rolled to the required radius at a contract section bender. Problems might be: 1. There is no flat bar available in that dimension. 2. There is no section bender available who can roll that dimension flat bar on edge. 3. If there is all of the above you may find that the flat bar when rolled on edge has, because of its deep 5" section a slight conical twist to it. This should not occur though as the rolled radius is very large. Ask the section bender about this. 4. Occasionally because of the slightly different springiness of the flat bars running through the same roll setting the rolled radius varies. This is usually very small and can be rectified as Gary has said by hitting the bar over an anvil on the face close to the edge so that the edge lengthens. Regards, Ted 2025 From: Don Taylor Date: Mon Aug 11, 2003 6:04am Subject: Cutting fishmouth ends on ss sch. 40 steel pipe Does anyone have any tips on tools (cheap) or techniques for cutting fishmouth ends on ss pipe for use as a handrail? Thanks in advance, Don. 2026 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Mon Aug 11, 2003 6:38am Subject: Re: Cutting fishmouth ends on ss sch. 40 steel pipe Don, Using a jig and a hole saw more or less the same size as the pipe that the fishmouthed pipe is to be welded too I drilled through 1" Schd 40 316 pipe cutting it in half making two fishmouths to fit over the 1¼" bulwark cap. Use the correct slow cutting speed and plenty of cutting oil or the holesaw will overheat and blunt. Regards, Ted 2027 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Mon Aug 11, 2003 6:44am Subject: Re: Cutting fishmouth ends on ss sch. 40 steel pipe Don, Piece of cake if you have a drill press available. All you need is a good support for the tube and hole saw. It helps to have good drill press with a very slow speed setting. If you are doing stanchions cut the tubing double the length, then cut them in half with the hole saw. The hole saw works best when cutting a completely round slug. Get a hole saw with an integral welded on arbor if you have to do open ends. Or drill two pieces end to end at one time. To hold the pipe take a block of wood and drill a hole the size of the pie though it. Then split it so you can slip the pipe in and clamp it together tight. Drill a second through the middle of the block intersecting the first hole. You could even tilt the block to do 45s if you needed them. I used to produce parts for steel frames this way, a couple of hundred at a time. Gary H. Lucas 2028 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Mon Aug 11, 2003 6:50am Subject: Re: Re: Cutting fishmouth ends on ss sch. 40 steel pipe Ted, I saw your post when I finished writing mine. Slow spindle speed is important. A fairly heavy feed rate is important though. Don't go too slow on stainless. It work hardens and then you are done cutting it. On another group we were talking about drilling stainless. I had to make 12 backing plates with 4 -9/32" holes in each plate. I used a drill press running at 500 rpm, 400 would have been better. I used 1 squirt of cutting oil and really leaned on the handle. 48 holes through 1/8" in under five minutes with one cheap drill bit. Not cobalt, no special grind. Could have done another 48 without resharpening too. Gary H. Lucas 2029 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Mon Aug 11, 2003 7:12am Subject: Re: Cutting fishmouth ends on ss sch. 40 steel pipe Gary, Yes, I agree about the feed rate. I was using an electric hand drill with a speed controller in a hobby type drill stand. A heavy feed rate slowed the drill down as it is not that powerfull so fortunately the two worked together with a bit of guess work. I would have preferred a proper drill press though. Regards, Ted 2030 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Mon Aug 11, 2003 7:14am Subject: Mufflers and silencers Does it matter which way the exhaust goes through a silencer/muffler? I have bought a second-hand ss Ford muffler. The inlet and outlet are offset and looking through one opening the pipe carries on to a chamber at the other end. Looking into this other end the chamber wall is about 3" away. Does any one know which end the inlet is, into the chamber or into the straight pipe or doesn't it matter? Regards, Ted 2031 From: Gord Schnell Date: Mon Aug 11, 2003 7:26am Subject: Re: Lead I placed it outside the keel with an L-iron tray to carry the lead into the keel. I had difficulties keeping the tray hot enough to prevent "freezing" Ultimately, I placed it to straddle the keel and dumped it in directly. Worked well. Gord 2032 From: Don Taylor Date: Mon Aug 11, 2003 7:33am Subject: Re: Cutting fishmouth ends on ss sch. 40 steel pipe Ted and Gary: Thanks for these tips. I especially like the notion of cutting a double length stanchion in the middle, obvious once you say it, but... I had thought that a hole saw might do the job but wondered if it might get 'exciting'. I have a small drill press with a minimum speed (the only one that I have ever used) of 620 rpm. I will ask around the yard to see if anyone has a slower speed drill press. Don. 2033 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Mon Aug 11, 2003 7:39am Subject: Re: Mufflers and silencers Generally the inlet end of a muffler will be larger to slip over the exhaust pipe, and the other end will fit into the swaged end of the next piece, for smoother flow and less leakage. It can make a difference too if the muffler is tuned to cancel resonances, and not just damp them. Gary H. Lucas 2034 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Mon Aug 11, 2003 7:45am Subject: Re: Re: Cutting fishmouth ends on ss sch. 40 steel pipe Don 620 is VERY fast for a 1" round hole saw. That would be a circumference speed of about 150 feet per minute. For stainless you'd want about 40 to 50 fpm. On the other hand the hole saws are fairly cheap and you probably don't need hundreds of cuts. Drill carefully until the pilot drip pops through, you don't want to break a tooth on the way in. Then as soon as the teeth start cutting, begin pushing to ensure you get a healthy chip all the time. Don't ease up at any time unless you just pull it out of the cut quickly. 2035 From: Stephen Wandling Date: Mon Aug 11, 2003 3:20pm Subject: Main hatch lock No matter how long I stare at it I can't figure out how to make the main hatch lock as shown in Brent's book, on page 48. I understand it is a 'dog' type latch, so it is probably in the shape of one half of a swastika? ------- | -------- In the crude drawing above, the vertical line passes through the door. What provisions are made for it to turn easily and to not leak where it passes through the door? I am sure there is something I could buy, but I am curious to see how I can make this item. Any help will be appreciated. Stephen 2036 From: johan_de_bruin1 Date: Mon Aug 11, 2003 4:11pm Subject: Re: Lead I'm no expert, but I was told by my buddy that's big time into guns & stuff + hunting that he has asked around about making his own lead bullets... He was told in no uncertain terms it is illegal (in Alberta), and that anybody, even as a hobbyist, needs a smelting license. I haven't tried to confirm this with any authority yet... 2037 From: Phillip Allen Date: Mon Aug 11, 2003 5:56pm Subject: Re: Re: Lead I don't know from Canada, but the way you describe it, anyone who solders a piece of pipe is "smelting" and therefore--guilty--of smelting... As for me, smelting would be the recovery of any metal from its natural state, as in, ore. Gotta watch those politicians, not one of them wants to share power with the people (my ex-wife's one) (the US of A ain't no different...just a matter of relative advancement to date) BTW anyone who uses muzzle loading rifles is likely to be "smelting his own bullets"...go figure...........must be dangerous people! BTW(2) One is more likely to burn himself than to vapor himself...careful with those eyes, remember that stuff is HEAVY so adding scrap to your melting device is an opportunity to overload your "smelter's" support and dump a lotta very hot stuff in your lap. Use common sense, have someone stand by on your first attempt. Wash your hands (use gloves that are easy to jerk off quick...leather work gloves) Phillip 2038 From: keith green Date: Mon Aug 11, 2003 6:04pm Subject: Re: Re: Cutting fishmouth ends on ss sch. 40 steel pipe To take the guesswork out of the speeds a little, you can use a cutting speed formula us machinists use from time to time. 4 x cutting speed / dia. of drill = rpm Cutting stainlesses varies a bit, but you'd be pretty safe between 20 and 30 surface feet per minute to start. Surface feet per minute = the amount of cutter surface (linear) passing by any given point on the job in a minute. the number 4 is an approximation of pi with a safety factor built in. A 1" hole-saw would run best at around 100 rpm (25 sfpm). Some cutting oil will make all the difference in the world. keith 2039 From: Stephen Wandling Date: Mon Aug 11, 2003 6:43pm Subject: Re: Re: Cutting fishmouth ends on ss sch. 40 steel pipe I am waiting for Brent to respond to this long thread but probably he won't . One thing I have learned, to a very small degree, from Brent is what's important when building a steel boat. Cutting a birds mouth on 1" pipe is not on the list. You could use a Zip disk to rough it out and then the grinder to finish it up. You're only looking for a fit that can be properly welded. We're not building pianos are we? 2040 From: mynode Date: Mon Aug 11, 2003 9:54pm Subject: Re: Cutting fishmouth ends on ss sch. 40 steel pipe I knew someone who fabricated space frame type motorcycle chassis of tubular steel. He fishmouthed the tubing for the complicated joints on a bench grinder with a wheel radiused to the tubing size. He could get a good fit for tig welding much faster than with a hole saw and a commercial fishmouthing jig. - Mark 2041 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Tue Aug 12, 2003 6:53am Subject: Re: Re: Cutting fishmouth ends on ss sch. 40 steel pipe Mark, For the odd angles you see in motorcycles you are right. It would take several cuts just to get the angle right. Also, your friend was working with carbon steel, not stainless. Stainless is much tougher to grind that way. It leaves a huge burr you have to keep knocking off. It doesn't file real easy either. And it takes skill, developed over years of doing that kind of work. If you've got the time go for it. How's your welding skills? Can you fill a hole on thin wall tubing, without making it bigger, or a big ugly mess that will never even grind out properly? If you'd rather just go sailing the hole saw is a better bet. Gary H. Lucas 2042 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Tue Aug 12, 2003 7:00am Subject: Re: Re: Cutting fishmouth ends on ss sch. 40 steel pipe So let's save lots of time. Get a 40' shipping container, add bow and a keel, go sailing. Brent's book and plans aren't an all inclusive how-to manual on building a boat. It is more of a minimum acceptable standard. Gary H. Lucas 2043 From: Gord Schnell Date: Tue Aug 12, 2003 9:04am Subject: Re: Re: Cutting fishmouth ends on ss sch. 40 steel pipe My two cents worth. I radiused a course grinding wheel and "fish mouthed" all my stanchions. Furthermore, I welded them with an AC arc. They look fine and the railing system was up in under a day. Gord 2044 From: nelstomlinson Date: Tue Aug 12, 2003 11:45am Subject: Re: Cutting fishmouth ends on ss sch. 40 steel pipe I've seen folks just squish the tops of the pipes flat (heat the ends a bit, then squish in a big bench vise) then clamp and weld. Looks ugly, seems to work just fine. If you start going for pretty, there's just no end to it, in my experience. When I was building my house, an old carpenter friend said ``Go for the rustic look. You want a place to stay warm, not a work of art.'' I guess that the marine equivalent would be ``Go for the workboat look. You want to go places, not a work of art.''. Of course, if you DO want a work of art, that's a different story! Nels 2045 From: brentswain38 Date: Tue Aug 12, 2003 8:06pm Subject: Re: Grade of Steele for the Hull I've used nothing but common mild steel and have had no reason to change. Someone is using scare tactics to get you to spend more money, a common tactic in the boating world. Brent Swain 2046 From: brentswain38 Date: Tue Aug 12, 2003 8:08pm Subject: Re: Gewrew Brent I got your e-mail Brent Swain brentswain38@y... 2047 From: brentswain38 Date: Tue Aug 12, 2003 8:11pm Subject: Re: Lead The easiest method is with the caukldron outside the boat as is shown in my book. The weight of wheel weights are 20% clips, so allow for that . They float to the top when the lead melts and can be skimmed off. Brent Swain 2048 From: berzerker76 Date: Thu Aug 14, 2003 5:50pm Subject: Aft mast rigs I was debating with myself the other day the various rigs and how easily each one could be single handed. Deciding that I needed more knowledge on the subject I went online for some research and came across this interesting site. Tis a tad off from the common sloop but Origami boats are off from normal steel boatbuilding so I was wondering how y'all think it would work. The link is http://www.runningtideyachts.com/monohull/ Gimme some ideas you might have on it. To my amateur eye it would save a lot of work and might increase performance some but like I said I am an amateur. Russyl Neumann 2049 From: Michael Casling Date: Thu Aug 14, 2003 8:47pm Subject: Re: Aft mast rigs I liked the info on the twin keels but find the rig a bit strange. I think a mast standing straight makes good sense from a structural point of view. There are some misconceptions about twin keels and this info helps. Michael Casling 2050 From: Ted Stone Date: Fri Aug 15, 2003 0:53am Subject: Re: Aft mast rigs Russyl, This might be a better address for the aft mast info. http://www.runningtideyachts.com/sail I would like to sail with one before passing comment. In a cruising rig ease of reefing is what I am looking for and that is why I like the junk rig. I joined the Junk Rig Association and have sailed on many of the other members boats learning the pros and cons of the various different set ups. Regards, Ted 2051 From: mynode Date: Fri Aug 15, 2003 0:57am Subject: Re: Aft mast rigs The aftmost sail looks like an updated version of the back staysail. Back in the 20s and 30s there was a yawl rig called the Foster rig that used a back staysail. As I understand it, this sail was popular for a time, but proved to be fragile given the rigging technology of the time and over time most Foster rigged boats were converted to conventional yawls with the addition of a mizzen. The design in the diagram might be made to work with modern rigging, but you give up a lot of sail area especially since the roach shown in the diagram will not stand without battens which would not be compatible with the roller furling he suggests. - Mark 2052 From: Date: Fri Aug 15, 2003 11:16pm Subject: G55 updated pictures This week's pictures added. Port side folded, beginning stbd side. http://www.easysoftwareinc.com/Design/Genoa55/G55_Construction/G55_construction.htm 2053 From: mark_schlichting11 Date: Fri Aug 15, 2003 11:46pm Subject: Re: Lead Brent's method of a cauldron outside of the boat worked great. If you are concerned about vapours (and you should be), wear a North mask with appropriate cartridges - ask the retailer which ones you need for the job. A day with enough breeze to blow the fumes away but not too much to rob the heat of the tiger touches/cauldron is an added bonus. My only regret is not wearing long sleeves and pants (despite the heat) to keep the smoke etc off my skin because the lead can probably be absorbed that way too. Mark S. Costa Vida Shearwater, BC 2054 From: Date: Sat Aug 16, 2003 3:59pm Subject: offshore rigs For offshore cruising, my preferred rig is a keel stepped, double spreader, cutter rigged masthead sloop. Loss of the mast offshore can be a life threatening event. Thus, the rigging should be such that no single point of failure can bring down the mast. Some people prefer a split rig to deal with this problem. However, it has been my experience that this is often an illusion, as the rigs are usually tied together in a way that ensures that if the main mast goes, the mizzen will as well. Usually the mizzen is rarely if ever used offshore and thus an unnecessary expense. I would not recommend fractional rigs for offshore cruising. Either diamond stays must be used aloft, or the masthead can be subject to whipping motion and shock loads from the topping lift and/or backstays. I have had similar problems with unstayed rigs. The problem can be minimized with a gallows to support the weight of the boom, but it is hard to eliminate. However, unstayed rigs are beyond the scope of this discussion. This discussion is specific to stayed rigs. Keel stepped is preferred to deck stepped, as it significantly increases the column strength of the bottom of the mast, where the loads are greatest. There are a number of harbors that cannot be entered without a tabernacle mast, so there can be reasons why a deck stepped mast is unavoidable. Make sure the foot of the mast is adequately pinned. One well known steel factory boat we sailed with had a deck stepped mast. The mast foot jumped right off the deck and over the side when a shroud failed. The release of tension was so great that the mast acted like a giant spring when the shroud let go. Fortunately this was within sight of land (Tonga). Double spreaders are preferred to single spreaders, as the loss of a shroud on a single spreader rig will usually bring down the mast. The lowers should be conventionally rigged fore and aft, with a combined breaking strength at least equal to the displacement of the boat. I do not feel that the practice of single lowers, supported by aft swept spreaders is suitable for offshore cruising. The intermediates and uppers should be independently rigged. The practice of rigging the uppers and intermediates from the lower spreaders should not be employed as a failure of this single point can bring down the rig. To me there no good reason to use heavier wire on the uppers than on the lowers or intermediates. Even running under spinnaker alone, the loads on the mast increase towards the step, not the head. Thus, heavier wire is wasted on the uppers and is an unnecessary expense and weight aloft. Double backstays should be used. The practice of using a single backstay on a "Y" should be avoided, as a failure of the backstay can bring down the rig. I find double headstays convenient for downwind work. Either they can be permanent, or a jackstay can be run using the spinnaker halyard. I do not like using a spinnaker offshore. I find flying sails dangerous at the best of times, and doubly so when cruising short handed. Spinnakers have a nasty habit of wrapping themselves around the headstay when the boat rolls, and often can only be removed with a knife. As an alternative, two genoas can be rigged on twin headstays, with a spinnaker pole used to hold one genoa to windward. The heavier genoa material does not weld itself to the headstay the way spinnaker material does and having the sails on stays makes them easy to control. On a broad reach, the two genoas will function as a single huge sail, with the wind flowing in the reverse direction over the windward genoa, and you will be surprised at your increase in speed. We used twin genoas for thousands of miles of 10 knot winds in Indonesia with great results. Should you need to turn upwind for any reason, the pole is released, and the two genoas set on the same side of the boat. We used this technique to avoid a problem in Indonesia. We were running under twin genoas, miles from anywhere, when a fishboat downwind of us changed course to intercept. We changed course repeatedly, and they changed course to match. This was a worry, because the area we were in had a problem with fishermen operating as part-time pirates, and the distance was closing rapidly. We turned upwind, bringing the windward genoa alongside the other genoa, and took off. The fishboat was not able to match our speed upwind in the seas, and we eventually left them behind, our motor and sails drawing to their maximum. We find that small fishboats can easily outrun us downwind, but upwind into a sea they have a much tougher time. In this case they chased us for quite awhile before giving up, leaving us to believe they were more than simply curious. Under spinnaker we might have continued along, unwilling to make a sail change, trusting to luck. With the one set of sails that work well both upwind and downwind, we were able to change course early with a minimum of effort, and thus avoided a potentially serious problem. Twin headsails offer the advantage of being able to rapidly increase sail area downwind, when the apparent wind is much less, yet reduce sail immediately for upwind work, when the apparent wind is so much greater. You can leave both sails in place upwind and downwind, and drop one inside the other when convenient. If you can afford it, dual roller reefing headsails offer the prospect of being able to tack the boat without having to pull the headsail across the boat. As you are tacking, furl the leeward headsail, and unfurl the other headsail as you tack through the wind. In this configuration you could get by with a single genoa sheets for each headsail. A staysail can be very handy, especially to windward in heavy weather, or downwind as a steadying or steering sail. In spite of the extra work required to walk the headsail around the staysail, I would recommend the babystay be left permanently rigged for offshore. One production boat we know, with a very strong double spreader rig, had the mast fall down pounding to weather in Hawaii after installing a lever on the babystay. The problem with levers on the standing rigging is that it is no longer standing rigging. If you forget to attach the levers, you become the single point of failure that can bring down the rig. For offshore work, I prefer permanent intermediate back stays in place of running backs. To me, running backs represent an unnecessary risk, especially when sailing short-handed. Using a rule of 1" of drift for every 1' of loft, permanently attach the running backs to turnbuckles immediately aft of the lower shroud chainplates and they can adequately support storm loads on the staysail. These intermediate backstays not only support the staysail. They hold the main out of the spreaders downwind, which can be a real benefit when trying to reef while running. However, they will restrict the boom from being fully extended, which should be protected with a preventer. For offshore work this is not a problem because it is rare that conditions are calm enough to allow the boom to be fully extended without inducing too much roll. Offshore in seas, we more often have a reefed main amidships to prevent the roll, and use the headsail(s) to drive the boat. The ability to reef the sails downwind is a crucial safety factor for offshore sailors. Before you invests in a fully battened main sail, make sure you have a way to reef this downwind. If you need to turn the boat into the wind to reef the main, you have a potentially very dangerous situation on your hands. In storm conditions and breaking seas, the last thing you want is a boat that must be brought into the wind to make a sail change. Typically, I make all our sail changes off the wind. Changing a headsail upwind can be a serious challenge offshore. It is much simpler to turn the boat downwind and change a headsail that is blanketed by the main. Unless you are racing, a loss of 5 or 10 minutes to windward is not significant, compared to the increased safety. Reefing the main downwind can be a challenge, because the battens and sail will try and foul themselves in the rigging. I avoid this problem by keeping pressure on the aft reefing lines while reefing the main. This pressure holds the main out of the rigging. This means having the aft reefing lines permanently installed, with lots of cleats to hold the lines as you adjust the reefs. Shorthanded this is can be challenge, as you often need to bring in the reefing lines at the exact same time you let out the main halyard. Greg Elliott Yacht Lazy Bones www.easysoftwareinc.com 2055 From: brentswain38 Date: Mon Aug 18, 2003 5:14pm Subject: Re: offshore rigs Roller furlers are cheaper than new hanks, about $100 worth of materials for the one in my book. When running downwind with the jib poled out and the main vanged out , you can gain considerable speed by setting another jib between the forestay and the main to catch the wind which goes between the main and poled out jib. Double spreader rigs are stronger sthwartships but need intermediat or running backs to get adequate strength fore and aft. They are mainly for narrow boats with a narrow shroud base and are unneccesary on wider boats. I've sailed several times home from the South Pacific with a runner set up and untouched from 18 degrees south to 33 degrees north. I havent found them to be any incovenience and prefer them as they give a better angle than permanent ones could.Using a preventer on the main at all times when running eliminates any risk associated with runninng backstays Deck stepped masts are oK as long as they are strong enough. They leave one less potential leak. I've seen many keel stepped masts crack where they go through the deck. There is a tremendous point load on them there.Deck stepped masts are a lot easier to step and unstep. With adequate sized galvanized rigging and turbuckles,all well painted, rigging failure is extremely unlikely. Failure is far more common with stainless rigging.I don't see justification for the hassels of a keel stepped mast, or a double spreader rig. Double lowers should be used aon all offshore boats to stp the pumping of a mast in a head sea; it pumps both ways. I asked a client at Fanning island what he thought of his new fully battened mainsail. He said " Battens suck". When he got back to BC from New Zealand I asked him again. he said" Battens still suck"Other cruisers have said the same thing. I've always cut the roach off a mainsail and run a foot wide panel of sailcloth the full length of the leech, the last time using the piece I cut off ,with the seams staggered.This eliminates the need for battens and triples the life of the mainsail.A cover on the roller furling headsail does the same re-inforcing job. Brent Swain 2056 From: brentswain38 Date: Mon Aug 18, 2003 5:19pm Subject: Re: Lead I hooked up a face mask( a surplus gas mask will do) to 24 feet of plastic sump drain hose from the hardware store, price $7. Breathing air from 24 feet away is as safe as you can get ,especially upwind with a breeze blowing.It's easier to suck air through 24 feet of 1 1`/4 inch plastic hose than through a filtre. The check valves in the mask make sure it goes in thre right direction. Brent Swain 2057 From: sae140 Date: Tue Aug 19, 2003 2:01am Subject: Junk Rig ? Hi Brent In view of your comments regarding fully battened mainsails, I wonder if you'd be willing to express an opinion regarding the suitability of junk sails for your designs ? Although still a rare sight, this rig is beginning to gain popularity, and I'd have thought would fit in well with your DIY- build approach ... ? Also, as you spend your cruising time away from electrically 'hot' marinas, I'd be interested to learn of your experiences with sacrificial zincs, and what your recommendations are. Regards Colin 2058 From: brentswain38 Date: Tue Aug 19, 2003 11:29am Subject: Re: Junk Rig ? Having made two trips home from Tonga in the last three years , if I'd had a junk rig, I'd still be out there. A couple of years ago we had a race with a couple of junk rigged 40 and 44 footers against my sloop rigged 31 footer and 36 footer . The sloops were pointing 30 degrees higher and going faster to windward.The junks were much faster downwind.Coming home from Tonga is windward work for 4,000 miles. The last time , was unable to make enough easting to reach Kauai and had to pass west of it. With a junk rig I would have lost so much easting I would have almost had to come home via Japan. One of the junk rig owners we raced against likes to tell people that he beat us to windward while showing them the video of us clearly sailing circles around him. This type of self delusion is not uncommon with junk rig enthusiasts. Some boats have brass plaques saying something like " Powered by Ford " or "Powered by Caterpillar" It's been suggested that there should be one for Junk riggers saying "Powered by Bullshit" You can't get much efficiency out of an airfoil with a log on one side of it, no matter what else you do to it.Take the claims of junk rig owners with a heavy grain of salt and skepticism. Believe they outpoint marconi riggs only when you see it with your own eyes.I once left Mexico in my 31 footer at the same time as a 40 foot junk rigged schooner. We sailed more or less the same course. I took 38 days to get back to BC he took 57 days.Till the day he died he claimed his boat could outsail any marconi rig to windward, anytime. Some claim a junk rig is simple and cheap. The 44 footer has 300 feet of line in it's rinning rigging. That , and the maze of battens , parrels, hayards, etc ,is far more complex and expensive that the simple standing rigging of a sloop.As for cheaper, I can walk into a used boater's equipment store , buy a sail for a sloop rig for a fraction the cost of materials and have it up and sailing in half an hour .With a junk rig you have to build everything yourself or have it custom built. If you build it yourself out of the cheapest materials, what do you value your time at, time you could spend cruising, which is what it's supposed to be all about. A friend who has been cruising with a junk rig for many years and probably knows more about them tan anyone around here told me that when people tell him they plan to use a junk rig , the first thing he tries to do is talk them out of it. If that proves impossible, he'll tell them how to do it. The only reason he hasn't changed his rig is because he can't afford it. With roller furling and slab reefing, I can tie a reef in a mainsail in under a minute and furl a bit of jib in less time. Brent Swain 2059 From: Alex and Kim Christie Date: Tue Aug 19, 2003 1:28pm Subject: Re: Junk Rig ? The junk rig has been getting a lot of press lately, and I think has always found favour with people working to a budget, and people looking for an easy-to-handle rig. Brent's rig as designed for his boats is pretty simple, though. There are so many variations on the junk rig (for instance, the difference between Vietnamese, Chinese, Riverine, Coastal and Ocean-going rigs and so on) that I would hesitate to make a general statement about it, but I do have some first hand experience and observations to put in the stew pot here. The performance of any rig should be looked at subjectively, and in context of the hull it is attempting to drive, plus the person handling it. Phil Bolger, has explored more different rigs than anyone, and still can't find himself wholly liking the junk, despite repeated pleas to him to design for it. Instead, his instincts and experience have led him to a type of hybrid, the "Chinese Gaff" rig, which is basically a very heavily battened gaff rig. It has the advantage of still breaking the pressures on a sail up into smaller pieces, and has the same aerodynamics on either tack. It is a quiet rig, and reputedly easy to handle. With all of it's sail area aft of the mast, however, it doesn't have the junk's balanced wing, nor can it be moved fore and aft like a junk (though how often people adjust a junk in this fashion once they have it tweaked to their liking is open to conjecture). It may or may not be a reflection on the rig as a whole, but I do have some recent direct observations of a local 44 foot junk schooner 's performance to windward which gave me pause for thought. I hope my critique of her performance doesn't ruffle the feathers of any members of the group who favour junk rig, but these are simply my subjective observations. She was tacking south down Baynes Sound a few days ago, and I had the opportunity to see right off my bedroom balcony how she worked on one tack vs the other. The wind was out against them, coming out of the south at about 10-14 knots. Here is what I saw: on her eastward tack, coming towards me, with the battens on the leeward side of the mast and held away by the wind pressure, she charged along quite smartly, making the 2.5 kilometre crossing from one side of the sound to the other in good time. The sails had a distinctly air-foiled shape as they bulged out away from the mast. Just below my house she came about in the relaxed manner that junks are known for. But once pointed on her new tack, she just stalled out, not making any headway, with even a little drift downwind. Now the battens were pressed heavily against the mast (both fore and aft sails were on the same side, by the way), such that there was a distinct "bump" where the sail material contacted the mast, and if there were a smoke stream going over the sail I'm sure I would have seen the confused vortexes of wind generated by the "log" in the way of the airflow on the windward side of the sails -- no doubt robbing a lot of the thrust one would need to get the boat moving. The skipper bore away from the wind to try a broad reach and she still didn't appear to move much, even starting to crab sideways downwind. If she had been on a lee shore that would have been the end of her, is all I could think. Eventually she began to get a little way on, but very reluctantly so, and not nearly as close to the wind as her previous tack. She seemed to struggle her way across the sound very reluctantly on a broad reach. Any more, and he'd have been sailing downwind. The boat made it's way in this ponderous way across the sound to the other side where it could finally turn around and make a more successful run. What happened? A friend said that the function of the junk rig, like any rig, is also a function of the person handling that rig but I know the owner of this boat is a seasoned sailor. Tom Colvin told him that non-asians never seem to sail them right (excluding himself, of course!), but I don't know how much to make of that. What I saw happening is unfortunately the same thing that used to happen to me in my junk-rigged Grand Pelican (18 footer): When on the tack which favoured the fullest shape of sail (battens held away from the mast) without the vortice-inducing bump caused by the mast pressing against the cloth, the boat would move along happily. Then, on the opposite tack, the boat would not make to windward, meaning that one tack would be wasted on a broad reach until the opposite tack could be taken and the rig allowed to work on the favourable side of the mast. I found this quite irritating, and it more often than not resulted in me firing up the outboard to get to windward. If I had removed all the battens and used the rig as a dipping lug-sail, I could have dipped the yard and put it on the other side to get some nice sail shape happening, but this obviates the intention of the junk rig to be easy and relaxing to use. Some junk schooners hang the fore sail on one side of the mast, and the aft sail on the other (see the cover of Annie Hill's book) thereby having at least one sail on the good side on any given tack, but the other day the observed 44 foot junk had both sails on the same side. On the surface, the junk seems like a "people's rig", and they are beautiful to watch (though beauty is not very relevant when you are trying to claw off a lee shore and save your boat and the life of your crew). I like how quiet they are, and how sedately they come about without undue anxiety, though it disturbed me to watch that junk the other day just sit there after coming about. Some rigs on some peoples' boats have worked great, while other rigs spend a lot of time wrapped up while the boat motors everywhere even though the wind is up. Obviously there is something worth exploring there, and I continue to watch with interest the ongoing research into the rig, despite my misgivings. I have also seen boats like Allen Farrell's China Cloud, where the rig worked wonderfully (and it should be noted that he designed the hull and rig to work together, whereas Brent never intended his boats to be junk-rigged.). The fully battened aspect really tames the tendency of a sail to flog, and as long as there is not rigging to get it hooked up on you've also got an easy-reefing sail. Junk rig proponents point out that the aerodynamics of the junk are in a different realm than marconi, operating on different principals, and that vortex-induction may even play a role in generating lift on the junk sail. That said, it may be a mistake to attempt to make the junk try to act like an airplane wing, if it should be working with a different aerodynamic principal altogether. If that is the case, then I'd make sure my junk rig is not simply cobbled together without thought to the best way the technology should be used. If cost were not a factor, it would be amusing to rig the same hull with a proper junk rig, then try it again with marconi, and see which one a person prefers. But even if I had the extra money to expend on such a fancy, I think I'd rather throw it at my cruising fund and go sailing! Alex 2060 From: Stephen Wandling Date: Tue Aug 19, 2003 1:48pm Subject: Re: Junk Rig ? Alex, Thanks for the great story. You should be able to use your great writing skills to keep your cruising fund topped up! Two things: Because of your mention of the bulge at the mast when on the tack to the West, I imagine the battens are too "soft" in the effort to create the type of aerodynamics that western minds insist on imposing on this 2000 year old design. Secondly, Blondie Hasler has done more to make the junk rig currently popular than probably any other person around. He has also done his share in giving it a bad name. He wanted a rig for the Atlantic Singlehanded race that he could run from inside Jester and he succeeded at that task with his version of the junk rig. Others have built to his specs and then complained that it doesn't sail to windward. Since sailing well to windward was never a criteria for Blondie it's no wonder. My point: Stick to the classic asian design, paying attention to all of the details. You may well end up with a rig that holds it's own with western rigs. They are out there. Maybe it won't point quite as high, but it may well get to the finish line at the same time! I will junk rig my engineless steel boat. I'll give you a shout before I come through Baynes Sound. Stephen 2061 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Tue Aug 19, 2003 4:20pm Subject: Re: Junk Rig ? I've read this thread with great interest. I'll bet I know why the Junk rig was developed in the first place. Sails have tremendous loads placed on them by the wind. A Marconi rig has enormous loads at the corners. Imagine what those loads did to the fabrics 2000 years ago, 200 years ago, 20 year ago, and today. The junk rig provided more support for the fabric than any other rig out there. If your sails rip and you don't have a motor, you don't have much going for you. So you build a rig that breaks the sail up in smaller panels, and take most of the loads on sturdy wooden battens. Then if a panel blows out you have only a small reduction in your ability to sail, and you may get a chance to relate how wonderful your new rig is. Aerodynamics is like any other area of physics. There is a lot we don't know about in every area, but there aren't any BIG mysteries about how things in the physical world work. The 'big breakthrough's are all relatively small and incremental in every field of physics. That junk rigs use some other basic theory of physics to explain how they work is just wishful thinking. It's a lot like the truck drivers back in the seventies during the first fuel crunch claiming that their rigs were 'designed' and 'geared' for 70 mph, and running at 55 was actually using more fuel. Guess what, trucks have the equivalent of 'hull speed' aerodynamically. Above a certain speed the drag goes WAY up and the fuel economy goes way down. Anybody want to buy a car that runs on water? Gary H. Lucas 2062 From: Alex and Kim Christie Date: Tue Aug 19, 2003 10:50pm Subject: Re: Junk Rig hull types There is a popular Yahoo group all about junk rig, for anyone wanting further information about it: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/junkrig . Quite a few metal boatbuilders on that site, and it was started by an origami boatbuilder from my area. I think the type of hull may have quite a bit to do with the function of the rig. Allen Farrell's China Cloud was designed to "skim" across the water. He didn't mean that it could plane, of course, but he did keep the displacement light with a cedar hull of shallow draft. The three-masted China Cloud had ghosting abilities that baffled fellow boaters in expensive yachts, and Allen could handle his 42 footer solo, keeping his engineless vessel moving and in control in the tight quarters of a crowded anchorage. He was a master boatbuilder and experienced sailor who, by building a boat and rig to his own specifications, wedded his sailing skills to his craft perfectly. No wonder he could practically perform ballet in his boat. A buddy mentioned that the junk schooner I saw the other day was said to be very under-canvassed, which made me realize that there is more to a rig's performance than simply what type it is. Size does count, especially on a 44 foot steel boat! There is definitely something to learn from every type of rig, be it aft rig (Bolger has also done some exploration of that one), staysail schooner (interesting way of using two roller-furlers to create a rig that can be furled without going on deck), junk rig, gaff or marconi. It is sometimes very difficult to compare rigs based only on a few examples, and I'm afraid I have ventured into an arena of discussion with my example that has answers beyond my scope. I think every rig has examples that are highly successful, and examples that are not (such as the rig on my Pelican). Stephen made a good point about sticking to the Asian design of the junk rig. It makes sense to first start with the rig as it is meant to be then if we must, make our modifications from there. Again, the junkrig group has reams of postings that go over this, so well worth checking out what they have to say if you have further interest. Alex 206 From: sae140 Date: Wed Aug 20, 2003 4:06am Subject: Re: Junk Rig ? > Since sailing well to windward was never a criteria for Blondie > it's no wonder. I don't understand this, as the race was across the North Atlantic, where windward sailing is common. To catch the more southerly trades would mean an extra 1000 miles. See: http://www.open50.com/background/bgRaceCourse.html BTW, for a really *ace* world-wide weather site, see: http://www.weatheronline.co.uk/sail.htm (you can check-out the Atlantic weather from sailing/ europe/ atlantic-route - it's a difficult site to navigate through at first) Gives: wave heights, satellite images, barometric pressure, forecasts etc. Best I've come across so far. C 2064 From: Ronald Date: Wed Aug 20, 2003 4:41am Subject: Re junk rig my five cent ......some links for designs hiya our Mr Designer of origami boats wrote in his message "we raced aginst" Oh ...cruising is the word what I like to do if you like racing buy a French plastic bathtube like they have it for the Figaro race or the outher french monster races 80 h no sleep and with a medical guru on one boat deep sleep for 10 minutes all 4 hours the french way and that is racing !! in Practical Boatowner october 2000 I found an article " Rigged for safersailing" ok lot's of lines but no fancy winches no bayby stay 2nd genoa and furling system a lot of lines but only sails as masts. lines and offset of China Cloud a bit fancy are in "Sailig back in Time" amazon has it in stock seagoing classic Junk's like SAO MAI build 1996 in Vietnam all wood but dead traditional heavy displacement 17 meters and 30 tons (European) 2 masted had huge very heavy sails 450 Kg the mainsail and a huge diameter mast losely stayed aginst wipping a la colvin or as Colvin does it now Ok with modern canvas and aluminum hinged battens you gain a lot but acrylic canvas is cheap, easy to repair UV resistent, and glasfiber battens cheap. China cloud was a bilge keel design if you like to do a hull a bit like but origami building look at http://www.brayyachtdesign.bc.ca/ http://www.brayyachtdesign.bc.ca/aisha_large.gif she is an origami design and a two masted junk not so beautifull as China cloud not a modell for painting or even coins all that is out with China Cloud something other http://www.mandragore2.net/ a french page but no problem go on PLANS there you have lines, offset interior s ailplan etc they build it in wooud but looks much origami to me Farell gave his lines allways for free as time goes by ronald 2065 From: russingram Date: Wed Aug 20, 2003 5:57am Subject: patterns Hi, Does anyone know of a source of paper patterns similar to the one in the "Files" that a newbie could experiment with? Thanks, Russ 2066 From: Date: Wed Aug 20, 2003 8:59am Subject: offshore rigs First, let me put my preferences in perspective. The intended service for my boat is offshore cruising, with my wife and children. For this use I require a greater level of safety than I would for sailing single handed or with an all male crew. Perfection does not exist in human endeavors. Even the best rigging in the world will fail on occasion. Double spreader rigs provide a level of redundancy not found in single spreader rigs, in that double spreader rigs can survive a rigging failure that will typically bring down a single spreader rig. This is reflected in the boats seen offshore cruising, where double spreaders are common in sloops and single spreaders are common in ketches. The reason being that ketches can (hopefully) rely on the mizzen if the main fails, while sloops must take care to ensure the main never fails. From Euler we know that a column with a fixed end is twice as strong as a column with a pinned end. What does this tell us about deck stepped and keel stepped rigs? If you are going to deck step a mast, it must be twice as strong in section as a keel stepped mast. Usually it is cheaper to buy a longer mast than one that is twice as strong, which is the economic reason to keel step a mast. Also, a stronger mast is usually less efficient for sailing, which is the performance reason for a keel stepped mast. note: I have seen some builders place a pin in a keel stepped mast right at the deck level, to use the mast to support the deck. Do not do this as it can lead to stess cracks in the mast at the deck. Support the deck with a bulkhead or column. Euler also tells us that the strength of a mast varies inversely with the square of its unsupported length. How does this affect the choice of rigging? Consider a 36 foot boat. 10 ton displacement. 10 foot beat. 42 feet from deck to masthead. With a single spreader, the column length will be 42/2 = 21 feet. 21 squared = 441. With double spreaders, the column length will be 42/3 = 14 feet. 14 squared = 196 Thus, double spreaders will yield a column strength advantage of 441/196 = 2.25. With single spreaders, the mast will need to be 2.25 times stronger than it would need to be with double spreaders. Thus, a deck stepped single spreader rig will need to be 2.25 * 2 = 4.5 times stronger than if it was keel stepped, with double spreaders. note: The ratio of 2.25 for single spreader versus double spreaders is not specific to this example. It can be calculated using the inverse square as follows (1/2 * 1/2)/(1/3 * 1/3) = (1/4)/(1/9) = 9/4 = 2.25 However, we are not finished. The wires in a single spreader rig are at a steeper angle than the wires in a double spreader rig of the same beam. This means that more of the rigging force is applied downward as compression on the mast in a single spreader rig as compare to a double spreader rig. In our example, we will use 4 feet as the base of our rigging triangle. Consider that our worst case load is equal to the displacement of the boat. single spreader - force triangle = 21 x 4 x 21.38 = 10/21.38 * 21 = 9.8 tons compression double spreader - force triangle = 14 x 4 x 14.56 = 10/14.56 * 14 = 9.6 tons compression Thus, single spreaders, the mast will have to be 2.25 / 9.6 * 9.8 = 2.3 times stonger in section as compared to double spreaders, and 4.6 times stonger in section if deck stepped with single spreaders as compared to keel stepped to double spreaders. Greg Elliott Yacht Lazy Bones 2067 From: brentswain38 Date: Wed Aug 20, 2003 0:49pm Subject: Re: Re junk rig my five cent ......some links for designs I've sailed on China Cloud. It pointed very high in the calm waters of Nanaimo Harbour, but Allen Farrel , her designer , builder and skipper said in rough water she could barely sail better than 90 degrees to the wind. He once tried to get from Scotty Bay to Jedediah Island against a 15 knot southeaster for a picknic there, a distance of roughly ten miles. He beat for an entire day, then gave up at sundown. He tried all the next day and again gave up for good. He had nothing good to say about junk rigs at that time, sayng his previous , conventionally rigged boat would have made it in two easy tacks. Good semanship means giving seaworthiness priority over decorative priorities, altho the two can be compatible. You can buy a used sail in excellent condition for a fraction the price of acrylic material or most other materials for that matter, never mind the work of making a sail out of it. Excuse me, I meant" we cruised to windward against" The sails on a junk rig with all it's battens are extremely heavy, limiting the sail area you can carry. 2068 From: brentswain38 Date: Wed Aug 20, 2003 0:51pm Subject: Re: Junk Rig ? Go sailing on a junk rig amid other boats with marconi rigs and you'll understand well Brent Swain 2069 From: brentswain38 Date: Wed Aug 20, 2003 0:57pm Subject: Re: Junk Rig ? Bernard Moitessier once told me how , when he had his junk in Asia , he used to go to the market place after they had closed and pick up all the straw mats they used to put their wares on. They'd start sewing them together , and in a couple of days they would have a set of junk sails that would last several weeks. When they were trashed they would go back to the market place and begin the proccess all over again. Such was life back then. Brent swain 2070 From: Michael Casling Date: Wed Aug 20, 2003 1:08pm Subject: Re: Re: Re junk rig my five cent ......some links for designs Brent, we may be on different sides of the fence about hull materials but I am with you on the sails and rig. The system that has been developed with a single mast, wyre and spreaders to hold it up works well, is dependable and allows the boat to sail in all directions except straight upwind. As with diesel engines it is an area that I would not try and reinvent as it all works so well. If the rig on your boat happens to match that of another popular boat then used sails become available. I got our main new and cheap as the Bayfield 29 owner changed his mind. Michael Casling 2071 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Wed Aug 20, 2003 2:34pm Subject: Re: Junk Rig ? Although my wife and I haven't been sailing long we have sailed on about 10 different junk rigged boats, 6 different Marconi or Bermudan rigs and too many motorboats to mention. The best to windward were definitely the motor rigs although the ride can get very bumpy. My understanding is that for the best windward performance in a sailing boat then a sail with a long luff is best, which is what you get with a high aspect Bermudan (Marconi) rig. Off the wind then a quadrilateral or polygonal sail such as a gaff rig, square rigger, or junk performs best, which is what Brent says. Junk rigs I have seen in photos, drawings and in real life vary widely especially the Asian ones with the sail battens varying from almost horizontal to sails with the lower battens almost horizontal but progressively cocking up until the top batten or yard is at about 70°. The latter sail has better windward performance as the upper panels, having a batten at their luff much like a gunter rig form a better aerofoil shape. The junk rigs with horizontal battens, would, I should think, have been used where the prevailing wind was always on the beam, much the same as with a commercial western schooner, which are best on a beam reach, would have been used. Blondie Hasler's Jester, which as I understand was not noted for its windward ability but has crossed the Atlantic thirteen times, had battens that were more horizontal than many would use today on a Western junk rig. Thoughts vary in the junk world as to how to improve windward performance. These range from switching on the iron topsail, to hinged battens, to cutting the sail to give each panel an aerofoil section much like stunt parachutes, to different batten angles. When ailing to windward in light winds with a Bermudan rig the sheets are slackened to let the sails make an aerofoil shape. As the wind increases the sheets are tightened to make the sail flatter. Junk rigged boats with flat sails are at a big disadvantage in light winds sailing to windward compared to a Bermudan rig, however as the wind freshens the disadvantage lessens especially if the Bermudan rig has a furling fore sail where the roll of sail upsets the airflow. I have been in a junk rig sailing to windward that has overtaken a Bermudan rig and I have been in a junk rig that has been left standing by a Bermudan rig sailing to windward. People race boats of the same design. They don't all win. To me the windward performance of the junk rig is OK but it is not the main issue. I like the fact that the junk sail is quiet, the sheets can be let go to slow the vessel without the sails flogging, it gybes without the boom trying to kill a crew member, it can be reefed so easily without me, who is not getting any younger having the distress of watching my wife struggling to tie up a flogging sail while the boom tries to throw her off the cabin roof. Off the wind it is easier than a Bermudan rig. My wife prefers a junk rig for our boat. Regards, Ted 2072 From: Ted Stone Date: Wed Aug 20, 2003 4:44pm Subject: Re: Junk Rig ? Regarding trying a boat with a marconi rig and a junk rig: A month ago we sailed on a junk rigged Etap 26. When the owner took early retirement some 20 years ago he had bought the unsinkable boat with a marconi (Bermudan) rig and sailed away in it every summer. After several years one of the chain plates pulled out. Etap boats are twin skinned with foam between to give them their unsinkability so the repair would have been difficult. So he did away with standing rigging and fitted a junk sail with an unstayed mast which he has sailed every summer since, travelling from France to the UK, Holland, Germany and the Baltic. I did not ask if he preferred the junk to the Bermudan rig. He seemed happy with it. He was one of the most skilled yachtsman I have sailed with. Before retiring he had been master of a cross channel car ferry. Regards, Ted 2073 From: Date: Thu Aug 21, 2003 7:33am Subject: Re: Junk Rig ? I have seen few junk rigged crusing boats offshore. Over the years maybe 5 come to mind. I suspect that they would be more common if they were a good, cost effective cruising solution. One problem common to unstayed rigs is that they often need to have a mast relatively far forward to balance the boat. One junk rigged boat we cruised with had a mast leaning forward over the bow to balance the boat. Having a mast near the bow can result in the need for bluff bows to support the weight and loads of the mast, which can make the boat harder to drive to windward in a seaway. This as much as the sail plan might be behind some of the performance questions concerning junk rigs to windward. Ron tells me the Lazy Bones was inspired by a junk rig. He had built a bluff, junk rigged design by a well known designer and it was his frustration trying to sail that boat to windward that inspired him to design and build the Lazy Bones. Greg Elliott Yacht lazy Bones 2074 From: brentswain38 Date: Thu Aug 21, 2003 10:43am Subject: Re: Junk Rig ? Don't underestimate the loads an unstayed mast puts on the deck in a rough sea. A friend had his deckplate buckling in his junk while motoring into a rough headsea. A 1/4 inch doubler for about two feet from the mast around the mast pipe is a good idea. Again, having a log tied to one side of an airfoil seems to reduce the efficiency upwind in a junk and I don't see any simple way around that.Strong winds in smooth water would no doubt help a junk to windward, but a rough sea tends to stop them. Brent Swain 2075 From: fmichael graham Date: Thu Aug 21, 2003 11:01am Subject: Re: Junk Rig ? I guess I may as well throw in my "two bits" worth. I had the great fortune to observe, close-hand, one of the junk-rigged sailboats that were built and sailed by Allen Farrell, on the B.C. coast. While I could appreciate the simplicity of the rig (say goodbye to most of the rigging), and it is a very sweet looking design when seen against the horizon, I think it would be a mistake to substitute such a rig for the Marconi -Bermudian rig if one wished to sail about the planet. I understand that Allen Farrell chose the junk rig so as not to have to spend money - which he did not have in abundance - on wire & metal. What first attracted me to Brent's method of boat building was that, in the spirit of people like the Farrells, He designs & builds a boat that is simple, inexpensive and pleasing to the eye. A junk rig would, in fact, be more expensive to build and maintain - I understand that there is major sail chafe when the sail is backing to the mast - and would detract from the performance of the boat. I have noticed that many of the postings submitted in the past six months have been on issues which complicate the building of a sailboat and, while its nice to philosophise about alternatives, I think that the purity of what Brent, with Alex's assistance, has offered us is best appreciated when following the credo of "KISS" (keep it simple stupid). I hope I haven't stepped on any toes, that is not my intention. So, when is Brent going to schedule a workshop? Brent?? Mike 2076 From: Ted Stone Date: Thu Aug 21, 2003 0:07pm Subject: Re: Junk Rig ? Junk rigs with most of their sail area behind the mast do mean that the mast has to be further forward to balance the centre of effort and resistance than on a rig with a jib. This is a concern and is no doubt why that some have asked if a certain hull is suitable for a junk rig. There are those in the UK, with considerable experience in designing and building junk rigs for production boats, who say that it has not been a problem provided it is designed properly. I have sailed junk rigs on a wide variety of production boats such as a Freedom 36, a Macgregor 26 an Etap and a Newbridge Navigator and their owners seemed happy enough. On many traditional western boats bowsprits were/are used to balance their low aspect rigs. A bowsprit could be thought of as a mast leaning so far forward that it is horizontal. Tom Colvin had a bowsprit and jib on his otherwise junk rigged "Gazelle" although in later junk designs he did not use one. He used standing rigging on "Gazelle" although the Bisquine, the traditional sailing fishing boat of the Mont-Saint-Michel area of France, which is a two or three masted lugger had a bowsprit with mostly unstayed masts, which seems brave. Their masts lean all over the place. They have a deep forefoot. Google bisquine to see some photos of these spectacular looking boats. Regards, Ted 2077 From: vinnie_barberino2000 Date: Thu Aug 21, 2003 1:32pm Subject: Re: Junk Rig ? I have no advice to offer on junk rigs just an observation from a Kiwi who has never seen a junk rigged yacht down here.They are not very popular on our waters , I dont know if it has to do with our racing backgrounds or our need for a rig that has good allround ability,especially when trying to scratch yourself off our islands in the gulf or to avoid others.I hav'nt thought too much about them but alternative rigs are not that popular ,in saying that I dont know why. Maybe the need to sail well on all points of wind is more important than the romantic aspect of alternative rigs. Regards Steve 2078 From: Alex Christie Date: Thu Aug 21, 2003 3:53pm Subject: Re: Junk Rig The exploration of the junk rig issue here is really interesting, in that the original reason many are attracted to it is for reasons of simplicity and safety. So, in many ways, their quest is aligned with much of the philosophy of Brent's approach (the do-it-yourself attitude). It is just a different approach, and many who take it are well aware of the pros and cons. It may be interesting to note that Allen Farrell made it clear to would-be China Cloud builders that his junk was designed for coastal work, and never for offshore use. Farrell was quite a sane sailor, and over his long boatbuilding career he designed/built each boat to perform in the environment in which he intended to venture. His words were worth heeding, and Brent's recollection of Farrell's comments about China Cloud's performance stand out strongly in my mind. Even though I'll likely rig my future boat as a marconi, I am attracted to the spirit of the junk rig people; They are seeking the same kind of simplicity that Brent's boatbuilding philosophy promotes, just in a different way. The evolution of the offshore sailing rig is ongoing, and it is fascinating to contemplate the possibilities, if not tempting to experiment myself. I must admit that I have been following with interest Phil Bolger's "Chinese Gaff" rig as a possible meeting ground between the extremes, though the chafe of the batten pockets against the shrouds remains a stumbling block. Brent's comments about the problems of chafe in fully battened marconi mainsails are a case in point. Alex 2079 From: sae140 Date: Thu Aug 21, 2003 11:35pm Subject: Re: Junk Rig ? You misunderstand me. What I don't understand is why someone with Halser's lifetime of experience would take a rig supposedly incapable of any windward performance whatsoever (which is what many would have us believe about Jester's rig) onto the more northerly route of the North Atlantic crossing - on a race - where some windward work might reasonably be expected. To be sure, he was no mug, and tried to predict favourable easterlies for his crossing - but this was at a time long before the computerised weather prediction systems we have today were developed. Guys in those days (and still !) had to contend with whatever weather was dealt them - and that would almost certainly have included a dose of adverse winds. The racer simply doesn't have the cruiser's luxury of waiting around patiently for favourable winds to materialise. The original Jester crossed the Atlantic over a dozen times plus countless shorter passages during it's 27 year life, before being sunk during a botched rescue - racing for much of this time. Are we really to believe that this boat never encountered nor successfully contended with adverse winds during this period ? Personally, I have found junk rig to be a most willing performer around these coasts, in anything but the lightest winds. The rigs sailed were classic flat-cut Halser-McLeod, although later designs are reported to be even better. The rig seemingly *wants* to drive - indeed, hoving-to isn't at all easy with this rig - a slow drift is the best I've ever achieved. However, I *do* have misgivings about it's offshore suitability, and hence my initial enquiry. I'm not sure why China Cloud is being commented on in terms of offshore sailing, as it was never built for this purpose. It's amazing light wind capability probably has as much to do with it's underwater profile as it's rig, and having so little hull in the water would probably make it a very dangerous (or at least uncomfortable) boat in high seas. But - what really motivated my initial enquiry was an awareness that *everything* (discounting gps & charts etc) on a Swain-designed boat can be built or obtained from non-marine sources (even the engine, g/box and prop if you're a DIY fanatic) - everything - except for sails, mast ... and sacrificial zincs. If just seems one helluva pity that the design can't be made from 100% non-marine sources, that's all - on a point of principle - call it a kind of 'design objective' if you like - and I was kinda hoping that junk rig might have found a warmer reception. It would also be useful to know whether there is any way around the zinc issue (without starting a flame war) for similar reasons. I find it interesting to compare the Wylo II with the Swain 31 and 36. Almost identical hullforms (as far as I can tell from modelling the multi-chine Wylo into Origami) and based on a broadly similar 'DIY, Low-Cost philosophy', but whereas the Wylo comes with a choice of many rigs, the keel choice is rather limited - whereas with the Swain design, the reverse is true. No complaint - no big political point scoring - just an observation. I'd like to think that these two designs are sufficiently similar that some mix-and-match of rigs and keels between them might be possible ? With due caution of course. Colin 2080 From: sae140 Date: Thu Aug 21, 2003 11:38pm Subject: The case for DIY ? One reason to build your own gear is that manufacturers of yacht fittings appear to be more concerned with issues of appearance and fashion, and simply do not build their products strongly enough to take the hardships of a marine environment. Another reason to build your own gear is that although some items of second-hand equipment (such as masts and sails) would be more cost- effective to buy rather than make yourself, these items are simply not readily available. Although I live near the coast, this sea-area of England is a commercial crab and shell-fishing region, and leisure sailing is an almost non-existent minority activity. Ergo - there are virtually zero supplies of yachting equipment to be had, either new or second- hand. Visiting a yachting area in the search for s/h sails or propellors or w.h.y involves a full day's driving - and then without any guarantee of success. There'll undoubtedly be folk building boats well inland, in the outback or in desert areas perhaps, in a much worse situation than myself. So - before anyone writes saying that a second-hand sail/ mast/ engine/ prop etc is the simplest and the most straightforward and cost-effective solution to a problem .. please bear in mind that not all of us have equal access to such resources. Colin 2081 From: Stephen Wandling Date: Thu Aug 21, 2003 8:07am Subject: Re: Junk Rig ? I suspect that most modern cruisers sail with what comes on their production boat. Modern cruisers look at me with glazed over eyes when I explain the boat I am building and then they change the subject. I get a similar reaction when I suggest to them that they could make their own self furling gear or anchor or anchor winch. Only a small portion of the population are innovators. (BTW, I love the cutter rig and would have that if I weren't so keen on trying the junk rig.) Junk rigs don't NEED their mast forward or leaning forward, it's that they CAN do so. It spreads the rig. 2082 From: Phillip Allen Date: Fri Aug 22, 2003 2:16am Subject: Re: The case for DIY ? The build it yourself person (imo) represents a "mind set", that is, one automaticly thinks "I wonder if I could build that?" As a twelve year old, I became very interested in firearms...guess what, Mom says I can't buy one--even if I somehow got the money myself. So... I built one myself...then another...and so on. No gun powder?...I made it myself. As an aside...I think now that one dosen't just grow-up and leave his childhood, he "survives" his childhood...maybe. :) The point is that I agree with the DYI attitude and learned very early that even if others seek to limit me (Mom in the above example), not to limit myself. Phillip Allen (Arkansas) 2083 From: Don Taylor Date: Fri Aug 22, 2003 5:30am Subject: Re: Re junk rig my five cent ......some links for designs My own experiences of sailing our junk-rigged Colvin Gazelle are the opposite to what Brent describes for Allen Farrel and China Cloud. Once the wind pipes up then a Gazelle will sail very well to windward as long as you keep up lots of sail area - which is not intimidating to do because she is easy to reef. On the other hand, light air performance to windward is poor. In one instance, we short-tacked for about 10 miles against F5-6 winds and the flood tide up the St. Johns river to Jacksonville, Florida. Our engine had died so I was forced to sail when I would normally have turned on the iron topsail. I was amazed at how well Pilger made progress. It was a bit of an "aha" experience for me. Another data point, FWIW, is that our jib (Gazelles are junk schooners with a western jib) will start luffing when going to windward before the foresail stops drawing. I usually have to fall off because the only western sail on our Gazelle objects, not because the junk sails stop drawing. From photographs that I have seen, China Cloud looks quite light and I suspect that she has little, if any, lateral plane. If so, then this would explain both her light and heavy air performance. I think that both the rig and the hull have to be considered when discussing performance characteristics. Don. 2084 From: robertgm36 Date: Fri Aug 22, 2003 9:14am Subject: 36 Twin Keel For Sale There is a photo album plus a file for this boat. Robert 2085 From: Alex and Kim Christie Date: Fri Aug 22, 2003 9:26am Subject: China Cloud - a unique case, and other considerations Don Taylor is completely right about China Cloud: she has minimal lateral plane generated by the shallow keel and very small bilge keels -- not giving much "bite" on the water for windward work. It was a compromise that Allen knowingly made in order to enjoy thin-water, the peace of tranquil coves normally unexplored by boats of that size. And, as I mentioned before, China Cloud was never intended for offshore work. That said, while the boat is an interesting study in the use of junk rig, her peformance characteristics cannot be compared to an offshore boat with the same junk rig but more lateral plane. The steel junk schooner I saw was working in quite light air, I realize, and a more in-depth analysis of her performance should be undertaken in a variety of conditions. I imagine there'd be quite a difference in stronger wind, and the junk rig may really come into its own on long offshore passages. Here's an interesting opportunity: I am actually going to have a friend's unfinished 36 foot Swain moved to and completed on my property over the next year, and it will be rigged as a junk. When this craft is launched, it is going to provide an excellent opportunity to see how the rig works on a 36. I haven't sailed on a junk rig of that size, so I am definitely looking forward to it. There'll be a full account of my experiences on this site, no doubt, and maybe we can get some real performance data that we can work with. Alex 2086 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Fri Aug 22, 2003 11:10am Subject: Waterline What is the best way to mark off the waterline on a 36' of Brent's design? Regards, Ted 2087 From: Don Taylor Date: Fri Aug 22, 2003 11:37am Subject: Re: China Cloud - a unique case, and other considerations I don't want to turn this into a discussion on junk rig performance, I moderate the junk rig egroup and I would rather folks joined my group for that discussion. See: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/junkrig/ However, I will say that light air performance is a constant source of discussion and experimentation. The notion is that in light airs you need some camber in the sail, but not in heavy airs. The techniques being tested include flexible battens, battens with knuckles, sewing rounds into the sail panels (baggy panels), and "Gurney" flaps on the leech. Finally, it has been suggested that we Westerners did not copy the Chinese design very faithfully and that we should re-examine how they did things. Regards, Don. 2088 From: Alex and Kim Christie Date: Fri Aug 22, 2003 11:40am Subject: Re: Waterline I don't know of a specific technique for Brent's boats, but I just read about a relatively cheap method on the Bolger Chebacco website (www.chebacco.com), where you use a cheap laser level mounted on a tripod, and simply shoot the hull. If your boat is level, you swing the laser (making sure the laser itself is level in all directions) in an arc, making marks on the boat at regular intervals. The rest is a matter of taping off and painting your waterline. Hopefully it is as simple as it sounds! (And when is that ever the case :-) Some lasers are gimballed to allow self-levelling (maybe rent this type?). As long as your boat is level, this would make marking off the waterline a cinch. I have a listing for a laser level in our local building supply catalogue at a cost of $49.99 Canadian. Looks just like a house builders' level, but has batteries and shoots laser light out one end. It has a convenient hole in the centre for attaching to a tripod, and you'd use the bubble vial on the level itself set the equipment level in all directions. A self-levelling laser can be had for around $100 and up. The same catalogue features a kit which includes level, goggles, batteries, tripod with 3 leveling wheels, carrying case and two lenses for $89.99. Since you'd be walking back and forth sometimes right through the laser beam, make sure you wear eye protection to avoid zapping your eyes. Some lasers come with the glasses, some don't. Alex 2089 From: Leif Thomsen Date: Fri Aug 22, 2003 11:36am Subject: Re: China Cloud - a unique case, and other considerations Alex, Very interesting about the junk rigged 36. One or two masts? Sailarea? Type of junk sails? /Leif T 2090 From: Stephen Wandling Date: Fri Aug 22, 2003 0:27pm Subject: Re: Re: Junk Rig ? In stating my understanding of Blondie's criteria for Jester's junk rig, I may have downplayed any consideration he might have had for windward performance. That was not my intention, and I apologize. Jester did of course sail to windward. I don't know of *anyone* who says differently. One question is, how well did it sail to windward. IMHO, the more important question is: Is Jester's sail a reasonable application of the classic junk rig sail as found on traditional coastal cruisers? Don Taylor is right. We should take this discussion to the junkrig group. Right now, origamiboats has more junk rig posts than the junkrig site! 2091 From: Ted Stone Date: Fri Aug 22, 2003 0:32pm Subject: Re: Waterline Thanks Alex, what I really meant though is were is it? There is a waterline marked on the plans but no dimension that I can see. I read of one chap who sailed his boat until the weed started to grow and used that line as the water line for his antifouling. Regards, Ted 2092 From: Stephen Wandling Date: Fri Aug 22, 2003 0:36pm Subject: Re: Waterline Renting a laser level is a method of determining the location of the waterline, as is using a water level. My question regards "fixing" the line onto the hull. On a wooden hull and some FG hulls I have seen a groove at the waterline that allows you to maintain the waterline after sandblasting, sanding, etc. Does anyone know an analog for steel boats? 2093 From: Ted Stone Date: Fri Aug 22, 2003 0:41pm Subject: Re: China Cloud - a unique case, and other considerations Your junk rigged 36' Swain project is interesting Alex. When do you think it will be finished? The reason I ask is because, as you probably know, I am building one and if you finish before me then I can learn from your project and vice versa. At the moment I am about 9 months behind schedule in what was originally a 3 year project having started 14 months ago. Mine will have two masts. Originally I was going to have only one mast with a 640 sq ft sail but was advised that it would be difficult to handle Regards, Ted 2094 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Fri Aug 22, 2003 0:47pm Subject: Fabricating Anchors The all weather lifeboats of the RNLI in the UK are equipped with two anchors that are fixed to chocks on the foredeck. One is a traditional fisherman type and the other is a plough. The rode passes through a bullring on the stem. I am thinking of making my own anchors of these types and am wondering what is the best source of suitable second-hand steel. Many years ago on the farm we welded pieces of old truck leaf springs to worn digger bucket teeth and cultivator tines to provide new cutting edges. The leaf springs were heated to remove the spring temper and provided this was done they were very tough. Does anyone have experience of using quality scrap to fabricate anchors? Regards, Ted 2095 From: ... Date: Fri Aug 22, 2003 3:01am Subject: Re waterlines Hi Alex, If you paint the waterline to your laser your marks it will be a horizontal strait line,which will look very odd when the boat is in the water. It has the visual effect of making the hull look like the bow and stern are drooping,what you need to do is adjust the line gradually running upwards more at the bow and less at the stern. I corrected the waterline on my cousin's 39 ft yacht that my he had painted to a horizontal line. I am not sure if there are any rules as to how much to adjust the line,I will have to look if there is anything in my books. Ted are you at the painting stage? I hope you are able to understand what I have described as it is getting late hear. Geoff Cheshire England 2096 From: Ted Stone Date: Fri Aug 22, 2003 4:33pm Subject: Re: Re waterlines Geoff, No I am nowhere near the final painting stage. I like to think about things in advance. Regards, Ted 2097 From: Gord Schnell Date: Fri Aug 22, 2003 8:48pm Subject: Re: Waterline I borrowed a survey laser level as used in the house building industry. I leveled the boat to its anticipated waterline, set the laser up inside and marked out all the floor plate attachments points, tanks top levels etc. I bought a cheap laser level from Costco for $29 and use it for everything. The only way to go. Gord 2098 From: richytill Date: Sat Aug 23, 2003 0:23pm Subject: Re: Waterline Waterline people, being on a tight budget, I used an old clear-ish garden hose (any fat clear hose would do), a piece of string, a roll of (on sale) masking tape to mark the waterline as follows: 1. as soon as the boat is painted and dry tie string to stern-rail and bow pullpit 2. fill hose with water (to simulate the sea) and purge bubbles 3. tie hose to string at stern and bow 4. set water level to the intersect of top aft point of skeg and and base of the transom 5. apply masking tape all around hull at water-level with a second person sighting the water level at the skeg intersect as you go 6. fill hose 2" -- 3" more elevation depending on how wide you want the boot-stripe 7 lay out with masking tape as before. You now have 2 horizontal, parallel lines ready to paint. When complete, it should look wider at the bow and stern as you look up from below but parallel from the side. Obviously the method assumes the boat to be perfectly level for this to work. By putting on several layers of paint on the boot-top, there is now a permanent contour mark for future re-painting. The paint was off tint red polyurethane that came free from a wharehouse clean-up. The boat is now floating and everything looks true and as it should. Cost: time and the tape. I am sure there are better ways, but this was all I could think of at the time. Have fun, rt 2099 From: richytill Date: Sat Aug 23, 2003 0:41pm Subject: Re: offshore rigs/spreader width Greg, thanks for the comments on Euler. I was going to weld up a steel mast but found a tapered 51' aluminum pole abandond in a nearby garden. Investigation and audit trail showed it to be drawn from marine grade aluminum. The price was right so I bought it. It tapers from 10" at the base to 5" at the 47' elv. Being deck stepped I consulted Skene (who quotes Euler) and decided it better to go double spreader. What no book seems to supply is the length (thwart- ship dimension) of the uppers in relation to the lowers. Looking at rigs in the harbour indicates narrower at the top. If anyone has any insights into the function and geometry here, I would be greatful to hear about it. Thanks, rt 2100 From: John Olson Date: Tue Aug 26, 2003 0:24am Subject: Re: Digest Number 567 Ted On Eclectus, we used a 35 lb CQR as the main anchor, but also carried a 45 lb Belfast pattern fisherman's anchor on the bow. I built the Belfast to a drawing from one of Ian Nicholson's books. I used mild steel offcuts and it worked just fine. Its no more like to bend or break than any other anchor. There was also a 120 lb Belfast (in 5 pieces) in the bilge. I only used it once, but was glad to have it when I did. Brent was building a plow anchor from mild steel, with good success as I recall. Cheers John 2101 From: brentswain38 Date: Tue Aug 26, 2003 0:03pm Subject: Re: Waterline For the 36 footer measure down from the bottom of the bulwark pipe at the bow 4ft 6 inches to where it crosses the stem . That is the waterline at the bow. At the stern it's the bottom of the transom. As most people overload the boat and weed will grow up to 4 inches above where boats float , it's a good idea to take your antifouling six inches above that line. Brent Swain 2102 From: brentswain38 Date: Tue Aug 26, 2003 0:11pm Subject: Re: Digest Number 567 There is less work in building an entire delta anchor than in just building the hinge in a plow or danforth and it's a much better anchor. High tensile steel for the shank ( T1, AR or QT100) isn't hard to find.It would have to be welded with low hydrogen rod.The delta wouldn't be hard to make collapsible with a removable shank. The spade anchor looks even simpler and looks like an even better anchor. Brent Swain 2103 From: Stephen Wandling Date: Tue Aug 26, 2003 1:08pm Subject: Re: Re: Digest Number 567 This site has all of the dimensions for various sizes of spade anchors, and even has downloadable templates that you have to print on A4 paper to make patterns: http://www.spade-anchor.co.uk/dimensions.htm 2104 From: Ted Stone Date: Tue Aug 26, 2003 2:22pm Subject: Re: Re: Digest Number 567 Thanks for the info on anchors. When I said plough I think I probably meant delta. It hasn't got a hinge anyway. With regard to high tensile steel for the shank ( T1, AR or QT100). What are those grades usually used for? How would one recognise it in a junkyard or do you usually buy it new? I agree about the Spade anchor, it looks good. Alain d'Hylas the inventor has been a live aboard for eleven years now and has, I believe, a patent on it. Regards, Ted 2105 From: Date: Wed Aug 27, 2003 7:37am Subject: Re: Re: offshore rigs/spreader width Sounds like you might have a (Sylvania?) lamp pole. I believe they make good masts. With the taper there is less benefit to keel step the stick, as the butt is already the strongest point. You sometimes want to move the lower spreaders upwards to increase headroom for walking by the lowers, and depending on the sailplan you might want to shorten the uppers spreaders to minimize chafe when sheeting a large genoa in tight. For appearance, you might adjust the spreader height/length so that each section is slightly shorter than the one below it, and the wires running to the mast are at approximately the same angle. I'd probably take a picture of a rig I liked the look of and measure it with a ruler, and use those relative dimensions as a starting point in Skeenes, scaled to the length of my mast. If the results from Skeenes gave an acceptable safety factor for my mast, I'd think that would be sufficient. Otherwise I'd adjust the spreader heights and lengths to ensure each section of the mast had sufficient support. Greg Elliott Yacht Lazy Bones 2106 From: sae140 Date: Wed Aug 27, 2003 9:03am Subject: wheel weights I've just been doing some 'market research' on wheel weights in the UK. Of the 6 tyre and exhaust places I checked, 2 didn't even know what happened to their used weights - they just get 'swept-up' - so probably end up in the waste bin(?). One gave them away 'for free' to the guy who collects the scrap exhausts. The rest sold them annually to scrap metal dealers - one for a kid's charity, the other two used the money for the tea fund. All of these guys commented that they get virtually nothing for wheel weights, as the lead is considered 'dirty' (containing both steel and antimony). When I offered to supply bins and offered to pay £200/ton equivalent - *all* of them showed great enthusiasm, much to my surprise. So - given that I'll end up with a pile of these weights eventually - what happens then ? Can they be installed 'as is', with (say) liquid cement poured in afterwards to fill the voids, or must they be melted- down ? I'm talking Swain 31ft (bilge keels). Colin 2107 From: Phillip Allen Date: Wed Aug 27, 2003 2:59pm Subject: Re: wheel weights I have melted a lot of wheel weights and find it fairly easy to do so... use propane or other outdoor gas of the deep fryer cookers kind. You’ll want to flux the metal but borax like that purchased at grocers for laundry works well enough. Safety concerns for the obvious...really BAD burns if you tip the mass over...it will be surprisingly heavy...have some sort of pig/ingot mould ready (actually a series of them)...I use the gauntleted leather work gloves/safety glasses...a stainless bowl like you'd use to mix bread dough in (about three gallon capacity)...pliers (two pair) to pick up the edge of bowl or ingot mould...the wheel weights will smell badly so think of your neighbors...a big spoon to skim off the dross and clips...BTW do not store the un-melted wheel weights where water may intrude...steam explosions are violent! All the foregoing is meant to be a sort of overview only, if you want to try this, ask again/with questions and I’ll try to help. Phillip Allen (in Arkansas) 2108 From: Don Taylor Date: Wed Aug 27, 2003 4:30pm Subject: Re: wheel weights Colin: By wheel weights, do you mean those little weights that are attached to an automobile wheel rim to balance the wheel after installing a new tyre? Don. 2110 From: sae140 Date: Wed Aug 27, 2003 11:31pm Subject: Re: wheel weights Yes - them's the ones. I'd assumed that these were recycled by the wheel-weight manufacturers - but apparently not. Phillip - very much appreciate your comments. I've melted down quite a lot of lead water pipe in my teens and 20's (to make diving weights) - indoors, and without ventilation(!) - which probably accounts for my poor navigation skills these days .... I totally agree about the water/steam issue, but the weights I'm looking at are covered in road grime and soil, so really need to be hosed down first. A couple of weeks in a polytunnel would soon dry 'em off though. I can't quite see the point of using flux in this application - the lead melts, the dross floats and can be skimmed off. Pour the lead. What does the flux do ? (except make a stink) 'Course, if I was soldering or leadworking, then a decent flux would certainly be at the top of my list. However - the question I'd really appreciate some feedback on, is whether these weights can be installed 'as is' (well, after a good wash) ? Their sizes range from a few at (say) 3" long, but most are around 1", and they seem to bed down pretty-well. I guess the only way to know for sure what the typical 'percentage void' is, would be to melt down a sample and compare against an equivalent weight sample of unmelted. If we were looking at (say) 10-15% void space - which would be filled with cement anyway - I'd much prefer to chuck 'em in 'as is' and save the hassle of melting. I'm also conscious that the smaller the individual wheel-weights, the higher becomes the proportion of steel to lead .... I guess what I'm really asking, is whether there is sufficient capacity in the twin keels of the 31 footer to adopt a no-melt install of lead wheel-weights? Regards Colin 2111 From: Don Taylor Date: Thu Aug 28, 2003 8:57am Subject: Re: wheel weights Colin: As they are such small chunks of lead, couldn't you just pound them into lead pigs? If you pounded a layer at a time into a mold then maybe you can get a solid, almost voidless lead pig. Don. 2112 From: sae140 Date: Thu Aug 28, 2003 11:01am Subject: Re: wheel weights Don: good idea - but have tried this without success. These are much harder than pure lead, due to the antimony. (In cast form, this stuff would make a very good traditional exposed lead keel for a wooden boat !) I think it's either 'as is' or a melt job. Colin 2113 From: kingsknight4life Date: Thu Aug 28, 2003 1:32pm Subject: life jackets Hi. I'm considering buying a Mustang, floater coat. Does anyone out there have any experience with these or own one? They're expensive around $350 CDN so before I buy them I'd like someone with more real world experience to let me kknow what they think. Would I be better off buying an inflatable vest type PFD? Thanks Rowland 2114 From: Alan Smith Date: Thu Aug 28, 2003 3:36pm Subject: Re: life jackets I've had a Mustang floater coat for years and I really like it. As a matter of fact, their factory is only about a mile from where I live here in Richmond BC. Even though the initial cost is high, they last a long time. I find though that I can only wear it in the winter because it's so warm. In the spring-summer-fall you can get by with one of their vest type PFD's which are not so expensive. Al 2115 From: Alex and Kim Christie Date: Thu Aug 28, 2003 3:55pm Subject: Re: life jackets The new coats are quite expensive, but I found an interesting alternative: a few years ago I bought a Canadian military-issue Mustang floater coat at a shop in downtown Victoria, BC, and I paid around $20 for it. It was identical to the civilian Mustang, except that it was black with reflective tapes, and perhaps more heavy-duty (it is quite heavy). It had a neoprene "diaper" that was tucked up the inside on the back part that could be unbuttoned, yanked down, and brought forward through the crotch and affixed by clips (that popped out of the front pockets) to keep hypthermia at bay during immersion situations. The lack of visibility of the black coat is an issue, though the hood that comes out of a zipped pocket around the collar is a bright orange, waterproof rubberized material. If that surplus store still exists I don't know if they sell those jackets, but other stores specializing in Canadian military (navy) surplus may have them, as they are very common on all our navy ships. I think I got quite a good deal, but I'm sure these surplus coats won't be as much as a new Mustang Floater. A quick search with Google yielded this link to Andersen Andersen Military Surplus http://www.stores.ebay.ca/andersonandersonsurplus , and their E-Bay store: The 22nd or so item down yields an orange Canadian military Mustang floater coat for US $35.00 for CDN $49. I guess you can get them in orange after all. E-mail the owner at mark@a... , (found on their website at http://www.aasurplus.ca/ ) and he may be able to find you what you want without using their E-Bay portal. Alex 2116 From: Date: Sat Aug 30, 2003 6:00pm Subject: G55 - updated pictures Updated construction pictures, showing married hull and transom installation. http://www.easysoftwareinc.com/Design/Genoa55/G55_Construction/G55_construction.htm 2117 From: jim_both Date: Sat Aug 30, 2003 7:02pm Subject: converting sloop to cutter I was wondering if the position of the mast in relation to the leading edge of the keel was sacrosanct, or indeed if there was any significant reason at all to establish this relation. I am planning to move the mast aft from station 4 to station 5 (approximate), but keep the CE of the sail plan where it is by altering the sail plan to a cutter rig. The leading edge of the keel is fixed around station 4. Of course I will have a qualifed person design my new cutter rig, but I was wondering in theory if this is a practical objective. Thank you, jim_both 2118 From: Date: Sun Aug 31, 2003 9:08am Subject: new web site - Origami Magic www.origamimagic.com 2119 From: brentswain38 Date: Tue Sep 2, 2003 3:47pm Subject: Re: converting sloop to cutter This would be a big mistake. The stay sail doesn't alter the balance any . With the staysail up , or without it the balance feels the same. The only person I know who moved the mast aft to allow for the area of the staysail ended up with such a vicious weather helm that he couldn't get her to self steer downwind with the mainsail up and took 75 days to sail from Port Renfrew to Christmas Island, normally a 35 day or less trip.Leave the mast where it is on a sloop. Brent Swain 2120 From: brentswain38 Date: Tue Sep 2, 2003 3:56pm Subject: Re: life jackets I used to use floater coats years ago. After a while they get stiff and start to feel like wearing cardboard. The foam breaks away from the nylon and sags inside the coat. You sweat like a pig in them as they don't breath at all.It's been suggested that they are named floaters after their namesake , the man made logs that float away from boats which use a bucket for a head.After wearing one for a while ,you begin to understand the comparison.I wouldn't buy another one , unless I were a heavy drinker who lived on a boat. The ones with the crotch flaps were developed by U Vic for the coast guard ,when they found that the standard ones slip up in the water and do little to preserve body heat. Brent Swain 2121 From: jim_both Date: Tue Sep 2, 2003 4:41pm Subject: Converting sloop to cutter Thanks Brent I thought that weather helm was largely dependent on the relation between the CE of the sail plan and the CLR of the below-waterline hull shape (disregarding hull balance and angle of heel for the moment as outlined in your book). If I move the mast aft I can still maintain this relation by reducing the length of the boom and the area of the mainsail, and increasing the area of the staysail. I have not considered what happens when balancing-up under staysail alone, which I see as one of the advantages of a cutter rig. Thanks, jim_both 2122 From: kwing175 Date: Wed Sep 3, 2003 7:29am Subject: Some Encouragement As summer fades and fall begins a little encouragement. "I had no idea the final stages of building would be such a bottomless Grand Canyon of work, work, work. When I got discouraged, I reminded myself how lucky a man is to have a boat to work on." Author, Elliot Merrick, in "Cruising at Last" 2123 From: Alex and Kim Christie Date: Wed Sep 3, 2003 5:36pm Subject: Swain 36 for sale Hey group, Just spotted this new Swain 36 for sale the Buy and Sell, located on Vancouver Island. Looks like not a bad deal if it is fitted out for the price ($49,000 Cdn). http://www.buysell.com/showad.asp?id=24084629 Alex 2124 From: klroverland Date: Mon Sep 8, 2003 2:49pm Subject: Flush Deck 36 "My Island" Love It Hi, I have been reading with great interest the happenings of the board and finally have a question. What all is involved in the manipulation of plans for the 36' with a flush deck? Are the topsides just raisecd to the height of the normal coach house height? How does Brent feel about this from a design not asthetic point of view? It would also appear that the cockpit has been made shorter, has it? If the owner of "My Island" checks in on this board,I would love to bounce a few questions off him--- Any info anyone has on "My Island" I would be interested in hearing Cheers and Beers Scott 2125 From: brentswain38 Date: Tue Sep 9, 2003 5:32pm Subject: Re: Converting sloop to cutter Any moving of the mast aft would be a mistake. Brent Swain 2126 From: brentswain38 Date: Tue Sep 9, 2003 5:39pm Subject: Re: Swain 36 for sale Marcel just bought that boat and will soon be trailering it back to his home in Quebec. Those of you along the trans Canada Highway can keep an eye out for a well built, very shiny , bright red 36 footer. eastbound. Brent Swain 2127 From: Joe Earsley Date: Tue Sep 9, 2003 5:41pm Subject: RE: Re: Swain 36 for sale Much to my dismay! I was very excited about that boat. I could not believe the care and finish of the hull. Kurt did some great work. I can only dream of that quality. Congratulations to Marcel on his new acquisition. What will her name be? 2128 From: brentswain38 Date: Tue Sep 9, 2003 5:54pm Subject: Re: Flush Deck 36 "My Island" Love It Raising the topsides to make a flush deck would raise the centre of gravity and make the boat quite tender. The reason people like flush decks is because most boats have sidedecks which are far too narrow, and their only experience is sailing on boats with very narrow sidedecks. With 2 ft wide sidedecks, the craving for flush decks diminishes considerably. Flush decks can be dangerous as there is nothing to get your feet against when the boat is well heeled, just a huge open space between you and the ocean. It feels a bit like trying to stay on the back of a whale, when well heeled in a rough sea.Any gain in interior space is visual only and quite useless otherwise. You can gain more visual space by putting mirrors on bulkheads and elsewhere. Flush deckers are more difficult to build as the pieces you have to handle are huge and it is far more difficult to control distortion on such huge expanses with less camber.Cabinsides act as longitudinal stringers and the space between such support is much smaller that between supports on a flush decker. The ultimate stability of a flush decker is far less than that of a boat with a trunk cabin as ,in the inverted position, the deck has far more resemblance to a raft that a boat with a trunk cabin has.If a flush decker capsizes , it would tend to stay capsized much longer than a boat with a trunk cabin would . Brent Swain 2129 From: Date: Wed Sep 10, 2003 5:42pm Subject: Re: Re: Swain 36 for sale Someone got a very nice boat. I have visited it on three ocassions during construction. Attention to detail was commendable. Nice job! It has set the bar much higher for my own boat. Gord 2130 From: Date: Thu Sep 11, 2003 8:01am Subject: Re: Re: Flush Deck 36 "My Island" Love It I'd like to echo Brent's caution regarding flush decks. Many people ask for flush decks for reasons of space on deck. However, from a design point of view flush decks introduce problems and should not be installed without careful review and approval of the designer. I once thought I wanted flush decks on a boat. No longer. I have on more than one occasion found myself flat on my belly, in the lee of the cabin sides, as a green water swept over the decks. (In heavy weather, I normally go forward on the lee side of the cabin). That 1 foot of cabin side has on those occasions been my best friend, keeping me aboard, where otherwise the water would have swept me from the decks. Seriously, when 5 or six feet of breaking wave gets cut off by the hull and lands on the foredeck, there is no way you can stand up to that much force on an open deck. A cabin, with a good strong handrails on top, is in my mind very welcome. For passage making, we secure the dinghy upside down on the cabin top, firmly lashed in place to the handrails. If possible, pick a dinghy that fits on the cabin top, inside the handrails, and it will stay secure in the worst of conditions. greg elliott yacht Lazy Bones www.origamimagic.com 2131 From: Date: Thu Sep 11, 2003 8:14am Subject: alloy construction All boats are a compromise, as are the materials they are built in. Anyone considering building a steel sailboat might also consider aluminum construction. While labor costs have risen rapidly over the years, the cost of alloy has not. As a result, alloy construction is more economical than it once was. We believe that the life cycle cost of alloy construction may now be less than the cost of steel construction. The higher initial cost of alloy discourages many builders. However, this cost is in many cases an illusion. As we will see, the advantages of alloy offset the higher initial cost, so that the overall cost of construction in alloy may well be less than in steel. Alloy welding does intimidate some builders. However, in many respects alloy welding is not more difficult, it is just different. Experienced steel welders can have problems switching to alloy, because they do not make allowance for these differences. In some respects it may be easier for a novice to learn alloy welding, as compared to an experienced steel welder. One of the major advantages of origami style construction is that it can produce fair, round appearing hulls, without filler or painting. An alloy hull allows you to take full advantage of the origami technique, by leaving the hull unpainted. There is a significant cost saving in not having to paint a hull. Regular sandblasting and painting of a steel hull can be a significant cost over the life of the boat, and can eventually exceed the price of the steel. Alloy can be cut and worked with normal wood working tools. This is significant time saver when working with alloy, and can significantly reduce the labor cost of alloy construction. Even if you do the work yourself, there is a always an opportunity cost. You could be sailing rather than building. The weight saving of alloy is a major reason to consider it for sailboat construction. Alloy is approximately 1/2 the weight of steel for the same strength. Every time you move a piece of steel it is twice as much work as compared to alloy. This adds up when building a boat, allowing you to build a larger boat in alloy than steel for about the same amount of work. Labor aside, to see how the weight of alloy affects the overall costs of construction, consider our JM 50. The JM 50 has a displacement of approximately 30,000 lbs. In alloy, the bare hull (unballasted) weighs approximately 10,000 lbs. Approximately 10,000 lbs is ballast, giving a ballast displacement ration of 1/3. This leaves approximately 10,000 lbs for everything else (engine, rigging, interiors, fuel, water, stores, etc). In steel, the bare hull would weigh approximately 20,000 lbs. Allowing the same 10,000 lbs for everything else except the ballast, the boat would weigh 30,000 unballasted. Thus, the boat cannot be built as designed in steel, because there is insufficient buoyancy to take the ballast. In general, a boat designed for steel can be built in alloy, but a boat designed for alloy cannot be built in steel. In this case, to achieve a ballast displacement ration of 1/3, we would need to change the lines of the boat to raise the displacement to 45,000 lbs and change the ballast to 15,000 lbs to suit. However, this is not the full story. To handle the increased displacement in steel, we also would need to increase the size of the engine, fuel tanks, mast, rigging, sails, winches, blocks, anchors, chain, lines, etc., to handle the larger displacement. This means that the 10,000 lbs we have allocated to handle the weight of this equipment will not be adequate. We need to increase this from 10,000 lbs to say 15,000 lbs, for a total displacement of approximately 50,000 lbs. So, our two 50 foot boats, one in alloy at 30,000 lbs and one in steel at 50,000 lbs will have approximately the same effective capacity for cruising, but the steel boat will have a significantly greater displacement. How does this increased displacement affect costs? Outfitting a boat is a significant portion of the cost of building. The cost of engines, rigging, sails, anchors, winches, etc varies approximately as the weight of the boat. Thus, it will cost significantly more to outfit a 50,000 lb boat as compared to a 30,000 lb boat. While steel might appear initially cheaper, it can be more expensive to outfit because of the increased weight. For example, consider the JM 50. The alloy for this boat is approximately $45,000, and lead approximately $5000 for a hull cost of $50,000. In steel the hull would cost approximately $15,000 and the lead $7500 and blasting and painting $7500 for a total cost of $30,000. Outfitting a 30,000 lb boat might easily cost $30,000. At that rate, outfitting a 50,000 lb boat would cost $50,000. Thus the total cost of materials in alloy would be (50+30) = $80,000 and the total cost of materials in steel would be (30+50) = $80,000. Thus, after outfitting, there is no significant material costs between alloy or steel. The alloy boat would likely be quicker to construct - leading to a lower labor cost. The alloy hull would likely have a better resale value, and would not require the ongoing maintenance of steel. Both boats would have approximately the same effective capacity. But, for cruising, a 30,000 lb boat is easier to handle than a 50,000 lb boat. Every time you need to raise/lower/adjust the sails you will be aware of the difference. Also, a 30,000 lb boat is likely cheaper to maintain than a 50,000 lb boat, because the gear is that much smaller and less expensive to repair when something breaks. As can be seen from this example, initial costs should not be the sole reason you decide to build in steel over alloy - because there may be no cost advantage. We believe on balance that over the last 20 years alloy has reached the point where it can be more economical to build in alloy than it is in steel. Note: The figures presented here are approximations, meant only as an example. You are encouraged to repeat the exercise for your own situation. The benefits of alloy over steel are not as great if you simply build a boat designed for steel in alloy. We would expect a boat designed for steel, but built in alloy, would cost more than the same boat built in steel. To take advantage of alloy you should investigate designs specific for alloy, where the weight saving is incorporated into the design from the beginning, resulting in smaller, lower cost equipment throughout. Where the initial higher cost of the alloy has been offset by the weight savings as part of the design. Greg Elliott www.origamimagic.com 2132 From: brentswain38 Date: Fri Sep 12, 2003 8:00pm Subject: Re: alloy construction Steel for a 36 footer , wheelabraded and primed, thus needing no sandblasting,is around the $6,000 to $7,000 range. A friend who built a 36 in alloy spend $20,000 on metal alone. Unpainted aluminium in the tropics gets hot enough to fry eggs on. I had to paint the inside of my aluminium dinghy white last winter in Tonga so I wouldn't burn my feet in it . The only guaranteed way to get paint to stick to aluminium is to sandblast it according a friend who has built aluminium boats for a living for most of his life. Aluminium welding equipment and gas is very expensive and you can only do your welding inside, or , outside under very calm or dry conditions which can seriously slow progress ,or make it far more expensive. I've built a lot of steel boats outside in the winter using very low cost materials and equipment ,under conditions which would make aluminium work impossible. When you can tack a complete shell together in less than 100 hours, labour isn't a big expense anyway. My current boat is 19 years old and still has the original paint on it, in excellent condition. I spend a couple of hours a year , and less than $20 a year maintaining it. It's never been sandblasted and as long as I look after the paint job it won't need to be in my lifetime. Having done the trip from BC to Ensenada in 14 days, south of Frisco in 6 days,best 24 hour run of 175 miles ,and two trips from Hawaii to BC in 23 days doesn't make it a slow boat. The most you would probably shave off those times in a lighter boat of the same size is 2 or 3 days.The ride in a lighter boat would be consideraably less comfortable. If you hate being at sea that much, take the plane. Aluminium can be a wonderful boatbuilding material as long as your so rich , that the cost of the boat won't cost you any freedom time ( which is what pleasure boats are supposed to be for.) Brent Swain 2133 From: brentswain38 Date: Sun Sep 14, 2003 9:36am Subject: Re: alloy construction Another problem with alloy construction is the difficulty with finding an effective antifouling .I saw a good example of this when I left Tonga in April bound for Vancouver Island ,at the same time as a Perry designed sloop rigged aluminium fin keeler with approximatly the same waterline as me. I took 57 days, he took 99 days . When we arrived in Ucluelet, he rafted up to me and we dried out on the beach. I had a dozen or so goose necked barnacles , he had a solid three inch layer over most of his hull underwater.I have tried the aluminium compatible antifouling in the past and found them abysmally ineffective. They are also very difficult to find. Brent Swain 2134 From: richytill Date: Mon Sep 15, 2003 5:10pm Subject: Re: Flush Deck 36 "My Island" Love It Scott, sorry not to reply yet--been away guiding in the mountains. Brent has experience in offshore design, testing and practice--heed the cautions as noted in the responses given. In point of fact, the flush deck on My Island was very easy to make and required no heavy lifting. I simply laid out the whole deck on the ground, cut it out in one session and slid each panel up on deck after welding the deck beams in place in the flat position. I used old bits of pipe as a ramp to slide the panels up and pulled/steered with 2 come-alongs. It was fun, slick and quick. But, (and take this seriously)unless you are well versed in welding light plate the whole thing can buckle up into a real mess. The good news is that there are only 2 butt welds accross the whole deck--still the welding sequence is critical. All that said, the flat (curved) deck is not the design and for many, many other reasons it is best to stay with the plan. I have spent most of my life exploring, experimenting and investigating- -that's just my way. In summary, better to listen to the experts than the experimenters, rt 2135 From: sae140 Date: Tue Sep 16, 2003 3:29am Subject: welding info for those who have the need, http://www.tpub.com/steelworker1/ reveals everything you ever wanted to know about welding, including the overhead stuff. http://www.millerwelds.com/education/tech_articles is also a mine of welding info. I'm sure there are many other equally good sites - I just happen to have found these this morning. http://www.tpub.com also offer info in other areas, mostly military- related. Colin 2136 From: Date: Tue Sep 16, 2003 4:55am Subject: Re: Re: alloy construction Alloy weighs only 1/2 as much as steel. Thus to achieve the same performance as steel, an alloy hull can use less lead, smaller sails, smaller mast, lighter rigging, smaller engine, smaller anchors, and generally smaller and less expensive equipment throughout. This cost saving, when incorporated into the design from the beginning, can result in a similar overall cost for a finished boat, regardless of whether it is built in alloy or steel. A local builder of Swain boats list these prices for a 36' hull on their web site: steel $ 39,000 alloy $ 46,000 From Brent's figures there is a $13,000-14,000 difference in the price of alloy and steel for a 36 footer. From these builders, there is only a $7,000 difference in the price of a hull. This suggests that these builders were able to save 6,000-$7,000 in labor and overhead by building in alloy, which is in line with our experiences. However, these are not the only savings. The hull is only part of the cost of a finished yacht. Many reference texts place the cost of a hull at only 1/4 to 1/3 the total cost of the finished yacht. By these accounts, it can be the outfitting, not the hull that is the major cost of a finished yacht. Simply put, by reducing weight, alloy construction allows you to reduce the cost of outfitting. As the cost of the outfitting can exceed the cost of the hull, alloy construction can allow you to build a boat for similar or perhaps even less overall cost than in steel. Steel and alloy are both fine building materials. We are not suggesting that anyone should build exclusively in alloy or in steel. Rather, that when you look at the overall cost of a boat, you may find that there is little difference between the total cost of alloy or steel. Coupled with the typically higher resale value for alloy as compared to steel, you may find that alloy provides better long term value for the time and $$ invested in building a boat. Here are some articles that might be informative: http://persweb.direct.ca/tbolt/aluminum.htm http://www.kastenmarine.com/alumVSsteel.htm greg elliott yacht Lazy Bones www.origamimagic.com 2137 From: lingarnanaimo Date: Tue Sep 16, 2003 9:57am Subject: Righting Moment for Brent Swain 36 I am currently looking at purchasing a new aluminum mast and boom for our 36 foot Brent Swain currently under construction in Nanaimo, BC. The spar manufacturers would like to know the righting moment for the boat at 30 degrees of heel. I can not find this information on the plans or in Brents book. Has anyone gone through this process and could you forward your information. One manufacturer is recommending a mast section based on 26,000 foot-pounds of righting moment at 30 degrees of heel. Is this a safe limit for an oofshore boat? Thanks, Gary 2138 From: Mike Date: Tue Sep 16, 2003 2:51pm Subject: "Material choices for idiots" - the K.I.S.S. approach So, ya wanna build your own boat, do ya? But what metal should ya use? I would suggest that if you are following designs that are specifically for aluminum and you are going to build this boat in your fabrication shop that is tooled for alum. fab. and you don't have a concern over how much that boat will cost to build, then... your still better off to build in steel. Why? Glad you asked... 1) a welded joint in steel construction has a strength equal to the base metal, whereas, in alum. const. the strength of the joint isn't even close. 2) the skill required to competently weld aluminum - to x-ray quality - is high and, even among experienced alum. welders, hot cracking, porosity, undercutting and hard spots are not uncommon phenomena. 3) The difference in costs for weld equipment, filler metal, shielding gases(alum.fab.) are great - steel fabrication being the cheaper. 4) Aluminum does not react well with other metals and will corrode & deteriorate where in contact with dissimiliar metals.(stanchions, mast base, shroud/stay bases, etc. - take a look at any sailboat at your local marina and count the number of places where dissimiliar metals would come in to contact with an aluminum hull. 5) If you discover a poorly welded joint during construction, it is, by far, easier to repair the steel-constructed hull or deck joint. 6) steel is easier to paint and repair - very important when your laid up in "Nowheresville, South Pacific", or even at "Some Small Island, British Columbia". 7) The belief that you can use a smaller rigging, mast, etc. on an aluminum boat than with a comparably-sized(waterline length) steel one is erroneous. you use the maximum allowable rigging, mast, winches/winch bases, stanchions, pushpits/pulpits, etc. for reasons of safety concerns in adverse wind/sea-state conditions, regardless of your hull material - ergo, the maximum that the boat in question can adequately handle. 8) Another consideration - believe it, or not - is fire. During the Falkland Islands War, the British Navy discovered that there was a major flaw in their new aluminum-hulled warships; aluminum can burn and, when it does, it does so at an alarming rate and is not easily extinguished.(Don't take my word for it, look it up!) So, there we are. an aluminum boat of equal waterline length and design will be a bit faster and - except where the aluminum meets dissimiliar metals - more resistant to corrosion than the steel- hulled version. Yet, I have always viewed this group as a place for discussing the commonsense approach to building a quality sailboat on a budget. In keeping with this philosophy, if you want to build the best boat on a limited budget, the OBVIOUS choice is steel - the cost savings will be substantial - if greater corrosion resistance is desired, use an alloyed steel. That's my opinion - I look forward to hearing dissenting views. Mike 2139 From: mynode Date: Tue Sep 16, 2003 10:54pm Subject: Re: "Material choices for idiots" - the K.I.S.S. approach > 1) a welded joint in steel construction has a strength equal to the > base metal, whereas, in alum. const. the strength of the joint isn't > even close. Here is a good page on relative strength: http://www.kastenmarine.com/alumVSsteel.htm > 2) the skill required to competently weld aluminum - to x-ray > quality - is high and, even among experienced alum. welders, hot > cracking, porosity, undercutting and hard spots are not uncommon > phenomena. I think this is an overstatement. I doubt you'd find much x-ray quality welding on an amateur built boat anyway and probably not much on professionaly built boats either. Welding aluminum is different, but not that much more difficult. It is a little more sensitive to prep, but once you get your joint and rig set up right, it welds beautifully. IMHO, this should not be a factor in ones choice of material. > 3) The difference in costs for weld equipment, filler metal, > shielding gases(alum.fab.) are great - steel fabrication being the > cheaper. I would suggest that given the amount and type of welding needed on a metal boat you could save *A LOT* of time and get better quality by using a wire feed rig anyway. Buy one, build your boat and then sell it. This way, it's a few hundred dollars over the cost a stick rig at most. But then for aluminum I'd probably want a plasma cutter as well. Off the top of my head, I can't comment on the cost difference between wire/gas and sticks, but you would need more filler for the thicker aluminum sections. If you are using a gas shield you will need a sheltered work area and argon for aluminum is more expensive than C02 mixes. While I have no experinece with them (and am a little leery of them), I do know that aluminum flux core wire and even sticks exist. Anybody ever use them? > 5) If you discover a poorly welded joint during construction, it is, > by far, easier to repair the steel-constructed hull or deck joint. Aluminum grinds easier. :-) Do you have a solution other than grinding the offending material out and rewelding it? > 7) The belief that you can use a smaller rigging, mast, etc. on an > aluminum boat than with a comparably-sized(waterline length) steel > one is erroneous. you use the maximum allowable rigging, mast, > winches/winch bases, stanchions, pushpits/pulpits, etc. for reasons > of safety concerns in adverse wind/sea-state conditions, regardless > of your hull material - ergo, the maximum that the boat in question > can adequately handle. Greg Elliott's points about rig/engines etc. seemed valid to me. Given a particular performance specification, the heavier boat would need larger sails and engine. Larger sails = higher loads = stronger rigging all of which would increase cost. Larger engine = higher cost and more fuel = more weight and volume etc. - Mark 2140 From: Date: Wed Sep 17, 2003 7:55am Subject: Re: Re: "Material choices for idiots" - the K.I.S.S. approach Let's consider a theoretical 36 footer, an approximation of the 36 footer built locally based on Brent's designs. From the local builder: steel - $39,000 alloy - $46,000 difference - $7,000 I don't have the weights for Brent's boat. The following are my approximations for the purposes of demonstration only. In steel: steel - 10,000 lbs lead - 5,000 lbs rig, engine, tanks, interior, stores, etc, - 5,000 lbs total - 20,000 lbs ballast displacement ratio, 25%. In alloy (option 1): alloy - 5,000 lbs lead - 5,000 lbs rig, engine, tanks, interior, stores, etc, - 5,000 lbs total - 15,000 lbs ballast displacement ratio, 33%. Option 1, build the boat in alloy, without changing anything else. The boat will be stiffer, probably better capsize resistance, and likely faster under sail and power. The boat will be able to carry an additional 5,000 lbs of cargo than the steel version that can be used to generate an income, to pay the extra $7,000 to purchase the alloy hull, or to carry an additional 500 US gallons of water and 150 gallons of fuel to extend the cruising range. Option 1 costs $7000 more than steel, because it has better performance and capacity than the steel version. However, there is another option. Most people don't need the extra 5,000 lbs of capacity in a 36' boat. Consider what happens if you adjust the design of the alloy boat so that it performs similar to the steel version. In alloy (option 2): alloy - 5,000 lbs lead - 4,000 lbs rig, engine, tanks, interior, stores, etc, - 5,000 total - 14,000 lbs ballast displacement ratio, 29%. Option 2 has the same capacity to carry fuel, water and stores as the steel version. However, the boat is only .7 the weight of the steel version. You can cut 1000 lbs of ballast. This is going to mean a saving in the amount of lead that must be bought. You could even cut the lead more to 3333 lbs, for a ballast displacement ration of 25 as in the steel version, but as you decrease the displacement it helps to increased the ballast displacement ration to maintain stability. You can reduce the mast and rigging to about .7 the size of the steel version and still get similar performance to the steel version. This is a large enough difference that you can likely go down a wire size and to a smaller and shorter mast section, which can add up to a huge saving. Buying winches .7 the size can make another huge difference in price. You can reduce the engine to about .7 the size of the steel version and still get similar performance. There can be quite a difference in price between a 15HP and a 20HP engine. These savings in lead, rig size and engine size can then be used to pay for the $7,000 price difference between the steel and alloy hulls. You can also apply similar reductions (with care) to other gear on the boat for further savings. The smaller rig and sails will be easier to handle for cruising. Offsetting this, lower displacement in option 2 will have a quicker motion in a seaway. The smaller engine in option 2 will likely get better fuel economy than the bigger engine in the steel version, thus the alloy boat will likely have a greater range under power for the same size tanks. The lighter hull will likely be move responsive to the rudder under sail and power, likely making it better handling under sail and easier to maneuver around the docks. As a bonus, the additional weight savings in the rig and engine in option 2 allow you to carry extra fuel, water and stores than the steel version. It may only be a few hundred pounds, but that is still an extra 4-5 jerry cans. My purpose in this demonstration is simply to show that it can be a mistake to assume that it is cheaper to build a boat in steel than alloy. The cost of the material to build the hull is only part of the total cost, and building in a heavier material adds costs elsewhere to the boat. There is no free lunch. Alloy boats that perform better than steel cost more than steel. Alloy boats that perform like steel cost about the same as steel. By attention to design, building in steel and alloy can deliver comparable boats at a comparable price. When most people compare alloy to steel, they are comparing apples to oranges - a high performance alloy boat to a low performance steel boat. Of course there is a difference in price. However, if you use alloy to build a boat that is similar in performance to steel, your should find that your total cost is comparable to steel. I hope that the above example will prove instructive to some that are considering building a boat. Research the topic for yourself and see what other builders and designers are saying. You might find that the best material for your next boat will be alloy. In either case, steel and alloy are both fine boat building materials. I own a steel boat, mostly because I was able to buy the boat used for a low price. Steel boats do not always have a great resale value, which is why they are a great boat to buy used. I sold a 26' FG boat, bought my 39' steel boat, and put money in my pocket to go cruising. However, if I was going to build a new boat, I would go with alloy. If for no other reason than if my plans changed, and I wanted to sell the boat, the alloy boat would likely have a better resale value. greg elliott yacht Lazy Bones www.origamimagic.com ps: Alloy welds are not as strong comparatively as steel welds. This is because the heat of welding alloy removes some of the temper, reducing the strength of the weld to the strength of aluminum. Something similar happens in steel, where the heat of welding reduces the strength of the surrounding steel, but the effect is not as great. However, it is a mistake to say that because the welds are not 100% strength, this makes alloy weak. The strength of alloy welds is accounted for in the design of an alloy boat. Stiffening members and backing bars are used on the inside to bring the effective weld strength of alloy up to 100% strength. For example: a doubler on the inside of a butt weld brings the weld to 120% strength. Alloy boats are as strong as steel by design, but much lighter. Pound for pound, alloy is twice as strong as steel. 2141 From: metak20032000 Date: Wed Sep 17, 2003 8:08am Subject: wheel weights In response to Phillip Allen's post: Do you use an aluminum mixing bowl to melt the lead weights in? Also is there any advantage to using epoxy to fill the voids with? 2142 From: Phil S. Date: Wed Sep 17, 2003 5:51pm Subject: Material Choice Hey Guys: I thought I might chime in on the materials debate. First off any of us that are/have/ will build our own boat will do a heck of allot of research before we pick up a tool. So I believe that the choice will be a personal one. Misinformation may be out there, so "Builder beware" as it were. My personal choice of materials is steel. I have many ready sources of scrap or "2nd use" steel. Much of the steel is in pristine condition, unused and uncut. It is returned to the local steel distributor as "Purchasing Over Run Returns" I am sure there are many places in the country with such a Distributor/Scrap Dealer. Very rarely do they have aluminum in the grade required to build a boat. I also have a large pool of experienced ASME Code certified welders where I work. Not to mention a ready supply of scrap steel, cutting tools... Will, when I am done with my dream boat, take off for the South Pacific? Not likely. I have to many family obligations. I will probably be thrilled to just take off with my kids and grand kids and explore the great lakes, finger lakes, Erie Canal and the Thousand Island. I have been on this board for almost a year I believe. I have Brent's book just about memorized and I truly believe his over laying philosophy of "Keep It Simple Stupid". To build most of the boat yourself, follow this religiously. I have tackled several large projects, using outside labor gets extremely expensive something like 70% of almost any construction project, materials 30%. My recommendation, build in steel, build it yourself, relax and enjoy the process. Just my opinion. Phil Sacchitella PS. Keep in mind, Michael Kasten may make some really cool aluminum designs, but how many have been built by amateurs in their back yard? Not many I'll bet. 2143 From: brentswain38 Date: Wed Sep 17, 2003 8:03pm Subject: Re: "Material choices for idiots" - the K.I.S.S. approach It costs a lot more to build inside than outside. Performance is not directly porportional to the weight of the material.One of my 36 footers beat a C&C35 to windward in 12 knots of wind, another repeatedly left a 35 ft Beneteau far behind while heavily loaded cruising Mexico. The example of an aluminium boat taking 99 days to get home from Tonga compared to my 57 days is another example. One 36 footer sailed 2200 miles across the atlantic in 14 days, and another covered 1006 miles beating to windward in 6 days.You wouldn't make much better time that those in any loaded cruising boat , not enough to compensate for the extra expense.A boat which is half the weight doesn't sail twice as fast, only marginally faster at best. Lighter boats have more trouble punching through a head sea.I can reef the main in under a minute and roller furling makes headsail handling a non issue. The saying that the hull is a small part of the expense assumes you buy all your gear new. For a good scrounger it's a major part of the total. My steel cost $3500 and I was sailing for $6,000, the steel representing more than half the cost of the boat. Add several thousand to the price of the metal and you have a huge difference. The reason is because a much larger part of the total cost of a metal boat is metal. The leftovers from your hull make anchors, woodstove, fittinmgs,etc.In a fibreglass boat these are bought in the marine store along with fasteners, bedding , etc, usually at great expense. With the weight of stores and equipment needed on an offshore cruising boat it's a bit naive to believe it can be kept as light as a full time marina resident which isn't lived aboard . The 36 floats on it's lines empty at under 18,000 lbs. Brent Swain 2144 From: brentswain38 Date: Wed Sep 17, 2003 8:17pm Subject: Re: wheel weights Those reject propane cylindres you see in scrapyards make a great cauldron for melting lead in . An aluminium container might melt itself. Epoxy filling the voids is no real advantage , just weld a piece of plate over the lead to seal out any air. Where there is no oxygen there is no oxidation. It takes very little corrosion to use up the oxygen in voids .If you weld the cap on airtight while the lead is still hot, there won't be any moisture either. Brent Swain 2145 From: sae140 Date: Thu Sep 18, 2003 0:56am Subject: Re: wheel weights What a great pity wheel weights can't be used 'as is', without melting 'em down .... I've got a couple of giant (6ft tall) unwanted propane cylinders I keep looking at and wondering whether they'd make keel torpedo bulbs - plausible, or crazy ? CP 2146 From: Phillip Allen Date: Thu Sep 18, 2003 1:43am Subject: Re: wheel weights I used one of those propane cookers sold at Sam's Club as a deep-fat-fryer. The Mixing bowl is one of those Wal-Mart sells for such things as bread making...they are thin stainless steel. Remember when choosing the vessel you will melt the lead in that it will be heavy when full and choose size accordingly. Mine held about sixty pounds at the level I allowed it to reach. I do heavy work for a living and have a good idea how much weight I can control...this is important! Use lighter weights than your maximum to account for fatigue (a sack of portland cement weighs 94 pounds). I even did a practice carry and pour to see any dangerous flaws in my technique. I live by myself and there's no one to pull my chips outa the fire if I make a mistake in judgment. I don't know if pouring several thousand pounds makes a great difference in approach. I wanted clean melt because I was adding to the alloy in order to make bullet metal (for my hobby) and wanted a fairly large supply for consistency’s sake...a couple hundred pounds and now I won't have to repeat the process for years...unless I actually build that boat! As to filling voids...I don't know. I read Brent's comment and it makes a lotta sense to me. The only thing I wonder about is removable ballast...but I'll burn that bridge when I get to it. Phillip Allen 2147 From: brentswain38 Date: Thu Sep 18, 2003 7:45pm Subject: Re: wheel weights Propane tanks are too thin for keels Brent Swain 2148 From: brentswain38 Date: Thu Sep 18, 2003 7:48pm Subject: Re: wheel weights The french Joshua type yacts used removable ballast and the keels rusted out from the insides quite quickly. You have to seal out any oxygen to prevent corrosion. Brent Swain 2149 From: berzerker76 Date: Thu Sep 18, 2003 9:11pm Subject: removable ballast Would you not be able to paint the inside of the keel and seal the steel in such a way that it will not sweat? It is not like you will be removing the ballast daily so I think scratching a nice thick paint job would not be much of an issue especially with lead pigs. Of course I might be totally off base here and talking out my ass but hey, never know till ya try. Russyl Neumann 2150 From: richytill Date: Fri Sep 19, 2003 0:07pm Subject: Re: removable ballast When I think about removable ballast I think about water in the water tanks above the ballast tanks. The lead can stay sealed tight and secure below where it belongs. rt (My Island) 2151 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Fri Sep 19, 2003 0:55pm Subject: Has this group died? Haven't seen any discusion here for a while. Gary H. Lucas 2152 From: Aaron Edelman Date: Sat Sep 20, 2003 10:19am Subject: Propane bottles Hi, In reference to using propane bottles as melting pots. Questions: How do you cut them open, without blowing yourself up. How do you empty the propane 100 %? What do you use to cut? Torch or angle grinder with cutting blade? Can you cut off the "bottom", invert the bottle, and use the valve assembly as a spigot, (will it still turn on and off, when the lead is heated to melting temp); and then let it pour into a trough, (similar to the chute at the tail end of a Cement truck), to direct the molten lead to the keel-form. Thank you, Aaron 2153 From: Aaron Edelman Date: Sat Sep 20, 2003 10:26am Subject: How to test welds HI All, Can you tell me how to test the weld seams on a homebuilt steel boat, to assure integrity of the weld, and of course for "water tightness". 1.) How to test it during construction? 2.) How to test and older steel boat, primed and painted? Thanks Aaron 2154 From: John Jones Date: Sat Sep 20, 2003 10:49am Subject: Re: Digest Number 586 No, It's not dead...... just tired of the same questions and comments aired months or years ago; if only they would look back through the previous posts thier questions would likely be answered. I look in daily, I just sometimes find it hard to find my password to satisfy those "yahoo's" to get in. John 2155 From: jim dorey Date: Sat Sep 20, 2003 3:18pm Subject: Re: Propane bottles i'd think unscrewing the spigot and turning it upside down would do the job, since it's heavier than air. 2156 From: jim dorey Date: Sat Sep 20, 2003 3:19pm Subject: Re: How to test welds hit the welds with a hammer, the good ones should ring differently, or thud differently. 2157 From: Jack Gardiner Date: Sat Sep 20, 2003 6:48pm Subject: Re: Propane bottles fill it with water and dump it out Jack 2158 From: gjm123smau Date: Sat Sep 20, 2003 6:54pm Subject: gas bottles The propane bottles be careful.......remove the tap and fill with water to purge all the gas out ........ 2159 From: brentswain38 Date: Sat Sep 20, 2003 7:15pm Subject: Re: gas bottles You'd want at least 1 1/2 inch opening all the way to the keel. Weld 1 1/2 inch elbows and pipe all the way to the keel and put a 1 1/2 inch gate valve in the pipe to control the lead. When the lead is all melted, you have to heat the pipe and gate valve to the melting point of lead before opening the gate valve with a wet rag, or the lead will freeze solid when it hits the cold pipe. The original propane valve will be far too small an opening to let enough lead through. Brent Swain 2160 From: keith green Date: Sat Sep 20, 2003 9:43pm Subject: Re: Propane bottles Fill the thing with water and leave the valve open while you cut it with a zip-disk. Drill a vent hole if you're cutting the bottom off. If you have a recipro-saw, that should work as well, though getting the cut started will be harder. The gas will be purged if you dump the water out, though the stink will remain. God help you if you get that stuff on your clothes and in the house. The wife ragged on me for weeks after that one. Worse than a skunk I'd say. Lasts longer. keith. 2161 From: lon wells Date: Sun Sep 21, 2003 9:07am Subject: Re: How to test welds Weld testing depends on what the test budget is and how critical the weld. X-ray the US Navy will x-ray critical welds on ships. Many bridge welds are x-rayed. Nuclear welds are x-rayed. Ultra sonic testing another excellent testing method is Ultra sonic testing the cost is less than x-ray. Magnetic particle testing is common for testing weld cracks and plate cracks. But for all practical purposes visual testing will work on a steel pleasure craft and work boats. Look the weld over closely. Generally a good looking weld is a good weld Check for undercut this will appear along the edge of the weld. Boats are subject to vibrations and the undercut weld has a greater chance of cracking. If you can catch you finger nail on the weld edge there is under cut. Weld porosity is where there are many small holes in the weld. This is generally from shielding gas problems or surface contamination of the weld joint. The weld surface should be smooth and full showing good fusion of the joint. Welds having roll over and fall backs are a indication of operator error with heat range and travel speed. There are many good sources for visual testing of welds. Search around the net and you will find some, Good Luck Lon 2162 From: Jack Gardiner Date: Sun Sep 21, 2003 5:18pm Subject: Re: Propane bottles I would be VERY carefull with power tools where water exits. Jack 2163 SPAM 2164 From: sae140 Date: Mon Sep 22, 2003 5:32am Subject: Re: Has this group died? Well - I've sent a comlaint off to Yahoo about the spammer - if others do the same maybe we could rid Yahoo of these irritants .... Discussion: well, although I don't ever intend to build a plywood boat again, I've been wondering whether the Origami method could be used to build plywood boats successfully (and quickly) - any thoughts ? Colin 2165 From: Bert Date: Mon Sep 22, 2003 7:02am Subject: testing welds... I'm sometimes guilty of undercutting when I stick weld... What causes this? Solution? Bert Eggers....Saginaw, Mi 2166 From: brentswain38 Date: Mon Sep 22, 2003 10:23am Subject: Re: Has this group died? Origami methods can be used for any sheet material, although the ends of a chine may put quite a stress on plywood, It would be wise to saturate the area with epoxies after pulling it together and laminating several layers of veneer over the area . Brent Swain 2167 From: jim dorey Date: Mon Sep 22, 2003 1:54pm Subject: Re: Re: Has this group died? if you soak it in lots of hot water you might get it to bend right, but it's likely that laminations would be best, but likely it'll break easily, so bend slow and keep it saturated. 2168 From: mynode Date: Mon Sep 22, 2003 4:03pm Subject: Alternate materials I've been thinking about the practicality of building a small origami boat out of some sort of plastic sheet material like the polyethylene they make truck bedliners out of. In spite of the elasticity of the material, with a stout sheer clamp and perhaps a few stringers and buikheads, it might work well in a small size. It would certainly be one tough boat. The joints could be joined using the plastic welding technique and the sheet could be heated to make it easier to form. Just a thought. - Mark 2169 SPAM 2170 From: sae140 Date: Mon Sep 22, 2003 11:47pm Subject: Re: testing welds... Too much current, so turn the wick down a little. If for some reason you can't reduce the current, try weaving the electrode. Colin 2171 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Tue Sep 23, 2003 2:05am Subject: Re: How to test welds Aaron My welding supplies dealer sells dye penetrant for testing welds. The red dye penetrant is sprayed on one side and a white spray used on the other. If there are any cracks the red dye shows against the white. This shows cracks that are invisible to normal eye inspection. In an older boat any cracks would, I think show as rust bleeds. Regards, Ted 2172 From: T.H. & V.D. Cain Date: Tue Sep 23, 2003 3:19am Subject: RE: Re: How to test welds Ted & Aaron, There is a basic treatment of the dye-penetrant process on the MBS site --- access via the search function. This process can detect and make evident things which are linked to the weld surface, not anything which is sealed by metal or very tight slag. In effect, the cleaned area of interest is sprayed with a kerosene based dye (usually red), time passes, excess dye is wiped off, and then a developer (a chalk-type spray) is applied to the same area. The chalk coat leaches out any red dye material from whence it was able to penetrate (ie. cracks or porosity pores). The result is evident as a reddish fine line (cracks) or red dots (porosity) in the generally white background. The MBS site also has some posts relevant to the visual inspection of welds. Terry 2173 SPAM 2174 From: nadim Date: Thu Sep 18, 2003 1:41am Subject: Re: Re: wheel weights > I've got a couple of giant (6ft tall) unwanted propane cylinders I > keep looking at and wondering whether they'd make keel torpedo bulbs - > plausible, or crazy ? CP Not crazy, might be a bit long though. The exit part of the bulbe should not be flat! look at any U-boat for shape idea. Another important point is to be sure your bulb head will NOT grab any line floatting around. N. PS. Great links in your previous mail Collins. 2175 From: fmichael graham Date: Tue Sep 23, 2003 2:54pm Subject: Re: testing welds... Re: Undercutting. Generally, the only harm from undercutting is poor appearance. However (there's that ominous word again!), undercutting may also impair weld strength, particularly when the weld is loaded in tension or subjected to fatigue. To minimize undercut: 1) reduce current, travel speed, or electrode size until the weld puddle is manageable. 2) Change electrode angle so the arc force holds the metal in the corners. use a uniform travel speed and avoid excessive weaving. When welding process used is SMAW("stick"), travel speed and electrode angle are usually the culprits. With GMAW("wire feed"), wire speed and shielding gas pressure should be given special attention. "Practise makes perfect". Mike 2176 From: jim dorey Date: Tue Sep 23, 2003 2:55pm Subject: Re: Alternate materials if you made an origami boat mould and formed the plastic it might be better, no joints at all. practical size may be anything up to 40 feet depending on how thick and well braced it is. with a mould you could pop a boat a week out. 2177 From: brentswain38 Date: Tue Sep 23, 2003 6:58pm Subject: Re: Alternate materials Despite the claims of kevlar , carbon fibre and other high tech materials, a guy who has canoed all the arctic rivers running out of Canada told me that the toughest canoe he ever used was a moulded polypropylene one made by Coleman which sells for around $100 CDN It was also the lightest. I've been experimenting with moulding and welding things out of 45 gallon plastic drums which float up on beaches everywhere. So far I've only made swimfins ( Very effective and easy to make ) and other sportiong goods, but haven't tried a dinghy or kayak yet. Brent Swain 2178 From: keith green Date: Tue Sep 23, 2003 7:31pm Subject: Re: Re: Alternate materials You weld it with one of those heat guns? How's the elasticity after you do that? I've often wanted to try it. Making a little kayak for the kids might be worthwhile. Would the origami design programs work for plastic as well? keith Vancouver 2179 From: jim dorey Date: Tue Sep 23, 2003 9:29pm Subject: Re: Re: Alternate materials i think maybe a welding type glue would be better, chemically bond the edges. 2180 From: Don Taylor Date: Wed Sep 24, 2003 9:51am Subject: Re: Alternate materials Is there a way to get paint to stick to this stuff? Don. 2181 From: sae140 Date: Wed Sep 24, 2003 10:36am Subject: car tyres I reckon there's a Nobel Prize waiting for the person who can find a use for used car tyres - mountains of which are developing in all countries. As vulcanised rubber is virtually indestructible in the marine environment, it seems to me it would be an ideal material for the outer skin of a hull - suitably supported of course. But - how to make it into sheets, and how to join the stuff ? - sounds like a Ph.D. project for somebody .... 2182 From: Joseph Smith Date: Wed Sep 24, 2003 10:38am Subject: Re: car tyres Have a friend who knows how to build a house with them... 2183 From: Michael Casling Date: Wed Sep 24, 2003 10:45am Subject: Re: car tyres They make ramps out of them. You use them to drive your car up to get more clearance underneath, or you drive one wheel of your tandem axel trailer up to change the other wheel. It is shreaded and mixed with bark to make footings for arenas and race tracks for horses. They make mats for your horse stalls and stock trailer. The metal has to be removed and that has posed problems. They have used them in the US as retaining walls for roads and the metal has caught on fire and has smoldered for years in one place. Michael Casling 2184 From: Phil S. Date: Wed Sep 24, 2003 0:26pm Subject: Re: Alternate materials I think Brent should be on that Junk yard show that is on cable. He think he could figure out a way to make anything from a pile of junk. Phil 2185 From: ... Date: Wed Sep 24, 2003 5:16pm Subject: Re: car tyres What happens when he gets a puncture? or do you call it a flat tyre? The house must smell of rubber. Geoff 2186 From: brentswain38 Date: Wed Sep 24, 2003 6:54pm Subject: Re: Alternate materials Nothing sticks to poly. Just choose a colour of material you can live with Brent Swain 2187 From: brentswain38 Date: Wed Sep 24, 2003 6:58pm Subject: Re: Alternate materials There is no glue which would work on poly. Welding it with a heat gun or torch is the only way.You have to have both surfaces in the molten state , then press them together and hold them together while the plastic cools. Then they make an extremely strong bond. It would work well doing a kayak using the origami method. 2188 From: mynode Date: Thu Sep 25, 2003 0:45am Subject: Re: Alternate materials These tough plastics are often bolted or rivited through large washers. Similar methods might be applicable to boat construction as well. Left and right half hulls might be sealed with a sealant and then clamped between a metal keel and keelson which would then be rivited or bolted through. - Mark K 2189 From: Joseph Smith Date: Thu Sep 25, 2003 5:02am Subject: Re: car tyres The house is lined with regular building material both inside and out. The tires make up the inner walls and offer superior insulation both to the elements and noise. It is an alternative building method taught by some folks in Maine. I do not know the particulars of the construction but if you are serioulsy interested in what one can do with old tires I would be glad to find out the name of the people who teach this method. 2190 From: RICHARD KOKEMOOR Date: Thu Sep 25, 2003 5:21am Subject: Re: alternate materials Sheet plastic molded around a minimal framework of aluminum is used by Coleman for canoes. The limitation is that wherever the surface is nearly flar, i.e. the bottom of the canoe, the material bows up between supports. Smaller kayaks with more curvature and only small openings make good use of molded plastic. I doubt it would work on larger craft. Rich 2191 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Thu Sep 25, 2003 9:09am Subject: Re: Alternate materials These people make folding boats out of polypropylene sheet: www.porta-bote.com. Polypropylene and polyethylene can be welded with a special hot air gun with a small nozzle. Welding rods of the appropriate plastic are fed through a tube into the hot area. I have seen Leister heat guns used but there must be other makes. Tanks for water etc. can be made this way. Regards, Ted 2192 From: De Clarke Date: Thu Sep 25, 2003 1:37pm Subject: welding poly Fascinating, Brent -- cutting and welding up useful stuff out of plastic drums -- do tell more! Could you share some details on the welding technique, as in what heat source you use, how hot to get the plastic, do you use a jig of some kind to clamp the molten edges together, how fast do you have to work, is there any curing process etc? I've seen "poly welding kits" for repairing ATV fenders and the like but they looked pretty hokey to me. I have a rotomolded PE hull that I've regarded as "unhackable" except by drilling holes and attaching (poorly anchored in the soft plastic) screws. if I could weld on reinforcing plates, I could do far more creative things w/the hull. have been told by local plastic workers that "you can't do that," so I am really interested in how/what you're doing. de 2193 From: jim dorey Date: Thu Sep 25, 2003 2:24pm Subject: Re: car tyres it's parged on the inside, no stink. 2194 From: jim dorey Date: Thu Sep 25, 2003 2:28pm Subject: Re: car tyres earthship.com 2195 From: keith green Date: Thu Sep 25, 2003 1:48pm Subject: Re: Re: Alternate materials Steinel is the make of hot-air gun I'm most accustomed to seeing around here. Cool tool to have (though I don't) as there are lot's of attachments for paint stripping, plastic welding, soldering, etc. keith green Vancouver, BC 2196 From: brentswain38 Date: Thu Sep 25, 2003 6:47pm Subject: Re: Alternate materials I've been heating an inch of or so of the edges of the plastic until the surface liquifies , then clamping the two liquified surfaces together and keeping them clamped until it cools. I've been using a propane torch but the air gun would be more controlable. The fold boat could easily be made out of this material. Friends who have them as dinghies swear by them. The plastic also makes good blades for dinghy oars and kayak paddles, almost indestructable. Brent Swain 2197 From: ... Date: Fri Sep 26, 2003 4:59am Subject: welding pol The plastic drums are blow moulded from High density polyelene,as Brent has discovered you can weld this material. The best way to weld HDPE it is to use what is known the hot plate/ hot knife technique,this involves heating a metal plate and placing it between the faces of the plastic parts to be joined,when you see the edges of the plastic melting you withdraw the metal plate and push the two surfaces together and hold them until the material has cooled ,which will take some time as the plastic is a poor conductor of heat. There is no curing process,and the temperature will have to be determined experimentally for the grade of plastic material that the drums are made from. Some drums might be made from cross link material which will not remit. The drum material and similar materials of LDPE/HDPE can be painted, but the surface has to be treated first,one way is to oxidize the surface by using a gas torch with a soft flame. Work the flame over the surfaces to be painted,you will need to see a change in the surface as the flame just melts the surface,allow to cool and apply paint. I have painted the drums brown to use for collecting rain water as I did not wish to have blue drums which do not look right in the garden. The flaming technique is used to prepare the surface for printing on plastic containers which are used for all types of product from oil containers to washing up liquid. The drum material is very high spec material as they have to withstand drop tests when filled, going from memory I think the test is dropping them when full from 8 FT. The problem of making a boat hull from drums is that you would have to join a number together, and the sheets cut from drums will all have a preset radius,and the thickness varies depending on where the material is cut from the drum. The material can be worked with woodworking tools,and can be turned with very sharp tools. Any ideal application would be blades for oars or wearing pads for the underside of Dinghies. If anyone requires more information email me. De, you have do very well to mould a PE boat hull do you have a moulding company? or did you do it at home? What is the size of the hull? I have been designing products using rotomoulding for many years, you have to change the way things are fixed to the mouldings. Geoff Cheshire England 2198 From: Date: Fri Sep 26, 2003 2:55am Subject: Re: welding poly I have had a patch stick to the top of one of those red gas tanks, the ones that are really tough and slippery. I used a piece of a thick liquid soap bottle for the patch, and after cleaning everything well and roughing the surfaces up, I used one of those cheap electric glue guns, like the ones used for wood working, and it has stayed stuck for about 3 years. 2200 From: ... Date: Sat Sep 27, 2003 2:06pm Subject: welding Poly I hope my post re welding Poly has not sent you all to sleep, it has gone very quiet since then. Are you all busy welding Ploy drums together? I don't want to be responsible for stopping all discussions, maybe we will see the results of lots of poly drum boat building. Geoff Cheshire England 2201 From: Date: Sat Sep 27, 2003 3:11pm Subject: Re: Has this group died? Origami Magic is committed to the growth of the origami concept. To this end we continue to innovate with new designs, new patterns, new techniques and new materials. We have made fantastic advances over the years in 3-D computer modeling of origami hulls, to the point where we can take just about any sailboat design and reliably create a very accurate origami pattern for that boat. There are lots of great boat designs in the world from which to create an origami pattern, to suit the different requirements of different owners. We have added structural support for twin keels directly into the skin of the hull by introducing a strengthening chine at the keel attachment. We have removed the chine-end knuckle from origami construction. Our patterns simply do not have the knuckle at the chine ends. We have produced new patterns for both alloy and steel, and have shown how the advantages of alloy can be used to offset the higher material costs. To us the advantages of origami construction are not that it produces the cheapest boat. Rather that it can allow a small builder to produce the most economical boat. Different owners have different needs, and over the life- cycle of a boat cheapest does not mean most economical. When you buy a product, do you always buy the cheapest? Or, do you buy the one likely to give the best value? You could go to an auto wrecker, and with time and skill assemble a car from salvaged parts for less than the cost of buying a car. Yet, for most of us this is not an economical way to get a practical, safe, reliable vehicle that we would trust to carry our families and loved ones. Why think differently for a boat? In my own personal case, I bought a $2000 computer and wrote a program that I sold, and ended up with a sailboat and money in the bank to go cruising. A 39' foot sailboat and a cruising kitty for $2000 is a whole lot cheaper than a 32' sailboat for $6000. Keep that in mind when someone tells you their way is the "best" way. By that logic, you should be buying a computer if you want to own a boat, because it certainly worked for me. We can provide single, double, and triple chine origami patterns, in steel or alloy, single or twin keels to suit each individual owner's requirements. Let us know what you would like to see in a boat. greg elliott www.origamimagic.com 2202 From: brentswain38 Date: Sat Sep 27, 2003 5:52pm Subject: Re: Has this group died? With so much good ,little used sailing gear around for a fraction of the new price , only a fool would buy it new, without shopping around a bit. I recently worked with a graduate student who took computers. When he started working in the field it paid $100 per hour. Now the same job pays $10 per hour and he's still $15,000 in debt and thinking of getting a welding ticket. Brent Swain 2203 From: mynode Date: Sun Sep 28, 2003 2:56am Subject: Re: welding Poly Quite the contrary Geoff, I was hoping to find someone with some experience working with these plastics. I'm having difficulty imagining how one would manage a long butt weld by the process you described. Say you had a butt seam 3 meters long in 4mm thick material. What would be the best method of welding this? Would it be better to add a backing strip and weld both sides to that? I've also heard about methods that involve filler material. Perhaps a v groove weld with filler would be more managable. - Mark K 2204 From: Phil S. Date: Sun Sep 28, 2003 6:39am Subject: Christmas Islands Hey Brent I just read your letter in Latts And Atts about getting kicked out of the Christmas Islands. Sorry to hear about it. Maybe you should carry a grade school globe with you for the stupid people on the planet that don't know that Canada is a Different country than the USA. Glad your back though. About the Computer Comment. I agree I know of several guys that made big bucks during the millenium bug lie, now most are having trouble making more than $18 or $20 and Hour. I am also getting a little tired of all the advertising and spam on the group. If you have a cool idea, great share it with the group, otherwise quit advertising what you do. I am just about ready done with my origami tug hull plans. After I build the paper models I will post my idea and design. Any Ideas for a good format to do that in? Jpeg and GIF work ok for the web but an eps or dwg file would allow for resizing without the pixilization. Thanks Phil 2205 From: Olav Lindkjoelen Date: Sun Sep 28, 2003 7:35am Subject: Re: Christmas Islands Phil, Publish them in DWG format, and point people to the free Autodesk Express Viewer that will allow them to view and print the DWG files you create. They can download it here: http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/index?id=2787358&siteID=12311 Olav! 2206 From: keith green Date: Sun Sep 28, 2003 8:20am Subject: Re: Re: welding Poly Here on the West coast of Canada, fish are transported in insulated totes made of this material. Sometimes they get damaged and require repair.. The material is at least 6mm thick on these. Usually they end up with a jagged crack or the corner of a foot broken off. I believe they were repair via the hot-air gun method. The gun has a special tip with a small cone-shaped orifice for the air and, on top of that, a smaller tube formed in to preheat and guide the filler material. As I stated before, the stuff I see available to the average guy here seems to top out at the Steinel level of equipment. Here's a link to an international supplier of professional plastic welding equipment; http://www.wegenerwelding.com/ . There's lot's more if you do a google search for plastic welding or thermoplastic welding. keith green Vancouver, BC 2207 From: brentswain38 Date: Sun Sep 28, 2003 10:50am Subject: Re: Christmas Islands Phil I am early on in the learning curve when it comes to computers. Alex may be able to help you more as he knows a lot about them. Evan shaler and John Dawson built an origami tug many years ago for log sallvage. It's moored om the NW tip of Gabriola Island off Nanaimo.Any comments Evan? Brent Swain 2208 From: brentswain38 Date: Sun Sep 28, 2003 10:57am Subject: Re: Has this group died? What's a pleasure boat for anyway?I've managed to get my cost of living and cruising so low that since 1976 I've been able to work for about a month a year and cruise and play the rest of the time, including three trips to the South Pacific and back, one to Mexico and back and 8 trips to the Charlottes and back as well as cruising Canada's Pacific Southwest eleven months a year.Is someone suggesting thatI'm doing it all wrong? As I mention in my book, you can judge the value of advice by looking critically at what it's done for the person offering it. Brent Swain 2209 From: Date: Sun Sep 28, 2003 3:22pm Subject: Re: Re: Has this group died? Since 1984 I've spent most of my time cruising with an all girl crew. Canada, USA, Mexico, Hawaii, Palmyra, Samoa, Tonga, Fiji, New Caledonia, Australia, Papua New Guinea, Indonesia, Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand, Brunei, Sarawak, Sabah. Raised 2 children aboard along the way. I am not retired, yet I have a income 12 months a year, even when I don't work. I started out with nothing, working for peanuts in an office programming computers. Looking out the window one day I realized I could be doing the same job sitting on a boat in a tropical paradise, which is how I got started cruising. Personally I don't want to be a single-hander with little or no money in my pocket. Most people I know are the same. They want the resources to raise a family, own property, provide for their old age, or simply open up other options in their lives. Most people think you can only have one or the other. You can either go cruising with little or no money, or stay ashore and work and have a family and money. To those people I say you have it all wrong. If you stay ashore and work, you will likely spend most of your life in debt. Taxes and the cost of living almost make that a certainty. In the previous generation, one working parent was sufficient to support a family. Now for most families both parents must work just to make ends meet. This situation will only get worse as global competition increases. I you plan to go cruising after you retire, you are unlikely to every go. Most people do not have the strength, reflexes, or health to start a cruising lifestyle at age 65. By that age people are tied to medication and doctors, and cannot travel for extended periods to remote third world locations. Most people we meet cruising are in their 30's, 40's and 50's. If you go cruising without a plan to make money, then you will not have money, and your options will be limited. Increasingly it costs money to visit foreign countries via yacht. Without money you can get kicked out of places like Christmas Island because you cannot pay the harbor, customs, and immigration fees. The trick to cruising is to get a first world income while you are cruising in the third world. That is all there is to it. The gap between the first world and the third is so great, that even a small first world income is sufficient to keep you going, and any surplus can be invested to generate an increasingly greater income back home. How to get that income is up to you. Examine your talents, and see what you can do. If you are an english speaking caucasian with a first world education, then you have a tremendous advantage. In many developing countries such people are in short supply and high demand. You are needed to help the first world and the third world do business, and the pay can be very good indeed. When I first went cruising I was $110,000 in debt - the bank owned the boat, not me. After cruising for 20 years I have no debts, own a house, a boat, and have money in the bank. I spent much of that time playing with my children on the beach in remote tropical locations. Consider the options: 1. Spend your life working to get out of debt. 2. Spend you life single-handed cruising with little or no money. 3. Spend your life cruising with your family with money in your pocket and increasing wealth ashore. By all means judge advice by what it has done for the person offering it. I am the proof that option 3 works. So, who has the better advice for you? It all depends, which option would you prefer. 1, 2, or 3? greg elliott http://www.origamimagic.com/ 2210 From: Alan Smith Date: Sun Sep 28, 2003 5:02pm Subject: Re: Re: Has this group died? You forgot about Option 4: Go cruising now with useful skills that allow you to make just enough to live adequately. Actually, I think most people are on Option 1 trying to get on Option 3. Al 2211 From: Olav Lindkjoelen Date: Mon Sep 29, 2003 0:51am Subject: Re: Re: Has this group died? Hi Greg, I am a computer programmer too. I have had these very same thoughts. Please tell me more about your lifestyle. What kind of a boat do you have? How do you do things with school and education for your children? What do you do for a living (in specific) to generate a full time income while cruising? Olav! 2212 From: bahadiregi Date: Mon Sep 29, 2003 2:02am Subject: Ron Pearson contact address Does any one know what is contact address of origami boat designer Ron Pearson.I have seen picture of his design Mungo-2 40 feet origami steel boat on the files of this group.Hard chine line over sea hided with striking bars and hull looks like radius chine and stylish. Regards, Bahadir Eði 2213 From: Len den Besten Date: Mon Sep 29, 2003 2:32am Subject: Re: Re: Has this group died? Hi, Could you elaborate on the possibillties you mention for educated cruisers in the third world. Let's take a 49 year old finance / ict-oriented guy. How would you go about it to get employed in what developing country. Regards, Len. 2214 From: jim dorey Date: Sat Sep 27, 2003 6:50pm Subject: Re: Meet glamorous tall guys! how bout' poop? ain't an easy way to stop spammers from having a computer automatically sign up for a webmail account then spam every group they can find. i get from your message that you feel a regular in this group is responsible, it wounds us deeply, we offer condolences, where do we send the fish sticks(more crap)? 2215 From: Phil S. Date: Mon Sep 29, 2003 6:52am Subject: Lifestyle Choices Greg: Many of us that are interested in building and origami boat, have no interest in cruising full time. I have seen most of Asia (Korea, Japan, Thailand, HK and the Philippines) and frankly have no interest in returning there unarmed. I am more interested in a cruising Europe the Med and especially the high latitude countries. I love to be on the water, but I also have many other interests. Raising my 5 kids, training and working with draft horses (would be difficult on a boat) and building my house are a few. I am not willing to sacrifice all of my other interests just to cruise. Also picking up and moving 5 teenagers (Currently 18, 17, 16, 15 and 14) just to satisfy MY desire to go play on the water, would be the height of irresponsibility, I won't do it. My plan right now is to build a decent small boat (28 ft Tug) that I can weekend cruise on the Lakes, Canals and rivers of the Northeast United States. I may someday, build an origami Troller yacht, and do some long range cruising. I won't do it if it means sacrificing my responsibilities to family (Children and Grandchildren). With my family, I can justify the expense of a well made, built from scrounged materials, paid for as I go, steel boat. Another point, if you are happy with what you are doing and enjoying the lifestyle you are living. Who is anyone else to criticize? In the fine tradition of Anne Hill, live simply, the way that fits you best. > 1. Spend your life working to get out of debt. > 2. Spend you life single-handed cruising with little or no money. > 3. Spend your life cruising with your family with money in your pocket and > increasing wealth ashore. > By all means judge advice by what it has done for the person offering it. I am the > proof that option 3 works. I say you missed a few Greg, 4. Enjoying the life you have already chosen, and enjoying the challenges in each new day. 5. Skip out on your family and responsibilities, and become a boat bum. 6. Sail/Cruise with your family when you can and enjoy the time that you get to do it. "To much chocolate cake is bad for the soul" I am thrilled that Brent has shared his boat building ideas and philosophy with us. Few of us, Greg, would be lucky enough to hit a windfall money making software idea like you did, or do it early enough in life where we don't have to many other responsibilities. Just my Opinion Phil Sacchitella 2216 From: Date: Mon Sep 29, 2003 7:55am Subject: Re: Ron Pearson contact address Ron Pearson is a partner in Origami Magic. http://www.origamimagic.com/ My boat, the Lazy Bones was built by Ron, and I have sailed her for 15 years in the tropics with great success. Pictures of the boat can be seen at our web site. I've passed your email along to Ron. greg elliott yacht Lazy Bones 2217 From: Date: Mon Sep 29, 2003 9:31am Subject: Re: Re: Has this group died? Hi Len, Much of what I did was before the Internet. It was a struggle, as we had to do a lot of work via fax and word of mouth. Sort of like the advent of GPS, the Internet has opened up cruising for the average person. I did many different things to make money along the way. I wrote computer software while sailing, and had some success selling this via a publisher back home. I helped out people on their boats at every chance, and made money that way. I bought a house before I left and rented it out to pay the mortgage. Eventually the rent paid off the mortgage, and I now have a steady income. I did some chartering, but you must be cautious about doing this. I left a small business operating in my home country, because it is often easier for a foreign company to pay an invoice to your company back home than it is to pay you personally. Also, if the boat is owned by a company, rather than by you personally, it is harder for the officials to shake you down. You don't own the boat, so they can't threaten you nearly so easily. We flew back home when finances permitted to visit family. I used those opportunities to keep in contact with everyone I could think of, and later picked up short term computer contract work flying into different countries. Also, I worked in foreign countries along the way, which is what you have asked about. Many other yachts have done this, so what I am going to relate is a mixture of my experience, and what other yachts have told me over sundowners. In almost every developing country we have traveled to there are Internet cafes. Get yourself a web accessible email address on hotmail or some similar service, and keep that address. Get an email version of your resume ready. Have many different versions of your resume, that emphasize different skills, because you never really know what people are looking for. Create a list of countries that you would like to visit, and would be practical to cruise to from your location. Generally, the more unsettled a country, the more desperate they are for expats - no one else wants to go. Of course the higher the risk to you and your family, so you must use some common sense. In any case, in any foreign country you travel to, you must be careful because of the different laws, local customs, driving habits, etc, etc. Search on the Internet for jobs and job placement agencies, with opportunities in the countries you want to visit. Send out your resumes, and follow up religiously with anyone that answers you back, even if they just say no. If they can't use you, they may have a contact that can. Make the point with the people that might hire you that you will pay your moving costs. Most companies have to pay big $$ to move foreign workers, and it is a risk, because they might not work out. So they tend to be cautious. If you are paying your own way, then you can point out that there is less risk to them. Once you get your first job, you are on your way. Leave yourself lots of time. Don't risk your lives or break the boat making an impossible schedule. Take time getting to your job, because now you are cruising. On the job in your new location, join the local yacht club and keep your boat there. Live aboard, and put the housing allowance your new employer gives you directly into your pocket. Go out racing and cruising with the other sailors every chance you get, and improve your skills. Other yachts are a gold mine of information - many other yachties are also working as they cruise, which means they know what works locally and what doesn't, and where the best opportunities are to be found at the current time. Foreign companies usually offer annual leave back to your home country with paid air fare. This is a good way to visit friends and family back home if you stay on the job at least one year. You are not cruising while you are working, but you should be able to do a lot of cruising on the weekends, and racing during the week, all in a tropical location. With your salary and housing benefits and a low cost of living, you should end up at least as well off as you were back home. Do not stop this process once you have a job. Start looking for your next job, and when you find one that you like better than what you are doing, it is time to move on. In any case, cruising is a nomadic lifestyle, and the longer you stay in any one place the harder it is to leave. Onboard a yacht you move with the weather, so plan accordingly. Leave a large window before starting the new job and you have your next cruising opportunity. Hope this helps, regards, Greg http://www.origamimagic.com/ 2218 From: Date: Mon Sep 29, 2003 9:46am Subject: Re: Re: Has this group died? HI Olav, I've included much of your request in my reply to Len. We home schooled the children on the boat, and also took time out to put them in formal school those times we were working ashore. The Lazy Bones is a 39' steel triple chine design custom built by Ron Pearson. regards, Greg 2219 From: fmichael graham Date: Mon Sep 29, 2003 2:41pm Subject: Re: Re: Has this group died? Len: There are two excellent books written by Susan Griffiths that detail working abroad. One is, in fact, called "Working Abroad", I am not sure of the name of the other book. If you wish to travel in Asia or South/Central America/Mexico, you will easily find work teaching english as a second language. Depending on the country, you will make either a lot of money or enough to pay the bills. I did this in the early '90's (Asia). My only regret was that I didn't have a sailboat to "kick around on". I did, however, build an eighty-foot fishing boat in the Philippines. I understand that my boat is still plying the waters for the muslim gang that took it from me. Oh well, that's a story to tell my grandchildren. You can also make money by carrying cargo for trade, assisting others in their boat repairs, or by having skills in sail making/repair, diesel engine repair, etc. I could go on, but suffice to say that I have rarely seen a seafarer "stuck" and there are enough opportunities to pay your way as long as your not afraid to roll up your sleeves. Think about this; if you can teach a group of locals how to build a boat by bending a couple of pieces of metal together, you have something to offer in most developing countries (of course, you'll probably have to plan on staying in one place for awhile!). Good luck! Don't let the "what if's" stop you from really living! Mike 2220 From: Date: Mon Sep 29, 2003 10:11pm Subject: G55 construction details Our latest innovation at Origami Magic has been in the design and construction of the bow of the G55. Modern yacht designs have adopted the "U" shaped bow section for performance reasons. The challenge was to reproduce this in an origami pattern, which standardly have a "V" shaped bow section. Through extensive use of our 3-D origami computer modeling we were able to create a new method of developing the origami bows, resulting in the "U" shaped bow section in the G55. This bow maintains both the centerline rocker and deadrise to avoid pounding. This innovation is an important step forward as it allows us to reproduce both traditional and modern hull forms in our origami patterns. Previously we added an origami sugar-scoop to our designs. With an aging population, not all sailors have the ability to board comfortably from a ladder. The sugar-scoop allows for the ladder to be replaced by permanent stairs, and provides a convenient platform for water sports. If you have ever felt origami boats were limited in shape or design, have another look. http://www.origamimagic.com/Design/Genoa55/G55_Construction/G55_construction.htm We can provide single, double, and triple chine origami patterns, in steel or alloy, single or twin keels, "V" or "U" bow sections, sugar scoop or traditional transom, to suit each individual owner's requirements. Let us know what you would like to see in a boat. greg elliott http://www.origamimagic.com/ 2221 From: Michael Casling Date: Tue Sep 30, 2003 9:40am Subject: Re: Lifestyle Choices There are no correct answers or incorrect answers, nor an option list about how we plan and live our lives and how it relates to cruising. What we need to ensure is that we maintain the right to chose what we want to do. Living in a rural area with the kids and the animals is a wonderful way to go, taking the kids and cruising is a wonderful way to go. Earning a pile of money, or not is fine with me. In my day job I work with people and their money, or lack of. I can admire the efforts of others knowing that I would not chose that path. If I could modify Greg's option one: To spend your live attaining the goals you want to reach with yourself and family ( which would include getting out of debt ) and stay healthy enough to enjoy your self as you age. Cruising after 60 with money to live on is quite possible and realistic. Michael Casling 2222 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Tue Sep 30, 2003 11:22am Subject: Re: welding Poly A couple of companies that I work with weld polypropylene (PP) and polyethylene (PE). One firm welds PE pipe for landfill gas collectionsystems. These pipes, which can be up to more than 12" diameter are butt welded by clamping in a purpose built automatic machine. From memory the mating faces are machined true then the faces bought together with a hot plate between them. At the required time and temperature the faces are moved back the hot plate removed and the faces bought back together under pressure. The machine logs the times and temperature of the operation for quality assurance purposes. The other company makes tanks and extraction ducts for metal cleaning and plating plant. Many of the tanks and ducts are fabricated from 4 to 6mm (5/32" to 1/4")PP sheet. These are machined using mostly woodworking routers and other woodworking tools. Any oxidation is scraped clear before welding with a fine nozzle hot air gun and the appropriate filler/welding rod as has been described in previous posts. To make a right angle, for instance, a router with a vee bit was used to cut along the fold line leaving about 1mm (3/64")uncut. The sides were folded into a right angle, the sides of the vee coming together, and a fillet welded along the inside of the fold. To make the sheet into tubes it was heated slowly using a large nozzle hot air gun, like a paint stripper DIY gun and the sheet put through a set of simple rolls. Heat travels slowly through plastic and when heating it to make shapes it is easy to burn it before the other side is hot enough to be moulded. The PP used in making tanks was a beige colour and not particularly resistant to UV. Black PP is more resistant because the carbon black in it stops the UV rays penetrating far. Where the fume extraction ducts passed out through the roof after the extraction fans and scrubbers a special PP was used with a scrim on the outer face. After fabrication the duct was coated with fibre glass, which adhered to the scrim and could be finished with any colour gel coat to make it weather resistant. I think they used backing strip when making butt welds but cannot be sure. I can ask if required. The welds were tested by putting metallic strip on one side of the weld and seeing if they could get an electric discharge through the weld. I am a bit hazy on details but can ask if necesary. I understand that by using a router with vee or U bit fold marks can be made in a sheet which can then be used as a hinge with many thousands of movements before failure. This would be usefull in a folding boat or even marine hinges. I have heated PVC tube in the middle and the pulled each end to reduce the diameter in the middle to a smaller size. One can make reducers, elbows, fishtails etc this way. Regards, Ted 2223 From: Len den Besten Date: Tue Sep 30, 2003 1:29pm Subject: Re: Re: Has this group died? Hi Mike, Thank you for your thoughtful reply. My wife and I really are thinking about quitting our present jobs and go en get "out there". Two kids are on their own and self-sustained. We've sold our house, live on a SY. We're 49 now so this is the time to make a decision. I sure will search for those books. It is a big decision so when I can reduce any risks or incertanties I think it's only sensible to do all I can. Thanks again. Regards, Len. 2224 From: brentswain38 Date: Tue Sep 30, 2003 4:27pm Subject: Re: G55 construction details The amount of V or U shape in the bow of an origami boat is determined by the amount of curve or straightness of the stem. My current boat has considerably more U shape to the bow than my last two and it goes through a head sea much more easily. Previous boats would stick their bows into a sea and not get any reserve buoyancy until they were well buried, then it would build up suddenly at deck level ,and stop the boat. With a U shape it builds up buoyancy evenly and gradually.Clipper bows on a small boat tend to stop the boat suddenly when they hit a head sea, almost like hitting a rock. Brent Swain 2225 From: tronfxr0 Date: Tue Sep 30, 2003 9:28pm Subject: Re: Christmas Islands jpeg is great to get the idea across (small too) and dwg is perfect for pc users only (AutoCAD). dxf was cross platform compatable (and the most dwg like with a few problems) but pdf seems to have the corner in that market (cross platform). Most plans I download on my humble little iBook are pdf. and, of course in this efile world, size DOES matter- depending on your connection! Mike Keck Observatory Atop Mauna Kea Big Island of Hawaii 2226 From: Bert Date: Wed Oct 1, 2003 10:54am Subject: cruising life style I've a friend who at 75 singlehanded to Europe and had a great time of it (from Florida), so there's even hope for us old timers ;o)... Follow your dreams as long as they're worth following! Bert Eggers...Saginaw, Mi 2227 From: Bert Date: Wed Oct 1, 2003 11:04am Subject: Michael's 28 foot tug design? Hey Michael, have you found any plans that excite you yet? Bert Eggers...Saginaw, Mi 2228 From: Bert Date: Wed Oct 1, 2003 11:10am Subject: Brent, clarification...the U's and V's... Is it safe to assume that all your present plans include the U type hull, with lots of buoyancy in the bows? Thanks, Bert 2229 From: Michael Casling Date: Wed Oct 1, 2003 2:59pm Subject: Re: cruising life style Is he the fellow who has the Columbia 8.7? Michael Casling 2230 From: Michael Casling Date: Wed Oct 1, 2003 3:06pm Subject: Re: Michael's 28 foot tug design? Bert, I am not the one that wants to build the tug. It is the fellow whose post I was replying to, and I have deleted that post from my sent box. He has four teenages and works with heavy horses. On the horse subject we donated our large black horse to the RCMP last year and she is now standing on guard for thee in the Ottawa area. We have a Tanzer 8.5 sailboat. It is a solid fiberglass construction, bought new in 1979. It is small enough to take to the ocean and big enough to go anywhere. I agree with Brent when he said to use the smallest boat that will suit your needs, not the largest. I would also like to see plans for a 28 foot tug. Michael Casling in Kelowna BC 2231 From: Phil S. Date: Thu Oct 2, 2003 6:53am Subject: Orgami Tug Hey gang: I am working on the plans when I can. I based them on Al Sorensons(sp) "Fred Murphy" design. I am just eliminating the framing. Right now I am doing the calculations to see how thick a hull material I can use, with going way over on displacement. I am also deepening the hull just a little to allow for steel topsides instead of the dead vegetable material. I love working with wood but I don't want it on my boat. Because the weather sucks like 80% of the time here I want a tough, safe, seaworthy craft. If the weather (like it is on most weekends here) is bad I will still want to go play. Also with all of the rocks in the Thousand Islands I want as thick a hull as possible. Instead of a completely open deck, I am planning on having a sturdy awning frame. I will still have tug like bits and other hardware. I have the 3d Model just about done. I will try to complete it this weekend. IF I get to use MY computer. Thanks Phil 2232 From: Date: Thu Oct 2, 2003 7:35am Subject: Re: Re: G55 construction details In conventional origami construction, the conic sections in the bow have their apexes near the forward end of the chines. As a result, the conics flatten towards the bow, allowing only modest curvature in the bow sections, much of this above the waterline. This was not what we wanted for the G55. Modern bows combine straight stems and increasing curvature in section towards the bow. This curvature is concentrated below the waterline. By adding multiple chines to an origami hull, we were able to change the standard origami conic bow development so that it allowed for a new way of developing the origami bows. The basic idea is that we have been able to reverse the direction of one of the cones in the bow, so that its apex is ahead of the bow and below the waterline. Because a cone is most curved towards the apex, by moving an apex ahead of the bow and below the waterline we have been able to increase the curvature of the sections towards the bow and below the waterline, whereas in conventional origami boats these sections flatten towards the bows. The net effect is that by moving the point of maximum curvature in section forward and below the waterline, reserve buoyancy is concentrated in the point at which it will do the most good. In this way the G55 duplicates closely the design of modern bows. greg elliott http://www.origamimagic.com ps: For the technically inclined, here is a more complete explanation: Think of one side of a single chine origami hull. There is a single cone radiating forward from the chine end to form the bow. In a 2 chine boat there are two cones radiating forward from each of the chine ends. Between these two cones is a cone radiating aft, with its apex near the point where the two cones from the chine ends intersect at the bow. By controlling the location of the chines, and shape of the bows, the location of this apex can be controlled, allowing us to determine the point of maximum curvature in section in the bows. The minimum number of chines required to accomplish this is two. It is physically impossible in a single chine boat. We use three chines in the G55, because this allows us to move the point of maximum curvature further below the waterline. In a 2 chine hull the point of maximum curvature is higher, because the two chines are higher than the bottom two chines on a 3 chine hull. Multi-chine construction requires only a very small percentage increase in the total effort to build a boat. The only real complication is in the design, which is why we use computers. One of the advantage of multi-chine development is that it allows a flexibility in creating hull shapes that are simply not possible in single chine construction. 2233 From: richytill Date: Thu Oct 2, 2003 0:38pm Subject: Re: spray foam fires? I just had ANTA from Vancouver BC (www.sprayedinsulatin.com or (604) 328-9337) do my foaming: they claim that the foam they use will not burn (self extinguishing)and is very water-proof. They used the 2.2 lbs foam as opposed to the 1.7 lb product. At 30 lbs psi a 3" deck beam 10' long has about 1000 lbs adhesion to the hull. You can shoulder check the bulkheads to realise how solid the bond to the hull is. Hard to believe how strong this foam is. Warm and quiet here, rt 2234 From: jumpaltair Date: Thu Oct 2, 2003 1:15pm Subject: Re: spray foam fires? Rich, I'm just trying to get a hold on some pricing, would you give me an idea as to what the approx pricing of this quality foaming costs...and for what size boat. Peter Vancouver, BC 2235 From: brentswain38 Date: Thu Oct 2, 2003 2:03pm Subject: Re: G55 construction details If you want the maximum transverse curve to be below the waterline, you put the maximum curve of the stem below the waterline, regardless of the number of chines. The straight stemmed shapes that modern ocean racers have tend to bury their bows in a head sea and thus tend to be very wet foreward, and take a lot of green water over the foredeck, as they have little reserve buoyancy above the waterline. This is not an important issue with racing boats, but is with cruisers. Having built several multichine hulls, I can say from experience that they have a lot more pitfalls for the first time builder and are more work.They are much easier to screw up. Brent Swain 2236 From: brentswain38 Date: Thu Oct 2, 2003 2:07pm Subject: Re: spray foam fires? A friend had a foam fire aboard his boat which gutted it aft. foreward where it was painted with cheap latex paint, it refused to burn despite intense heat. There are also intumescent paints available which foam up and prevent heat from reaching the sprayfoam. They are not expensive. When you take the flame away, the foam goes out. This isn't always the case and many people have gained a false sense of security from such experiments, only to have a big surprise fire later. Brent Swain 2237 From: Phillip Allen Date: Thu Oct 2, 2003 2:49pm Subject: Book Brentswain...I would like to order your book (considering building 36-40 footer as liveaboard). I've never built a boat before but believe a lifetime of general construction qualifies me to follow instructions/plans. I understand the book would be the obvious place to start for me. Money order or check? address? Thanks, Phillip Allen in NW Arkansas 2238 From: Mark K Date: Thu Oct 2, 2003 3:20pm Subject: Re: G55 construction details I must say I find the discussions between Brent and Greg facinating and very informative. I understand just enough about boat design to be able to follow them. Their approaches to boat design and the application of the origami paradigm are different enough to expose many of the whys and hows behind what would otherwise be some curves on a plan or a nice looking boat in the water. - Mark K 2239 From: Mark K Date: Thu Oct 2, 2003 4:07pm Subject: A bit of heresy How about mating a plywood deck and cabin to a steel hull? I realise that this in not commonly done as most boats are either one thing or the other, but I would think that you could get some of the best of both materials this way. I recognize that one would be giving up the monolithic quality of a welded all metal hull, but with a carefully designed hull to deck joint how much would one be giving up? I have to confess since I haven't built a boat this is all speculation on my part. Using a stitch and glue construction technique constructing simple panel shapes in plywood is not difficult. The plywood structure might be lighter than steel. I don't know the scantlings for either material but I think that .1" of steel weighs about the same as 1.25" of plywood. With the stiffness of plywood the deck would require less supporting structure simplifying construction and reducing weight. Plywood is a better insulator than steel. Plywood might be quieter than steel. Fitting out the interior could be easier with plywood. With all the plywood above the waterline, issues of rot, leakage and impact damage would be minimized. Opinions? Mark K 2240 From: richytill Date: Thu Oct 2, 2003 4:34pm Subject: Re: spray foam fires? Despite the claims of the foamers, I went ahead and coated all the foam with latex soon after they left. Liquidation World has a good selection of light colours at very reasonable prices. One other thing Brent, your suggestion of welding corners with stainless has paid off. I went over all outside corners and welded on 309 ss. Three times now, metal edges on carelessly moored dingies have bashed off the paint around the outside corners of the transom, no rust. Gives some lead time to do touch-up. Thanx for the tip, rt 2241 From: Don Taylor Date: Thu Oct 2, 2003 6:41pm Subject: Re: A bit of heresy Plywood decks on a steel boat? Don't do it. We own a Colvin Gazelle with a plywood cabin top - which is a lot simpler structure to attach to a steel hull than a plywood deck. The plywood cabin top to steel cabin side joint has been a major problem. Right now, the forward cabin roof is detached and jacked up while I weld in patches for the rusted-out steel that was attached to the plywood. It has not been a happy experience. Wood, steel and salt-water are not good companions. I think that I can come up with a better joint than currently exists, but I wish that I could afford the additional weight of a steel roof. I cannot, so I will reinstall the existing roof - if it still fits... Don. 2242 From: bahadiregi Date: Fri Oct 3, 2003 3:06am Subject: aplication details for plywood deck on steel boat On my 36 feet steel boat project, I am planning to decrease deck weight using plywood sheets screwed from under side of " L " type steel deck beams .Most important point is not to allow contact between bare wood and steel.I am planning to cover with epoxy top of the steel deck beams and plywood.Along the sheer line of boat where plywood deck touches I will weld a steel bar (5mm x 100mm) horizontally .First 6mm plywood will touch only side wall(butt joint) of the steel bar,second 6mm plywood will cover this buttjoint up to hull. The left 1mm space between steel bar and second plywood will be filled automative type slicon sealant(it is used to fix glasses on cars)so this sealing joint will have enough flexibility against twisting loads on the sheer line and acts as a corosion preventive seal.Second plywood can be screwed under of first one,between plywood sheets epoxy has been used.After covering second plywood ,surface can be covered with fiberglass,the corner where fiberglass cloth touches to steel hull can be filled using some epoxy putty so fiberglass cloth can continue up to welded steel pipe (toe rail)so waterproof deck and corosion free deck joint can be achieved.If you use 400gr/m2 rowing for fiberglass cloth also you can provide antiskid deck surface (because epoxxy can not fill all the grids of the cloth). Ofcourse building steel deck is more easy,cheap and faster but with plywood deck we can save at least half weight of steel deck(more than 350 kg on 36 feet boat) Regards, 2243 From: Alex and Kim Christie Date: Fri Oct 3, 2003 3:05am Subject: Hull for sale I am forwarding information about a hull for sale from Richard Wilford: ----- Original Message ----- From: Richard Wilford To: Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2003 1:36 PM Subject: Hull for sale The following Swain hull is for sale due to various life changes. 36 foot raised pilot house fin keel.P/H is slightly higher than the norm giving a very nice look to the design. With the exception of some minor welding of a couple of pilot house beams all hull welding is done. The hull has been professionally constructed. The rudder is complete except for the bottom plate. Included with the hull are the following: Marinised 44hp. mercedes diesel. (See From a bare hull by Ferenc Mate') with Borg Warner 2:1 transmission. 40 feet of schedule 40 aluminum pipe for mast. An excellent diy series of articles from Pacific Yachting on all aspects of homemade mast construction is available from them for a small fee. I have some of the articles. Baby blake toilet, (a classic!), with service manual and parts list. 700lbs lead ingots. Cutting torch, hoses and gauges. approx 250 lbs welding rod miscellaneous stainless steel items, including mast box/step, and shaft log tube. The hull is located near Parksville on Vancouver Island. I'll be able to show interested parties during the latter part of October as I'm away 'til then. Asking price for the lot is C$16,000.00. Miscellaneous items will not be sold seperately. Please address serious queries only to Swain4sale@w.... 2244 From: Alex and Kim Christie Date: Fri Oct 3, 2003 3:15am Subject: Re: A bit of heresy Regarding the use of plywood for decks and cabin tops: Topper Hermanson Boatbuilding has an article on their excellent website regarding shedding weight on steel boats, and details how they mate a cold molded coachroof to a steel hull: http://www.thboats.com/pages/shedwate.html ). Note -- they custom cold-molded their top, instead of using a single piece of plywood. This makes sense, for all plywood these days has to be looked at very carefully for quality. The layers of epoxy essentially plasticizes the wood. Brent doesn't recommend the mixing of metal and wood, nor do his designs need it if built to his plans, and the strength benefits of keeping the boat monolithic are obvious. But if you had to do it, follow the advice of people like Topper Hermanson to the letter, as they have a lot of experience. The biggest mistakes people make with plywood on boats are the improper coating of the overall surface, scanty edge-sealing, and poor bedding of attachements (grab-rails, sheet traveller, cleats, etc). Unlike a steel boat, where grab-rails and cleats can be welded down to the roof-top, the same items bolted to a wooden top may eventually loosen under load. Even on wooden boats where a cleat has been properly bedded, I have seen tell-tale signs of weepage around the bolt heads inside the cabin (if the cleat is never used, then such occurrence is more rare, but if you aren't using the cleat, then maybe it was never needed to begin with). It is a normal course of maintenance on all wooden boats to re-bed such fittings as needed, but most boat owners ignore this and are plagued by weepy fittings. Woe-betide such a boat-owner who hides the inside bolt-heads behind a panel where they cannot be monitored! To have plywood on the horizontal surface of the deck, where water swills around alot, seems to be inviting problems, especially where the ply edge meets the raised steel bulwark, with different rates of expansion of these dissimilar materials. Even though potentially mediated by a flexible adhesive, such movement may eventually allow water to find its way inside the layers of the plywood and cause rot in even the most expensive of plywoods. Alex 2245 From: Don Taylor Date: Fri Oct 3, 2003 6:35am Subject: Plywood cabin tops on a steel boat I thought that I should post some more details about my cabin top to cabin wall joint failure. Maybe somebody will have a brilliant idea that I can steal. First of all a picture that I took before I started patching: http://tinyurl.com/pkie or http://f1.grp.yahoofs.com/v1/sFZ9P- y2CDVPxisULviYWfEXBcFH5jCfj6Go1p53dET5-4FtB78UR1EtmPo- LerDy9pilyljWRWNvdYUUzGOcyh6pd2cWhI6aqeQag/SchoonerPilger/RustOnCabinJ oint.jpg This sort of damage was all the way around the cabin wall tops. In many cases it was worse than this. It has been a pretty tedious job to fix, but the worst aspect of it is that I had to destroy the interior of the boat to get at the steel. This is how the original roof was constructed: http://tinyurl.com/pkl9 or http://f5.grp.yahoofs.com/v1/wGR9P6ksGwjUeEo6woMgcL- 8B9ErbwmlUMtcG4XxLxIb2Cm-wbPh99d8C4Fi3vK21CPJDC2CNc8u5UpDvE_3zw0gzA- xO- qFa3s57w/SchoonerPilger/SketchOfCabinTopConstructionAndFastening.jpg The problems that I have observed include: 1) There is no channel or drip edge to stop water running down the cabin roof, under the roof-edge and settling into the joint. This was called for in the original design. 2) The luting material (maybe black polysulphide) was very thin and had been squeezed out before it set up. 3) The original fastenings were on 12" centres and obviously the roof leaked from day one. The DPO (damn previous owner) and builder then drilled through the roof and the steel boundary bar to through bolt additional screws at 4" intervals. 4) The washers and nuts on the underside of the boundary bar cracked the paint and destroyed the coating just where water could seep in. The wooden cabin top is in very good condition except for some damage where I removed the screws (which was not an easy job). Right now I am patching in new sections of steel. I have not yet made my final decision on how to re-roof, but this is what I have in mind: http://tinyurl.com/pkpr or http://f4.grp.yahoofs.com/v1/wGR9P0FLIX3UeEo63RB3ylP64kWasc9wvFERXXSIy SBp3vxtK4P4k4F_xrJiryXrhW- uQKEez4VPk0RwQbyAwodW8Qh3mVxI1p9F8g/SchoonerPilger/SketchOfNewFastenin gRegime.jpg The features that I like about this technique: 1) The bolts are welded up through the boundary bar and are captive. I can paint over the bolts and the boundary bar. 2) The aluminium (or s/s) flatbar on top of the roof clamps the roof to the cabin. This idea came from a discussion with Richard from S/V Orbit - he felt that his counter-sunk machine screws may have simply pulled through the plywood when the cabin top flexed under the weight of water from the rogue wave. It also to serves to spread the compression from the bolts and hopefully give a better seal. 3) I am not relying simply on luting to seal the joint - I will use a solid neoprene gasket that is bedded in luting. The roof is heavy and difficult to control when lowering it - I would squeeze out too much luting if that was all there was between the wood and the steel. 4) There is a rain channel. 5) It is removable without destroying the interior of the boat. Removing the rain channel exposes all of the nuts holding the roof down. 6) It allows me to re-use my existing roof. The features I don't like: 1) It is still wood and steel together. 2) It is complicated and laborious - but not as laborious as making a new roof. 3) I am not 100% sure about the gasket. I have a 1/4" thick UV resistant solid neoprene gasket, and the gasket itself will not be exposed to light except at one edge which I might cover in luting that can be be replaced. Exposure tests so far have been good. I welcome any comments, suggestions, ideas. Don. PS. Many of you will say: just put a steel roof on 'er. My rough calculations[*] yield a weight gain of about 700 lbs if I do that, and this weight gain would be up high. [*] Based on these numbers: 1 cu. ft. weight: plywood 38.4lbs, steel 495 lbs. A steel roof will weigh in at about an additional 2lbs/ sq. ft. I have about 350sq. ft of cabin top. 2246 From: Don Taylor Date: Fri Oct 3, 2003 6:40am Subject: Re: Plywood cabin tops on a steel boat Aargh! My TinyURL links to the photo and sketches seem to have been foxed. Sorry about that, you can find them in the Files section under the folder "SchoonerPilger". Don. 2247 From: brentswain38 Date: Fri Oct 3, 2003 0:11pm Subject: Re: A bit of heresy Attaching wood anywhere on the outside of a steel boat where it is exposd to the elements is a big mistake.It destroys the monolithic integrity and watertightness of a boat, which is why we go for a steel boat in the first place. All wood decks and cabitops leak eventually regardles of how they are done.Regardles of the weather , with an all steel boat you know your bunk will be dry at the end of the day, which is not the case if you rely on dead vegitation to keep the water out. Brent Swain 2248 From: richytill Date: Fri Oct 3, 2003 2:16pm Subject: Re: A bit of heresy This is not a suggestion--it is a point of discussion. A few years ago we were asked to lighten the above deck portion of a certain type of naval vessels. We prefabed the deck-house etc. and then welded it onto a transition bar that was welded to the hull. The bar has aluminium on the topside, steel beneath. The two components are pre made by rolling the steel and aluminum into each other. This is waterproof all-welded construction with complete structural integrity. No problems. I would not do this--it costs too much. On the other hand it suits working vessels where the aluminum deck etc. can be abused without risk of corrosion and all the fittings can be welded on. The increase in stability may be worth the effort on some boats. You still have the problem of expensive welding equipment and building a shelter. rt 2249 From: Date: Fri Oct 3, 2003 3:18pm Subject: G55 construction details Here is a simple demonstration: take a piece of 8.5 x 11" 20 lb printer or photocopier paper. something with a bit of body to it. hold it in with the long axis vertical. make a horizontal cut in the right side, half way across the paper, so you have something that looks like this: ----------------------------------------- | | | | | | | | | | | -----------------------| | | | | | | | | ----------------------------------------- overlap the cut edges of the slit in a triangle, about 2" on the end, to form a cone. tape in place. notice the curve on the left side of the paper. you will have limited ability to modify this curve by pulling on the paper, without causing buckles or bulges elsewhere in the paper. this is a single chine bow. Now take a second piece of. again hold it in long axis vertical, but this time make two horizontal cuts in the right side, space evenly 1/3 and 2/3 down the paper, half way across the paper, so you have something that looks like a fat "E". like this: ----------------------------------------- | | | | | | | -----------------------| | | | | | | | -----------------------| | | | | | | ----------------------------------------- overlap the ends of the top and button slits about 1" to form two cones. tape in place. this is a two chine bow. notice there is a spot of higher curvature on the left side of the paper between the curves formed by the two cones. gently rock the two cones relative to each. You can move this point of maximum curvature up and down the left edge of the paper. this simple device shows how multi-chine construction allows us to control the point of maximum curvature in the bow, independent of stem or centerline shape. this allows the G55 to re-create the high performance bows of modern designs, without having to compromise stem shape, centerline rocker, or deadrise. With an accurate pattern it is no more difficult to add a second chine than the first. It adds a very small fraction to the total time and cost required to complete a boat. When someone says that they had problems with multi-chine construction, they are actually saying the multi-chine pattern they used caused them problems. It is quite possible they simply used a poor pattern. To us, the solution is to build better patterns. If you are going to spend the time, effort, and money to build a boat, often thousands of hours and tens of thousands of dollars by the time the boat is fully completed, start with a pattern that delivers a great looking hull shape. Because no matter how good a job you do, the boat can look no better than the pattern. If the pattern is rough, it will be reflected in the boat. greg elliott http://www.origamimagic.com 2250 From: Mark K Date: Fri Oct 3, 2003 5:23pm Subject: Re: Plywood cabin tops on a steel boat I think the problem may be that the hull flexes slightly under load and the bolts holding the cabin top allow it to float, the result being a small but constant rubbing between the two parts. This would eventually rub through any coating that could be applied to either part. This may be why such joints are so difficult to make work. I think you need either a thick gasket that is resiliant enough to accomodate the relative motion or perhaps a stainless rub strip welded to the flange to take the abrasion. - Markk 2251 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Sat Oct 4, 2003 2:05am Subject: Re: Plywood cabin tops on a steel boat Don, Tom Colvin in his book, Steel Boatbuilding Volume 2 page 44, discusses plywood cabin tops. The salient ppoints are drill the holes in the steel boundary bar before sandblasting and painting with primer and barrier coats. Make sure you don't break the barrier coat when fitting the cabin top. Use carriage bolts not countersunk screws. Tighten and using a maul and bronze doller hammer the heads below the surface of the plywood. Cover the heads with epoxy paste, sand smooth, cover the cabin top with epoxy resin and then with fibreglass cloth in epoxy resin. He uses a polysulphide for luting. Wooden window ledges for houses usually have a groove underneath to stop water running back under and into the house. Maybe that would help. Regards, Ted 2252 From: Don Taylor Date: Sat Oct 4, 2003 8:53am Subject: Re: Plywood cabin tops on a steel boat Ted: I have Tom's book and have studied this section. I don't think that I can use his techniques to replace an existing roof - his fastening and luting scheme are based on new construction where you are manipulating 1/4" plywood one sheet at a time. Even so, I think that it has some weaknesses. I don't think that carriage bolts have enough bearing surface to prevent the head being torn through a piece of plywood that flexes under big wave impact. This is why I am going to clamp the roof on using continuous flat bar. If you have not read about Orbit's last voyage, then it is well worth visiting: http://www.issumacorp.com/rhudson/orbitlog/OrbitsLastVoyage.htm In particular, the phrase "Part of the cabintop on the forward cabin had separated from the cabin sides" really got me thinking. Even if you sand-blast and coat the boundary bar before bolting on the roof, then the washers and nuts on the through-bolts crack the coating as you tighten them up to seal the roof. I plan to weld the bolts up through the boundary bar before sandblasting and coating. The roof is then tightened down onto the boundary bar. It is pretty hard to avoid squeezing out the luting before it sets, and this leads to a leaking joint. I am going to put a 1/4" thick gasket bedded in luting between the roof and the boundary bar. I plan to make a combination rain catchment, grab-rail and clamping bar cover along the lines of the design in fig. 20 of Volume II of Tom's book. I don't think that I need a drip edge as well because the rain will have been guttered away before it gets to the edge. Don. 2253 From: Alex and Kim Christie Date: Sat Oct 4, 2003 0:00pm Subject: Aluminum cabin tops on a steel boat Has anyone costed out pieces of "DetaCouple" , that explosively-bonded aluminum/steel strip in order to facilitate welding down an aluminum roof? Using such a strip would allow one to build an aluminum roof in one go with no goops and screws. Possibly even come out to weighing not much more, if not the same, as a very thick ply roof (if you want to build it to specs that can take a beating from a roll or rogue wave). Doing aluminum would certainly return the boat to as near a monolithic state as one could ever get without going to steel. I know you aren't considering steel, but if you chose to go with it (just bear with me on this for a moment!), then could you not make up for the increase in tophamper by revising the rig to remove weight aloft? Being on the end of a long lever, you would not need to remove the equivalent amount of weight up high, just enough to return your roll moment back to what it was with the wooden roof. Anyone out there with more naval architecture under their belts than I who could comment on this? Just a thought, as long as the rig weight reduction didn't open up a whole new technological can of worms (ie exotic materials), in which case I'd spring for the strips of DetaCouple and wang down an aluminum roof. Alex 2254 From: Joseph Smith Date: Sat Oct 4, 2003 4:40pm Subject: Re: Aluminum cabin tops on a steel boat Topper Hermanson did the exact same thing on the boat he built for himself for a recent trip around Cape Horn. http://www.thboats.com/index.html 2255 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Sat Oct 4, 2003 5:10pm Subject: Re: Plywood cabin tops on a steel boat Don, Now I reread your previous posts I can see you already knew what I wrote. Sorry about that. In the Gougeons Brothers book on boatbuilding using wood and epoxy they suggest on page 267 that steel can be stuck to wood using the following method. 1 Solvent clean the steel. 2 Coarse sand the steel 3 Apply a thin coat of epoxy and while still wet sand again. 4 Bond with steel or let dry, then lightly abrade, then apply more epoxy and stick on the steel. That said given the size of your cabin top I think I would like to test epoxy bonding of wood to steel on something smaller and less important first. I think I would do the same as you. Regards, Ted 2256 From: Don Taylor Date: Sat Oct 4, 2003 6:15pm Subject: Re: Aluminum cabin tops on a steel boat - radical proposal? Alex: Thanks. I have considered DeltaCouple, but whenever I asked about the price the answer has been "you don't really want to know". Well, maybe I do, so perhaps I should find out. Anyway, how can this really work? It is still aluminium bonded to steel so surely the al. will just go poof! in the night and corrode away. I don't really understand how the method of bonding would make a difference - surely you still get a galvanic couple between the two metals? As far as going with a steel roof and then compensating by reducing weight aloft. Hmmm... sounds like carbon fibre to me. Another alternative that I have seen used on a Colvin Gazelle with a steel roof was to lower the ballast (and presumably reduce it's weight) by welding a length of railroad track onto the bottom of the keel. I sailed on this boat, she was not tender and floated to her lines. She did seem to be slow, but managed a solo circum- navigation. (For anyone in BC, this was the "Broomielaw" built and owned by Ron Dick). I have not really thought about this alternative seriously before, but perhaps I could build a box section onto the bottom of the existing keel and pour lead into it as Brett does with his keels. This way I would minimize the additional draft from extending the keel. Right now Pilger floats about 6" below her DWL so this approach could actually reduce her wetted surface. Hmmm... I am not sure that I am ready for such a radical change and I would certainly want advice from a NA first. I don't have the nerve to ask Tom Colvin about this idea as he would probably have a conniption. I dunno, is this a good idea, or a brain f**t? Don. 2257 From: lon wells Date: Sat Oct 4, 2003 11:48pm Subject: Re: Re: Aluminum cabin tops on a steel boat explosion bonded When I was building the US Navy Frigates which had a steel hull and aluminum house they did use the explosion bonded bi-metallic strip. It is a interesting process worth looking at. http://www.highenergymetals.com/ The earlier Destroyer escorts had a Huck bolt where there was a flange with a rubber strip in between the Aluminum and steel that had mixed results. Sometimes we would replace the Huck bolts and corroded areas with the bi-metallic strip. Lon 2258 From: Alex and Kim Christie Date: Sun Oct 5, 2003 3:08pm Subject: Re: Re: Aluminum cabin tops on a steel boat - radical proposal? This pdf file from "Triclad", which makes the explosively bonded alu-metal strips, explains a lot, including specifics on welding to the strip. http://www.triclad.com/pictures/triclad.pdf Their answer to the question of whether the aluminum would corrode away is valid, but their research shows that there is a small amount of aluminum corrosion which builds up a protective layer at the alu-metal interface, which effectively seals out further corrosion. The reason there is no corrosion inside the interface is because no electrolyte can enter that space (having been explosively bonded together, there are no voids). This message from a forum has links for the companies who make the product: http://www.sname.org/forums/feedback/messages/1536.html I still can't dig up a price for this stuff anywhere! Anyone? Alex 2259 From: Date: Sun Oct 5, 2003 8:15pm Subject: Re: Re: Aluminum cabin tops on a steel boat - radical proposal? Hi ALex, the .pdf file you referred to had this intresting quote: Both the US Navy, and the UK Royal Navy have carried out exhaustive testing of aluminium-steel transition joints in the laboratory, during fabrication, and analysed in service performance. Either are happy that the majority of problems arise from failure to adhere to the simple guidelines given above. Indeed, following the losses of Royal Navy ships in the South Atlantic during the early 1980's, analysis of the damage to ships with aluminium superstructures showed that there were no failures of the transition joints used on these vessels. The myth that aluminium burned was dispelled. In particular, the one ship which was originally cited as an example of the risks of using aluminium in warships, HMS Sheffield, was an all steel ship. Interesting, the alloy didn't burn. We've rearranged our web site somewhat to speed things up for dial-up users, with the addition of some picture viewers. Visitors may have to refresh to see the changes. I'd be interested to hear people's comments. 2260 From: lon wells Date: Sun Oct 5, 2003 8:49pm Subject: Re: Re: Aluminum cabin tops on a steel boat - radical proposal? I don't know about now, but in the early 80's it was a dollar a inch for the 1-1/2" square bars when bought in large quantities. We also bought plates that were bonded they were used for columns. We only had these bars fail when it was a poor fit and the weld contraction would pull the explosion bonding apart. The stuff looks OK for a ship of War or work boat but it would be hard to dress it up for a sailing yacht. Another thought might be flange the cabin foot and bolt the cabin to the hull. Sandblast and epoxy coat the aluminum and steel, place a rubber gasket between and caulk the edge this would allow for cabin removal if the engine ever need to be replaced and it would be alot cheaper and better looking. Lon 2261 From: richytill Date: Mon Oct 6, 2003 5:58pm Subject: Re: Aluminum cabin tops on a steel boat - radical proposal? The type of transition bar we used on naval vessels looked like interlocking saw blades rolled together. The seams are void free and give no problems. There is a system of forcing a longditudinally slotted aluminium pipe over a steel round bar but it forms a crevice that begs capillary action and looks like trouble. One can only guess that the stronger and user friendly (easy anti-fouling, stability down low, lower metal prices) steel hull would be complemented by the light wheight, paint free deck surface of aluminum on top. On a yacht, why can't the transition bar be used as a bulwark cap where it remains unseen and protected from corrosion, rt 2262 From: Date: Tue Oct 7, 2003 0:51am Subject: displacement power boat hulls I'm curious about the reasons people would want to build a new tug or trawler hull for a displacement power boat. Both these hulls are optimized for use as work boasts, and when used as pleasure craft they are not optimized. They are optimized for cargo work. Compare the almost wave free wake from a sailboat under power with the sizeable wake thrown by most power boats. This represents wasted energy. Replacing the keel weight with diesel, the Lazy Bones would have a minimum range of about 8000 miles. 16,000 miles at low RPM's. How many 40 foot power boats have a range even a fraction of this amount? Alternatively, this weight could be replaced with fresh water, or more spacious accommodations. Sailboat hulls cannot be converted directly to powerboats, because the center of gravity must be adjusted to minimize roll when the mast is removed. However, once this is done, it seems likely that an easily driven sailboat hull would be a much better choice for a displacement power boat than either a tug or a trawler hull. For an aging population, permanent stairs in a sugar scoop are much easier to board from a dinghy than a ladder alongside. It is a simple fact of biology that many ladies (and men) lack sufficient upper body strength to board via a ladder as they age. Anyone that has ever had to boost people aboard from the dinghy will know what I am talking about. I can see how tugs and trawlers, once they retire from working, might end up as pleasure boats. Sailboats would not, because the ballast is wrong. However, it a sailboat hull was used to create a power boat, with the ballast replaced with fuel and water, and the center of gravity adjusted to allow for the mast to be removed, it would seem that a more easily driven and fuel efficient boat would result. Not only would this be important because of the high price of fuel, it can also significantly increase the range and/or fresh water capacity of the boat. Thus, it you are building a new displacement power boat, wouldn't a sailboat hull be a better starting point than either a tug or trawler hull? Greg Elliott yacht Lazy Bones 2263 From: bahadiregi Date: Tue Oct 7, 2003 2:30am Subject: home made cam cleats or clutches Hi everyone, Does any one know how to build home made cam cleats or clutches ?They are too expensive.I have seen some cleats made from PVC pipes but they are not suitable for heavy steel boat. Regards, Bahadýr 2264 From: Phillip Allen Date: Tue Oct 7, 2003 3:03am Subject: Re: home made cam cleats or clutches The world is full of answers to these and other questions/needs...just a matter of open thinking. Cam cleats...think old fashioned (rope) fence stretchers. Where would someone have needed to take a strain on rope and hold it while doing something else? I think I'd look at antique store/junk store, not for the actual item but ideas on how to create what I needed. Maybe it doesn't need to be self-actuating but just able to operate easily with the same hand holding the rope (palm/fist pressure). How about the spline on an old transmission, cut into "cookies" then drilled off center to create a cam? Stainless would be better but maybe galvanized? Phillip (stream of consciousness) 2265 From: w2gl Date: Tue Oct 7, 2003 11:21am Subject: Re: displacement power boat hulls I've always liked the looks of a tug, but wouldn't want to own one. The freeboard is a little low, and those beautiful rounded sheer lines are optimized for pushing and ability to steer away from flat surfaces like piers, barges and ship sides. The power on a real tug is way too much without a load to push, pull or tow. A true working trawler is also a work boat, and profit is measured by the catch load carried. I doubt very much that you could make a good fishing boat by converting a pleasure trawler, and vice-versa. The similarity is in the name, not the hull. Sometimes it's better not to reinvent the wheel, or boat type. As you point out, the Trawler is not that efficient, but the subject has been explored. The two best books are Robert Beebe's "Voyaging Under Power" and George Buehler's "The Troller Yacht" or "A Powerboater's Guide To Crossing Oceans Without Getting Wet Or Going Broke". Both stress heavy displacement, low power single screw boats. Buehler makes a case for less beam, and simpler construction. Comparing the wake of an auxiliary to a higher powered motor yacht isn't valid unless you put it into terms of the Froude number or speed length ratio. A sailboat propelled at a speed /length ratio of 1.35 tows about the same wake as a heavy displacement powerboat of the same length. I think wake observations are usually of a sailboat at 1.0 to a powerboat going at 1.3, a huge difference. It is far better to design a power boat from scratch than to convert a sailboat to a power boat. A sailboat usually has a prismatic coefficient selected for least drag in light to moderate air, where a powerboat can be designed to operate at a specific speed. The higher prismatic coefficient makes for more room aboard too! I hope you or someone else designs an Origami Power Yacht, it would fill a need and be very popular. Larry 2266 From: jim_both Date: Tue Oct 7, 2003 2:32pm Subject: Re: Aluminum cabin tops on a steel boat A link to google sci.engr.joining.welding thread on explosive welding of bimetal strips, aluminium vrs steel (big boats), and other sundry topics. http://groups.google.com.au/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF- 8&threadm=5401db42.0304081322.160bf1d2% 40posting.google.com&rnum=4&prev=/groups%3Fhl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF- 8%26oe%3DUTF-8%26q%3Dexplosive%26btnG%3DGoogle%2BSearch%26meta% 3Dgroup%253Dsci.engr.joining.welding 2267 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Tue Oct 7, 2003 3:22pm Subject: Re: Brent, clarification...the U's and V's... Brent, My 36' plans, which I bought at the beginning of 2002 are dated October 29 1988. Is this the same plan that your current boat, with the improved buoyancy, was built to? Would you recommend splitting the stem, which is still only tacked and then welding in a widening piece to give more buoyancy? Regards, Ted 2268 From: Bert Date: Wed Oct 8, 2003 8:34am Subject: Re: Digest Number 602 Greg, help us out here, I have motored with a mastless sail boat and noticed a much quicker motion....is that what you mean by saying the sailboat would be undesireable as it is? And what do you mean by "adjusting" the center of gravity? INteresting comments from you, Bert Eggers...Saginaw 2269 From: prairiemaidca Date: Wed Oct 8, 2003 9:00am Subject: port size(size does matter) Hi All; I've been following the discussion on combo material building and for myself I'll stick with the steel through out. What I'm interested in is there any data out there on how big a piece of lexan,plexi,etc etc. can be (1/2inch thick) before it becomes a liablility offshore. Some of the newer production boats are installing every size of port,some that are starting to look like the picture windows in ones home. My pilot house is a little taller and I'm about to cut the holes for the ports. If anyone is interested the reason for a slightly bigger pilot house, it was one thing that a lot of the owners that we have talked to all seemed to think would be an improvement without compromising the design. My first question to anyone who has built anything that I'm cosidering doing is would you do it again, if you could go back, and what would you change? Martin and Betty (Prairi Maid)... 2270 From: John Foster Date: Wed Oct 8, 2003 0:35pm Subject: Aluminum hull rotted by scraps of copper I sure would like some of the long time aluminum boat builders and aluminum boat users to share with the list some of the housekeeping steps they take to prevent the sort of major damage reported in this article. Palawan VI the Refit Saga Annual Special Issue of Ocean Navigator Issue Number 133 American Yacht Review 2003-2004 Pages 4 thru 12 by Steve C. D'Antonio Boatyard Manager, Zimmerman Marine http://www.zimmermanmarine.com/ Quoting briefly from page 8: .... each time a hatch was removed a microscopic brass-dust snowstorm fell into the bilges. Where aluminum and copper alloys are concerned, a single brass screw falling into an aluminum bilge is analogous to a hot BB being dropped into a stick of butter.......copper alloy gremlins conspired to attack the aluminum hull and tanks.....the source of the rotted tank tops was traced to water leaking from copper plumbing tubing..... Have a nice day John 2271 From: jim_both Date: Wed Oct 8, 2003 5:47pm Subject: Re: Aluminum cabin tops on a steel boat Sorry for the dead link in the last post; yahoo doesn't seem to like long hyperlinks. To find this information, go to google groups sci.engr.joining.welding and search for 'Joining steel to aluminum'. Some good posts are there. 2272 From: De Clarke Date: Thu Oct 9, 2003 0:19am Subject: welding poly > The best way to weld HDPE it is to use what is known the hot plate/ hot > knife technique,this involves heating a metal plate and placing it between > the faces of the plastic parts to be joined,when you see the edges of the hmmm so you move along the seam doing this? could you use a sailmaker's butane powered hot-knife I wonder? or do you need more BTU than that? > Work the flame over the surfaces to be painted,you will need to see a change > in the surface as the flame just melts the surface,allow to cool and apply > paint. interesting. with UHMW if you play a flame over the surface you get, allegedly, a mirror finish. but with HDPE it roughens it enough to take paint? good to know, maybe I could paint the reg number on my toy boat. > De, you have do very well to mould a PE boat hull do you have a moulding > company? or did you do it at home? no, sorry to disillusion you, this is a prefab (commercial) PE hull. I bought it because it was indestructible and had a basic unstayed catboat rig which seemed good for playing with -- wanted a hull on which I could try out a rig design. never having designed a whole rig before I found it took a very long time and far more materials and design decisions than I had at first imagined... many moments of "what have I got myself into here?" but after several months it is finally coming together and I hope to hoist the new rig and try to sail on it, RSN. > What is the size of the hull? it's a 13 ft sailing dink -- made by Escape (oddly enough I think it's a Hoyt design) -- a screaming yellow bath-tub toy. swing-up daggerboard, swing-up rudder ensures you can ground it w/o much damage. it's unsinkable and hard to capsize. as you might expect from that spec, it's also a dog :-) but the idea is to have fun, not to compete with Lasers. I bought it knowing it was a "learning experience" and it has certainly been that! > I have been designing products using rotomoulding for many years, you have > to change the way things are fixed to the mouldings. yes I understand (vaguely) that the rotomolded form is sort of a monococque, gaining stiffness from the shape of "bubble" chambers molded into it, so you don't want to weaken any of the chamber walls that serve as "beams" inside. my main concern has been attaching hardware on the outside :-) the plastic is so soft that there are almost no strong points, and to attach anything useful like oar locks or a decent transom that accepts standard motor clamps and so forth, you have to do a lot of head scratching. if I could plastic-weld reinforcing plates on here and there, I could have much better attachment points. the weirdest newbie experience I had with this boat was attaching some pad eyes on a warm day. I drilled the first hole and was alarmed when air started whistling out of it! in my experience of normal hulls, when air comes spouting out of one place it means water is coming in someplace else -- so I was alarmed :-) but it turned out it was just the air inside the sealed rotomolded hull, warmed by the sun, escaping when I punched a hole in the outer skin. from then on I tried to do my drilling in cold conditions and sealed every hole with adhesive on the screws thanks to all for the info on how to weld plastic, I will get some samples and try it on the workbench before attacking the hull. de 2273 From: Date: Thu Oct 9, 2003 4:42am Subject: Re: Digest Number 602 Hi Bert, A sailboat without a mast reminds me of piano lessons as a child. The device the instructor placed on the piano with the sliding weight that kept time. The metronome. As the weight was moved down the steel rod, the device sped up. As you have noticed, the same thing happens in a sailboat. Remove the rig and the roll motion of a sailboat can become uncomfortably fast. However, as you remove ballast from the keel, or move weight from the keel towards the deck, this motion will slow. As you move weight higher in the boat (from the keel towards the deck), at some point it will roll very slowly, making it very comfortable. However the trade off is that the boat at this point is unstable, because it is now very slow to roll back upright if tipped to one side by wind or waves - a second wave may result in a capsize. As you continue to move weight even higher the boat will become stable again - upside down. Thus, it is not a good idea to stand up in a small dinghy, especially if it is narrow as in a canoe. This effect can be predicted by an analysis of the distribution of weight in the boat and the buoyancy of the hull form, and will be explained in detail in books on yacht design. In stories of sailing ships in the past, they will make reference to loading of the cargo high or low, to change the roll period of the boat depending on the expected winds on the voyage. Upwind they would load the cargo low to increase their stability under sail. Downwind they would load the cargo high to slow the roll on the boat. regards, Greg 2274 From: Date: Thu Oct 9, 2003 5:11am Subject: Re: Re: Aluminum cabin tops on a steel boat - radical proposal? An NZ builder we cruised noted that the "Delta Couple" was too expensive to be used in NZ. He passed along a technique that is also found in "Boat Strengths". Alloy and SS are typically well behaved together. On a steel hull and deck, you can weld a SS flat bar vertically and bolt on an alloy cabin or pilot house with SS bolts and bedding compound. You do not need an insolating gasket or isolation washers. The vertical SS flatbar would tend to minimize leaks. A variation on this technique would be to weld an SS flat bar to the inside of the hull, and bolt on an alloy deck similar to the maner in which FG yachts are constructed. Leaks would be more problematic, as they are on FG yachts at the hull deck joint. However, with countersunk bolts in an alloy extrusion over the deck edge, this could give an attractive finish. A similar strategy could be used to mount ply decks/cabins to steel. Personally I would not recommend ply in a wet climate or the tropics. It is prone to rot even covered with epoxy and FG. The problem is fresh water entering the ply through any bolt or screw hole. I would not recommend using epoxy and FG to waterproof a joint between steel and ply. It would likely delaminate from the motion of the boat. Similarly, I would not recommend using silicone to seal a joint in a boat. Mildew or similar organisms in the tropics eat silicone. greg elliott http://www.origamimagic.com 2275 From: Date: Thu Oct 9, 2003 6:07am Subject: Re: Aluminum hull rotted by scraps of copper On the Lazy Bone (steel) we had a bronze strainer fall into the sump unnoticed, which ate a 3" hole thru the steel. Luckily the area under was part of the keel. Repair required the removal of the engine, and welding of a new plate over the bottom of the sump. Dissimilar metals are a problem on metal boats, and cannot be ignored regardless of hull material. Steel will not show the damage as quickly as alloy, but it is still occurring. The steel will lose strength before it shows much physical damage, which can lead to a false sense of security. Paint, spray foam provide some protection from metal dropped into the bilge. Alloy hulls can be left unpainted inside, which can make them more vulnerable to metal dropped into the bilge. I would recommend spray foaming inside a metal hull. The sump cannot be foamed. On the Bones when I made the repair I welded a 10 lb zinc to the sump on the inside of the hull, which has all but eliminated corrosion in this area. The zinc sits in the low point of the sump, in the salt water that enters through the packing gland. I would recommend this strategy to any metal boat owner. Put a zinc on the inside of the hull in the sump. A zinc in the sump can be a big help if you have an electric bilge pump. The float switch on a popular brand of bilge pump we had developed an electrical leak from fatigue, and luckily we had a zinc in place in the sump which was promptly eaten by electrolysis from the bilge pump. Better the zinc than the steel - or alloy. greg elliott yacht Lazy Bones http://www.origamimagic.com 2276 From: Don Taylor Date: Thu Oct 9, 2003 6:49am Subject: Re: spray foam fires? - Latex paint? By cheap latex paint, do you mean ordinary household paint as sold in Home Depo and the like? Or, anybody got any brand names for flame proof paint for coating foam. Thanks, Don. 2277 From: Richard Hudson Date: Thu Oct 9, 2003 9:24am Subject: Re: Digest Number 604 - port size > I'm interested in is there any data out there on how big a piece of > lexan,plexi,etc etc. can be (1/2inch thick) before it becomes a > liablility offshore. For sizing ports/windows on an offshore vessel, I strongly suggest you consider how big a hole(s) in the boat you could deal with if the windows/ports break. You could go find out the tensile strength of polycarbonate (lexan), and then figure out the force it might have to withstand (the only believeable figure of maximum forces at sea that I've ever heard of is 100 tons per square metre), but after you do that you'll probably decide 1/2" is way too thin :-). On my last boat, I replaced a hatch with a small doghouse, so that the person on watch could sit on the ladder and see outside. The sides of the doghouse were about 20" long and 14" high. They were supported by three pieces of Honduras mahogany laminated together (2.25" total thickness). At the aft (opening) end, 1" stainless steel channel supported the wood and acted as a dropboard channel. 1/2" lexan (polycarbonate) was thru-bolted onto the outside of the wood. The unsupported area of the lexan was about 14" long and 10" high. After the boat rolled over in a storm, the only pieces of the doghouse remaining were the 1" SS channels, which were welded to the steel cabin sides, and badly bent. Also, I saw half of one side piece of the doghouse floating in the water, split roughly diagonally, still securely thru-bolted to the broken wood pieces backing it. Two 7" round opening ports were also broken (among other damage). Due to their small size, they were less of a problem to deal with. The only hatch that did survive the roll was a production (cast?) aluminum hatch with probably 1/4" thick (acrylic or polycarbonate) smoked top, supported by two (or four, i don't remember) aluminum bars. This hatch was about 20"x20", the aluminum frame was very heavy, and the unsupported area under the top was probably about 6" x 18" (or 6" x 9"). This surviving hatch covered the forepeak, which was lower than the cabintop and the bulwarks and probably did not get hit by any spars. I think Don mentioned earlier my story of Orbit's Last Voyage (http://www.issumacorp.com/rhudson/orbitlog/OrbitsLastVoyage.htm), and the technical notes that follow it (http://www.issumacorp.com/rhudson/orbitlog/rolltech.htm). Someday I'm going to get around to putting some drawings up on that site that explain things better. >My first question to > anyone who has built anything that I'm cosidering doing is would > you do it again, if you could go back, and what would you change? To specifically answer your question, no I wouldn't replace a hatch with a doghouse again. A much better way to achieve a dry place for watchkeeping is a sacrificial doghouse (or deckhouse), that permitted entrance to the interior only thru a low-profile, strong, metal hatch or door that only opened in one plane (and a welded cabintop). I see a lot of boats with big windows (I'm currently looking for a boat, or a design), and I immediately think about what happens when the windows are stove in. I am well aware that a great many boats do sail far offshore with big windows/ports, but I don't want to do it, and wouldn't recommend the idea to anyone. Richard 2278 From: Alex and Kim Christie Date: Thu Oct 9, 2003 0:10pm Subject: bimetallic alu/cs revisited Hi all, I've been doing a little research on pricing for "Detacouple" (also confirmed there is no "L" in Detacouple) from Dynamic Metals Corporation, Boulder, CO. For two different thicknesses I've got prices of $24.48 USD and $26.88 USD per linear foot. Read on for details. I didn't know the linear length around the tops of the cabin sides on Don Taylor's Pilger, but I just made a wild guess of 40 linear feet so that Jose Olivas, the rep, could have a number to work with (although I think I over-estimated). This should allow for 20 feet on either side of the cabin and 20 feet extra for all bits in between, with tons left over. The resulting price quote seemed to be not too bad considering this is a permanent (hopefully!) fix and returns the hull to monolithic form: __________________________________________________________________ Thickness Width Unit price USD/ft Total price USD 40 linear feet 1.375" 0.75" $26.88/ft $1,075.20 0.75" 0.75" $24.48/ft $979.20 __________________________________________________________________ If Don only needs, say, 30 feet of the 0.75" thick stuff, then total cost is $734.40. It comes in lengths of 10 to 12 feet, btw. Certainly joining an entire deck to hull with this stuff would be more prohibitive cost-wise but for this specific situation where one is simply joining a new "lid" to the top of the cabin, it sure would make a nice solid fix without any concern for leaking through-bolts several years on. One interesting thing to note is that this material is now made up of three layers, not two, the base layer being carbon steel, the intermediate layer (called the "interlayer") made of aluminum 1100, and the top layer of your choice of 5446 or 5985 alu according to customer preference. Since the bonded metals have different rates of expansion, you should only cut it mechanically (no plasma or gas cutting), and follow exact procedures for welding. Doing a proper job with it doesn't appear to be beyond anyone who can weld carefully, though real proof of this should really come from someone who has actually used it like Topper Hermanson. Alex 2279 From: Joseph Smith Date: Thu Oct 9, 2003 0:30pm Subject: Re: bimetallic alu/cs revisited I have researched this stuff pretty throughly but I have not found any info explaining specifically how the process of bonding is accomplished. They mention an explosive connection, along with the words detonation. I don't get the impression this stuff is laid down and then welded in a conventional manner. Any thoughts on this? 2280 From: Mark K Date: Thu Oct 9, 2003 1:01pm Subject: Re: bimetallic alu/cs revisited Did you see this site? http://www.highenergymetals.com/ 2281 From: Joseph Smith Date: Thu Oct 9, 2003 1:13pm Subject: Re: Re: bimetallic alu/cs revisited I saw it but was not able to play the video. It mentions 600,000 psi. I'm still not sure how you ignite the stuff. Don't think I want to be fooling around with it. Sounds a lot like dynamite caps! I live close enough to T. Hermanson I might be able to arrange to witness a Blow if I really needed to. Think I'll attach my stainless samson post to the aluminum deck the old fashioned way, unless anybody has any new ideas. Appreciate the info though... 2282 From: Alex and Kim Christie Date: Thu Oct 9, 2003 1:50pm Subject: Re: bimetallic alu/cs revisited Joseph, Here's a very interesting full explanation from Triclad how it is done (pdf file, may take a minute or more to download): http://www.triclad.com/pictures/triclad.pdf A full technical description of the process if found on page 6 of that file, but I offer a basic synopsis of the process: Both metal and aluminum sheets are prepared so as to be completely clean and free of contaminants. The thinner piece is suspended above the thicker, which is resting on a sand base, and a special explosive charge is detonated above that, blowing the two pieces together. How do they stick? They state: "The extremely high pressure generated at the point where the metals initially meet vaporises the surface contaminants (oxides) which are ejected, thus producing the molecular bond between the two virgin surfaces. The outer layer of metal is only microns thick. Some very localised work hardening occurs, but in general the properties of the two metals remain unchanged [there is no alloying between the two metals -alex]. The metal temperature after cladding is such that you can place your hand on the surface. " They do not preheat the metal, it is done cold. A diagram of the explosion taking place shows a wave induced into the interface between the materials as the pressure jet escapes from between the two layers. This results in an uneven surface inside the material, but the outside remains flat. They also mention that they use an inner layer of pure aluminum between the steel and the alu alloy (hence the name "triclad"), to improve the bond . (the stuff I got the quote on is the same three-layer as this). I was partially wrong about plasma cutting, in part, since they can cut it with submerged plasma cutting (to create a heat sink with the water, I guess), not open air plasma. They use waterjet cutting normally, for any complex shape you'd like, or it can be cut mechanically. In the narrow strips for Pilger's case, this would be pretty easily accomplished with a metal cutting wheel on a grinder or metal saw. Lastly, the technical file mentioned above explains everything about the corrosion resistance of the bonded strip. Suffice it to say, after a small amount of penetration of corrosion at the alusteel boundary the material protects itself with a layer of very hard and inert aluminum oxide hydrate, which acts as a seal and prevents any further penetration of corrosion. If you scratch that spot, there is only a pinpoint of further corrosion at that spot, then it reseals itself again. If appears that there is simply no chance for an electrolyte to get into any spaces where it could create an active environment, and as the oxide plugs the hole and renders the environment passive again. They have these main points to remember when welding the tri-clad strip: Never weld across the interface, otherwise disbonding will occur Never make a sharp bend in the joint Never pre-heat joint prior to welding or bending Never allow the interface to exceed 300 C Never gas cut the joint strip Alex 2283 From: Alex and Kim Christie Date: Thu Oct 9, 2003 1:55pm Subject: stainless samson post to alu deck Just to note, Triclad also sells a stainless steel/aluminum strip that would work for your deck. T. Hermanson would not be the one bonding the sheets together -- this is done in a remote location under controlled conditions. I imagine it is a mighty bang! Alex Ps, I don't work for Triclad, though I would like it if they paid me for extolling the virtues of their product...might help fund my boat project. 2284 From: Dale J. Robertson Date: Thu Oct 9, 2003 2:41pm Subject: Re: Re: bimetallic alu/cs revisited Joseph, to be more clear: the explosive process is used only in the manufacture of the material itself. To use the material you just weld your alloy to the alloy side of the material and weld your steel to the steel side. No blow is required! Dale Robertson 2285 From: Mark K Date: Thu Oct 9, 2003 3:04pm Subject: Re: bimetallic alu/cs revisited I'm wondering about thermal expansion issues with the completed structure. The thermal coeff. of steel is about 0.000012/degC and aluminum is about 0.000023/degC. Over a temprature range of 50degC and a joint of 20 feet you could have as much as 1/8" difference in the expansion from one extreme to the other. If I've got my numbers right, it seems like you could build up a lot of stress. I wonder what the practical joint length limit is for applications like ours. - Markk 2286 From: Joseph Smith Date: Thu Oct 9, 2003 4:16pm Subject: Re: bimetallic alu/cs revisited Great! The fog is beginning to clear. Somehow I was under the impression that the strip had to be bonded to the surface by some sort of detonation. Now I see, the strip is ready to go as is, you simply weld metals to metals. This opens up a whole new world, I have been agonizing over bolt up's for a while. Am looking at a whole new method of propulsion incorporating a Fischer Panda diesel electric system that might well require a steel or stainless skeg. Man, this stuff is the way to go! No doubt about it. Thanks very much... 2287 SPAM 2288 From: Alex and Kim Christie Date: Thu Oct 9, 2003 6:32pm Subject: expansion coefficients Triclad recommended welding the bimetal strip to the aluminum first, then welding the steel to that, allowing the larger structure act as a heat sink. They also recommended very short runs of weldment (I can't remember how much but it was indicated in the pdf file), probably shorter than the shortest runs when welding alu if you really wanted to be careful. I expect you have to adhere to their instructions religiously in order to avoid problems. If they recommend something, it is likely for a good reason! Alex 2289 From: richytill Date: Thu Oct 9, 2003 7:51pm Subject: Re: expansion coefficients When we welded the aluminum/steel transition on the naval vessels I mentioned earlier--we relied on the mass of the hull as a heat sink. It worked well and the structures are still in service. rt (My Island) 2290 From: sae140 Date: Sat Oct 11, 2003 4:18am Subject: Re: G55 construction details > I must say I find the discussions between Brent and Greg facinating > and very informative. Informative regarding design issues - perhaps. But not informative at all regarding design success nor prices for plans/ design work. Brent's designs have been built in substantial numbers, and he is very open about his modest prices. Colin 2291 From: sae140 Date: Sat Oct 11, 2003 4:30am Subject: Aluminium cabin Some time ago I researched the Tri-clad explosive strip system of joining steel to aluminium, and came to the conclusion that it was far too expensive for my budget. It occured to me that 2-3" s/s strips could be welded to the deck inside edges, as a form of 'upstand', then the aluminium cabin sides could be bolted onto the outside of that. I was thinking of a gasket strip being used between the materials, with the aluminium overlapping this strip by a few millimetres below to act as a drip edge, with the whole caboodle being through-bolted using s/s roundheaded coach-bolts. But - is the weight saved worth all this effort ? I'm not convinced. My 2p Colin 2292 From: sae140 Date: Sat Oct 11, 2003 5:07am Subject: avoiding an ugly boat There is one aspect of building which doesn't seem to get much air- time - that of appearance. I'd very much like to build using traditionally shaped round portlights (like the Wylo), but with a pilot house as well. How can these two aspects be married together without creating a dog's dinner in the process ? Has it already been done successfully ? Brent briefly covers this aspect of boat-building in his book, but uses rectangular lights to create a modern(ish) design. I'd like to retain a more traditional appearance if possible. Any thoughts/ suggestions ? Colin 2293 From: mark_schlichting11 Date: Sat Oct 11, 2003 7:10am Subject: Re: avoiding an ugly boat I don't know if it was unusual, but my old boat had exactly what you describe - round portlights in the main cabin and pilothouse (with rectangular ports) and it looked just fine. It was a Colin "Saugeen Witch" and I'm almost positive the pilothouse was a common design modification for that model. If you are interested, I may be able to scan an old photo when I get home in a couple of weeks. Mark S. "Costa Vida" Shearwater, BC 2294 From: jim dorey Date: Sat Oct 11, 2003 8:01am Subject: Re: avoiding an ugly boat up here on glass fishing boats, the pilot houses have square windows, but with rounded edges, maybe that will work. of course you could hide the windows under a lintel, make it look like you don't have windows at all. tilt them out at the top so the sun doesn't reveal your treachery. rugged sailor is he, can take waves in the face and still see clearly. 2295 From: jim dorey Date: Sat Oct 11, 2003 8:10am Subject: Re: Aluminium cabin you're using square tubing to hold the cabin together? weld some steel square tube to the deck, maybe 12", seal the ends, slide the cabin framing on, bolt through, put gasket under the plates, weld up the thing. you'll save maybe 500lb? gain 100 in steel? save 400 total? i'm sure you can figure the numbers out, after all, you have the plans. 2296 From: brentswain38 Date: Sat Oct 11, 2003 3:16pm Subject: Re: avoiding an ugly boat The best looking ports are those with rounded ends with a good length to height ratio.You could also go for eliptical ports using the method for drawing the elipse given in the section on sheerlines, but those don't look as good as ones with straight top and bottom and rounded ends. Eliptical ones look a bit too cartoonie. Brent Swain 2297 From: Mark K Date: Sat Oct 11, 2003 5:49pm Subject: Re: G55 construction details I was simply expressing appreciation for their participation. I find it reassuring that a professional is willing to come to a public fourm like this and discuss the finer points of their designs. Nowhere it seems are opinions on design features argued more strenously than in ocean cruising boats, and yet it is among these that we find the greatest diversity in boats intended for the same service. There are those who contend that only a fool would go to sea in anything other than a heavy displacement full-keeler while others argue that advances in design and materials have made these older boats obsolete. It's nice to have people who's job it is to know these thing come here and discuss them with us. It means a lot more coming from them than from someone who begins their proof with "I heard about a guy who...". To be fair, if you wanted to know the prices for Greg's services, I'm sure he would be happy to provide them, though I don't know whether he sells stock plans like Brent does. I believe the two of them are targeting slightly different but overlapping markets. - Mark K 2298 From: Don Taylor Date: Sat Oct 11, 2003 6:03pm Subject: Re: avoiding an ugly boat Mark: Yes, please post some photos. I am pondering some sort of inside steering position for our Colvin Gazelle. Since I already own a set round bronze portlights I would be very interested in seeing what other Colvin boats look like with a small wheel-house and round portlights. Don. 2299 From: Don Taylor Date: Sat Oct 11, 2003 6:21pm Subject: Re: bimetallic alu/cs revisited Alex: Thank you for doing the research for me. I think that I would need about 70-80 linear feet Detacouple for the two cabins on our Gazelle (the forward cabin is about 16' long and the aft cabin about 5' long; both cabins are about 8' wide). So this would be about US$2,000 for the new boundary bar. This is already a bit rich for me, but added to that is that I am not set up to do Al. welding, and that I have very little experience in welding Al. The only time I welded Al. was during a course when I seemed to blow holes more often than weld metal. Given the cost of the Detacouple and my inability to weld to the spec.s required then I would have to hire the job out which would add to the cost. Especially, if I had to take the boat down to Topper's yard. I don't think that I can go this route. Of course, I may regret this decision later. Don. 2300 From: robertgm36 Date: Sun Oct 12, 2003 0:31pm Subject: 36 twin keel for sale The 36 twin keel featured on the home page has been sold . Robert 2301 From: Date: Sun Oct 12, 2003 2:34pm Subject: Re: Re: G55 construction details To date our work has been custom designs, 39-60 feet, steel and alloy. The boats may be viewed at our web-site http://www.origamimagic.com. Should we receive sufficient interest for a particular custom design, we would be more than happy to create a standard design to match. We are happy to provide quotes on request. Designers and builders have a general policy of a fixed price for standard designs, and time and materials for custom designs. We have the same policy, and can assist owners to minimize design costs if we also do the building. Confusion results when comparing apples to oranges. Custom designs from most designers typically run about 5% of the finished cost of a boat. A standard design that costs $6000 to build, with plans for $300, still represents a fee of 5%. Our fees to date have been less. In comparison, a broker will charge you 10% just to sell a boat. We do have people contacting us, hoping we will provide free advice. We do not provide this service, rather we will consult with you for a modest fee ($25/hr) and will do our level best to ensure that every $ you spend with us saves you many more down the road. Occasionally we do not accept business. We have considerable experience, and we will not design cruising boats that we ourselves would not be happy to take to sea with our families aboard. I put my wife and children aboard one of our designs and sailed them across the Pacific. What greater proof can anyone offer of a design? Anyone with children will understand what I am saying. Ron and I are long time steel boat enthusiasts, and have been sailing, building and designing boats for quite awhile. We have probably 75 years combined boating experience. Safety and value for money is our primary concern in designing and building a boat. You cannot build a silk purse from a sow's ear, and when other people's lives are at stake it is irresponsible to suggest otherwise. In general we do not design steel boats below 40 feet, because the weight of steel tends to compromise the stability, performance, and/or corrosion resistance of the vessel. Even at 40 feet a good design in steel is a challenge. We believe metal construction under 40 feet is in general better suited to alloy, especially for decks and houses. Readers interested in this question are encouraged to consult authoritative works on metal boat design. The Elements of Boat Strength by Dave Gerr has been mentioned in this forum. As I recall, this work recommends 50 feet as the smallest size for all steel construction. greg elliott yacht Lazy Bones http://www.origamimagic.com 2302 From: sae140 Date: Mon Oct 13, 2003 6:34am Subject: Re: G55 construction details Hi Mark > I was simply expressing appreciation for their participation. Sure - I understand that. I simply wanted to extend the thread to include wider issues of information: pricing and design success. Perhaps I should have started a separate thread ? Those whom you describe as 'professionals' may or may not be qualified in naval architecture, so I'm not sure professional is entirely the right word to be using, except in the ordinary sense of someone who gets paid for doing a job of work. In this sense, even the guy who sweeps the street is 'a professional'. Having said this, I don't give a tinker's cuss for qualifications, but there *are* those who do. Personally, I am far more concerned with whether a boat design 'works' or not - that is, whether it is safe, comfortable, well thought out, economical to build, and so on .... One barometer which can quickly and easily be used in this context is design success: i.e. how many boats have been built, and what feedback has been received from their owners/ users. A design which has been proven over a decade or more of blue-water voyaging is clearly a design which works. As I mentioned, Brent's designs have been built in substantial numbers, and afaik the feedback has been positive. I have no information regarding the number of boats built to Greg Elliott's designs, so cannot comment further. As I also mentioned, Brent's prices are well-known and have been mentioned several times on this forum. To the best of my knowledge Greg Elliott's prices have never been discussed here, and it may be of interest that some months ago I was quoted $Cdn 1500 for a set of plans for an unproven, untested Wylo-style origami hull. This is several hundred percent more than both the original Wylo plans and Brent's equivalent plans (the underwater lines are practically identical), both of which are well-proven designs, with dozens of boats already in the water. The fact that this price is not for a stock plan is of no concern to me whatsoever. If a designer does not have stock plans in his portfolio, that's a deficiency he needs to remedy, and is not my concern. I wouldn't dream of promoting myself as a designer of anything without a basic portfolio to demonstrate my work. As a customer, all I am interested in is the bottom line: i.e. how much the plans will cost me, and how good the design is. And by 'good', I mean how appropriate the design is for my particular needs. It's worth bearing in mind that custom-made boats are unknown entities, and as such should be cheaper, *not* more expensive. Why should I pay extra to be a guinea-pig for someone else's learning exercise, and to develop their design portfolios ? > I believe the two of them are targeting slightly different but > overlapping markets. This is not how I see it. Only one is involved in 'targeting' by making persistent and rather irritating sales pitches (of a hull size which falls outside of this group's description) towards a perceived market, which may or may not exist. The other is not 'targeting a market' at all, but relying upon a reputation based on proven demonstration, a modest pricing approach, helpful advice freely given, and a large dose of goodwill which has developed over many years. Recent acrimonious exchanges should tell you that an underlying conflict exists, which is not just about two individual designers nor their designs, but is about fundamental differences in lifestyle approach: one consumerist, the other not. Respectfully, Colin 2303 From: prairiemaidca Date: Tue Oct 14, 2003 9:43am Subject: port failure Hi All: Richard it sounds like you had a major problem on your hands when those ports failed. What conclusion did you come up with as to why the failure. Was it due to a weakness in design (too big an area of unsuported plexi) Or was the forces of nature just to much for any reasonalbly constructed port? In your case did the plexi itself break or did the surrounding area of the boat let go first? Mayby an object from the boat hit the port or was it strictly a major dose of sea water. Does anyone else have any stories and ideas on homemade ports and their failures at sea and why it happened?? Martin and Betty (Prairie Maid) 2304 From: Date: Wed Oct 15, 2003 9:12am Subject: promoting origami The email below provides history behind the estimate provided for Wylo. You will note Colin's reference that developing an origami pattern was "very laborious and time-consuming". Creating high-quality origami patterns takes time. We are not charging hundreds of dollars for making copies of a pattern we have sold over and over again. We charge for the time, years of experience and training, and thousands of dollars of computer equipment we use to make a new pattern. Our understanding is that this site is to promote all origami designs, not just those of a single designer. Unless new designs are created, and the origami process refined and improved, it can never hope to gain widespread acceptance as a boat building technique. I recently attended a meeting of the metal boat society and had the opportunity to meet and talk with people about origami boats. A great many people I met rolled their eyes up when I mentioned origami. They were not interested in the process, seeing it solely as a means of producing cheap, rough looking boats. We see a much different potential for origami. My purpose at that meeting was to educate people that origami boats can be spectacular, original, and beautiful. That the only limits to origami are the imagination to explore new ideas. greg elliott yacht lazy bones http://www.origamimagic.com 2305 From: cain2abell Date: Wed Oct 15, 2003 9:20pm Subject: How do I get the book? I sent a check to the address that was given in one of the earliest posts and I had it returned to me. Is there a new address? Did I screw something up here? Any help would be greatly appreciated Abell 2306 From: Paul J. Thompson Date: Wed Oct 15, 2003 10:00pm Subject: RE: How do I get the book? Abell, Here is Brent's address. I bought his book from him about a month ago, from this address. For a copy of my book, please send $20 CDN plus $10 CDN for airmail postage ,to 3798 Laurel Dr, Royston BC Canada V0R2V0 Thanks Brent Swain Regards, Paul 2307 From: fmichael graham Date: Thu Oct 16, 2003 0:03am Subject: Re: Re: G55 construction details Great! Once again Mr.Elliott shamelessly uses this board as a venue to plug his company. I think once is enough. It was my impression that this group was set up for the purpose of meaningful discussion, NOT for free advertising. Mike Graham 2308 From: Mark K Date: Thu Oct 16, 2003 4:09am Subject: origami cabin I've noticed that the cabins on many modern boats look a lot like inverted boat hulls so naturally it occurred to me that it might be possible to construct a metal cabin top using origami techniques. Hide the chine with a grab rail or with some stylishly shaped windows and everyone would swear that it had to be a glass boat. It could reduce the amount of metal fabrication required, but it could make finishing the interior a bit more challenging depending on how you did it. just thinking out loud, - Mark K 2309 From: sae140 Date: Thu Oct 16, 2003 4:32am Subject: Re: G55 construction details Couldn't agree with you more Mike. I've been skipping over Greg's posts for some time now to avoid being exposed to irritating advertising, but I kinda object to having to filter posts like this, and I still get a dose of it anyway when I read someone's post whose opinion I value replying to it. But, in trying to stay positive about this issue - wouldn't one easy solution be to set up a second origami group to discuss hulls in excess of 40ft, where folk with lots of money could discuss their giant-sized issues, and Greg could make as many sales pitches as he wants there without invoking adverse criticism. I'll set up the group if no-one else wants to, but I certainly wouldn't want to run it. Those of us with smaller wallets, more modest aspirations, a less consumerist approach, and those who object to a group being abused in this manner, could simply stay here. Feedback ? Colin 2311 From: sae140 Date: Thu Oct 16, 2003 5:59am Subject: promoting origami Greg I have just read your post, following advice from a group member that you have reproduced my private email to you in a public forum. This demonstrates very poor form and shows lack of personal integrity. It has always been my understanding that a document should only ever be reproduced publicly with the consent of it's author. Your post is also dishonest, as the email you have published was by way of an early introduction, and was *primarily* a discussion about paint issues - which I note you have edited out. This mail does not relate *in any way* to the request I made to you 8 days later for a quotation - which followed after numerous exchanges between us on the subjects of paint and electrolysis. The request I sent you reads: Greg I'd be interested in learning how much you would charge for the conversion of an existing set of offsets to origami. The boat I have in mind is the 32/35ft Wylo II - I've attached a couple of graphics to give you some idea of the shape. I'd prefer twin keels and a skeg, as per Brent Swain's designs, and a wheelhouse if this could be incorporated without knackering the lines. Regards Colin This is somewhat different from the image you have sought to portray in your post. There is no *history* here - it's a stand-alone request for a price for a conversion of a proven design. Why on earth can't you be honest about these things ? I'd also like to clarify that taking the lines from a half-model by means of an 'orange-peel' is indeed time consuming and laborious, but it's also an enjoyable process and one which is virtually *free*. And the results are plenty good enough to build a boat from. As I'm sure you must realise by now, I didn't want you to actually do the job - I only sought to know how much you charged. I already had an acceptable orange-peel to work from. I would encourage anyone who is strapped for cash, or who wishes to 'origami' a design of conventional construction, to consider using this method - which I describe in posts 1468, 1477 & 1484 earlier this year, having copied the idea from Brent Swain. Colin 2312 From: Date: Thu Oct 16, 2003 7:15am Subject: Re: promoting origami Colin, we are happy to have the full record made public. We look forward to your success in building an origami Wylo II. Are pictures available? regards, greg greg elliott yacht lazy bones http://www.origamimagic.com 2313 From: ... Date: Thu Oct 16, 2003 9:33am Subject: RE: Re: G55 construction details This group would be the poorer if Greg left and set up his own group, he has made a valuable contribution to the development of origami hull construction. Surely we are all able to learn something from his experience building larger hulls, and apply it to our own ideal yacht, whatever the design or size. How many commercial designers or builders would take time to contribute to a group like this, not many, then the cry would be they don't want to bother with use and don't reply to our emails. Most groups welcome people with knowledge and expertise they would be of little interest or value without them. I cannot recall you having made any contribution, perhaps you would like to tell the group what you are project coordinator of and what you are building. Geoff 2314 From: Paul J. Thompson Date: Thu Oct 16, 2003 11:47am Subject: RE: Re: G55 construction details I am in full agreement with this. Paul Thompson 2315 From: alex_christie Date: Thu Oct 16, 2003 0:36pm Subject: spreading the origami word As moderator, I feel a need to step in and state that as long as whatever is being promoted has something to do with origami boatbuilding there is no problem with it. The whole field of origami boatbuilding and design is very narrow currently (2 designers in N.A., as far as I know), and needs all the promotion it can get, even including self-promotion of a given designer's work. The eye-rolling response that Greg has had from Metal Boat Society members upon mention of origami boatbuilding is the very same eye-rolling response that Brent has encountered over the years in the same milieu, making Brent and Greg kindred spirits in many ways, even if they are from different ends of the origami spectrum. We need diversity in order to expand this field and promote the building technique, and I would welcome anyone else out there who is exprimenting with origami to come forward and promote what they have to the group. They should be able to do so without fear of being run out of town:-) I don't believe Greg is dabbling in origami boat design out of charity for our interest alone -- he is investing his time and money to make a legitimate attempt to forge a living out of something he likes, rather than spending his days in suit and tie stuck in an office only dreaming about designing, building and sailing boats. It's free enterprise in the full tradition of most of the cultures represented on this board, and as such I don't see much harm in it. And, just as in any free market economy, if you don't like the price, don't buy the product. Brent's pricing is a bargain compared to what is out there, and if Greg's pricing is more on par with the usual offerings out there I don't know what the issue is. Greg's ability to take any design and make it origami should be a boon for anyone out there wants a particular type of boat but would like to "origamify" it. As we make our way through the advertising that Yahoo now makes us wade through on our way to messages (which keeps this service free) let's keep in mind that at least Greg's advertising is directly related to our subject of interest, compared to the spam that plagues all e-mail users the world over. If it is not to your liking, then simply toggle your mail settings for the group to "web only" and skip the messages you wish to avoid by reading them online. We need to keep the tone of the board friendly, open to new ideas, and encouraging of designers nurturing a career in the field in order to allow word of the building technique to flourish, so let's cut some slack for this one of only two designers active in the field, ok? Yours, Alex 2316 From: Phil S. Date: Thu Oct 16, 2003 1:57pm Subject: Subtlety I agree that Greg has made some interesting contributions to this forum. I have had a few private e-mails with him as well. Maybe you need to tone it down a bit Greg. If someone wants your information they will ask for it. Then you can carry out deals off board. On a side note I am still working on the Tug plans, I have been side tracked again with a more impotant project. Thanks Phil 2317 From: fmichael graham Date: Thu Oct 16, 2003 3:06pm Subject: Re: Subtlety Yes! That's all I am saying. Constructive contributions are valued by all and if a member requests info. on designers, fabricators, suppliers, etc. then 1)the previous posts, 2)those members "in the know", 3)links, and, perhaps, 4)the moderator exist to assist that individual(no need to bombard the membership with advertising). An example to clarify; I noticed a post by Alex(moderator) - in the not too distant past - informing us that there was a 36' hull for sale. we would not have needed subsequent posts, selling us on the beauty of the lines, the fine construction, the "steal of a deal" price. I have not, nor would I, suggest that any member leave the group. I did not mean to paint a target on Greg. Having said this, I think that If the "spirit" of this group is amicable to the sale of products and services - as suggested by the moderator - then I should re-evaluate how I utilize my membership within this group (perhaps, selling my own services). shall we move on? Mike Graham 2318 From: richytill Date: Thu Oct 16, 2003 3:23pm Subject: Re: spreading the origami word Thanks Alex, I am greatful to Brent for his pioneering of the basic folded metal technique here because it allows a working man to achieve a dream: brilliant. At the same time if someone wants to design and build a multi million $ origami, multi chine, super-yacht out of monel or whatever--it's a free(ish) world and we can usually learn from a new venture: admire another pioneer--or disagree respectfully. In building My Island, I did some experimenting and will report on modifications to the VW engine, underwater exhaust, flush deck etc. in due course. I expect some people to disagree--I am glad they have the freedom of expression and forum to do so. People visiting the wharf here consistently are wowed that this is a metal boat, they expect metal to be crude and ugly--I tell them it's folded origami etc. Virtually everyone walks away convinced that welded, folded, metal is an attrative, practical, alternative. For the most part, it speaks for itself. rt 2319 From: Jim Phillips Date: Thu Oct 16, 2003 3:55pm Subject: Re: spreading the origami word Very well put, Alex. Carry on, Greg. And Brent. Take it easy, mates, Jim. 2320 From: jim dorey Date: Fri Oct 17, 2003 1:04am Subject: Re: Subtlety when advertising enlightens a group to a new product it's good, when it's the same damn thing everybody else has then hunt them down with your honey and fire ants. maybe this is an instance when advertising is necessary, far as i know, origami boats are still niche things. 2321 From: sae140 Date: Fri Oct 17, 2003 2:34am Subject: Re: promoting origami I'm not sure who is meant by 'we' (?), but photographs will be made available in due course. In the meanwhile, perhaps you would care to publish a photograph or two of a hull which has been built to your origami design ? Colin 2322 From: Mark K Date: Fri Oct 17, 2003 3:27am Subject: You've got a hull, now what? I think I have a fair grasp of what it takes to get something boat shaped floating in the water, but I'm curious about the rest of the boat building process, in particular the finishing of the interior. Can anyone recommend some good books that cover this area of boatbuilding? Better yet, anyone want to tell us what you did, are doing or plan to do to fill your empty hull? Perhaps someone has some good ideas for simplifying the interior the way the origami process simplifies the hull. For myself, I'm not big on woodworking and find fiddly wood trim work tedious so I would be looking for solutions that yielded a reasonably finished look without so much woodwork. Perhaps a simpler look like of some of the recent production boats rather than a traditional wood finished interior. - Mark K. 2323 From: Jim Phillips Date: Fri Oct 17, 2003 3:28am Subject: Re: promoting origami Colin, If you want to see some of Greg's photos, you should probably just go to his website, like many of us have already done. Maybe you need to go cruising real soon in order to relax a bit, mate. As a supplier, it always irks me to have to supply quotes to people who have absolutely no intention of using my products. If they were actually getting quotes to buy a product - fair enough - that's free trade, good competition and I'm all for it! However, when it is just using my time and resources in order to screw someone else or to obtain free info, it's abuse. But I shrug my shoulders and treat it as one of life's little annoyances (sort of like advertising sometimes, hey? or a contrary wind). The important thing is to not let it get to me. Go for a sail and relax. And I am sure you can, Colin. Take it easy, Jim. 2324 From: Joseph Smith Date: Fri Oct 17, 2003 5:09am Subject: Re: You've got a hull, now what? Sort of feel the same way you do! My plans are to make below decks suit my needs. I am not interested in the number of people the boat will sleep, I am interested in comfort, convience, and functionality (heavy on the comfort!). I want a couch that makes in to a bed rather than a 'setee' on the Port side. The unit I have in my 5th wheel travel trailer is located on the slide-out (Port side) and is 3" from the wall, 6' 6" long and when extended makes a 3' 3" wide very comfortable bed with plenty of storage underneath. It is secured to the floor and has been pulled over 200,000 miles with no problems. There MAY be some weight considerations, but I am sure that could be dealt with easily enough. Directly accross from that on the Starboard side, I would like to have a recliner, much like the one in my R.V. Lazy Boy makes a model for small apartments that, like the couch, can be activated almost flush with the bulkhead. Re-upholster it in a marine-durable material, secure it to the floor, tie it down while underway and I don't see any problems. This set up would probably need at least 34' overall to work, w/ a 10' beam minimum. I am only using 10' out of the 12' I currently have available. I have never cared for the 'traditional' layout below decks. Wasted space for my needs. V-births? Maybe one starboard side, the rest of the area storage and work bench w/a vise. Put in a good Head... and it's rock and roll! 2325 From: Mike Date: Fri Oct 17, 2003 5:44am Subject: Re: promoting origami So, if I understand you correctly, Jim, this is not a venue to ask questions but, rather, one in which to promote products and services. I guess Colin, et al, should simply hang up the stinger and pull out the wallet. Yeah, right. Do you then advise that we skip this group and go to a boat broker or fab. shop, instead? I think that maybe you should go sailing & give your head a shake. I joined the group when I decided that I'd build a steel-hulled boat utilizing the origami method and thought that those whom had gone before might have valuable suggestions as to avoiding pitfalls, sourcing material/parts, etc.. Have I missed something here? If you and Greg only wish to part with your opinion for a price then I suppose we won't be hearing much more from you then. Nevermind, Colin, there are enough of us here whom are willing and able to share our opinions and abilities for free. Mike 2326 From: Mike Date: Fri Oct 17, 2003 7:08am Subject: Re: You've got a hull, now what? In revamping an old "plastic" boat for off-shore sailing, I copied the Bayfield 29' settee which has a single berth that slides out to become a double - when in port, it made for a very roomy bed. I turned the v-berth area into a sail/equipment locker as a forward berth is quite useless at sea. I have found that comfort is on par with safety considerations and makes a long passage that much more bareable. I made best use of two books by Ferenc Mate: "From a Bare Hull", and "The Finely Fitted Yacht". These books have a lot of knick- knacks that can be built to add a lot to your lifestyle without sacrificing too much space(stores take up most of your interior, it seems). I often used systems/parts from my RV, as it was easier than building from scratch. The biggest problems I encountered when I did this were sharp edges and a lack of corrosion resistance in some areas. Mike 2327 From: mark_schlichting11 Date: Fri Oct 17, 2003 9:07am Subject: Re: You've got a hull, now what? -When my wife and I were considering building a boat, we felt confident we could build an Origami hull with Brent's help, but my wife asked "What about an interior"? I said "We'll put in something quick and easy". Brent said he could help us throw one in in a few days! We knew that wasn't likely but we also laughed at those who told us the hull is only 10% of building a boat and that we shouldn't launch until "the last screw has been turned". It just goes to show how everyone's expectations and experiences differ. With 8 weeks of Brent's help and very little of anyone else's, we had the boat in the water within 13.5 months (including 3 months away working and a 2 week vacation). The hull was complete, painted in & out, engine/shaft/prop in and almost functional, hull interior foam insulated and plywood skinned, ports and hatches in, mast built and stepped, and 2 setee bases built. One great thing about building your own boat is that you can put in whatever kind of interior is right for you - a crude or as refined as you like. We opted for a traditional interior for the same reasons Joseph opted not to have one - comfort, convience and functionality. How else can you fit everything for 2 into 36'? Things like a good functional shower, a nice galley with stove and oven, a wood stove, a comfortable saloon, plenty of tankage for water and fuel, lots of room to store food, clothing and equipment - everything to live aboard in comfort and to go sailing/cruising at the drop of a hat. We probably spent more time on it than the average Brent Boat builder because we planned on living aboard full time for the foreseeable future, but I think most people underestimate the time and money that go into an interior. It took us another year to build in the basics to move aboard, and then a third year to "finish" the boat - when are boats ever finished anyhow? Of course it would have taken less time if I had some woodworking skills before we started (I had never even owed a powersaw). Then again I had never done any metalworking before beginning the hull either. Fortunately Jean (my wife) had lots of finishing and painting experience. I always joke that we could build the next one in half the time. Jean says "There isn't going to be a "next" one!" We have lived aboard for over 3 years now and are very happy with the boat in all respects. She is warm, dry, & comfortable despite the cold and wet climate we live in, performs very well under power and sail, takes very little maintenance, and looks great. No regrets here! Mark & Jean "Costa Vida" Shearwater, BC 2328 SPAM 2329 From: sae140 Date: Fri Oct 17, 2003 0:07pm Subject: Stainless trim It occurs to me that it would be a nifty idea to protect the transom edges from chipping with a s/s trim. I was thinking in terms of using 6-8mm s/s rod. Is this the best way to go ? The problem as I see it is how to incorporate the rod at build-time: at present the transom is cut to size and the hull-sides pulled onto it, with the excess being cut-away after welding. How then to incorporate the rod at the edge ? Maybe it's obvious, but I can't see it. Colin 2330 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Fri Oct 17, 2003 0:41pm Subject: Re: You've got a hull, now what? Mark K "Boat Joinery and Cabinetmaking Simplified" is available from McGraw- Hill of Blacklick OH Tel:1-800-262-4729. It has some very good ideas including jigs and tools to make. I am not at the interior stage yet but was advised by a boat surveyor recently to only use removable interior cladding and that only between the furniture and not behind it. Of course in more robust times anything more than two hooks for a hammock and a bucket for ablutions would have been considered the height of decadence. Regards, Ted 2331 From: Don Taylor Date: Fri Oct 17, 2003 2:09pm Subject: Re: You've got a hull, now what? I like this book too, BTW. it is by Fred P. Bingham who is Bruce Bingham's dad. Another (part of a) book worth reading is the chapter on "Chips and Shavings" in "This Old Boat" by Don Casey. Casey's approach assumes that you know absolutely nothing about joinery, and have no money for fancy tools. Worth at least borrowing from a public library. Don. 2332 From: brentswain38 Date: Fri Oct 17, 2003 2:31pm Subject: Re: You've got a hull, now what? You'll save a lot of unneccessary work if you build your interior first, then cover only the foam insulation that is showing. For the last 20 years I've had nothing but foam in my lockers and under my bunks and despite piling stuff on the the foam for decades, it's still in good shape . There is no need to cover foam inside lockers.Just paint it with cheap latex paint. Brent Swain 2333 From: brentswain38 Date: Fri Oct 17, 2003 2:37pm Subject: Re: Stainless trim It is a good idea to protect the corners of the transom with stainless. Rod works but it does stick out a bit . A friend was able to find stainless cope iron half round in a scrapyard and weld that on the transom projecting 1/8th inch beyond the hull. Another option here and elsewhere is to make several passes of stainless welding rod around the corner , then grind it smooth , but being careful not to grind enough to take all the stainless off. Brent Swain 2334 From: brentswain38 Date: Fri Oct 17, 2003 2:57pm Subject: Re: You've got a hull, now what? It only took me a couple of days to rough the interior in my 31 footer ( and I mean rough , just all the big stuff, unpainted and unsanded) The fine finishing was for doing in quiet ,pleasant anchorages with no deadlines,and only when I felt like it . In the meantime the boat was usable ,liveable and cruisable, and finishing things under those conditions was more like an enjoyable, part time hobby than like things that absolutely had to be done. To get the interior livable cost less that $50. Several years ago I met a guy who had bought a wet kit from Waterline Yachts; painted hull and deck with foam insulation and engine. He said that while people tell him that everything must be finished to the last bolt,before launching , he noticed that people who went cruising in unfinished boats took about the same amount of time as those who finished their boat on land, but they had a lot more fun in the meantime and were far less likly to want to change everything after a few years of cruising. I believe that the notion that you had to do all your hard work before having any fun is a left over from the masochistic puritan era, puritanism being accurately defined as "the terrible , nagging fear that someone , somewhere, just might be having a good time." Some say that if you launch early, you'll never get it done. I would say that what never gets done , doesn't really matter all that much, or you'd be motivated to do it. Brent Swain 2335 From: brentswain38 Date: Fri Oct 17, 2003 3:16pm Subject: Re: spreading the origami word I'm grateful to Greg for dealing with the people who want to have built a large boat and don't want to get their hands dirty building it.I don't want to deal with them , and I'm glad someone is. I have never had any interest in that market and I am thus in no way in competition with Greg. I prefer to work for the proletariat, who want to build their own boat and may need a hand in the early stages , and who don't have a lot of money.My kinda people. The wider the spectrum of origami boats available the better it is for all of us and the sooner it will be when origami is accepted as the proper way to build a metal boat .Some members of the metal boatsociety are still bogged down in the " be reasonable and do it the hard way " school of thought . They continue building and setting up frames while the enlightened are cruising interesting places. Some have gotten the message tho.Go origami and leave the framing to the legal industry. Carry on Greg ; pardner. Brent Swain 2336 From: brentswain38 Date: Fri Oct 17, 2003 3:21pm Subject: Re: origami cabin All my cabins are built using the same origami techniques as the hull, just different shapes. Handrails should always be used wherever possible to protect corners from chipping . Brent Swain 2337 From: jim dorey Date: Fri Oct 17, 2003 11:12pm Subject: Re: Re: promoting origami > So, if I understand you correctly, Jim, this is not a venue to ask > questions but, rather, one in which to promote products and services. sure, if you want, though i was thinking more along the lines of advertising being as good a way to assist us all in learning what's available. > I guess Colin, et al, should simply hang up the stinger and pull out > the wallet. Yeah, right. Do you then advise that we skip this group > and go to a boat broker or fab. shop, instead? i think we should all have a fab shop, so yeah, pull out the wallet. > I think that maybe you > should go sailing & give your head a shake. I joined the group when I > decided that I'd build a steel-hulled boat utilizing the origami > method and thought that those whom had gone before might have > valuable suggestions as to avoiding pitfalls, sourcing > material/parts, etc.. Have I missed something here? those advertising have gone through this stuff before, and if they are willing to share their expertise then they should be welcomed. very much like open source software, the difference between getting the design free or making it up yourself is that the experts can do a better job at providing a more standard product, as well as offering support to the owner. > If you and Greg > only wish to part with your opinion for a price then I suppose we > won't be hearing much more from you then. i'm sure they know that free advice won't make any difference, somebody wants to build a boat they'll find a way, they'll only have a bit harder time, and if someone who wants an origami boat sees that they don't have to put their brain in a blender to figure out how to get a nice boat thy've made a sale. someone who want's to build a boat will build a boat, even if a commersial product exists. > Nevermind, Colin, there are > enough of us here whom are willing and able to share our opinions and > abilities for free. 2338 From: sae140 Date: Sat Oct 18, 2003 1:24am Subject: Re: spreading the origami word > I'm grateful to Greg for dealing with the people who want to have > built a large boat and don't want to get their hands dirty building > it. If that was the full extent of the situation, then I wouldn't be making waves. But it isn't. I feel it's important to specify the context with which I'm concerned here, being that of ocean-going small craft built by amateur construction. Thus far, I've only criticised the value-for-money aspect of Greg's origami conversion plans, and I do accept that - once the information is known (which it wasn't previously) - then caveat emptor quite properly applies. But there is another, far more serious matter to be considered. What is supplied is (and I quote), "A set of plans that would allow you to fold up all the major components, including keels, rudders, deck, cabin, and wheelhouse is ... (followed by price)" Unless I am mistaken, what you get is the computerised Origami sheet folding information only. There is no mention of key information such as mast positioning, rig details, ballast and so forth, which are essential and provided as a matter of course with proven stock plans. More importantly, there is no mention of any construction details - not only deck fittings (the integrity of which can determine the survival or otherwise of a boat) but vitally important information such as the method of skeg attachment: concern for the failures of which - resulting in loss of the vessel - have been expressed elsewhere. The plans being offered might be adequate perhaps for the experienced metal boatbuilder or professional yard, but surely not for the amateur constructor who may be building for the very first time. My concern isn't about legal indemnity or anything like that, but a concern for those of my fellow human beings who will be taking their home-constructed boats offshore. In my opinion an attitude of caveat emptor is no longer acceptable here, especially in those countries where boat-building remains (thankfully) unregulated, and where the integrity of a designer's work becomes central to a safe and seaworthy build. Plans for safe amateur construction need to be both comprehensively detailed and of proven design, and between Brent's own book, stock plans, evidence afloat and positive feedback, he appears to have this well covered. I would respectfully suggest that anyone wishing to address the amateur self-build market by offering origami conversion plans could do a lot worse than follow his example. If they were to restrict their activities solely to the production of expensive turn-key boats of course, the owners of which are no doubt well-placed to sue if things go wrong, or recommend the design onwards according to their experiences, then my cautionary comments no longer apply. At this point I'll now bow out from this subject (unless specifically requested to clarify anything), for it certainly isn't my chosen role in life to act as an internet policman or critic. So - break over - and back to the welder .... With very best wishes (and safe sailing) to all, Colin [100% chilled-out and unstressed] 2339 From: ... Date: Sat Oct 18, 2003 6:17am Subject: Re spreading the word Brent has done an excellent job pioneering Origami construction, anyone who has designed and built boats will appreciate how much time he must have spent working on the patterns for the developed shape of the plates and the final design of the hull. His designs have proven to be good safe deep keeled cruising yachts as he has demonstrated by his very extensive deep sea voyages in the pacific. As some people are limited to where they can sail, the depth of water and the shortage of moorings for deep keel yachts they require a different hull design. Until recently no alternative origami designs have been available, a number the group have been working on ways to develop the plate shapes for the design of hull they require, but it is not that easy. Greg has developed methods using software for modelling the hull and develop the patterns of the plate shape and can then model the hull from the data to check that it is fair, that is the information some builders require. His series of photos of the construction of the 55 hull in aluminium are very interesting as they show all the stages of construction, these are of considerable value to any prospective builder, what ever the material they choose to use. If all they see is a large hull constructed from aluminium which is not the material they wish to use, which might be for someone who is unable to construct the hull themselves and is prepared to pay the price, then they should consider if they are able to take on they building of a steel yacht. Most commercial builders would not publish these photos as they would consider that all the development work to get to the stage of construction had cost them a considerable amount of money, and would not be prepared to put it into the public domain. This comes under the heading of intellectual property, which Brent's also has in his designs. I have visited a company where they were building aluminium yachts, they would only allow a very few people into the building area as they did not wish to disclose the construction methods. This protection of production techniques and processes is the rule in most industries. If a builder requires every small detail to be specified down to where a deck fitting is postioned,then he should go for one of Brent's designs but even then the design will not ensure a safe yacht, if the armature builder has not got reasonable welding and construction skills, he might still produce a yacht that was unsafe to go to sea in. Designers cannot be responsible for the finished yacht if the builder has not got the skills to construct all the part that go into a finished yacht. It is not my impression that Greg is aiming for the inexperienced first time builder, but for others who have more knowledge and experience, who know what they require and what Greg will provide them with i.e. all the data required to build the hull they require. Geoff 2340 From: prairiemaidca Date: Sat Oct 18, 2003 11:43am Subject: Books on interiors.. Hi All: I'm wondering if I'm part of an online soap opera??/ Anyway I have some of the previously mentioned books and would like to recomend another that was given to me by a fellow sailor who built his own coast 34 out here on the prairie's and just passed away. This book is quite old and probably only to be found in used book stores but I find the info on building interiors to be very informative. Building your dream boat by Charles E. Wood.. Martin and Betty Forster (Prairie Maid) 2341 From: fmichael graham Date: Sat Oct 18, 2003 0:09pm Subject: Re: Re spreading the word It seems that there is a great deal of speculation as to what detail Greg goes into when supplying patterns, etc.. I would suggest that only Greg can tell us exactly what is and is not included. Then again, perhaps, this is better dealt with by any interested parties contacting Greg directly, rather than expending so much time by posting to this group. On the topic of the purchase of plans, patterns, etc., however, I do think that one must be cautious in how they spend their hard earned dollars & with whom. I have been fabricating steel structures from blueprints for more than 20 years and know that it can be as frustrating to the experienced fabricator to have insufficient plans as to the amateur builder. If one wishes to purchase plans, patterns, or even complete kits, it would be wise to ascertain exactly what is/is not included and, if unsure, ask "the local fab. shop" if these components constitute a complete set. Those who buy incomplete sets allow ignorance/ego to interfere in the process and will find - in most cases - that a designer willingly ensures that the builder has all that he/she requires to succeed on the project. Remember, designers want to build a reputation as "the best", not as "the missing link". Even those whom seem less concerned with "fame & fortune" - can I throw you in here, Brent? - have pride in their workmanship and name(I understand that if you build a boat to Mr. Swain's. plans, he comes and lives with you until the project is finished - maybe that's why his boats are built so quickly). Mike Graham 2342 From: Date: Sat Oct 18, 2003 2:18pm Subject: many thanks I'd like to thank the members of this group for the many public and private messages of support. We will continue to promote origami construction to the best of our abilities. No one designing for origami is ever going to get rich in this business. We do this out of a love of boating. I read a quote in the Financial Post yesterday that I think is appropriate: "Science progresses by searching for the best possible answers to the questions facing us. It does not stop at one answer, however convenient, and then stifle all further debate - else it ceases to be science and becomes a pseudo-religion" As has been noted in this group, there is very little overlap between what Brent is doing and what we are doing. Brent is developing designs optimized for the lowest cost construction. We are developing designs to meet the needs of people that want or need something different. Think of it this way. Brent's boats are like the Chevy Cavalier, they are a lowest cost option. However, not everyone wants a Cavalier. We are designing for people that want/need something like an Accord, SUV, or a 4x4. I don't see it as any part of a class struggle. With 100 million people killed over various "ism's" in the past century, we don't need to debate this issue. People buy different cars because they have different needs. It is the same with boats. What we call "value for money" means simply this: If spending an extra $1 in building a boat returns more than $1 in added value, then it makes sense to spend an extra $1. Our patterns return value for money, because they add more value to the final boat than they cost. Anyone that has designed for origami and taken the time to do the performance analysis knows how difficult it is to achieve a good design without a great deal of trial and error. Brent built multiple boats to arrive at the current design. How many builders could afford to take this risk using their own patterns? We do the trial and error on our computers, not during the building. This flexibility allows us to achieve some pretty interesting shapes, as can be seen on our website. Our patterns return a predictable, fair hull shape when scaled to full size. We do the necessary calculations to ensure that performance and strength of the final boat matches its intended service. Our patterns are not a substitute for boat building knowledge. Rather, they are an aid to the builder to achieve a great hull shape. We don't recommend our patterns to someone without boat building experience. If you are a first time builder, then you should have us, or another builder help you. As people on this site are aware, we provide plenty of free advice. However, this is not a substitute for professional help. We would like to offer a standard pattern for amateur builders. Probably a 40 foot, center cockpit, pilot-house design similar in appearance to the G55, that can be rigged for either sail or power. To make this happen we probably need 5-10 people to come forward. This would allow us to develop the plans, along with a set of building instructions, and spread the costs so that the prices would be comparable with a standard design. Anyone out there that is contemplating a boat in the 40 foot range, power or sail, that likes the look of the G55 might wish to contact us and see if there is sufficient interest for us to develop a standard 40 foot design. We would likely offer the boat in alloy - with a steel hull and alloy house an option. I personally feel this would be a great boat for a cruising couple, or a small family. Big enough to go anywhere in safety and comfort, yet not so big as to overpower the crew. We would structure the construction options in such a way that it would be suitable for a wide range of budgets, however we would likely design something more like a Honda Civic than a Chevy Cavalier. Rather than lowest cost, we would be aiming more for the best possible value for the $$ spent. Some will say that the Cavalier gives better value for the money, others will say the Civic. We could debate this forever, but why bother? Lets get on with building some boats! Greg Elliott Yacht Lazy Bones http://www.origamimagic.com 2344 From: fmichael graham Date: Sat Oct 18, 2003 4:46pm Subject: Re: many thanks Greg: I wish you the best of luck on your future endeavours with "origami" design and fabrication. Though I am not willing to finance your plan development, I will check your website prior to making the final decision on which designer's plans I will purchase and - who knows - maybe you will have a set of plans for a 40' steel-hull sailboat by then. When I joined this group, I had already considered design plans by; Roberts, Ganley, Bolt, Kasling, etc.. The most impressive steel-hulled sailboat that I had viewed, however, was a 30 footer, built by Brent Swain, according to it's owner. As one with practical experience in the steel industry and a long time mariner - both amateur & professional - I at once appreciated the vessel's quality construction. Upon joining this group, I discovered another impressive feature of Brent's boats, namely, the low cost of construction. To you this may be the Chevy Cavalier of boats. Then again, there are probably more Cavaliers on the road today - of any given vintage - than Cadillacs of the corresponding year. I think that, as Cavaliers and Caddys are sold from the same lots, there is enough room in this group for the discussion of more than one "brand" of boat design. I just hope that you are willing to "scale down the hard sell" in your messages so that it doesn't feel as if I just stepped onto the dealership's lot. I also hope that you understand that my support for steel over aluminum was not meant as a critique of your product. I suppose that the atmosphere in this group has changed, from one of building a high quality boat for the lowest price, to considering all options in the "origami" method. So be it. By the way, I assume that you are CWB certified and, therefore, a buyer will be assured of sufficient NDT on all weldments? The reason I ask is that I was shown a weld failure recently with a 3/16" diameter pocket(porosity) in 1/4" aluminum. The structure escaped testing in construction-phase and is now about $80,000 worth of scrap. Good luck, Mike Graham 2345 From: Date: Sat Oct 18, 2003 7:56pm Subject: Re: many thanks Stephen, I certainly meant no offence. My understanding is that Brent is designing for lowest cost, which is a design criteria for the Cavalier, which has made it one of the most popular vehicles on the market. The Cavalier is a great car - an engineering success beyond anything most boat builders can ever hope to achieve. Our boats have all been built with owner participation - they got their hands dirty. My purpose in the analogy was simply to explain how our markets differ. Greg Elliott Yacht Lazy Bones http://www.origamimagic.com 2346 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Sun Oct 19, 2003 2:23am Subject: Bulwark Caps While pulling the boat together, I have bent the bulwark cap pipes where the come-alongs were attached. What is the best way to put this right? For others, who may be pulling their boat together in the future, what is the best way to avoid it? Regards, Ted 2347 From: Mark K Date: Sun Oct 19, 2003 3:18am Subject: Thoughts on interiors I'm going to be posting a few of my thoughts on quick and simple interiors, in the hope that we might generate some novel solutions. Perhaps some of you have opinions or experiences to offer. The obvious approach to covering the interior of the hull and coachroof is to use some kind of panel materal. The thing I don't like about this approach is that it always requires lots of little moldings and trim pieces at panel joints and corners etc. Unless this is carefully thought out and executed with skill and care it winds up looking really cobby. I was thinking that one possible way to cover large areas like the coachroof is with fabric, in the manner of a headliner in a car. Fabric comes in large sizes, a wide variety of colors and textures and is relativly inexpensive. Fabric requires little supporting structure and can be readily formed around single curvatures. It can be tucked into corners and behind cabinets and shelves. It can be attached with adhesives and for concave areas like the coachroof, it might be held in place with a few hardwood battens screwed or clipped to the roof structure. Fabric used this way has the drawback that it doesn't provide a solid surface so it wouldn't be appropriate where people might be touching it or leaning on it. I was also thinking that if sheet foam insulation was used inside the coachroof rather than spray foam, it could provide a smooth surface over which fabric could be laid with adhesive. It would probably be best to use a smooth fabric or one with a random pattern for ease of installation. A fabric with a little stretch to it might help as well. It should also be easy to clean and resistent to staining, perhaps a waterproof fabric, or even something like naugahyde. In an emergency, for instance a hole in the hull, fabric can be cut away quickly to access the hull. Comments? - Markk 2348 From: ... Date: Sun Oct 19, 2003 7:25am Subject: many thanks Hi Greg, I hope I might have made some people see that what you are doing they can learn from, but I think it is sour grapes. (do you use that saying over there) > I'd like to thank the members of this group for the many public and private > messages of support. We will continue to promote origami construction to > the best of our abilities. No one designing for origami is ever going to > get rich in this business. We do this out of a love of boating. I think some people think you are making lots of money, but I know only too well how long it takes to get to this stage. > I read a quote in the Financial Post yesterday that I think is appropriate: > "Science progresses by searching for the best possible answers to the > questions facing us. It does not stop at one answer, however convenient, > and then stifle all further debate - else it ceases to be science and > becomes a pseudo-religion" Some have a very blinkered view, they don't see they can learn and benefit from your experience > I don't see it as any part of a class struggle. Some do, they see a big yacht and think that is for someone with money, they don't realize that the person buying the big yacht is actually subsidising the development program > Brent built multiple boats to arrive at the current design. I thought he must have done, being so far away it is not possible to find out about his mistakes or the hull which is not fair. > We do the trial and error on our computers, not during the building. This > flexibility allows us to achieve some pretty interesting shapes, as can be > seen on our website. Our patterns return a predictable, fair hull shape > when scaled to full size. I fear that the hulls built from some peoples orange peel will be disasters. > Our patterns are not a substitute for boat building knowledge. Rather, > they are an aid to the builder to achieve a great hull shape. We don't > recommend our patterns to someone without boat building experience. This is the point I was trying to get across to the people, not sure if I did! > We could debate this forever, but why bother? Lets get on with building > some boats! It appears that Colin is going to build a Wylow from his orange peel pattern or has someone converted to origami it for him? Has he got permission from the designer of the Wylow to use his design or is it in the public domain. I look forward to seeing more photos as you progress, I have learnt a lot from studying them. The hull design I am interested in would be a scaled down version of your 55 with a shallow draft and a lifting keel or centreboard, this would enable the yacht to sit in a mud berth. The place where I can keep my yacht has only 760mm 30" of water at high water. Keep up the good work, It might be an idea to start you own group so that the more enlightened can discuses developments, design and software which appears to be like a red rag to a bull to some people. Where are you building? if I visit my sister who lives in Vancouver I would like to visit you. Best wishes Geoff Cheshire England 2349 From: Joseph Smith Date: Sun Oct 19, 2003 10:56am Subject: Re: Thoughts on interiors Sounds like a good idea to me, been kicking it around myself for a while. You can get vinyl headliner material on sale now at www.sailrite.com, also a lot of other material available, 2350 From: Date: Sun Oct 19, 2003 0:27pm Subject: Re: Thoughts on interiors I have seen white PVC panels used with good results. Sometimes sold as door skins. Easy to shape and keep clean. Formica panels give a good result, but are harder to work with. A thin wooden molding strip between the panels makes a nice accent, and hides the seams. Fabric might be hard to keep clean. In general I have had good results with PVC. I use PVC pipe to protect the paint on steel pipes from anchors, chain, etc. Cheap and easy to work with. It gets brittle over time in the sun, but even in the tropics it lasts many years. We built a permanent sun shade over the back of the Lazy Bones using thick walled PVC pipe, fittings, and glue, lashed to the stanchions. Covered it with shade cloth. It has now been in service 10 years without incident, at a fraction of the cost and weight of doing it in stainless. The shade cloth keeps out the sun, but allows wind and rain to pass through, and has allowed the awning to remain in place through hurricane force winds. You can see a picture of the awning here: http://www.origamimagic.com/Design/Cruising/LB_Yard.htm Greg Elliott Yacht Lazy Bones http://www.origamimagic.com 2351 From: Jim Phillips Date: Sun Oct 19, 2003 2:40pm Subject: Re: Thoughts on interiors Mark, For the interior lining we roughly cut and installed plywood and then covered it with a thick cream-coloured carpet. This was mainly for the ceiling and the upper part of the interior walls. We used an industrial stapler to hold the carpet to the plywood while the glue dried. The overall method was cheap, quick and looked fabulous. (Often got jokes from other yachties about walking on a carpeted ceiling during a capsize.) Months later, while out cruising, we took out the staples with needle nosed pliers. Jim. 2352 From: alex_christie Date: Sun Oct 19, 2003 6:30pm Subject: Letter from Genoa 55 owner Dear group, The following is an interesting letter sent to me by Greg Janes, the owner of the new Genoa 55 being built in Cowichan Lake at the Origamimagic boatyard there. It turns out I met Greg Janes about 8 years ago when he was onboard his 48 foot wooden Herreshoff ketch CANDLEWIN in Comox -- it's a small world! The successful marriage of beauty and strength in that classic boat most certainly counted among the influences which would later sway my decision to become a shipwright at the turn of this century. His letter here offers for us a different perspective on Greg Elliot's boat design: "Hello folks! My first response on this forum, although I have been following the banter found here for some time and have enjoyed the exchanges amongst the various members. To introduce myself, it would suffice to say that I am the owner of the new vessel under construction at the Origamimagic yard in Lake Cowichan, the G55 or Genoa 55 in honor of my good lady of the same name. I had no intention of joining into the fray as it were between the Swainers and Mr.Elliot but I feel that Greg has been much misrepresented in his role as designer of heaven forbid, an actual alternative to what is available on the market for low cost boat builders/owners. I have been working with Greg Elliot and Ron Pearson for several weeks now on the construction of my new vessel, a 55 foot Bermuda class high performance cutter. I would like to point out that I came to this project with my eyes wide open. I have thousands of sea miles (over 50,000) on my present boat, a 48 foot Herreshoff ketch which I have owned for 27 yearsand which I constructed with George Brugom in the Comox Valley. I have hundreds of thousands of miles on commercial freighters, most in the capacity as master. I have worked on wood, steel and alloy vessels of all types. Big deal, I say as well. Just wanted to clarify that I am not a complete neophyte, trusting in the smooth talk of just another salesman. For several years I have been planning to change my cruising platform and after our last blast to Easter Is. and back via Ecuador and French Polynesia in 2000 to 2002. I approached Ron and Greg about moving on with my plans. I brought along the ideas and concepts for the kind of boat I wanted. I won't get into the pro's and con's of one design over another at this point but will say that I had already seen some of their work and was impressed. The plans I brought were quite a departure from the usual origami style and I was curious to see what they could do with them. At this point I was prepared to abandon the origami process and go "conventional" if need be. I feel that it is here that the two of them really shone. Within a very few short days a prototype model was made. With further consultation, this was refined (all on computer) and a few more models were made, a final one at 1/12 scale being made of alloy to give a fairer representation and to confirm the accuracy of the plan (more for my sake than Greg and Ron's I suspect). Over the next few weeks (seven) I was actively involved in the building process so had a chance to work closely with Greg and Ron and continue "to get my hands dirty" everyday. I can not state strongly enough the commitment that these two have given to the project. The level of expertise and dedication to researching the best techniques and materials and constant refinement of the process has never failed to impress me. My gal and I now have a beautifully faired, exceptionally strong hull exactly what we originally wanted. It is triple chine with no knuckles at the ends of the chines. It has a very impressive U-shaped bow and the big fat ass stern with sugar scoop that I asked for. I won't get into justifying that one here though. I also have complete stability information for the vessel as well as rig design, interior and the deck plan. Would anyone start a boat project without knowing exactly the boats angle of vanishing stability?! This is the difference in service. Greg and Ron offer the ability to take virtually any design concept and create an origami pattern for it. It is too bad that some take this as an afront to the concept of origami or even Brent Swains creations. They are indeed apples and oranges. I have helped construct a Brent boat with my brother-in-law and I have always been impressed with the simplicity and strength of the design. He has helped put alot of people out on the water that maybe wouldn't be able to otherwise. Everyone is right here, it shouldn't be seen as a contest, just an alternative and we are all learning. What ever it takes to get out on the water, that is a good thing. As someone once said, anyboat is a good boat! Our vessel is not for everyone, but the alternatives are out there. We would welcome any one from this forum for a tour of the shop if they care to contact us. Cheers, Greg Janes candlewin@h... 2353 From: darryl_marlene Date: Sun Oct 19, 2003 7:22pm Subject: Re: Thoughts on interiors --- I used a fabric over plywood in my Brent Swain 36 ,the fabric is called boat liner and is used in glass boats alot. you just glue it on and add trim where needed..It stands up great in the marine enviroment and is washable. I will have the boat in Nanaimo Dec & Jan if anybody wants to see it. Darryl S.V. Ikale Savary Island B.C. 2354 From: Mark K Date: Sun Oct 19, 2003 9:05pm Subject: Re: You've got a hull, now what? Thanks for the tips on the books, everyone. The local library had "Boat Joinery and Cabinetmaking Simplified", as well as Ferenc Mate's "From a Bare Hull" and "Finely Fitted Yacht", the latter two for reference only, but they looked interesting enough that I might buy them. Markk 2355 From: jim dorey Date: Sun Oct 19, 2003 11:14pm Subject: Re: Bulwark Caps loadbinder straps around the whole boat. 2356 From: fmichael graham Date: Mon Oct 20, 2003 0:52am Subject: Re: Thoughts on interiors Mark: I've read your post and the replies - so far - with great interest. I went through the hassle of insulating and panelling my "plastic" boat and hope that my contribution may be of some value. I should apologize in advance, as most of what I am about to write may be of the "obvious" nature and you may have considered all of this. 1) Prior to tearing my boat interior out, there was no insulation and only a bit of "boat liner", about the rear quarter-berth hullside. My first attempt was to use foam panelling under plywood. I thought I was the "genius" of boat interiors because it no longer "rained" inside my boat - for about a year. Oh, sure, the plywood showed some dampness - after the mahogany veneer began to fall off - but there were no significant raindrops falling on me as I slept(except where there were screws-no countersinking/dowel plugs). When I removed a panel, in the following year, to begin re-panelling with 1"x3" mahogany strips, I discovered that the foam panels had disintegrated and moisture had collected between the panels & hull/deckside. And so started renovation #2! 2) With any boat - especially metal-hulled/decked - "sweating" is an expected pain. I would caution against using any material-covering that does not breathe well. With metals, this is most important, as air circulation will help to dry the moisture on inner metal surfaces, reducing opportunities for the rust to set in(of course, the inner hull is painted, but moving air makes a big difference). Also, breathable fabric will allow warm, dry air to enter. With a wood interior, you will have to put in a lot of vents which - if you buy them instead of fabricate them - cost a bundle, even used. I would also caution against using the stuff that they use for motorhomes as they eventually rot and, with a boat, your dealing with salt water. Brent's suggestion to not cover the insulation where it isn't seen, sounds good, I was going to try that but I figured that the cupboard contents would beat the heck out of the insulation. I guess not. I hope there's something useful in all of this. I will build my first steel boat with a wood interior because it is warm and fairly dry, and I have masochistic tendencies. Good luck Mike Graham 2357 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Mon Oct 20, 2003 7:13am Subject: Re: Thoughts on interiors www.fairlierestorations.com has some photos of the interiors of the classic fife yachts that they restore. Some (See Sirius)are lined with wooden laths probably about 1¾" wide by ½" deep at ½" spacing. Behind them the hull interior is painted white. It gives a light and airy feel to the inside. I thought about doing something similar over painted blown insulation. Regards, Ted 2358 From: richytill Date: Mon Oct 20, 2003 4:36pm Subject: Re: interiors/fitting out at the wharf Ted, I am working on the interior. Good spray foam is surprisingly tough--as in 30 psi multiplied by contact surface area. This works out to litterally tons of adhesion. As Brent's book points out, once the foam is in, the bulkheads and firing strips stiffen up to the point you can hang further joinery with complete confidence. Once the latex paint (I sprayed a 5 gallon bucket of exterior on for next to nothing)is on you can walk around on it just like any floor. If I had to do it again I would put even more conduit in the foam to route wires and pipes. I plan to have fun doing the joinery. A pile of flawless douglas fir, yellow cedar and then some teak arrived here at the right moment. It came from various abandoned projects. When you fit out at the wharf people show up to chat--it consumes time but I find I learn a lot from the real old timers who built fish boats from what they had. One old timer who crewed whalers in the arctic has provided some rare insights into life aboard small craft in the high lattitudes. Some have stashes of material they are willing or anxious to sell. The stack of 1" X 4" fir was 32' long and had been sitting in a shed for 18 years to build a boat that never happened. Some people just give away wood to get rid of it. Fitting out in the water also gives the opportunity to watch the trim and the waterline. One other thing--it reminds you that boats move quite violently at times and should be fitted out accordingly. rt 2359 From: richytill Date: Mon Oct 20, 2003 4:40pm Subject: Re: Bulwark Caps Ted, have you welded the deck on yet--this reflects on your options for straightening the pipe? rt 2360 From: Date: Mon Oct 20, 2003 8:05pm Subject: origami power cat One of the stumbling points in building a boat can be the time required to build the interiors. There is no origami equivalent, and while the hull can go together very quickly, it can take quite a bit longer to achieve a "finished" interior. The basic problem is that the insides of a boat are "round". There are few square "walls" to fit to, thus traditional "square" construction as used in houses doesn't work. You can just go down to the local furniture store and buy a set of cupboards, a table or a bed and install them in a yacht. However, there is a possible solution for power boat enthusiasts. Mobile-home and trailers provide a pre-fabricated living space. Many of these are relatively light weight, and have furniture bolted down, being designed to be moved on wheels. Set on top of two origami hulls ("amahs"), the possibility exists to rapidly create a very comfortable, low cost power cat. While not intended for offshore, with proper attention to the size of the amahs, such a design could give very good performance in inshore waters. Power cats have a large share of the power boat market in OZ, where they are used extensively behind the Great Barrier Reef. When we were in Oz, we were asked to design origami hulls for power cats, but we didn't have the technology at the time. We now have the technology to design the hulls. We have a very similar conditions here in the Straights of Georgia, as well as in our many lakes and rivers. Perhaps it is time to consider origami power cats. Used mobile-homes and trailers can often be purchased very inexpensively. The layout is such that they are perfectly acceptable for cruising on a stable base such as a catamaran in relatively protected waters. Thick undercoating can be applied to the mobile-home prior to attaching to the hulls to prevent corrosion, with provision to repaint as required. Wives and significant others love the built in washer, dryer, stove, micro-wave, fridge, freezer, bath and full sized accommodations - it is just like living ashore. A huge improvement over the cramped quarters in many yachts. The amahs are long, narrow, semi-wave piercing, with room for thousands of gallons of water, fuel, and waste. The large capacity tanks are intended to allow extended cruising for weeks or months without re-supply. There is no living space intended in the hulls. The mobile home rides high above the waves, with access via stairs at the stern. The roof has a flying bridge or pilot house, sun deck and awning. The narrow cat hulls provide excellent fuel economy, and can be easily driven past 1.5 DWL, even when operating in displacement mode. They are not prone to rolling, which makes them a favorite will those prone to motion sickness. Amahs can be steel or alloy at the owners preference. Dual propellers ensure maneuverability. Engines can be in the hulls, or for low cost construction a diesel engine can salvaged from a front wheel drive vehicle and placed in a utility room at the rear of the mobile-home. One axle might drive the 120V genset. The other axle a hydraulic motor to power the propellers, dual anchors, and hydraulic davits. An alternative drive would be a long-tail, with a swivel for maneuverability. Full width davits at the stern can lift a good sized FG run-about with outboard. When not in use, the run-about is tied at the stern, between the hulls, alongside the stairs. In an emergency, the run-about will push the power cat from its stern tie-up position. Anyone interested in a power boat for inshore cruising might consider such a design. It is a bit "out there" but it is something we have talked about for many years. If we can get some interested parties we will do the designs and help as required to build them. With a bit of care the resulting boat would be very acceptable to the eye. Because the interiors are already done, such a boat could probably be completed by an amateur builder in a fraction of the time required to complete a mono-hull, likely provide much more living space for the $$ spent, and provide many years of comfortable cruising. It isn't for offshore, but for 95% of the people interested in a comfortable live-aboard and/or cruising power boat it would certainly fit the bill. greg elliott yacht lazy bones http://www.origamimagic.com 2361 From: Phillip Allen Date: Tue Oct 21, 2003 2:11am Subject: Brent's book do I still use the Laurel Dr. address? Two checks...$20Cd plus $10Cd...what is US amount for check? I think I remember something about Alex taking book orders for Brent's book??? Phillip in Arkansas 2362 From: Phillip Allen Date: Tue Oct 21, 2003 2:14am Subject: Disregard book question within 30 seconds of posting my question I found information...oh well :) 2363 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Tue Oct 21, 2003 2:15am Subject: Re: Bulwark Caps and timber Richard, I haven't welded the deck yet but have the fore deck in position and intend welding it this week. I have built a pipe bending frame about 3' wide to use with my hydraulic jack. This bends the bulwark pipe OK but it is very heavy to lift on and off and it tends to kink the pipe, put a smaller bend in it than the original one. I was wondering if other builders had a similar problem and found that when they welded the decks on it pulled the unwanted bends out of the pipe and trued it up ok. I have found sometimes that when I try to put distortion problems right that if I had left it subsequent operations would have corrected the problem anyway. I don't envy others but if I did I would envy you your sources of timber and chats with the old timers. We have just been given some old pallets, large ones 16' long that were used to transport plastic sheet. The wood mostly splits for a pastime and some of the serrated nails are impossible to extract so we have disassembled them using a 3" wide sharpened brick chisel which lessens the split wood and shears the nails quite easily. We have used the timber to make a set of stairs to access the deck as we are building it and will make staging so that we can store and work on things at deck height, a bit like a dry land wharf. Regards, Ted 2364 From: Mark K Date: Tue Oct 21, 2003 4:20pm Subject: Re: Thoughts on interiors Mike, I wasn't sure how extensive the condensation problem would be in an insulated boat. I thought that a lot of fiberglass production cruisers use the inside surface of the coachroof's cored laminate as the interior surface with a simple texturing applied. Perhaps what I was seeing was some sort of liner, though it felt really solid, or perhaps these boats are generally wetter inside than I thought. I'm speaking here of boats like the Catalina 350 which I recently had the opportunity to inspect. In any event your post underscores the need to avoid pockets between the foam and the hull where condensation could build up, as well as the need to provide air circulation behind the covering and to channel condensation down to the bilge while minimizing contact with wood and other vunerable materials in the interior. I think a waterproof fabric might help here given that it would have few seams and fasteners to leak. It seems that there are multitudes of things to consider when building a boat, but doing so beforehand will hopefully save time and effort in the end. - Markk 2365 From: richytill Date: Tue Oct 21, 2003 5:27pm Subject: Re: Bulwark Caps and timber Ted, your frame and jack should work OK. The trick with pipe is to make a shoe to fit on the jack ram to prevent kinks. I use a longditudinal, half (180 deg.) slice of pipe one size over to make the shoe. It should be possible to fair the bulwark cap to very fine tolerances with the hydraulic jack. We do this on railings and it works a treat. As for the wheight . . . sounds like you need some kind of a boom to hang a come-along on??? rt 2366 From: richytill Date: Tue Oct 21, 2003 5:53pm Subject: Re: welding fore-deck next week Ted: further thought. Typically, we would not weld any seam of a deck until the whole hull was fitted together and tacked evenly. There are some exceptions--welds that need to be done prior to bending, or, the sole plate of the keel for example. The vessel would then be welded all over in sequence so as to pull together evenly and avoid distortion, uneven stresses etc.. Perhaps you have a strategic reason for welding the fore-deck at this phase but generally it is best to leave every weld you can until all is tacked. Stitch welding deck beams etc. in the flat position would not be a concern here--big seams and fillets that pull are the issue. Many of us have learned from bitter experience the cost of welding too soon. Often, it is simply a case of being able to go back and adjust, correct or modify without having to cut the whole thing apart with the inevitable mess that follows; usually it is about the control of distortion. All the best with the deck. Have fun, rt 2367 SPAM 2368 SPAM 2369 From: paull01 Date: Tue Oct 21, 2003 8:55pm Subject: Re: Thoughts on interiors Here's a link to a 31 Swain for sale in S.F. with a nice looking interior. It looks like tongue and groove pine. http://www.yachtworld.com/boats/index.html.en Type in Brent Swain for the builder. Paul 2370 From: Mark K Date: Tue Oct 21, 2003 11:01pm Subject: Re: Thoughts on interiors Fabric or carpet over plywood or some other panel material could be a good way to go. The panels would support the fabric and the fabric would cover the joints in the panels. Have you ever had problems with dampness from sweating? Is your hull foamed? 2371 From: fmichael graham Date: Wed Oct 22, 2003 2:12am Subject: Re: Re: Thoughts on interiors Mark: I haven't seen the newer Catalina350, so I don't know whether or not it is insulated. Most production boats are not insulated, however, and - as you say - are sandwich construction for deck material. condensation is common and not a big deal if you only day-sail or go for short trips(weekenders). With metal, I would suggest that you would want maximum exposure to circulating air. Your insulation should absorb & distribute moisture to the "outer" surface(the boat's interior) as long as the insulation is not completely impregnable. From this "outer" surface, venting in your covering material aids in the evaporation of the moisture. You will always have a modicum of moisture. I think that this is where it would be valuable to have input from those in the group who do/did liveaboard - regardless of type of boat - as those of us whom have done so - such as myself - have all experienced the joy of waking up "on lake michigan", "in a rain forest". If Brent reads this post, perhaps he could share his experiences/opinion with us - as he has, apparently, spent much time living onboard his creations. You will find, Mark, that the most popular interior cushions of a boat are made of breathable material. This is not because they do not absorb moisture, but because they dry faster. Hey! how about material with a lot of those small diameter vents that they use in cockpit cushions? Still, any kind of wood is going to be the warmest. Of course, this is from the perspective of one whom lives on the west coast of Canada. Regards, Mike Graham 2372 From: Date: Wed Oct 22, 2003 2:21am Subject: Re: Re: Thoughts on interiors Fabric and carpet surface in general in the tropics can be a problem, as they can quickly develop mildew and similar problems in the hot, humid conditions. In general, surfaces that can be easily washed with soap/bleach are preferred. Wood or plastic. All fabric cushion covers and matresses should close with zippers or velcro, so that the fabric can be removed and laundered. If you use a kero stove, you should have a washable interior - the soot can build up slowly. Carpets on the cabin sole are not recommended for the tropics. They collect sand and moisture, and often develop a funky smell. Wood cabin sole, with a grate and sump at the bottom of the stairs to collect sand and water from people coming down the companionway would be my preferrence. Need not be fancy - just a watertight tray under a grate is sufficient. Wood or plastic for the walls and ceiling. Foam inside lockers can be just painted, unless the locker are for heavy/sharp equipment. greg elliott yacht Lazxy Bones http://www.origamimagic.com 2373 From: Date: Wed Oct 22, 2003 2:25am Subject: Re: Re: Thoughts on interiors The Lazy Bones is T&G yellow cedar throughout. Nice to look at. Run longitudinally, the seams give the illusion of space. It must be varnished regularly, and it weights quite a bit. Every pound of interior is a pound that cannot be loaded as cruising stores. Also, when used for a ceiling, the weight of wood can affect performance. T&G can be hard to repair, unless you cut the tongues. A couple of times I've taken out 10 boards to get at one. I'm never tried the following. It is just an idea that might be worth an experiment. As an alternative, I've always wondered if you couldn't follow behind as the foam was being sprayed on, and lay veneer or plastic pre-cut panels on top of the still curing foam, pressing so that the panels are well stuck. Place the panels edge to edge and you will have finished all the interior surfaces. Once the foam cures, glue your furnishings to these panels. greg elliott http://www.origamimagic.com 2374 From: Date: Wed Oct 22, 2003 8:40am Subject: Re: Re: Thoughts on interiors More on fabric and carpets. In the tropics, salt underlies the problem with fabric and carpets. People perspire when it is hot and humid and leave salt everywhere. Also, salt is carried on the breeze by wind and wave action, and finds its way below because cabins are left open for ventilation. Over time this salt builds up in fabric and carpets, where it attracts moisture. In the humid tropical climate this leaves fabrics and carpets feeling damp all the time, unless regularly laundered in fresh water, and can lead to mildew and similar problems, which will eat the fabric. In general, minimizing fabric and carpet surfaces minimizes this problem - wood and plastic surfaces can be quickly wiped clean of salt, and treated with bleach or similar as required. Fabric surfaces are required in the tropics for cushions and mattresses, to wick the sweat away from people for comfort and should be easily removable for regular laundering. Otherwise, their use should be minimized. Any exposed (painted) steel inside the cabin is also a problem in the tropics. Condensation on the steel can lead rapidly to the growth of mildew and similar. It doesn't harm the metal, but it can be unsightly, and a possible health risk. Spray foam as much as is practically possible, then finish with wood, plastic, or paint over. Others may have different experience. We spent many years living and cruising in the tropics and this reflects our experience and the experience passed to us by others. greg elliott yacht Lazxy Bones http://www.origamimagic.com 2375 From: jim dorey Date: Wed Oct 22, 2003 10:02am Subject: Re: Re: Thoughts on interiors kitty litter box. > Need not be fancy - just a watertight tray under a grate is sufficient. 2376 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Wed Oct 22, 2003 11:52am Subject: Re: welding fore-deck next week Richard, Thanks for your replies. When I said weld the fore deck I meant tack it. I have the bitter experience of my work distorting when welded. I could not get long sheets for the hull and had to weld two sheets together for each side. I went on a course and consulted welders and then welded them together and made a pig's ear of it. The second side side is better then the first so I am making progress. In order to hammer out some of the distortion I made a lead maul out of a 2" sched 80 pipe belled out at the business end with a ¾" Sched 10 pipe handle. It is held over a used tuna can, belled end down and filled with lead. It works well as it does not stretch the steel as an ordinary sledge hammer would. It lasts some time before the lead needs remelting into a new tuna can. I use it with a lead filled dolly on the other side. Regards, Ted 2377 From: mark_schlichting11 Date: Wed Oct 22, 2003 8:18pm Subject: Re: Thoughts on interiors As a liveaboard, I agree with Greg that carpet wouldn't be my recommendation for interior finish, especially overhead where soot and cooking odors are bound to get imbedded. Nagahide (a vinyl like material) over 1/4 ply is popular, but we used 2.25" wide, 1/4" thick red cedar, ship lapped to look like t&g, running fore & aft. It is a bit darker than white nagahide but looks nice and is easy to wash down. Being out of the sunlight and with no wear, the varnish holds up well too. As for hull insulation, as long as there is 1.5" spray foam insulation there is absolutely no condensation in our climate. Be sure not to leave any metal tabs or anything else welded to the hull uninsulated because the cold will transmit through the steel and the moisture from warm air inside will condensate on it. One area prone to condensation is the ports, especially when the fire dies out and boat cools down overnight. Be sure to create a sill which won't absorb water or delaminate. A grab rail/drip catcher works well to prevent water from draining off the sills and dripping onto your head while sitting on the settees. We skinned the whole interior with 1/4" ply because when the boat is empty it is quite easy to cover large areas with almost full sized sheets and then you have full flexibility to attach your furniture anywhere you want on the plywood. For me, cutting small pieces of ply to fit between the furniture sounded more time consuming than just doing it all. Using the spray foam to attach the wood will not work because it dries hard enough to stand on in seconds - amazing stuff! Mark S. "Costa Vida" Shearwater, BC 2378 From: Mark K Date: Wed Oct 22, 2003 10:49pm Subject: Re: origami power cat How about a scow schooner instead? http://www.nps.gov/safr/local/alma.html These craft used to be the cargo workhorses around here (San Francisco) hauling all manner of things around the bay and up the Sacramento river. They must have been reasonably sea-worthy as the winds and currents in the Bay can get pretty exciting at times. I'm not sure whether the scow hullform really lends itself origami construction, but it's simple nontheless. - Markk 2379 From: Date: Thu Oct 23, 2003 0:14am Subject: Re: Re: Thoughts on interiors Marine parts generally mean expensive. We use automotive and RV parts as much as possible to cut costs. The Lazy Bones had an RV stove for 10 years, with a home made gimbal. Worked fine with a heavy steel plate bolted to the bottom, for a small fraction of the cost of a marine stove. 10 years is a good lifetime for a marine part. We continue to use a 3-way RV freezer with great success. No moving parts. We get 2 months refrigeration from a 20lb propane tank, and the waste heat from the freezer heats our hot water. greg elliott http://www.origamimagic.com 2380 From: Date: Thu Oct 23, 2003 1:04am Subject: Re: Re: Thoughts on interiors Origami allows rapid construction of hulls, but there is no equivalent process for the interiors. RV's provide ready made, light weight interiors. Is there a way that an RV can be used to make a boat interior? RV's share many parts in common with boats, and used RV's can be quite inexpensive, especially as you do not need one that is road worthy. One option is to convert an RV to an origami power boat, as per my article "origami power cats". However, many people want sail. For those contemplating building a larger sailboat - say greater than 8 foot beam, install round tracks inside the hull athwartwhips - angle iron is fine. Now install an 8 foot wide travel trailer inside the hull with small nylon wheels athwartships to fit on the tracks - dolley wheels are fine. Instant interiors, and they are gimballed to boot! No matter how much the boat heels, everyone inside rides level. Whatever the angle of heel, the trailer will roll level. You wife and/or partner will love it. No matter how rocky the anchorage, everyone will get a good night's sleep. You can survive a knock down or roll over and not even spil your drinks. Install a round door in the companionway to permit access to the interior as it swings. greg elliott http://www.origamimagic.com 2381 From: Date: Thu Oct 23, 2003 1:56am Subject: Poor man's blue poly crusier Many people have asked how to build a boat from the blue ploy drums. This article describes such a process. First you need parts. Buy a used camper van or RV. Find one with worn out tires, brakes and suspension so that it is cheap. It doesn't need to be road worthy, as long as the engine runs ok. Get a rear wheel drive vehicle. Cruise control would be great but not necessary. Check the vehicle registration for the Gross Vehicle Weight (lbs). Divide this by 250, and buy this number of blue poly (55 gallon) drums. Get an even number of drums. For a 5000 lb van, you would buy 20 drums. If you can't find blue poly, steel drums are fine. Divide the drums into two groups. Heat weld the drums together, end to end, into two "hulls". Make sure everything is watertight. Place these two 'hulls side by side, approximately 10 feet apart. Lash steel pipes or strong timbers athwartships, across the top of the drums, to make a raft. Drive the van onto the raft, so that it faces the same direction as the hulls, and sits between the hulls. Lash the vehicle to the raft. Remove the tires from the vehicle, but leave the rims. Tie a rope to each tire - these are your fenders to use while docking. In a storm you can drag them behind to slow you down. Simpler than anchoring. On the front rims, weld two 1/4" steel plates, approximately 1x4 feet, facing fore and aft. Weld the 1 foot side to the rim, and let the other end fall into the water under its own weight. These are your rudders, and they will kick up if you hit a log or other obstacle, or if you need to beach the boat. On the rear rims, weld steel blades across the rims, of sufficient size that they reach the water, but do not hit the wheel wells. You may need to adjust the height of the rear axle for this to work properly. These are your paddle wheels. Take the time to make sure they are reasonably balanced. If you are mechanically inclined, skip the paddles and drop the rear end - weld a propeller directly to the end of the drive shaft to make a longtail. You are just about ready. Get some lifejackets, paddles, bucket, and a cell phone wouldn't be out of order. Fuel up the van, beer and bait, some tunes in the 8-track and you are ready for a day's fishing on the lake. Led Zeppelin comes to mind. If you didn't get cruise control, you also need a brick for the gas pedal. Offshore passages not recommended. greg elliott http://ww.origamimagic.com 2382 From: ... Date: Thu Oct 23, 2003 4:21am Subject: Re: Re: Thoughts on interiors Greg, Will you be offering a roll compensating salon in your 55? An interesting idea, but like many attempts to reduce the motion of ships it has been tried in an early steam ship, they tended to roll badly and make the passengers sick. But the motion of salon which was built into the ship in this way was worse than motion of the ship, making the passengers sick sooner, it was reported that nobody was able to stay in the salon for long, what was probably required was some form of damping but at that time it was not possible to build stabilizing systems, in the end the salon was fixed solid to the ship. Geoff 2383 From: greenguy2ca Date: Thu Oct 23, 2003 7:07am Subject: Interior In Voyaging on a Small Income, Annie Hill used melamite for interior coverings. Would appreciate any comments about this material. Thanks.. Gary 2384 SPAM 2385 From: lon wells Date: Thu Oct 23, 2003 8:46am Subject: Re: Poor man's blue poly crusier it works!!! http://onenews.nzoom.com/onenews_detail/0,1227,208282-1-9,00.html 2386 From: Date: Thu Oct 23, 2003 10:35am Subject: Re: Re: Thoughts on interiors I can confirm that the G55 owner has recently bought a trailer, though I can't confirm that it will be used in the G55 interior. Here on the coast both the Haida Monarch and the Haida Brave have gimballed interiors. My inspiration came from reading Chitchester's account of his gimballed chair and table. Electric motors attached to the dolley wheels can be used to generate power as the boat rolls, and can be used to dampen any undue motion, similar to damping a wind generator. :) greg elliott http://www.origamimagic.com 2387 From: Date: Thu Oct 23, 2003 10:54am Subject: Re: Poor man's blue poly crusier it works!!! The design is now proven for offshore! 2388 From: Don Taylor Date: Thu Oct 23, 2003 2:16pm Subject: Re: Thoughts on interiors I was thinking of buying T&G hardwood flooring (which can be had for not a bad price for some very nice wood) and using a thickness planer to remove the bottom 1/3 of the wood so that you are left with a ship lap joint instead of a T&G. Ship lap boards can be removed without cutting tongues or removing multiple boards. Don. 2389 From: svmoonraven Date: Thu Oct 23, 2003 5:44pm Subject: keels number of last time i painted it(them) i only had one! 2390 From: Mark K Date: Sat Oct 25, 2003 7:26pm Subject: Interior wood Now that we've established the potential dampness of the interior of a boat, I'm wondering how well can I expect wood to hold up inside the boat? Should I limit myself to particular types of wood? Where I would use plywood, should I be using marine plywood, or would less expensive grades be sufficient? Would I need to fill and seal the edges? What about glues, nails, screws and finishes? What about long term care and maintence? Sorry for all the questions, but as I've said I really not a wood kind of guy. My woodworking experience is limited to trimming out a house I remodeled some years ago. - Markk 2391 SPAM 2392 From: brentswain38 Date: Sun Oct 26, 2003 9:03am Subject: Re: Interior wood I never worried about any special treatment of wood inside a seel boat and have had little trouble in twenty years in my present boat. With a steel boat well insulated things stay pretty dry, much dryer that boats made of other materials.I have had a bit of delamination of cheap pannelling where water drips on the back of pannelling near the chimney and where wiring goes thru the deck , and my plywoood floor has rotted in one spot from bilge dampness. Any new flooring I'll epoxy tar on the underside, and I'll epoxy tar on the backside of any plywood panelling I put in in future. Brent Swain 2393 From: brentswain38 Date: Sun Oct 26, 2003 9:05am Subject: Re: Thoughts on interiors Avoid oak flooring as it turns black in a few years and the black penetrates right through it, impossible to remove. Brent Swain 2394 From: brentswain38 Date: Sun Oct 26, 2003 9:11am Subject: Re: Thoughts on interiors Many years ago I read about an engineer who was singlehanding across the Atlantic. He made up a copy of a self winding watch system using a pendulum hooked up to a generator . He ended up with so much power that he had to keep the pendulum tied off most of the time to avoid overcharging his batteries.This idea warants further research as it may well turn out to be an excellent source of power at sea. The surplus centre in Lincoln Nebraska has permanent magnet motors which make good generators for this and wind generator use. Brent Swain 2395 From: brentswain38 Date: Sun Oct 26, 2003 9:16am Subject: Re: Thoughts on interiors My current RV stove, the cheapest available Magic Chef is still going strong after 20 years,and several Pacific crossings, no problems.The top rusted out so I made a new top out of stainless, but the rest is OK.There is no way I could justify spending ten times as much on an expensive "Marine" stove costing ten times as much. Brent Swain 2396 From: brentswain38 Date: Sun Oct 26, 2003 9:27am Subject: Re: welding fore-deck next week If I blew it on the midships seam, I'd be inclined to cut it and do it again, with lots of plate on edge tacked across the seam every 4 inches or so to stop it from ridging. The welds would have to be small uphand welds with 1/8th inch 6011, welding 2 inches at a time and letting it cool before welding next to it, doing a couple of 2 inch welds outside, then a couple inside , back and forth until it was done. With short plates I put a good bevel on the inside and do the inside weld with the plate flat on the ground, with lots of plate on edge tacked across the seam to keep it flat. When the hull is up, I grind to the inside weld from the outside with a 1/8th inch cutting wheel , then do small 2 inch uphand 6011 welds , a little at a time.Keep these welds tiny. I've had no problem with distortion this way. Brent Swain 2397 From: Date: Sun Oct 26, 2003 9:33am Subject: Re: Interior wood Exterior grade wood as used in houses can be acceptable for the interior of a boat, at a fraction of the cost of tropical hardwoods. In general use wood species that are rot resistant, light weight and strong enough for the job they doing. Locally, cedar or redwood over Doug fir might be a good choice for the interior. Exterior grade plywood is usually acceptable for the interiors. Do not use interior grade ply because the glue may not be waterproof. Usually if the glue is a light color, it is not waterproof. You only need to pay for a finished side if it will show. Use exterior grade paint and/or varnish to keep out moisture and minimize checking. End grain especially should be treated. You can apply a stain before varnishing, to simulate the look of tropical hardwoods. True tropical hardwood can be reserved for the trim and accent pieces. SS and hot dipped galvanized can be used as fasteners, backed by waterproof glue. SS is preferred in bilge or inaccessible areas. Galv should be protected with paint or wooden plugs. Nickel or zinc plated steel fasteners should be avoided if possible, because they can corrode much faster than hot dipped. Be cautious of bronze and brass because of galvanic reactions with steel. On the Bones the interior was roughed out in ply and doug fir, and then covered with redwood and/or white paint, with yellow cedar ceilings, and mahogany trim. SS fasteners were used to install the floors and fairing strips, with galv and glue used to join the woodwork. The fasteners were recessed and covered with wooden plugs where visible. Greg Elliott Yacht Lazy Bones http://www.origamimagic.com 2398 From: fmichael graham Date: Sun Oct 26, 2003 11:12am Subject: Re: Interior wood Mark: Two thoughts; use marine grade plywood and paint/seal both sides; always use screws - not nails. I would recommend stainless screws with "Robertson" (square) heads. Mike 2399 From: Date: Sun Oct 26, 2003 2:10pm Subject: Re: Interior wood More. It is a good idea to paint wood before installation, especially on the hidden side, except where you need to leave a spot exposed to apply glue. For most applications, a good exterior grade one part household enamel (oil based) should be sufficient. Thin the first coat heavily to aid in penetration, then add a second coat to finish. For the most part I prefer to use one part, oil based paints on wood. They are simple, cheap, and do a good job of keeping out water. Fresh water is in some ways more dangerous inside a boat than salt water, as it promotes rot and in the tropics it can lead rapidly to termites. Any place that fresh water (rain) can enter should be sealed or controlled, and steps taken to prevent fresh water from contacting the wood. I typically seal wood that is regularly exposed to water with a layer of epoxy resin and matt on the wet side. On the Bones I replaced a couple of the metal hatches with wooden hatches as a safety precaution. I didn't want any fingers cut off by metal hatch covers. I covered the wood hatches with epoxy resin and FG matt, and painted over with epoxy paint. They continue to perform without any problem. The first set of wooden hatches I made I simply covered with epoxy paint, but the paint developed minute cracks, and they eventually rotted due to rain. The battery boxes on the Bones were originally plywood inside a metal frame, covered with epoxy paint on the inside. These suffered a similar fate. The epoxy paint developed cracks, and overflow acid from heavy charging eventually ate out the battery boxes, and didn't do the bilges any good either. These I rebuilt with resin and FG matt over ply, with epoxy paint over, and they continue to work well, even though many times being exposed to acid. Baking soda can be poured inside the battery box to help neutralize any acid that might spill. Make sure your batteries are tied down. In a pinch, epoxy resin and FG matt can also be used to repair steel. Grind down to good metal, paint on the epoxy resin, lay on the matt, and then smooth and work out the air bubbles with more resin. Epoxy paint over to finish. I did some of the heavy wear points around the anchor in this fashion 6 years ago - areas that I normally had to touch up every year - and they have not needed repainting since. I also removed and repaired a porthole that had badly rusted, and covered the entire area with epoxy and matt on both sides of the steel. The repair shows no further signs of rusting after 6 years. The advantage of epoxy is that it sticks chemically and lasts for years in the can. Polyester is cheaper, but it only sticks mechanically, and soon kicks off on its own in the tropics. Greg Elliott Yacht Lazy Bones http://www.origamimagic.com 2400 From: prairiemaidca Date: Sun Oct 26, 2003 3:32pm Subject: interiors Hi All: Has anyone ever seen any of the laminate flooring products used in a boat. We have a pergo laminate in our house and I used a large lag bolt on a piece of scrap just to see how scratch resistant it really was. It took a great deal of effort to produce any mark on it! I was wondering if a cabin sole of laminate glued down to a marine grade plywood would create a nice looking sole without the work and cost of say the traditonal teak and holly. Martin and Betty (Prairie Maid) 2401 From: Don Taylor Date: Sun Oct 26, 2003 4:09pm Subject: Re: Thoughts on interiors I have seen this on red oak, but what about white oak which has traditionally been used in wooden boat construction? Around here it is also cheaper than red oak. DOn 2402 From: Don Taylor Date: Sun Oct 26, 2003 4:18pm Subject: Re: Interior wood - hold off for a while on the plywood? I was visiting the local building centre to buy some plywood for the house. I wanted 5/8" but was told they did not have any and furthermore they were not going to buy any until the price came down again. He would have to charge me over cdn$80 per sheet to cover his costs. Why is the price of plywood skyrocketing? The US Army has ordered almost every sheet available in North America for shipping to Iraq. I did not believe this at first, but I got the same story from the local wood mill. Don. 2403 From: Phillip Allen Date: Sun Oct 26, 2003 4:19pm Subject: Re: Re: Thoughts on interiors There are two basic types of oak; red and white. One requires two years for its acorns to mature and the other requires one. Red oak is poor construction for exterior anything and white oak may be used for fence posts which last for years. I plan on using white oak for construction if I manage to get that far. I will assume the attitude that anything on a baoat IS exterior. Phillip Allen 2404 From: smitty97006 Date: Sun Oct 26, 2003 9:54pm Subject: Re: Interior wood Hello Greg, I am particularly interested in your experience with covering steel with epoxy and mat. Do you think this might have application in new boat construction wherein the steel would be covered in this manner, both inside and out as a long term prevention to rust and electrolisis etc. Thank you for your thoughts, Gene Smith 2405 From: fmichael graham Date: Mon Oct 27, 2003 0:00am Subject: Re: Re: Interior wood - hold off for a while on the plywood? Don: I hear you! I bought some property in the Prince George area during the summer and went up there to build a small cabin. In one month the price of 3/8" plywood went up $10 ! So I stopped! guess I showed them, eh? I was told a multitude of tales, including; "It's because of the forest fires", "It is because of the local mill shut-downs, we ship the raw logs to the U.S. and we'll be buying most of our plywood from down south, now" (I'm not touching that one!), and; " construction is booming!". I guess I'll have to use fencing panels! Mike 2406 From: Don Taylor Date: Mon Oct 27, 2003 5:40am Subject: Re: Interior wood This technique was tried back in the '60s and '70s. There is an example rusting away in the back of our yard. The glass and epoxy (maybe polyester?) has separated from the steel allowing water to get in and be trapped. Expanding rust pushes the coating off even further allowing more water in. She looks very sad. Don. 2407 From: Don Taylor Date: Mon Oct 27, 2003 5:48am Subject: Re: Interior wood - hold off for a while on the plywood? I did a bit more research on this topic and it seems that plywood prices are quite seasonal. I plan to try again in Jan-Feb when house building activity slows down. It turns out that the US Army did buy quite lot of plywood for constructing barracks in IRAQ, but the total amounted to 3 hours of NA plywood production. Don. 2408 From: Don Taylor Date: Mon Oct 27, 2003 6:23am Subject: Re: interiors - use of laminate flooring I have considered this stuff too. I have laid a laminate floor in a house and really like it. There are a couple of potential problems with using it in a boat: 1) It is supposed to be floating on an underlay because it expands and contracts with heat and needs to move. Maybe if it cannot move then it will crack - it does not look as if it would be compressible like wood. However, the biggest area on a boat is quite small compared to a house floor so the expansion would be relatively small. 2) It is not supposed to be used in continuously wet areas. Most laminates are not recommended for bathrooms. However, I dumped some samples (cheap IKEA flooring) in a bucket of water for a week and they seemed OK afterwards. I suspect that if you sealed the outer edges after installation and filled any joint gaps with wax then you would be ok. Alternatively, the only parts that would allow water in is the edges of the planks, maybe they could be sealed with thinned down epoxy or deck sealer (Thompson's?) before installation. The T&G version of the stuff probably would not fit together after this treatment, but I think that the snap together version would still work. A friend's boat has a counter top made from cheap laminate flooring and it has stood up well over time - and she is a serious cook. They plan to do their cabin sole in the stuff. Don. 2409 From: Mark K Date: Mon Oct 27, 2003 4:15pm Subject: Re: interiors - use of laminate flooring I've used pergo in a house as well. The idea behind this type of flooring is that once glued up it forms a monolithic floor covering that is impervious to water from the top. Once the floor is laid you seal the edge to the wall or cabinets with silicone. It's a great idea for houses where the water is likely to come from above, but the edges and bottom are not waterproof. If the bottom and edges could be sealed, it might be useable, but I think it's advantages in a home environment would be wasted in a boat. I'm also a little concerned about how slick it can be. It is quite smooth and unless you are wearing appropriate shoes, it can be slippery, though this could be said about other wood floors depending on how they are finished. Does anyone have any ideas or comments on materials and finishes for cabin soles? A traditional wood plank sole looks nice, but looks like it could be complicated and expensive. I saw an interesting idea once in a fiberglass head where they bonded thin strips of teak to the fiberglass like planks with the fiberglass showing between them like a seam. I thought it looked pretty good and could be relatively easy to implement on a plywood sole in a metal boat. - Markk 2410 From: brian vezina Date: Mon Oct 27, 2003 6:37pm Subject: Perkins engine for sale I have a 50HP Perkins 4.108 diesel engine for sale. It is still in my 36' Brent boat and can be seen in operation. It has about 500 hours on it since it was rebuilt. A steal at $2100. Located in North Vancouver, Mosquito creek marina. E-mail Brian at brian.waterman@t... 2411 From: candle032000 Date: Mon Oct 27, 2003 7:20pm Subject: flooring Thirty years ago I laid the floors on my old wet-bilged wooden ketch using run of the mill plywood(half inch) with an overlay of 9/16th teak and maple. The maple strips stand proud of the teak by about a quarter of an inch to give excellent grip in wet heavy sailing conditions. Since the cheap maple takes the major wear, one could use fir or red cedar just as easily in place of the teak. Gives a very shippy and functional surface that has lasted almost three decades. I have never had a problem with any interior ply, just keep it dry. Incidently, I laid the cabin sole down in roofing tar then fastened it down with nails and plugged the countersunk holes. I would use screws next time and maybe a cheap mono-caulk from the local builders in lieu of the roofing tar. Cheers Greg Janes 2412 From: Date: Mon Oct 27, 2003 7:23pm Subject: Re: Re: Interior wood Hi Gene, The maximum area I have covered at one time is about 2 sq foot, using epoxy, with matt over - and this is the exception. I would be very reluctant to try this on a full scale boat without a lot of testing. I would think that polyester has no hope of working in this application, and that epoxy only works if the steel has been roughed up to provide a "tooth", similar to blasting. I typically use 16 grit flexible disks to prep steel for paint/epoxy repairs, which are usually the coarsest I can find. I see the epoxy matt technique more of a repair for damaged steel, in problem areas where repeated grinding and painting has not yielded a satisfactory result, or corrosion has perforated the steel, and where blasting/fabrication is not available/practical. I have only used this technique on the decks, cabin and rails, and I would not trust it underwater. Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com 2413 From: Date: Mon Oct 27, 2003 8:54pm Subject: Re: flooring Hi Greg The floor of the Lazy Bones is almost identical to what you describe, except Ron used doug fir instead of teak, screwed and glued with epoxy. Looks great, low cost and has stood 20+ years of service, almost exclusively in the tropics. As you note, a traditional floor does not have to use expensive wood. Just alternate hard and soft woods, so that the harder wood stands proud. Our previous factory boat had "teak and holly" ply, which is really just a plywood veneer colored to look traditional. Totally useless. Any time the boat was heeled and someone came below wet, it was like trying to walk uphill on an ice rink. It was plain dangerous, and required a coat of varnish and sand to correct. We did have one piece of ply delaminate over a period of years in the tropics, even though it was kept dry. It was the only piece of ply on board with white glue. All the other pieces had black glue, and were not a problem. I don't know if this problem was specific to the glue, plywood, or years spent in hot, humid weather, or it is simply a problem with plywood in Asia. Since then I have always bought ply with black glue, and have not had any further problems. One boat we cruised with bought some ply in Asia, and after they got it installed as a new berth, rain leaked in a hatch, and the new ply sprouted orange colored fungi over large areas, so maybe it was just the local product. greg elliott 2414 From: brentswain38 Date: Mon Oct 27, 2003 10:05pm Subject: Re: Interior wood Aluminium hatches weigh far less than wooden hatches ( as long as you don't do what one client did and bolt enough decorative gumwoood to them to make them as heavy as steel) and are far less likely to dammage fingers. The are also light years better than wood hatches and usually cheaper. They are far less maintenance.Wood is probably the worst material you could use for hatches, for reasons mentioned in my book. Some people have been covering the area from the anchor winch to the bow roller with fully welded 1/8th inch stainless plate during the building stage with good results.Others lay down rubber conveyor belting there with a hole cut out for the mooring bit with good results. Brent Swain 2415 From: brentswain38 Date: Mon Oct 27, 2003 10:10pm Subject: Re: Interior wood All plywood made in BC uses the same glue whether marine grade or not.This is not the case in the US where they consider the high quality of Canadian plywood to be an unfair trade practise, and want us to lower our standards to their virtual non-standards.The horrendous price of marine grade plywood makes it's use throughout a boat rather foolish, and unjustfiable in Canada. Brent Swain 2416 From: brentswain38 Date: Mon Oct 27, 2003 10:13pm Subject: Re: Thoughts on interiors Both red oak and white oak turn black all the way through once the water hits it. Brent Swain 2417 From: Date: Tue Oct 28, 2003 8:41am Subject: hatches Does anyone have some good metal hatch designs, simple to build, with lips that can't cut, that also seal well, while maintaining a low profile on deck? Aside from weight, it is the edges in metal hatches that create such a hazard to fingers. It just takes one child (or adult) to accidentally drop a metal hatch on their hand to create a disaster. Posting some good design to this site could save someone from grief down the road. I've seen many different ideas over the years, but never one that seemed to solve all the problems. thanks, greg elliott http://www.origamimagic.com 2418 From: brentswain38 Date: Tue Oct 28, 2003 10:24am Subject: Re: hatches I've been using the hatches described in my book for the last 27 years and have no complaints whatever. They are light, as watertight as the lid on a pressure cooker and totally mainteneance free.They make it far easier to get safely in and out of the boat in a hurry than the grossly outdated traditional arrangement, and are far more watertight. The aluminium forehatch feels almost as light as a piece of cardboard,far too light to cause any serious bodily injury. For the mainhatch the latch stops it from slamming totally shut without an extra ,deliberate effort to lift the latch to close it. On the hinge side I put a grabrail just inside to eliminate the temptation to gram the hatch frame.The aluminium main hatch is also far lighter than any of the alternatives. Brent Swain 2419 From: put_to_sea Date: Tue Oct 28, 2003 10:32am Subject: Pendulum electrical generation I found this post to be thought provoking. Brent, can you give us any leads on where you might have read this. In my opinion, if this worked it would sure beat most of the alternative electrical generation systems. Does anyone have any thoughts on this? I also posted some questions on this subject in the electric boats list. Amos 2420 From: Thomas Martin Date: Tue Oct 28, 2003 11:07am Subject: Re: Digest Number 622 Is it possible to get stainless steel gas piston supports, similar to automobile hatch back supports, that could be used as hatch supports that would close slowly. They could also hold the hatch in the full open position, as well as preventing possible injury. Tom Martin 2421 From: put_to_sea Date: Tue Oct 28, 2003 11:52am Subject: Re: Digest Number 622 I was thinking about possibly using a spring on the hinges just to keep the hatch from slamming down with full force. 2422 From: Mark K Date: Tue Oct 28, 2003 0:05pm Subject: Re: Digest Number 622 Counterweighting the hatch would be a good solution if it could be accomplished without the weight protruding into the cabin when the hatch was open. 2423 From: Date: Tue Oct 28, 2003 0:05pm Subject: Re: Digest Number 622 Pistons, springs, and similar forms of counter-balancing are used on many commercial hatches, and are a good solution, except that they are an added cost/complication. I'm hoping that someone along the way has seen a really brilliant, simple alternative. My concern is that even on a super light alloy foredeck hatch, if it falls, a 1/8 " metal edge at speed can/will cut off a child's fingers. I have seen some designs that widen and round the edges, so that it will crush rather than cut, which is an improvement, but still I'm hoping someone has an alternative. Children are a challenge while cruising. If there is a way for them to cut off fingers with a hatch, they will find it. Maybe not their own fingers, but their friends and siblings for sure. thanks, greg 2424 From: fmichael graham Date: Tue Oct 28, 2003 0:40pm Subject: Re: hatches Could not one use automotive door trim around the hatch edge? This, combined with the light weight of aluminum, might be one solution. Mike Graham 2425 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Tue Oct 28, 2003 4:16pm Subject: Re: hatches We use EPDM or nitrile edging strip on the doors of acoustic housings. There are many different sorts; the one we use has a 'U' that is a push fit over the edge of the 2mm steel door and has a hollow tube with ears that compresses as the door is closed. We buy this by the metre from a company that sells hinges and door catches etc for use in industrial enclosures. We also use a push fit nylon 'U' edging strip around the edge of the steel shelter roof over outdoor control enclosures to save tall folks splitting their heads open. Any of these should provide some protection for little fingers. It would be useful to have a spring or rubber stopper that the hatch hit just before it closed thus holding it open unless the catches were locked closed. This would stop the hatch lid trapping fingers and also allow one to see at a glance that a hatch was not secured to go to sea. Regards, Ted 2426 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Tue Oct 28, 2003 4:21pm Subject: Cockpit lockers Many sail boats of my aquaintance have one or more seats in the cockpit that open up to reveal a locker for storing fenders, mooring ropes, buckets etc. What are the views on building these very useful lockers in origami boats? Regards, Ted 2427 From: Mark K Date: Tue Oct 28, 2003 10:40pm Subject: Re: hatches How about a torsion spring like one might find supporting the lid on a pickup truck tool box? Those springs are nothing more than a bent steel rod. - Markk 2428 From: Date: Wed Oct 29, 2003 0:18am Subject: Re: Re: hatches what do they look like - can they be adapted? thanks, g 2429 From: Mark K Date: Wed Oct 29, 2003 2:18am Subject: Re: hatches Hmmm... It's actually a little tricky to describe even though it's very simple. It's actually quite clever in its simplicity. Basically the spring itself is like a sway bar on a car except that the ends aren't both bent in the same direction. There are a lot of different ways to do this, here's one: Take a steel rod that is a a bit longer than your hatch is wide. Open the hatch all the way and lay the rod along the hinge side inside the hatch. Bend one end of the rod 90deg, place it so the bent end lies along the hatch carling and attach the bent end to the carling with something like a hinge strap (the bar needs to twist slightly in it's mount). Bend the other end 90deg so it lies parallel to the open hatch and attach it to the hatch with a similar strap. Now try close the hatch. It should spring back and pop you in the jaw. Depending on how far your hatch opens, you may need to loop the torsion bar back and attach both ends on the same side rather than on the opposite sides to increse the bar's effective length and lower its spring rate. I hope my description makes sense. - Markk 2430 From: sabbdiesel Date: Wed Oct 29, 2003 7:42am Subject: 2JHR sabb diesel 30hp Hello I have a 2JHR sabb diesel. Anyone with info on this engine or any thought,s whatever please feel free email me. Al Jackson 2431 From: Len den Besten Date: Wed Oct 29, 2003 11:49am Subject: Re: Pendulum electrical generation It sure is promising, patented by seiko as a kinetic generator perhaps ? I expect the energy-consumption of a crystal/lcd-watch can be dealt with but say a constant 4-6 Ah this would take a few "horses".... In Holland we would post messages like this around the first of april. Just my 2 cts worth... Len. 2432 repeat posting 2433 repeat posting 2434 From: Dale J. Robertson Date: Wed Oct 29, 2003 0:23pm Subject: Re: Pendulum electrical generation 4A @ 13.8V = 55W a little more than 1/14th HP at 746 watts per HP. Dale R. 2435 From: Len den Besten Date: Wed Oct 29, 2003 2:29pm Subject: Re: Pendulum electrical generation That may be correct but how about the mechanical friction/loss in the pendulum / connection to a dynamo of any kind ? What do you think as a typical value for that and how do you take that in account ? And how many joules kan a dead weight of say 25 kgf render when rocked say 5 degrees port and back and 5 degrees starboard and back every 10 seconds ? When in heel I think these values to be even too optimistic. 2436 From: Date: Wed Oct 29, 2003 3:21pm Subject: Re: Cockpit lockers Amazing Grace (40'in Photo Section of this site) has three lazarette lockers across the transom. They double as seats and are all self-draining thru the transom. The combings also have access holes and splash-resistant covers (part of the wood-slat seating system) (covers and seating not shown). Note that this system is "untried" as yet. Gord 2437 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Wed Oct 29, 2003 5:05pm Subject: Re: Re: hatches On our electrical contracting trucks we used to use a torsion spring to hold the door on the screw bin closed. If you forgot to latch it and it dumped in a corner you spent a night or two sorting screws! We got them from a local hardware store. They were just a straight closed coil tension spring, with two hole mounting bracket at each end. One end also rotated freely until you inserted a little pin to lock it. This allowed you to install the spring at both ends, then wind some tension in using a long pin to crank in some turns. The neat thing was you didn't need a flat surface for the two ends. We actually installed them bent around an outside corner. One end was screwed to a side of the bin while the other end wrapped around the corner between the hinges and was screwed to the front of the cover. They've been in service since 1950! Gary H. Lucas 2438 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Wed Oct 29, 2003 5:19pm Subject: Re: Pendulum electrical generation This could be an interesting idea. I was thinking about how nice it would be to have a really small quite generator that ran virtually all the time. If you total up the watt hours you actually use in a day you realize that a very small generator could work well as long as a battery is used to supply the high demands. I build a machine that uses 8 -12 volt motorized ball valves drawing two amps each. A 16 amp 12 volt power supply would have been large, heavy and costly. The valves only draw power for 1/2 second opening and 1/2 second closing, about 40 times a day. I run them off of a 1 amp hour gel cell that can put out 40 amps briefly. I charge the battery using a 1/2 amp three stage charger. I once built a fairly simple mechanism where the output shaft always rotated the same way despite the direction the input shaft was turning. It uses a couple of sprockets and a pair of 'cam clutches' installed opposite one another on a hardened output shaft. The 'cam clutches grip the shaft in one direction only, and rotate freely in the other. This would allow your pendulum to swing back and forth while turning the generator. I would size the sprockets to use a high ratio to get a good output speed. Maybe use timing belts to make it quite and zero maintenance. I'd also add a flywheel to store as much energy between swings as possible so the generator turns continuously. A modern voltage regulator should be able to handle the output voltage swings. This device would also function as a roll dampener for the boat. In a rolly anchorage it might smooth out the boats motion noticeably. I was thinking of a drawing if anyone is interested further. Gary H. Lucas 2439 From: Paul J. Thompson Date: Wed Oct 29, 2003 6:10pm Subject: RE: Pendulum electrical generation Gary, I would most definitely be interested. Paul 2440 From: sae140 Date: Thu Oct 30, 2003 2:50am Subject: Re: Pendulum electrical generation An alternative approach would be to use an a.c. generator and allow the shaft to rotate in either direction. However, car alternators require high revs to work, as well as requiring a 12v supply for the field coils. There is a solution: add magnets to an induction motor to provide a low speed, bi-directional, a.c. generator. I've already built one which produces 20v (a.c.) by simply spinning the rotor with my fingers. I was wondering what to do with this experimental unit now I've built it, as it doesn't have thrust bearings and as such isn't really suitable for direct drive from an air or water prop. Driving via a light pendulum, without flywheel but using step-up gearing, sounds plausible. I'll dig out the links for modifying induction motors if anybody wants. btw - good quality cork tiles as used in bathrooms, suitably sealed, and stuck to wbp plywood make for a good hard-wearing cabin sole. Colin For the application 2441 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Thu Oct 30, 2003 8:08am Subject: Re: Re: Pendulum electrical generation It isn't the reciprocating motion that is the issue. It is that all the methods of converting reciprocation to electrical energy require a fairly high velocity though a magnetic field to put out usable voltage and current. Otherwise the efficiency is so low as to be useless. My thought was that converting the reciprocation into continuous motion at a fairly high rpms would allow the use of conventional generators and reduce the overall development cost. Designing efficient generators is not a task for amateurs. Another thought though is to use a short pendulum with a heavy weight and a long vertical arm above the pivot point. The end of this long arm would move very fast compared to the heavy weight on the other end. If a strong permanent magnet was placed on the end and it whipped past a row of coils laid out in arc along its path you might get quite a bit of power. The power could be collected in a large capacitor and drained off by some conditioning circuitry. Gary H. Lucas 2442 From: jalborey Date: Thu Oct 30, 2003 9:27am Subject: Re: Pendulum electrical generation Gary, I'll be very interested in your drawing. Thanks, Jesús 2443 From: Mike Graham Date: Thu Oct 30, 2003 0:22pm Subject: Re: Pendulum electrical generation One and all: About a year ago, I was considering an alternative for propulsion/electrical generation for a sailboat and came across a company, Solomon Technologies (www.solomontechnologies.com), that seems to be on the leading edge of technology in this field. Though the prices for their systems are "healthy", I thought that I would mention it for the benefit of those whom find an interest in alternate power systems for marine vessels. Mike 2444 From: put_to_sea Date: Thu Oct 30, 2003 1:38pm Subject: Re: Pendulum electrical generation I found a some "wave power" sites on the web and a couple of them used either hydraulics or air to capture the energy from a pendulum. Pressure would build in either a hydraulic accumulator or a compressed air tank and when sufficient, spin the generator. An advantage to these systems is that the pendulum could be damped at the end of its throw and even small movements could slowly build pressure. As was pointed out, we are probably not talking about a lot of power here but for auxiliary electrical power for a low energy using sailboat it might be almost enough. Amos 2445 From: jim dorey Date: Thu Oct 30, 2003 1:44pm Subject: Re: Pendulum electrical generation get the pendulum to pull a flywheel, use gears that will allow it to turn it in the same direction regardless of where the boat rocks. 2446 From: jim dorey Date: Thu Oct 30, 2003 3:11pm Subject: Re: Pendulum electrical generation never mind, somebody posted a better version before i did. 2447 From: Mark K Date: Thu Oct 30, 2003 11:36pm Subject: Cork floor tiles I like the cork flooring idea. There are some really nice color blends and patterns available in cork floor tiles. What kind of adhesive and sealer do you use? - Markk 2448 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Fri Oct 31, 2003 3:20am Subject: Re: welding fore-deck next week Brent, My understanding is that 6011 rods are only suitable for AC welders. I have a small 180A inverter DC welder and when I tried to get 6011 rods the welding supplies dealer steered me towards 6010 rods which are the DC equivalent and have a similar cellulose covering. These were appalling to use, either sticking or burning through and made a mess of the sheet. I am not a professional welder but have made and repaired machinery in my past farm life using 6013 rods so I wasn't convinced it was all down to my incompetence and after consulting every one that I could, including this forum, I phoned the rod manufacturer, Thyssen's, technical consultant. After a few questions he pinned down the problem to the fact that the open circuit voltage of my little welder was, at 55 volts, too low to run 6010 rods. So after wasting money, time and spoiling my work with cellulose covered rods I now use Ø2.5, 3.2(1/8") and occasionally 4mm 6013 rods in well veed joints and veed back on the other side with no distortion. I buy two different sorts of 6013, a fast freezing rod and slow freezing rod that gives a nice finish on downhand welds. Welding rods have been well discussed on these pages and I shouldn't think there is anything much left to say except to repeat that 6011 rods are not suitable for small DC welders. Regards, Ted 2449 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Fri Oct 31, 2003 5:16am Subject: Re: Re: welding fore-deck next week Ted, 6010 and 6011 are NOT equivalent welding rods. 6010 is commonly used by pipe welders for the root pass, before capping it with 7018. 6010 burns very hot and has great penetration, as you found out. For the pipe welder it guarantees 100% penetration and few voids on the inside of the pipe, when you can only weld from the outside. It also burns off contaminants like rust and moisture in the joint. The weld bead is not smooth and pretty, it has sharp ripples and the weld may not be gas tight. The slag though is very easy to chip out of the joint and clean with a wire brush. When you cap it with a pass of 7018, low hydrogen, you get a very tight weld that looks real nice. On the last pass the aggressive 7018 slag chips off easily, often it peels itself off. 6011 is completely different. It runs well on AC and even better on DC. It penetrates better than 6013 but not as much as 6010 and welds well in all positions. The slag is a little greater than 6010 and a little tougher to remove. The bead has sharp ripples similar to 6010. It is a good rod for structural purposes, like boat building. 6013 seals well but lacks penetration. This produces weaker welds that may pull out when stressed. It is a popular rod in the greenhouse industry for pipe welding. It produces good water tight welds on thin wall pipe in single pass. This is not a structural application though. I have lots of experience with poor weld penetration, particularly with MIG welding. I get lots of parts hot dipped galvanized. It is amazing how well that brings out the flaws from a lack of penetration. I get concerned when people have a favorite rod, because the weld bead looks so nice. A nice looking weld bead is NOT a good indicator of adequate weld penetration. You should see the look on expert welders faces when I pull apart their absolutely gorgeous welds after they've been galvanized! Downhand welding should not be used in structural welding. It is fast and the weld looks real nice, but the penetration just isn't there. Weld something vertical up and the same thing down. Break the joint, you'll be amazed at the difference in strength. I think your rod supplier has lead you astray, and should replace the rods he sold you, since he convinced you they were the same. Gary H. Lucas 2450 From: Date: Fri Oct 31, 2003 8:02am Subject: Re: Re: hatches Thanks Mark, It sounds like the torsion bar would be well suited to a hatch with a long hinge, where in effect the torsion bar is a spring that has not been wound into a coil. It sounds like such a device could be attached on the outside of the hatch between the hinges, but on a short hinge, fatigue might become an issue with frequent use. I have seen hatches with a single long SS rod used as a hinge pin, with a SS spring wound around this to counter balance the hatch, which also works well. Aside from fatigue, it might be possible to use a torsion bar in place of the single SS pin, and eliminate the SS spring. With one end of the torsion bar pinned to the deck, the other to the hatch, and the bar passing thru both hinges. This would certainly be simple, and would not impede entry thru the hatch. The bar would not need to act thru a full 180 degrees, but rather need only take the weight from vertical to closing to minimize fatigue. This sounds like a very promising idea. One alternative I used was big SS washers and lock nuts on the hinge bolts, and to simply to tighten the hinge pins, so that the hatch remained in position, and would not fall, rather needed to be pushed/pulled to open/close. This worked, but needs to be adjusted regularly. I used a piece of PVC pipe in the hinge end of the hatch as a safety, to catch the hatch before it closed. Mostly I used this approach because it could be built simply with the limited materials I had at hand, on the premise that a working solution implemented today is better than the perfect solution never implemented. Alloy hatches, with finished edges and a mechanism to prevent the hatch from falling under its own weight would be my preferred solution. Depending on hatch design, double or triple breaking an edge when you form the hatch can ensure that no raw edges are exposed. Even if you never have children aboard, a metal edge can injure anyone, and many women have hands not much bigger than children. Greg Elliott Yacht Lazy Bones http://www.origamimagic.com 2451 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Fri Oct 31, 2003 11:07am Subject: Re: welding fore-deck next week Gary, Thanks for your info. 6011 rods are not listed in either the sif hilco(UK) or Thyssen (German) catalogues that I have. Other dealers in this area that I asked for 6011 rods did not stock them. The consensus was that 6010 is the DC equivalent. However after reading your post I thought that I would look further. I have just asked another stockist and he said that although they are not listed in his comparison catalogue which covered Thyssen, Bohler, Murex, Oerlikon, Lincoln and Phillips one company Weldrite did list them. He will try and track some down next week. I have just done a Google search and it seems that while in the UK 6011 are rare, in North America every stockist lists them. For instance in one list there are the following 6011 rods from Lincoln: Murex 6011C, Easyarc 6011C, Fleetweld 35LS and Fleetweld 180. Of interest to me is that one page lists Weldmark 6011 rods as being AC/DC and as being suitable for 50v open circuit voltage machines. It seems that I was side tracked and that 6011 is worth tracking down and my apologies to any one that I doubted. My two catalogues between them list 8 different types of 6013 rods and on my welding course we used a variety of 6013 rods. The Thyssen catalogue lists 3 types of its 6013 rods as being suitable for shipbuilding. It would seem that while 6013 is the rod of choice in this neck of the woods in North America 6011 is more popular. I don't suppose that I will ever know why. Regards, Ted 2452 From: prairiemaidca Date: Fri Oct 31, 2003 11:33am Subject: welding rods Hi All: I would have to agree, a 6013 on downhand pass would be very suspect as to how well it penetrated. I would be very careful here and mayby do some test pieces and check them for penetration and strentgh.. Martin (Prairie Maid) 2453 From: Mark K Date: Fri Oct 31, 2003 0:11pm Subject: Re: hatches It is possible to loop the torsion bar back to make its length twice the hatche's width. Think of it as two springs which are mirror images of each other. Mount one to the hatch carling and the other to the hatch on the same side. Now connect the two free ends together. If you were actually making one you would simply bend the whole thing out of one piece. You should get something that looks like this (if my ascii art comes out right): This end mounted to hatch with strap. |________ ________| <-- This end loosly affixed to something. | This end mounted to carling with strap. In truck box practice the steel lids open less than 90deg. Two springs are generally used, mounted on opposite sides and crossing in the middle, each about 1/8 - 3/16 diameter and 18" long. It would probably be worthwhile to compute the fatigue life with whatever material you were using, especially for a customer's boat. That info is generally available. - Markk 2454 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Fri Oct 31, 2003 0:43pm Subject: Re: welding rods I think there may be a misunderstanding. When I talk of a downhand weld I mean a horizontal weld as in drawing a line in the sand. Do you mean a vertical down weld, which I agree is not the strongest weld in 6013? I was using the slow freezing nice finish weld to give a capping weld on say the trailing edge of the rudder where a neat rounded edge will hold paint better. With some fast freeze rods on a horizontal weld the slag sank into the weld leaving a lot of craters which looked very odd. Regards, Ted 2455 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Fri Oct 31, 2003 0:49pm Subject: Re: Cockpit lockers Amazing Grace is a good looking boat Gord. How did you fix the pipe uprights to the mixing bowl vents? I have bought a stainless mixing bowl for our heads basin. One thing I would like to ask is what the beer keg doing jammed behind the mast supports? As well as a lazarette locker under the tiller I was thinking also of the longitudinal cockpit lockers that many boats have under their seats. In some cases the locker reaches down to the bilge which gives a huge amount of top loading storage for ropes, fenders, buckets, deck brush, inflatable dinghy and so on. This is a great advantage on a cruising boat. The downside is the downflooding potential of an opening in a vessel in a storm. The other concern is the structual one of an opening in that part of a monocoque boat. Will it allow the boat to flex too much? All views and ideas appreciated Regards, Ted 2456 From: jim_both Date: Fri Oct 31, 2003 3:37pm Subject: fiberglass cabin on steel deck There has been a lot of discussion about wooden and aluminium decks/cabins on steel hulls, but I havn't seen any discussion about attaching a GRP cabin top to a steel deck, although I do recall an account of one such construction being rolled in a storm which ripped the GRP cabin top from the deck. Does anyone have any thoughts on using this combination of materials if the joint could be made strong enough and leak proof (i.e. GRP cabin top bolted to stainless flat that has been welded to the steel deck? jim_both 2457 From: fmichael graham Date: Fri Oct 31, 2003 4:59pm Subject: Re: Re: welding rods Ted: Those surface holes that you observed in the weld bead are usually due to some form of impurity in the weld, caused by dirt/paint/grease/etc. on the base material. Arc length and travel speed are two factors to be considered to alleviate this problem(in each case, reduce). By keeping the puddle in a molten condition for a longer period of time, the gas is able to escape. You may also consider running at a higher current. I would suggest that, if practicable, you consider using a more powerful welding source and switch to a low hydrogen electrode(7018). True, 6010/6011 are great rods for penetration and when welding "dirty" metal. They do, however, require a high degree of welder ability. When desiring x-ray quality welds, the 7018 gives a greater density of weld matter than the discussed alternatives. Risk of weld cracking is reduced and the mechanical properties - tensile strength, ductility, etc. - are much better. Weld spatter is minimal, deposition rate is higher, and penetration is very good, especially at upper-range currents. The 7018 electrode should be oven-baked at 700F for (1)one hour to remove moisture, and arc length should be at a maximum of 1/8". I realize that - in this group - we are often concerned with doing the most at the least possible expenditure, an ideal that I wholeheartedly support, but I really believe in buying a welding machine that can easily perform to the highest required standards. I don't know about elsewhere, but in Vancouver one has no difficulty in re-selling quality welding machines. I hope some of my ramblings are of use to you! Good Luck Mike 2458 From: richytill Date: Fri Oct 31, 2003 5:52pm Subject: Re: welding fore-deck next week Ted, I have worked on extensive projects in the UK, the US and Canada. The 6013 you use in the UK (Murex for example) is close to, but not the same, as the 6013 used in North America. The classification does not mean the same as--it means in the same group of electrodes. In this case, 6013 under AWS, renders the 3 at the end of the code a tiania potasium coating for ac/dc; the 60 at the begining indicates 60,000 (up to 78,000) tensile and the 1 before the 3 denotes all position. In Brent's book, he lists the most straight forward, practical, affordable, approach to welding a marine vessel in North America. That means AC supply with 6011--no problem. Top choice. You however, have a different power source and in some cases, different welding products. Your Lincoln Fleetweld 35 6011 is the same if you can get it: but that does not help you since you have an inverter--and yes, the small units don't have the kick to make a decent weld with 6011 1/8". Both 6011 and 6013 meet Lloyds grade 3 and American Bureau of Shipping. Both are used to build far bigger boats than we are. Note here, that 6013 is intended for sheet metal or light plate. Bottom line, it is certified for and will do the job. If I were to choose a rod for a small inverter for welding the keel sole plate and the leading edge of the keel--I would go 7014 or a European equivalent. All this said, when we were asked to repair a large Polish fishing vessel in Vancouver, they specified 6013 for everything to meet their code; so we did. We cranked the heat and laid it in--to 5/8" plate! Done and gone fishing. rt 2459 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Sat Nov 1, 2003 4:55am Subject: Re: welding rods Many thanks for your welding comments. With regard to the craters in the weld: They weren't so much craters as irregular indentations. The welds were on clean metal. I took the rods back to the stockist, who said I had used dirty or contaminated steel. So I got him to try them out on his welder with a piece of his steel of similar thickness. The same thing happened, irregular indentations. He had no answer, so I took them to the manufacturer's technical consultant 30 miles away who tried them on his welder with a piece of his steel; same result, irregular indentations. He tried some of the same specification rods from a different batch, same result. Watching the red hot slag as it cooled we could see "dark clouds" appear in it as parts cooled much quicker than others. Our conclusion was that these "dark clouds" were sinking into the still molten weld and causing the irregular indentations. My DC inverter welder is not the cheapest welder. I paid the extra money because it is light for moving about and has much better voltage control than AC welders I have used. One can change polarity for different weld types and it does a remarkably good stainless weld. I don't need a high duty machine nor to use more than 1/8" rods so its 180 Amps are plenty. The only thing that it is short on is open circuit voltage, which is something that I had never heard of until recently, and that does preclude the use of some types of rods such as 7018 rods, which need, I think, 70v open circuit voltage AC. Pros and cons to everything. Regards, Ted 2460 From: De Clarke Date: Sat Nov 1, 2003 8:15pm Subject: pendulum/seiko generator This is kind of eerie :-) great minds must think (or at least daydream) alike... I "invented" a device like this (in my head and a couple of sketches) a few years ago. Never got around to building it. It would have consisted of a long horizontal arm on a central bearing; at the far end of the arm would be a powerful little magnet (ceramic maybe?). Around the circle drawn by the magnet as the arm rotates would be a long wound coil or a series of coils. The magnet's own weight would pull the arm around in random arcs as the boat rolled. I imagined packaging the whole thing up in a sealed disc-shaped unit with a couple of wires coming out :-) and mounting it on the cabin top. The tiny trickle coming from the unit with every roll and pitch would be accumulated in a capacitor and drained automatically into the battery pack every time it reached some threshold. It all seemed fairly practical (no reliance on miracle technology, just old tried-n-true parts). Maybe one day I'll actually try to build it :-) The tricky part is a really good bearing surface at the hub and a very stiff arm, to eliminate sag. Either that or the magnet has to run on a wheel or wheels, on some kind of rail (which adds friction). It wouldn't be much good into the wind, but your wind gen or tow gen could pick up the slack then. It should provide a trickle charge, I would think, when running (and rolling) downwind, or in a rolly anchorage. Every little helps :-) A simpler model I suppose would be linear -- a kind of train track, running athwartships; the magnet slides back and forth along the track, flying just about the coil. Again a really good bearing surface is needed (always challenging in the marine environment)... The inspiration was of course my Seiko "self winder" (actually electronic) watch. My ancient Seiko from decades ago was truly a self *winder*, using a sloshing weight to wind up the mainspring. But when it finally died and I had to replace it, I found the new Seiko watches use a rotating weight to generate charge which keeps the quartz movement running. This intrigued me so much that I wanted to build a big version :-) de 2461 From: De Clarke Date: Sat Nov 1, 2003 8:21pm Subject: welding stuff onto existing finished boat? risks? Question for all you steel boat people: what about mods to the hull/deck *after* the boat is completed? suppose you want to change the engine mounts or install some new, major piece of equipment that will need a bed or some kind of reinforcement: some welding will be needed on the hull that is already epoxied, painted etc. the integrity of the existing hull treatment will be destroyed both inside and out, I should think, by the welding activity. so, is there an approved method of blending the new "patch" of fresh hull treatments in with the existing paint (and underlayers)? how do you make sure you don't create a vulnerable point in the inner and outer hull coatings? do you have to match exactly the chemistry, number of layers etc. of the original coatings? I ask because I've seen one or two steel boats whose hulls were in not-too-bad shape *except* for points where someone had welded on an afterthought, or cut or englarged an opening for some reason. the paint, compromised where the new weld or cut was done, failed; serious rusting seemed to start from this compromised point and spread outwards. it seems to be a dangerous proceeding to change your mind and weld more stuff onto a steel boat once the paint has dried. any comments, hard-earned wisdom etc. would be much appreciated. de 2462 From: T.H. & V.D. Cain Date: Sun Nov 2, 2003 2:46am Subject: RE: Re: welding rods Following this thread and relative to the welding power source in use, I am interested Ted, in the model of inverter unit you are using. These units may be physically small, but they deliver without complaint the dialled-in current up to and a little more than the quoted specifications. They also do this without regard to the prevailing mains voltage (within a reasonable range --- + 10% and - 15% , at least) which none of the older machines will cope with. The open circuit voltage is usually not an issue with iron variants or its consumables, since the restrike potentials are dependent among other things on pool and tip temperatures, well within the usual 90 V for inverter sources. Much less dependent on the electrode coating than with the older conventional machines, except that is, for a pure DC source. Having used and repaired welding machines over some significant period, I find the only major drawback to the current crop of inverter-based power sources is the cost of repair, in many cases this can be around 60% of the new item cost. Even though the records seem to indicate that small mobile power sources or process dust contamination are involved in a significant number of these failures, the performance of these high efficiency welding power sources is quite satisfactory. If this repair cost factor is eventually dealt with through effective competition, these units will replace much of the boat anchor units of the past. A tip for users of these machines in the typical boat building environment: Place the unit so that it does not draw its high volume cooling airflow from the immediate welding area. The amount of weld spatter and grinding product found on the boards and heatsinks of these machines is truly impressive, and it doesn't help their wellbeing. Put the fan intake in the best orientation to ensure clean cooler air is getting to the unit. Mind you, I have a range of machines including the anchor types, which don't get a hell of a lot of use these days. Terry 2463 From: sae140 Date: Sun Nov 2, 2003 9:35am Subject: Re: welding rods Hi Terry Perhaps I could stick my oar in on this thread .... You raise some interesting points re: inverters vs. 'anchors'. My own little 140A inverter is a real 'cutie' - about the same size as a ladies clutch handbag, weighs only 4 Kg (< 10 lbs). It has a shoulder strap, and I assume is designed to be carried around on your back, using long mains leads instead of long and heavy low voltage cables. I agree about airborn metal dust taking these devices out - this happened to a friend who has returned to using oil-cooled 'anchors' which are impervious to the boat-building environment. Repair of his all-singing, all-dancing inverter cost 3x what I paid for mine. If my own handbag should ever die, it'll go straight in the bin. The small ESAB equivalent has a fan filtration system with disposable paper filters, and I'm now considering making-up a similar fan-cooled and filtered enclosure to protect this cutie if using it in static mode whilst in the yard. It was because of it's apparent fragility that I bought a 240A 'big dog' which takes 2 guys and a hernia to lift - but which you could drive a truck over without concern. It's convection-cooled and has no sensitive electronics, so is more suitable for working in the metal dust/ gritty environment of a boat-yard. Although physically completely different, interestingly they both have 100A 100% duty cycles. If I'd bought the 'anchor' first, then I'd probably have added some high current diodes and large value capacitors to provide a (lumpy) DC facility. Still will, if the handbag should ever die. Have you any experience repairing oil-cooled welders ? If so, could you make contact off-forum please ? Colin 2464 From: sae140 Date: Sun Nov 2, 2003 9:44am Subject: In defence of the humble 6013 I'd just like to put my 2p's worth in the pot, regarding electrode choice. Although I remain relatively inexperienced, and would not yet refer to myself as being "a welder", I do have several professional welder friends who are fully coded, with bulkhead dispensations, Lloyds, DIN, Bureau Veritas (and a fistful more) approved - and so I take their advice on welding matters seriously. The following comments are a summary of many hours of 'talking about welding'. Highly stressed items such as rolling-stock undercarriages, bridges, JCB arms and so on require specialist welding, and thus special rods. But in pure welding terms, fabricating a boat from mild steel plate is just about as basic as it gets. 7xxx series rods are unnecessary - use 'em if you've got 'em, by all means - but there's nothing to be gained by using rods which are stronger than the material being welded. High penetration rods are used on thick material where preparation is either inconvenient or impossible. There is no case for using high penetration rods on 6mm plate or less, or wherever the material can be prepared for multi-pass welding. It is straightforward to achieve full penetration of (say) 5mm plate using 3.2mm 6013 rods by the simple expedient of increasing the current a little, and slowing down the rate of work. Although I aim for a penetration of 3 to 3.5mm when forming double-sided butt welds, it is relatively easy to melt through completely - and that of course is 100% penetration with a 6013 ! - to say these rods can't penetrate is a tad short of the mark. 4mm rods would be even more capable. There is no case at all for the use or expense of low hydrogen rods in mild steel boat-building. 6013 general-purpose, all-position rods are perfectly adequate for the construction of steel boats, oil storage tanks and similar structures, and are actually to be preferred for the less experienced welder. These rods are often disparagingly called "farmer's rods" - a term I view as actually being an endorsement, as farm workers tend to weld infrequently, but need to quickly and easily achieve a sound weld when they do, and often on highly-stressed machinery which is subject to enormous punishment, and where weld integrity is soon tested. On a boat there is probably never a case for vertical-down welding where vertical-up cannot be substituted, where again 6013's are more than adequate. These are the rods my professional friends use for all the mild steel work on boat hulls; these were the rods supplied on the welding course I attended; and these are by far the most popular rods stocked by commercial welding suppliers in the UK. Some *only* stock these. There must be many hundreds of MMA welders working in industry every day in the UK, and the lion's share of them are using 6013 rods for mild steel fabrication (if stockists can be believed) - surely there must be a sound basis underpinning this ? Can British industry really be using the wrong welding rods ? A caveat: there are different 'varieties' of 6013's on the market. Although having the same international number, and thus supposedly the same characteristics, manufacturers use different fluxes which impart different characteristics in practice. I recently collected samples of different makes of rod from my friends, and performed a comparative test using my 140A Messer-Griesheim MMA/TIG inverter (47V open/25V working), and 240A BOC-Transarc (55VAC open/25 volt working. 75V setting not used during this test). Oerlikon's "Fincord" (with a thick white flux coating) were by far the easiest to use on both AC and DC. They were easy to start, control, and produced very little spatter. Murex's Zodian (medium thick grey-white coating) were almost as good. Lincoln's "EasyWeld" were good although subsceptible to damp, but Hilco rods - although supposed to be AC/DC, were very sticky on AC, spattered a lot, and all-in-all were difficult to use. On DC they were fine. These had a much thinner greyish coating than the others, and I'm beginning to form the opinion that flux thickness, as well as the constituent chemicals within the flux, is an important consideration. I'd also add that the Oerlikon rods seemed to be more-or-less unaffected by damp, as I found some which had been left exposed in a damp, draughty shed for months, which performed just as well as those straight from an unopened box or those which had been dried/pre-heated. I don't know what chemicals are employed in these various fluxes, but I do know that the smell given off by each of them was different - the Murex rods in particular had a pronounced soapy smell reminiscent of washing soda. Hope at least some of the above is of interest. Colin 2465 From: fmichael graham Date: Sun Nov 2, 2003 4:52pm Subject: Re: In defence of the humble 6013 Colin: While I would concur that 6013 is sufficient for welding sheet metal and is a good enough choice for low current applications, I would suggest that your negative opinion concerning the use of low-hydrogen rods is not well thought out. When determining the cost of an electrode, one can not go by the purchase price alone. With similiar parameters, the 7018 deposition rate is more than (1)one pound per hour than the 6013. As they say, "time is money". If you estimate the difference in welding time and grinding time I think that you would soon find that the 7018 "pays for itself". Then again, if your building a "one-off", using an AC "buzz bomb", 6013 may be the better choice. Personally, I've been welding for 24 years and would prefer to get the job done quickly, with the highest level of confidence in the finished product. Still, if I wasn't considering start-up costs for builders, I'd go GMAW. Mike 2466 From: jim dorey Date: Sun Nov 2, 2003 10:37pm Subject: Re: pendulum/seiko generator was thinking one could be cobbled together out of ten speed bike gears, on one side the chain wrapped over the gear, on the other wrapped under, connect a set of gears to the axles to keep them turning at the same speed and direction, you can connect a generator to the other. maybe go nuts and wind the generator on the wheels with a belt in the groove. 2467 From: T.H. & V.D. Cain Date: Sun Nov 2, 2003 11:04pm Subject: RE: welding stuff onto existing finished boat? risks? Hi De, I suspect that the cases of poor coating system performance adjacent to the modification or repair are related to the standard of the original protective system in the first instance. If the new work is not married to the old (only co-habiting so-to-speak!) and protected adequately with a properly applied system, the troubles commence. Properly profiled steel (abrasive of correct grade and velocity) , which is carefully coated with an appropriate zinc-rich primer does not seem to suffer the undercutting corrosion you are reporting. The key function of a zinc primer is to handle the nicks and scratches in the barrier coats by putting the brakes on the undercutting corrosion at the edges of the intrusion. Terry 2468 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Mon Nov 3, 2003 6:10am Subject: Re: pendulum/seiko generator Jim, Here's a rough rendering of the mechanism I had mentioned. The green is the input from the pendulum. The blue sprockets contain the cam clutches that grip the red hardened output shaft, both turning it in the same direction. I show about a 4 to 1 speed increase from the pendulum and another 4 to 1 increase to the generator/flywheel. This would probably give speeds adequate to generate reasonable power. You could do it with spur gears too. The question of course is how much energy is actually available. If your boat weighs 16,000 lbs and your pendulum weighed say 100 lbs I'd think the power output could be a least as much as a good sized solar panel. Gary H. Lucas 2469 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Mon Nov 3, 2003 7:08am Subject: Re: pendulum/seiko generator Oops! guess I need to post the drawing to the pictures area. I uploaded a jpg called Pendulum power. Gary H. Lucas 2470 From: Phillip Allen Date: Mon Nov 3, 2003 11:48am Subject: Rig design For me the whole point of this endeavor is the fulfillment of an old, old dream. I want a sail boat. I want to sail to tropical places. I want to do this on a traditional (looking) boat. I'm thinking of building my own boat. Now, further thought; the boat should be built with my living aboard in mind. It will be (possibly) sailed without additional crew. I want it to look like the boat in my dream. I want a schooner...there, I said it...schooner-schooner- schooner-schooner...pant, pant. So, anyone considered the schooner rig for origami design? Phillip In Arkansas 2471 From: Date: Mon Nov 3, 2003 1:24pm Subject: Re: Rig design The Darwin 60 is an origami schooner rig, currently under construction on Lasqueti Island. http://www.origamimagic.com/Design/Darwin60/Darwin60.htm New videos have been added to our web site, to show the construction of the Darwin 60, Jean Marc 50, and Pangaea 50. http://www.origamimagic.com/Design/Darwin60/darwin60.wmv http://www.origamimagic.com/Design/JM50/JM50.wmv These videos are under 1MB each, and should be suitable for viewing even over dial-up. They are in a streaming format and should play almost immediately. The videos were randomly clipped from more than 2 hours of tapes, using an automated tool, so they are not continuous, but should provide a brief view of the origami process. Greg Elliott Yacht Lazy Bones http://www.origamimagic.com 2472 SPAM 2473 From: Mark K Date: Mon Nov 3, 2003 6:03pm Subject: Re: Rig design If you intend to singlehand this boat off-shore, you should have one overriding priority: ease of handling - espeically under adverse conditions. If you put anything else first, you will surely regret it. If you must have a schooner, you might consider a cat-schooner along the lines of Chuck Paine's cat-ketch, Whistler, however a bermudan cat-schooner is not going to be all that traditional looking. I suggest that you read a few books about cruising and single-handing before you make any plans. There are a lot of things to consider, and in the end a basic sloop or cutter starts to look really good. Been there, dreamed that... - Markk 2474 From: johaan2002 Date: Mon Nov 3, 2003 7:45pm Subject: FCAW welding process i am new to this group and have a quick question, for a pre employment test tomorrow i have a FCAW (flux cored arc welding) test, i have my CWB tiket (expired). and i was wondering if the Flux cored metal process would be too brittle due to hydrogen deposition and wave pounding action for marine use, such as the hull welds in an origami boat. hearsay is that most FCAW wire is in the 60 Kpsi tensile range. anyways any rhetoric or discussion is welcome. BTW flux cored wire is offered up to .070 wire size and is used on alot of large structures. jon 2475 From: Mark K Date: Mon Nov 3, 2003 11:31pm Subject: Re: FCAW welding process I doubt hydrogen embrittlement would be an issue with the mild steel these boats are made from. With regard to strength, I have a book that lists FCAW wire up to 120 ksi. Here's a bit on hydrogen embrittlement from Lincoln electric's excellent site for general welding knowlege: http://tinyurl.com/tkhc - Markk 2476 From: fmichael graham Date: Mon Nov 3, 2003 11:56pm Subject: Re: FCAW welding process Jon: Interesting question. I was chatting with my father, today, about recent group discussions on suitable electrodes for welding 3/16th mild steel, as he - a retired metallurgical engineer/boilermaker - finds these discussions of great interest. He reminded me of a past shipbuilding client whom had switched the bulk of their welding to FCAW (.045) with excellent results. Of course, they construct/repair a lot of marine vessels and related steel structures, so the extra initial costs paid off over time. I hope this helps. Mike 2477 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Tue Nov 4, 2003 6:06am Subject: Re: FCAW welding process This is an interesting topic. I've done MIG, TIG, Stick and Gas welding, but I've never even tried the flux cored wire. I have heard it is widely used in large structures, like building and bridges. The benefit is supposed to be the high speed of MIG with the wire being feed from a spool, combined with the not needing a shielding gas which blows away outdoors. That makes it sound like a possibly good choice for welding boats. Higher welding speeds also reduce warping, another benefit for boats. It will be interesting if anyone here knows of real experience in FCAW being used in marine applications. Gary H. Lucas 2478 From: lon wells Date: Tue Nov 4, 2003 7:22am Subject: Re: FCAW welding process Yes production ship building uses Flux core arc welding and they use a shielding gas with it CO2 is the cheapest and most common. If there is a wind problem effecting your weld put up a welding shield. Lon 2479 From: prairiemaidca Date: Tue Nov 4, 2003 7:43am Subject: welding Hi All: I'm finding the discussion on welding very interesting and infomative. The high tech machines and wire etc. are all very nice and probably with the right knowledge will do a very good job but the bottom line I think is cost. If you already have this type of eqipment or have good access to it great. But the cost of purchasing it to build one homemade boat will be very high compared to the good old glorified toaster(stick welder).. Brent makes reference to that in his book. Well it's out to the boat shed to burn some rod. Martin Forster (Prairie Maid) 2480 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Tue Nov 4, 2003 9:06am Subject: Re: welding I'm not entirely sure your cost scenario is true. If you buy a used professional caliber welder, weld up your boat then sell it you may find that the actual total cost is very low. A good machine generally welds better (easier for a novice) and a wire feed machine is much faster. Professional welders hold their value very well, after the initial purchaser. Gary H. Lucas 2481 From: fmichael graham Date: Tue Nov 4, 2003 10:23am Subject: Re: welding Martin, et al: I couldn't agree more. As much as I prefer the speed & ease of wire feed (semi-automatic) welding, I chose SMAW when I had my shop in the Philippines for the very reason that you state. In addition, access to parts and supplies can be a determining factor. On the other hand - (prepare for a chauvinistic view, here) - I am thinking about justifying the purchase of a wire feed machine to my wife by telling her that I "have to have it" for building the boat. I wonder if I should by a membership in the lonely hearts club first, just in case... Mike 2482 From: Mike Graham Date: Tue Nov 4, 2003 10:40am Subject: Welding gear To whomsoever is "in the know": What about the new "electronic" welding helmuts? In all my years of welding, I have never really perfected one essential fundamental of welding, namely, the timely dumping of one's helmut. Are these new helmuts all that they purport to be? Or, should I keep telling my wife to save her teabags? At least the semi- automatic processes have alleviated the problem, but if I go back to stick? Mike "red eye" Graham 2483 From: prairiemaidca Date: Tue Nov 4, 2003 11:36am Subject: Auto helmet Hi All: After a couple of years of working on Prairie Maid I've finally got the hang of the old helmet flip. It still drives me crazy when you go to weld and the shade is not in place when you flip the helmet down or you hit the damn thing on something due to confined space. I've had the opportunity to use one of the fancy electronic helmets, if you are an amature welder like me and just starting your boat project I would highly recomend one if it's possible to fit it into your budget without having to become celibate (wife finding out). They do come on sale but are still pricey compared to a good old fibre hat... Martin Forster (Prairie Maid) 2484 From: Paul Faulkner Date: Tue Nov 4, 2003 0:05pm Subject: Re: Welding gear The electronic helmets are wonderful. I learned to weld with a standard helmet. My welding improved with the electronic helmet. It will change your reality for the better. Once you have one, you'll wonder how you ever did without it. 2485 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Tue Nov 4, 2003 0:36pm Subject: Re: Welding gear Mike, I bought one 20 years ago when they first came out. Back then they were a little slow and you got a good bit of flash, but I learned to blink when I struck the arc. I've worked in the greenhouse industry and the guys who weld aluminum benches use them exclusively. Thousands of little welds a day spaced all over a large bench. The Mig arc is very bright on aluminum too. The new ones really do work well, they go dark much faster. Especially in out of position welding, or holding the part with one hand and tacking with the other, and crawling underneath with the helmet already on your head. I'd recommend them highly. Gary H. Lucas 2486 From: richytill Date: Tue Nov 4, 2003 3:59pm Subject: Re: welding Martin, visiting my daughter in Alberta, how far away from Red Deer are you? rt (My Island) 2487 From: richytill Date: Tue Nov 4, 2003 4:30pm Subject: Re: Welding gear Gary, I came accross an industrial quality AC/DC machine, paid a reasonable price for it, put a reohstat in and sold it after the last weld on the hull. It worked out like money in the bank. I figured money saved in the re-sale could go towards a winch, transmission or something. Having the DC was a bonus for the stainless. I used 7018 on the housing I made to join the VW engine to the transmission-most of the hull was done with 6011. I have seen the mess that can happen when people try to "do a better job" with 7018 on light hulls. The real problem is below the water-line where electrolysis eats the HAZ away. Not a problem with 6010/6011. The old name brand transformer/ rectifiers seem easy to fix. An older AC buz box would do the job. 2488 From: keith green Date: Tue Nov 4, 2003 5:55pm Subject: Re: Welding gear I've used one of those before and it was pretty good. Only problem I had was a bit of a headache once in a while. It was really handy in any place or situation where you were using both hands on the job and had to start with the visor down. Sometimes the head-bob would ruin your positioning, 'specially when doing some small TIG stuff. keith. 2489 From: Richard Hudson Date: Tue Nov 4, 2003 9:12pm Subject: Re: Digest Number 628 - Rig Design > If you intend to singlehand this boat off-shore, you should have one > overriding priority: ease of handling - espeically under adverse > conditions. If you put anything else first, you will surely regret it. I totally agree with the above statements. Actually, I consider them one reason to consider a schooner for shorthanded offshore sailing :-). A schooner's foresail can be made extremely strong, of heavier cloth than you would like for light winds. Since the foresail is not all that big a sail, making it of heavy cloth is not such a performance penalty. As the wind & seas increase, you reduce sail first from aloft (fisherman, topsails if you have them), then from the ends (main, headsails), until you only have the foresail up. At which point, you have a fairly small, relatively easily-handled sail, well inboard, that you can use on any point of sail. At sea, a schooner can be a very good rig. I say can be, because many schooners are not setup for short-handed efficiency...many are training vessels, where a major objective is to create enough work to keep everyone busy. A fisherman staysail, while intimidating to set and douse singlehanded, is not as difficult to deal with as a spinnaker singlehanded, in my experience. Windward work (don't underestimate this requirement) is a disadvantage of schooner rigs, though probably less so with a staysail schooner (which I know little about). Unfortunately there are no books on how to sail schooners. If you really want to build a boat with a schooner rig, it would be best if you found someone to show you how to sail one first. Finding someone who sails a schooner may not be an easy task. Other than asking the American Schooner Association or the Nova Scotia Schooner Association (if either of those is in the country you live in), or finding someone nearby with a schooner, I don't know what to suggest. Greg Elliot has designed and is building an interesting origami schooner, and I see no reason why a schooner rig would not be appropriate for an origami-built hull. Incidentally, the comments above apply to gaff-rigged schooners. I have no experience with junk rigs, and little experience with staysail schooners. Richard (working towards another shorthanded voyaging schooner) http://www.issumacorp.com/rhudson/orbitlog 2490 From: sae140 Date: Wed Nov 5, 2003 4:21am Subject: Re: welding But at the risk of stating the obvious, when you've sold your professional rig - you no longer have it. So what then happens if you want to change anything, or make additions ? The capital outlay on a basic buzz box is so low (mine cost the equivalent of 4 boxes of rods), that it can go into storage afterwards or be lent out. Overall, I think this is a 'swings and roundabouts' situation. Colin 2491 From: sae140 Date: Wed Nov 5, 2003 4:25am Subject: Re: Welding gear I was taught to momentarily strike the arc a half inch or so from where you're working (on a piece of scrap if necessary) to light-up the work area. That way you can keep your helmet down. I'm currently using an ancient Protex filter which has a 1/2"-wide clear (UV protection only) strip at the top which also leaves both hands free during the strike. A tilt of the head does the trick. Don't know if they're still obtainable. The solar-powered auto helmets have a NiCad life of around 6 years, which makes for a good deal if you're welding a lot during that time. But afaik, when the NiCads eventually fail the filter no longer works - period. Don't think the NiCads are replacable. So if a person only welds 'twice a year', then the battery-powered jobs would seem a better proposition, providing the batteries are removed before putting them into storage. Response times appear similar. Colin 2492 From: lon wells Date: Wed Nov 5, 2003 6:58am Subject: Re: Re: welding Or... You could buy a small gas powered unit and also use it as your genset on the boat. Get a unit that will accept a wire feed. It would be good for emergency repairs. Lon 2493 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Wed Nov 5, 2003 1:04pm Subject: Re: welding rods Terry, You asked about my welder. It is a Sterling 180i made by AA Welding Co of Leeds UK. Uo is 55v, 1A/17v to 180A/27v. 100% duty at 115A (3.9kva) 35% duty at 180A (6.8 kva). Regards, Ted 2494 From: fmichael graham Date: Wed Nov 5, 2003 3:04pm Subject: Re: Re: welding Lon: Excellent suggestion! I was thinking the same thing. When I was living in the Philippines, cruising around on my fishboat, I remember many times when I could not find the equipment to do weld repairs. I usually had to wait until I reached a large town and, even then, the boat would have to be hauled out on the ways, an expensive and time consuming process. With the expense of gen-sets, why not go one step further and have a motor-generator welder? If you were sailing a "twin-keeler", you could perform repairs when beached. If you designed a method for easy removal, you could perform repairs for others. Of course, now we get into the topic of the corrosion one would have in one's machine. Mike 2495 From: fmichael graham Date: Wed Nov 5, 2003 3:20pm Subject: Re: Re: Welding gear Colin: Thanks mate! Actually, I was being a bit tongue-in-cheek. The advice from yourself and others, however, has been of value. Like many "old school" welders, I am usually dragged, kicking and screaming, into the changes in the industry, such as when many local production shops switched from SMAW to FCAW in the late '70's & early '80's. So, I have avoided these "new-fangled" lids because, "who would pay $500(Can) for a welding helmut"? But, as I surf the internet and listen to the opinions of group members, I wonder why I haven't made the change, sooner. Well, I'd better get outside & shoe my horse so that I can make it to town before dark. Mike 2496 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Wed Nov 5, 2003 3:24pm Subject: Re: Re: welding Have you seen the little wire feed welders that can be run off of your batteries or a welding power source? If you used it with the kind of flux cored wire that needs no shielding gas it could be an excellent onboard repair welder. Gary H. Lucas 2497 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Wed Nov 5, 2003 3:56pm Subject: Re: Re: Welding gear Mike, www.mcmastercarr.com sells a 2" x 4" auto-darkening lens for US $127.50 and the bigger ones for US $161.75. I had one and lent it to a Dutch bench welder to try. He wouldn't give it back, insisted he wanted to buy it to take home! McMaster is excellent to buy from. Try the lens, if you don't like it send it back for a full refund no questions asked. Also a great source of all kinds of materials. I currently have about 1400 part numbers that I have bought from them. Don't bother asking for a catalog, you'd have to trade a couple of your kids. No kidding they are tough about handing out catalogs. If anybody is interested I have a two year old McMaster I am willing to part with for the shipping cost. It weighs about 8 pounds. Gary H. Lucas 2498 From: Date: Wed Nov 5, 2003 6:28pm Subject: Re: Re: Welding gear I've never found the need to have welding gear aboard the Bones. Once foamed, with furnishings in place, it is difficult to weld a funished boat. One origami boat we met in Fiji had burned out its interior trying to weld a steel pipe to the stern to protect the rudder. Another steel boat, factory built, was able to weld doubler plates below the waterline, with someone on duty inside spraying a hose on the furnishings. On the one occasion that I needed to make a welded repair, it involved days of preparation to remove/replace the interior and repair the paint. I have found SS fastenings perfectly adequate to attach items to a finished steel boat, so long as care is taken to seal/protect against rust. In an emergency, I would thru bolt a patch until the boat could be hauled and permanent repairs made. Bolted items can always be permanently welded during a haul out. If you think you might want to attach an item in the future, weld SS acorn nuts facing outwards, inside the hull at strategic locations during construction, and bolt it on when available. Originally the Bones had weld-on anodes, which did require regular welding, and made a mess of the paint, inside and out. The problem wasn't the welding, so much as repairing the paint after welding on new anodes. Especially as the area opposite the anodes inside the hull might be difficult to maintain. We replaced the weld on anodes with 3/4" SS bolts, heads welded to the hull. We now bolt on anodes. Bolt on anodes are common in other hull materials, and in 15 years we have never had an anode fail to make a good electrical connection. Greg Elliott Yacht Lazy Bones http://www.origamimagic.com 2499 From: J & H Fuller Date: Wed Nov 5, 2003 7:29pm Subject: RE: Re: Welding gear Go to WWW.princessauto.com you can sign up for a free catalog and download the current flier every two weeks, they often have helmets on sale and even the normal price is less than $200 CDN. John. 2500 From: sae140 Date: Thu Nov 6, 2003 2:29am Subject: Re: Welding gear > Actually, I was being a bit tongue-in-cheek. Duhhhh - missed that ..... touch of the 'teaching my grandmother to suck eggs' then ... ("suck eggs" !! - what *do* these expressions mean ? I seem to remember my little ol' granma didn't even like eggs ...) I road-tested a friend's ESAB helmet last week, and duly impressed, went shopping for one - until I saw the price ! And that has me puzzled: is there much difference in quality/ performance between the 'made in China' lenses and the top-end jobs which are 5x their price, or are the big names just cashing-in on their reputation ? An aside - has anyone tried welding with alternator conversions ? Such as: http://www.geocities.com/damonfg/obweld.html http://mywebpages.comcast.net/t.molnar/Obwelder1.htm http://www.trailhed.com/welding1.html If they're any good, maybe these could be the answer (suitably isolated from the engine/ boat of course) to the need for a 'take along just in case' welder. With suitable switching, could also revert to doubling as a standard high-output alternator. Pity we don't get big un's (>100A) over here. Colin 2501 From: fmichael graham Date: Thu Nov 6, 2003 3:58am Subject: RE: Re: Welding gear John: Thanks! I have heard of Princess Auto, before, but thought they were for auto parts & tools. From the look of their online catalogue, I should be able to save a few bucks on equipment. In fact, I think that I'll take the day off of work tomorrow and go "visit the dentist". Regards, Mike 2502 From: keith green Date: Thu Nov 6, 2003 6:18am Subject: Re: Re: Welding gear Careful in there, you can spend a lot more than you intended to; time and money both. Overall, I've been pretty happy with their products and they have a unconditional guarantee for something like 3 months, anyway. The sales are phenomenal and they seem to rotate most of their products through them throughout the year. Beat best deal I've seen so far was a 5" D-handle angle-grinder, variable speed, in a case, with cut-off and grinding disks as well as buffing head and diamond blade for concrete and tile included; all for the staggering sum of $49 Can. Have fun at the dentist. Keith Green Vancouver, BC 2503 From: Richard Till Date: Thu Nov 6, 2003 8:22am Subject: Re: Re: Welding gear/anodes Greg, I also welded 316 bolts on for the anodes on "My Island." Then I tested them all with a multimeter to see if I had contact--seems fine so far. An engineer friend tells me the best thing to seal under water joints with is Belzona (sp?) rubber. I would be tempted to carry a drill and tap and suitable screws to patch hard to get at places. rt 2504 From: richytill Date: Thu Nov 6, 2003 9:50am Subject: practical rigging While doing the interior of "My Island" I will brainstorm on rigging. There are a variety of approaches to standing rigging. I am trying to look at this from a cost/advantage engineering point of view and ask what jobs the rigging needs to do: high tensile; not crack; not corode; light; no stretch; low windage and in this case-- reliable and affordable. Turnbuckles, terminals and so on need to be factored in to a whole system. The conclusion I came up with is alloy steel rod rigging. Stainless rod would not meet the citeria: prone to cracking; expensive fittings; expensive rod; bad experiences--this is just not an option. Coated, galvanized wire would do a good job--this is a proven system for offshore. The question is: would a owner built steel rod system be a worthwhile experiment? The alloy steel rod I am looking at has a tensile of well over 100,000 psi, the metal can be formed and is not prone to cracking. The main disadvantage seems to be the time and effort spent doing a good job of coating the material. The main advantage seems to be the ability to make up the ends in such a way as to avoid poultice corrosion, rust and so on. I have a pile of ss rigging here (316 and 304 commercial grade) that I can use but the weakness seems to be in the area around the terminals: cracking; hardening; poultice corossion; cost of additional components; etc. No pressure to make a decission yet--just thinking ahead. rt 2505 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Thu Nov 6, 2003 0:23pm Subject: Re: practical rigging All that engineering is wonderful, while the boat is still in the backyard. Once you leave the dock for distant shores your priorities will change. Absolute reliability will of course be first, with availability of spares a VERY close second! Gary H. Lucas 2506 From: jim dorey Date: Thu Nov 6, 2003 3:02pm Subject: Re: practical rigging anybody here tried wingsails yet? 2507 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Fri Nov 7, 2003 3:54am Subject: Re: practical rigging Rich The problem that I can see with alloy steel rod rigging is that if its one and only strand fails then disaster. With a multi-strand system, and I agree about using galvanised wire rope, if one strand goes then nothing untoward happens and there is a chance of noticing it before disaster strikes. There is also a problem with the terminals of a rod system. If screwed fittings are used then there is a stress raiser at the start of the cut thread and that is where it will fail. Some people slush, serve, parcel and serve galvanised wire rope to protect it from corrosion. Remember: Worm and parcel with the lay, Turn, and serve the other way. Regards, Ted 2508 From: Phillip Allen Date: Fri Nov 7, 2003 4:21am Subject: Re: Re: practical rigging Sorry if this is a dumb question but exactly what part of the galvanized wire rope is covered in this way? (parceled/served) It also occures to me that pining, peening or clamping/welding may avoid the stress-riser effect of threading rod rigging. 2509 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Fri Nov 7, 2003 6:19am Subject: Re: practical rigging Phillip, I had never heard of this until I read one of Tom Colvin's books. Bernard Moitessier refers to it as well. Slushing wire rope with oil, bitumen or whatever is done to protect it from corrosion. Worming, parcelling and serving is done to a rope to protect it or to protect other ropes or people using it from stray wires and the slushing. It is mostly done on splices and around deck level where people and other ropes come into contact with it. It has to be maintained regularly. It is something that I have never done. I just mentioned it to show off the little poem. With regard to the rod rigging or indeed anything any sudden change of dimension will tend to increase stress and this is important with rigging that will be prone to induced vibration from high winds and flexing as the boat flexes in heavy seas. Drilling a hole for the pin will reduce the effective cross section and increase the stress. Peening or riveting depending on the shape would be better and is used. Welding will effect not only the dimension but also the alloy probably not for the better. My point is that the consequences of the failure of a single strand in rod rigging are somewhat greater than it is in multi-strand rigging. That said I have only rigged a sailing dinghy and have no experience of rigging a blue water cruiser. Best to discuss it with a rigger. The Metal Boat Forum has a rigging section and that might be worth a post. Regards, Ted 2510 From: Phillip Allen Date: Fri Nov 7, 2003 9:03am Subject: Re: Re: practical rigging Thanks for the reply, Ted. I was speaking in the most general of terms myself. I would think that galvanized wire rope would be a good choice for rigging. The advantage would be in strength per dimension and cost. An added plus would be that if a replacement were needed that the lower cost might preclude the "putting-off" that a very expensive bit of rigging might cause. Phillip 2511 From: evanmoonjunk Date: Fri Nov 7, 2003 11:23am Subject: Re: Auto helmet Hi Martin, you can get the inserts that do the same thing that fit into a regular helmet and are cheaper than buying another whole helmet...Evan 2512 From: brentswain38 Date: Fri Nov 7, 2003 11:30am Subject: Re: practical rigging On my current rig I epoxy tared the works, wrapped it with hockey tape ( Canajan eh)then gave it a couple more coats of epoxy tar, then put split black plastic pipe over it. I reckon it's good for my lifetime.Tensioning the wires between two trees with a comealong makes the job easier. Brent Swain 2513 From: evanmoonjunk Date: Sat Nov 8, 2003 11:50am Subject: Help I need Alex Christie's current email address to send a picture, can some one help...Evan 2514 From: jim dorey Date: Sat Nov 8, 2003 7:48pm Subject: Re: practical rigging was that a groan of disgust at the mention of these devices, or a blank stare? > anybody here tried wingsails yet? 2515 From: fmichael graham Date: Sat Nov 8, 2003 11:24pm Subject: Re: Help Evan: achristie@t... Mike 2516 From: Mark K Date: Sun Nov 9, 2003 3:37pm Subject: Re: practical rigging What exactly did you have in mind? I've seen the term "wingsail" applied to everything from rigid airfoil sails to variations on gaff and junk sails. Most of the people who post here are interested in cruising boats and as such tend to more conservative rigs. 2517 From: Date: Sun Nov 9, 2003 6:32pm Subject: Re: Re: Welding gear/anodes I've mounted many parts over the years on deck using a drill, tap and SS bolts/machine screws. I squirt some suitable liquid caulking into the hole to fill any void in the foam, and spread a layer to form a gasket between the deck and part, then bolt the works together. To date none have these have failed, the oldest being approximately 15 years old. I once used neoprene gasket material for a temporary patch underwater - with a steel plate over - and it also seemed to work very well. I don't know Belzona rubber. Often the choice of caulking is limited to materials at hand. I have a simple test. Select a caulking material that will stick to wet steel, because that is often when you need it the most. If you have a leaking port, you really want a caulking that you can squirt into a seam, work in with a finder or a thin blade, and it will hold the leak and set up. Greg Elliott Yacht Lazy Bones http://www.origamimagic.com 2518 From: richytill Date: Mon Nov 10, 2003 5:46pm Subject: maze of frames Check out the picture of frames in SAIL magazines' David Gerr article on steel vs aluminum. Now figure out how many frameless hulls you could form in the time it would take to set up that one frame. Makes me tired to think about it. rt 2519 From: Stephen Wandling Date: Mon Nov 10, 2003 11:06pm Subject: Alex Christie: What's your email address Alex, all of your email addresses are bouncing. Wazzup? Stephen 2520 From: jim dorey Date: Tue Nov 11, 2003 5:22am Subject: Re: Re: practical rigging well, i was thinking of putting a rigid wingsail on a 12' pram for going shopping, would have been neat, but abandoned it, i don't believe i've ever been accused of conservatism. i've wanted a weekend sailor that has almost a 1:1 length:width, perfect for a leisurely fully automated cruise. 2521 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Tue Nov 11, 2003 5:52am Subject: Re: maze of frames I felt that way the very first time I saw a Bruce Roberts design. I wonder just how many rusting hulks are out there from people who finally realize the enormity of the task they have started? My gut feeling is that a large part of the problem that people underestimate the second phase of building a boat, filling that cavern with machinery and furniture. On the hull you got some pretty good help from the boat designer. Unfortunately in many cases he hasn't really shared with you the actual shape of the interior. In lots of cases I'll bet he really doesn't know, he's been leaving it up to the clever guys at the yard to figure out how to shoehorn what he drew into the hull once it is built. So you can't actually do much of the interior work until you have a hull you can actually measure. Once you have the hull you are faced with another problem. This space isn't rectangular in any direction like the rest of your world. Suddenly, simple jobs like a chest of drawers becomes a difficult game of trying to even come up with a design where the drawers are all the same size, so you don't have to custom make them one at time. So inevitably you start building stuff so you can picture how it is all going to fit. Once you know how it fits though you are faced with either tossing some of what you've built in the face of your new found knowledge, or living with the results of your earlier oversights. In many cases this drives you to continuously making compromises from that point on. The process of building a boat then becomes very much linear. You build things step by step until finished. You can't move indoors to work on the interior while the hull is held up by bad weather, except for a few small items. You also can't have a third party, say a cabinet shop build the interior for you unless you can give them accurate plans. Today we have the solution to this problem, if we can implement it. We need to accurately model the hull in 3D software. We could also model a couple of different interiors, which could then be refined as they are built BECAUSE we have accurate model to refer back to. Modeling the hull though is quite difficult, because the design method used by manual design does not produce all the data to actually shape a hull in a 3D program. I bought a copy of Brent Swains 31' boat plans. I've been trying to produce a 3D model of the hull from the various drawings. I've been stymied for a couple of reasons. First, I am a machine builder, a blocks and cylinders guy, not the sexy compound curves kind of guy. Second getting it accurate is difficult, for a couple of reasons. I'm not working from a digital data set, I'm working from scaled down hand drawings. So there are translation errors. I also found out that the shapes you see in photos, in the lines drawings, and from folding up paper models are not the result of a full developed flat surface. On Brent's boats there are compound curves introduced at both the bow and stern by the process of forcing the parts together. These compound curves are much more difficult to model and they heavily affect the interior shape of the hull. This problem could be overcome by someone actually measuring a hull accurately, but doing that kind of measurement on a hull is quite difficult. You'd also have to be sure that the particular builder cut out his steel accurately, and fitted it together accurately as well. Of course doing this will much easier once we have a fully digital set of plans to build the next one. I suspect that Greg Elliot's company has as solution to this problem already at hand, since he already models the hulls in 3D. Of course once you release a digital model of anything it almost instantly becomes public domain. You can't really make any more money on it, except from the honest people willing to pay the designer for his initial efforts, and support as you build. That appears to be very difficult nowadays unless you have the clout of an entire industry behind you. One possible solution is for a number of people to commission a 3D model for the express purpose of making it public domain. If we had a known workable hull model to start from anyone with a 3D modeling program of almost any kind could play to their hearts content with the interior layout, and even the decks, and keel. I suspect that a lot more boats would actually hit the water as a result of this effort. I also suspect the boats would be a lot prettier too. If you can show people photorealistic drawings of your baby before you build it you have lot better hope of getting it right. If I am successful at producing a 3D model from Brent's plans I won't be free to distribute the model. It is after all Brent's design. Of course if I have to introduce lots of changes to model it, then it may very well become a whole new design. But I am not a boat designer. It could very well be a very bad boat. So right now the whole idea is simply a diversion for someone with neither the time nor money to put into a boat. Maybe this will encourage others though. Gary H. Lucas 2522 From: john blanky Date: Tue Nov 11, 2003 1:08pm Subject: Re: maze of frames Hi all, Long time lurker, always fun to read the forum. The beauty of Brent origami design is it inherent lack of ridged dimensional control and elegance of the creation process of the hull. IE no jiggs required and if the overall shape varies by an 1" or 2" it isn't going to create big problems. So for one off and low production this is great as this allowance for dimension allows a larger range of people to successfully complete the project. While Gary is quite correct in the notion that if one could get a good model then some of the finishing work could be expedited. Intuitively I suspect that is somewhat theoretical. As the reallity of humanity, tends towards Barents overrall ideology. Ya you could get the interior built but money, time, etc prevent it from happening. So get it started, get sailing and finish as you go. The fancy modelling from past threads could go on and on. Engineering always becomes about compromises. Thing to examine is the effort vrs the benefit, many people enjoy the exercise of refining designs so if thats the case then please take my comment for what they are, my concern is people spinning there tires on a exponential curve of time vrs benefit. Otherwise I'd let it go and enjoy the process the way it is, it really is very efficient design for this type of project. My impression is that Greg is in a tinker and enjoys the process of refinement, which is evident in his design, I would argue that while it's may have it's benefits, it is introducing complexity in production, now does that payoff in terms of long term benefits, that could be argued till we are old and grey. I think the thing is to appreciate things on there own merits. It s really the key to happiness Cheers, a fair wind and worthy opponent, Neil. ps: I've been involved with production of Aircraft and farm equipment. I actually bought a searunner 37, but really enjoy the nature of this forum and Brent's design, and plan to incorporate some of the ideas into my boat. Trying to think of a simple way to create a trimaran based on this ideology, but I enjoy sailing, which keeps getting in the way. 2523 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Tue Nov 11, 2003 2:10pm Subject: Re: maze of frames John, I think there is something about Brent's design that escapes casual notice. The fact that the hull gets pulled together from just two pieces means that the dimensional variation one boat to the next is much SMALLER than boats built by covering a frame. You just can't change the dimensions of those big sheets very much with a couple of come-alongs. So Brent's claim of his boats being accurately constructed is very true. I'm not wasting time not sailing. I currently don't have boat, it's winter here in NJ, I'm unemployed and looking for a job is not about feverish activity but more about waiting. I may never build my own boat. I don't mind helping others build theirs though. Gary H. Lucas 2524 From: john blanky Date: Tue Nov 11, 2003 4:00pm Subject: Re: maze of frames Gary, I apologize, I do not want to trivialize your effort, just that these type exercise have an exponentially diminshing return on effort. Even if you are not working for some one there is value in your efforts in whatever you are choosing to do. It maybe a give but I thought it worth mentioning. I haven't built a Swain boat so am just commenting from the sidelines, as I alluded to if you enjoy the work and like the challenge then by all means. It is just that much of times these turn into academic exercise (which is fun as well) but just to keep it in perspective. The completeness of the original process/design maybe already reduce to it's lowest common denominators. The greatest thing is to design something simply. As far as dimensional consistency, I've experienced 2 guys working with detail mechanical drawings, with dimension to a thou, create parts that are different enough so as not to be interchangable in an assembly. So it's probably a pretty good guess that boats built by different builder would vary, the 1" is hypothetical. It would be interesting to see how close the various boats are but I would specuulate this would be an elaborate effort. From previous thread wrt CAD exercise, it would seem that one needs to have a mathematician/metallurgist/engineer come up with new equation which model the origami, tortured steel process. As it is unlikely that there is any other presently used, common, process that necessitates the need for this model(emphasis on common and present, which is what drives software development) it is unlikely that any present modelling software will do be usable for this process. So to accomplish the model requirements requires a return to fundamentals to create the equation. Cheers,FWWO Neil PS I have a arguement personality so like to talk around a topic to determine if my position is valid, a logic shock jock has a saying "that intellectual consistancy is the hob goblin of the ___________, hmm it escapes me at present but you get the idea. 2525 From: jim dorey Date: Tue Nov 11, 2003 4:05pm Subject: Re: maze of frames try insulation foam and epoxy over glass, it will have to be built in a traditional manner(frames), but at least the parts will be dang light. the skin could be stressed glass sheet, like canvas on canoes. the hull would need to be wide to keep the lower weight from tipping in the wind, the upper decks could be built of foam too, build the walls out of sheet foam, then if you do tip, it'll be light enough to force it upright again using the air in it. might be something to think about for origami interiors, be a lot easier than wood to carve to fit, and you might find a kind that will bond to the hull insulation. 2526 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Tue Nov 11, 2003 5:16pm Subject: Re: maze of frames John, Close tolerances doesn't produce interchangeable parts. Good design does. I've been working in the greenhouse industry building watering/spraying robots. Let me tell you, "We don't need no stinkin tolerances!" The stuff I design has to work from parts made with basic hand tools, because if it stops working that is what they are going to use to fix it. You might be surprised to learn that I am not interested in a classic boat, or a really pretty boat, or a big boat, or a high tech boat, or a boat with lots of gadgets. I am interested in the simplest possible boat that will take you anywhere safely, while being very easy to maintain. I think that computer technology can help us come with the simplest design because we can try lots of things very quickly without the scrap heap out back. I've used 2D cad for 18 years, and switched over to 3D design about 3 years ago because I found that I could visualize parts so much better. You know how it is when you spend days making a part and the first time you hold it in your hand you say "Damn, I see a much easier way to make this!" Well with 3D modeling I find myself getting those moments before I've even made the first part. I don't think that figuring out how to model the compound curves in Brent's design will really lead us to anything simpler. I think that studying why we need that compound curvature will lead us to a way to eliminate the need for it. That could produce a boat that is simpler, if you define simpler as needing to rely less on hard to duplicate processes. Gary H. Lucas 2527 From: Mark K Date: Tue Nov 11, 2003 5:45pm Subject: Re: maze of frames I would think that the more planning you do the fewer problems you will have later. There is a certain point you need to get to in the planning of the systems and interior of your boat before you foam and finish the hull. Once the foam is in and the paint is on you won't want to have to weld anything onto the hull and running plumbing and wireing conduit could be more difficult after the foam is in. That's why I've been asking all these questions about interiors and such lately. Right now I'm planning an electrical system for a cruising boat. - Markk 2528 From: alex_christie Date: Wed Nov 12, 2003 8:43pm Subject: Re: Alex Christie: What's your email address Hi Stephen and group, I can now be reached at northcanoe@y.... We sold our house and are now living in a cheap old motorhome on an open piece of land with no internet or phone connection. These are the things we do to save up for a boat! Alex 2529 From: Stephen Wandling Date: Wed Nov 12, 2003 10:31pm Subject: Re: Re: Alex Christie: What's your email address Alex, That's way cool! Makes me regret trading my 40 passenger school bus conversion for the little FG sailboat that I no longer have. You're setting a standard and I salute you. Stephen 2530 From: Date: Thu Nov 13, 2003 10:07am Subject: Re: maze of frames Gary, your insight into computer modeling of origami describes almost exactly the thought process we went through in creating our models. Do you want to model the limitations of an existing design, or do you want to model what might be possible in a new design? Metal does not like to be compounded. It naturally assumes a conic shape. There is a saying, metal is like a beautiful woman, it yields only to superior strength or superior intellect. Rather than force the metal to compound, why not allow it to take the conic shape it wants to assume naturally? This requires less net energy to fold and yields a fairer shape. Using 3-D modeling we were able to eliminate the knuckle at the chine ends by modifying the patterns rather than trying to force it out during construction. Also, 3-D modeling led us to realize that the ends of the boats did not need to be compounded. This allowed us to add modern, high performance bows and sterns to origami designs, while maintaining the simplicity and low cost of origami construction. With the right patterns you can have the simplicity and low cost of origami construction, without the limitations of knuckles or compounded ends. Ron and I have a keen appreciation of the time and $$ builders invest to create a boat, which is why we invested in 3-D modelling - to ensure you start with the very best origami patterns available. greg elliott yacht lazy bones http://www.origamimagic.com 2531 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Thu Nov 13, 2003 10:14am Subject: Re: maze of frames How far do you go with the interior? Do your customers get you to design the interior, or do they just buy just the bare hull? Do any of them ask you for the 3D model to play with? Gary H. Lucas 2532 From: John Foster Date: Thu Nov 13, 2003 11:02am Subject: Re: Digest Number 636 Hi Gary: If you look at Derek Kelsall's site at http://www.kelsall.com/ you will see a method of construction by pulling flat panels into place very much like the pulling of steel plates into place for origami boats. These construction methods, be they using steel panels or foam and glass panels are about as simple as they can get. Suppose, with the cooperation of the designer, you built a pretty good 3D representation of the design, and let the designer sell it just the way he would have sold lines and offsets for lofting years ago. Wouldn't that allow some pretty good 3D "what if" games to be played in fitting in bulkheads and cabinetry? Suppose you have your empty shell of a hull built. There are all sorts of schemes available in various industries for mapping that hull in 3D, from both inside and outside. What sort of tolerances would you expect to need for fitting in bulkheads and cabinetry anyway? Why would the hull to hull variations in either of these hull construction methods be intolerably different from a 3D representation taken from the design? Sure hope you do that before employment ties up your free time again...(grin....) Have a nice day John 2533 From: Date: Thu Nov 13, 2003 0:06pm Subject: Re: maze of frames We can design/build to any stage - each customer is unique. A first time builder has different requirements than an experienced builder and we tailor our services to meet your needs. There are 3-D models of the Genoa 55 and the Darwin 60 on our website that anyone can play with. First load the viewer: http://www.parallelgraphics.com/products/cortona/download/ Press "Install Now!". Once you see the rotating blue cube, you can load either model: http://www.origamimagic.com./Design/Genoa55/G55_VRML/G_55.b.29.comp.WRL http://www.origamimagic.com./Design/Darwin60/d_603D.solid.WRL Use the "fit" and "study" buttons to get started. Experiment with the controls - you can "fly" inside the G55, stand in the cockpit, etc. These are not our design models - which are not available for reasons I'm sure everyone will appreciate. However, the models shown give a pretty good idea of the power of 3-D modeling. greg elliott yacht lazy bones http://www.origamimagic.com 2534 From: willmarsh3 Date: Thu Nov 13, 2003 2:43pm Subject: Re: maze of frames What I would do is once you have your plans for the boat you want to build is to do the following: 1) Go to an art supply store and get a sheet or two of heavy construction paper size about 24x30 or so. This is about the thickness of the gray paper board that sometimes comes with a dress shirt. 2) Get a hot glue gun. 3) Construct a 1/16 scale model of the boat from the plans. I think it could be done in an evening or two, cutting the paper using the patterns for the steel plate. Use the hot glue gun to "tack weld" the pieces together, then continuous weld with the glue gun if so desired. 4) You now have a 3D model in your hand that 95% meets what you get with CAD and you can quickly try out as many 1/16 scale model interiors as you want. 5) This may be slightly more time consuming with plans that involve lots of frames but the principle is the same. Will. 2535 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Thu Nov 13, 2003 3:11pm Subject: Re: Re: maze of frames Conceptually that technique works well. When you get to the metal though you find out where it fails. I build machinery. A couple of years ago I was really busy and needed to get a job done for a customer. I hired a guy I knew that was very good on a board, but didn't use computers. He drew a 1/16 scale assembly drawing and dozens of individual detail drawings for all the parts. As we started putting the machine together we found problems where things didn't fit. At 1/16 scale the drawings were useless as a far as determining where the discrepancies came in. So we couldn't actually correct the drawings without going through his yellow pad to see where the error was made. In the case of a boat interior you will have the same problem. You can mock up a paper model to work out the gross concepts very well. However you'll have a really difficult time actually getting usable dimensions so you can build all the cabinetry and have it drop right in. I am very much used to designing a machine with 800 parts and having only a couple of parts not fit when I am done. More importantly though is the fact that it only takes me minutes to determine where the error is. Often it isn't a design error, it's just assembled wrong. In either case the error gets corrected immediately and is gone forever, from this machine and from the drawings. I completely understand that learning 3D just to build one boat may be overkill for many people. For those that can't do it though the best course could be to build EXACTLY what someone else has built before. Or you could say modify a cabinet you don't like, knowing that if you keep the overall dimensions it will still fit. If the original was done in 3D the things that didn't work right could have easily fixed so that you don't make the same mistakes again and again. Gary H. Lucas 2536 SPAM 2537 SPAM 2538 From: Mark K Date: Fri Nov 14, 2003 0:59am Subject: Re: maze of frames What kind of machines do you build? I haven't built a boat yet, but I would be very much suprised if you could build interior fittings from plans and expect them to fit satisfactorily unless your fit and trim system can accomodate errors on the order of inches. Even production boats made from molds have to add things like liners to make pre-built fixtures fit. The usual approach for one-offs is to take templates off the finished hull and build the interior to those. Something the size and shape of a boat hull does not lend itself to precision no matter how it's made. I can't even begin to calculate the build up of tolerances for something like a origami hull. - Markk 2539 From: jim dorey Date: Fri Nov 14, 2003 3:06am Subject: Re: Digest Number 636 i figure the foam insulation adds a lot of tolerance. perhaps just use welded on mounts with horizontal bends, mount the interior on bushings, get a 1/4" of free play, maybe lots more, but stability could be a problem. maybe for stability use some of those gas charged dogbone engine stabilizers that front wheel drive cars use. 2540 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Fri Nov 14, 2003 5:33am Subject: Re: Re: maze of frames I build automation machinery for the commercial greenhouse industry. In particular, a robotic watering and spraying system. I also used to be an electrical contractor. Our trucks had very elaborate wooden bins and drawers that we designed and built ourselves. Fitting them into vans with curved sides, stamped ribs, wheel wheels etc. is very much like fitting out a boat. Our bins were all plywood and we used resin coated box nails and white glue to assemble them. It is amazing how well they held up. My brother still has some on the road that have been through two truck replacements and are now 30 years old. Some have been in accidents that destroyed the truck. In every case we were able to salvage the bins and put them in new trucks. We didn't start from scratch with each new truck either. Like the berths in a boat you have bins of certain sizes for each tool and material to be stored. We made complete drawings of the bins and then built to those drawings. A couple of things to realize. Origami produces very repeatable results, because you just can't change the shape of a single sheet of metal very much without very powerful machinery. So I would expect that the variations would be on the order of an inch or less. In a boat all the surfaces you see, are not the surfaces that must be fitted to the hull. That means that any trimming, or clearances left for the variations will be hidden behind the interior cabinetry. So you have to use a little cleverness when you build. Your bulkheads can go back to the hull surfaces and can be trimmed. Vertical surfaces against the hull though should stand clear so they wouldn't need to be cut away to fit. Your interior can be built offset from a centerline running down the hull. During installation a pair of taut strings, one high and one low can be used as a reference to check that each component actually goes exactly where it was intended. One common reference point lengthwise can be used to locate everything fore and aft. That means that installation can be installed out of sequence if needed. If the interior is completely designed, before the hull is constructed there is another big benefit. Part of what makes fitting out so time consuming is the lack of supports for the interior in exactly the right places. Then there is the lack of passages in exactly the right places for hoses, pipes, etc. Sure you can cut or weld later, but now you've got to deal with damage to the paint, foam, and the risk of fire. Gary H. Lucas 2541 From: willmarsh3 Date: Fri Nov 14, 2003 10:31am Subject: Re: maze of frames I give this method for application to designing the interior of boats only. I agree it has some limitations some of which you have noted: 1) You are not going to get a parts count or list of exact dimensions or generate patterns directly from it for parts 2) Scaling up, it will be only within an inch or two of the actual size However, 1) It will help one visualize things and figure out what works and doesn't. 2) It lends itself well to stick figure trials. 3) It better suits the piecemeal construction method I use. For me to try to build a cabinet all at once and drop it in, I would easily wind up with it being 1/4" off or worse, or the angles off. I'm do better at cutting and fitting a pattern made of cardboard or cheap plywood, then cutting the part. I would build the cabinets in place. 4) It's cheap and quick which suits most one-off home builders fine. 5) The construction will help in visualizing and understanding how the steel will go together as the paper bends similarly to steel. Also, visit other boats to see what you like. I was impressed by the interior layout of a late model Catalina 28 that a buddy of mine owns. The head was located port aft with the hatch offset slightly to starboard to accomodate the width. The galley was on the starboard side. This allowed a spacious saloon and airy v-berth forward. Will. 2542 From: fmichael graham Date: Fri Nov 14, 2003 11:45am Subject: Re: Re: maze of frames When I "revamped" the interior for my Cal 330, I used cardboard cut-outs to form the "outer"(hullside) edge of bulkheads, cabinets, etc., and transfered the shapes onto - in this case - plywood. If one were production building an origami boat, perhaps, one could make templates for interior components. I would think, however, that the "swain" method of constructing would create too many variances in the dimensions of each individual boat and would, therefore, necessitate a cut-out system similar to that which I used. It really isn't all that difficult, though. I had never tackled a boat interior before - previous to doing my own - and it is easy enough that I will do it again when I build my first "Swain". Mike P.S. It sounds as if Alex has the jump on me, though. Perhaps, a few experienced builders should have their wives write words of encouragement for the benefit of Mrs. Christie. That way Alex can point the finger elsewhere when his wife questions his sanity. Where/when are you planning to build, Alex? 2543 From: johaan2002 Date: Sat Nov 15, 2003 5:21pm Subject: questions hi all , i passed my welding test, wow! industrial duty mig welders ROCK! you should have seen how much metal that thing lays down, and the penetration too! i have welded heavy guage steel with high amperage and big sticks before but nothing compared to the bead you can lay with FCAW, the weld metal deposistion is very high. i guess the stats i read about it being more cost effective are true .i have been following this forum religiously, as well as the story of two women from northern alberta that have been working on thier roberts 42ft steel boat. both of them profess to have had little or no previous metal fabrication skills, thier site is a great symbol of achievment, and a huge inspiration to me. i believe the site is www.sandyscb.com/sanfun.htm, i check in there periodically over the past year and a bit to see how they are coming along. thier site has tons of photos from every day that they have put in on that boat. if you get the chance check it out. Its NOT to say that i think im as capable as they are this far into the project but, as with any seemingly insurmountable tasks my father always says "Son it HAS been done before!" and that kind of optimism is really the kind of attitude a person needs to start a project like this. so here goes.. by the way anybody know where to buy cheap mild steel plate in the hamilton ontario area? :) jon, at hamilton ontario 2544 From: prairiemaidca Date: Sun Nov 16, 2003 7:25pm Subject: Rig vrs anchor rode?? HI All: Two weeks of vacation and some good weather allowed for some serious work on prairie Maid. It also created a couple of questions. To those of you that have a swain built.... How does the anchor rode and the baby stay interact. It would seem that the rode comming from the winch will be in a conflict causing it to rub against the stay as the rode goes from one side of the winch drum to the other. All the pics I have show this situation and the plans call for the attachment point for the stay to be dead centre. Comments please. I'm also a little confused by the different rig attachment systems. Some have the plan version of a fore, a baby then one on each side of the cabin roof then the two on each side on the rail. Others have three on the rail and yet another has a cabin roof plus three on the rail. I know virtually nothing of the value in one over the other. Would some of you with experience please give your views. Thanks Martin Forster (Prairie Maid) 2545 From: opuspaul Date: Tue Nov 18, 2003 5:53am Subject: Re: Rig vrs anchor rode?? Hi.... This is my first time replying to the group....been lurking awhile now....I have a Brent Swain 36 (BS 36) and been cruising it a few years now....maybe I can help. You are right about the conflict between the anchor winch and the inner forstay.....its really not a problem though.... I use a big old galvanized turnbuckle...1/2 inch course thread and it only takes about a minute to take on and off with a bolt and then you are free to anchor. With the forstay tied aside to the rail you can then put a rain catcher up without any interference. You could get fancy with a Hyfield Lever or something like it but I have never found a need for that and I normally only use the inner forestay if I am expecting stonger winds. I have the forward inner forestays attached to the edge of the cabin top....its plenty strong for the rig and makes it easier to walk up and down the deck....the only reason I see to have three attachment points on the rail is if you had a double preader rig....you could have a thinner mast section if you did this but would have a little more complexity and probably cost. The relatively narrow beam of the BS 36 makes it a toin coss which way you go...some people would say the narrow beam favors the double spreader rig. I welded the chainplates so that I could go either way and then waited for the rig to show up. Just my opinion...I found a used single spreader mast and am very happy with the single spreader rig. Cheers, Paul 2546 From: mat_man22 Date: Tue Nov 18, 2003 9:28pm Subject: Re: maze of frames I would think that a CAD/CNC plasma cut sheets would produce a much more repeatable hull shape than hand cut. Brent Swain in Metal Boat Society forum: "The computer programmer could use his skills to cad cam all the parts that go into his boat, and have them pre cut, saving a lot of time and money." 2547 From: blueiceicle Date: Wed Nov 19, 2003 10:56am Subject: Purchasing Materials Hello Everyone I have a question for anyone who has built one of these boats in the Comox Valley. I live in the Valley and Im curious as too where would be the best place to buy the steel required. If anyone has any info it would be greatly appreciated Sincerly Jesse 2548 From: jim dorey Date: Wed Nov 19, 2003 4:40pm Subject: Re: Purchasing Materials dunno bout you, but round home there's a transport rig that delivers alloy sheet and rod to the local fab shop regularly for boat castles and antenna masts. course it's for use on glass boats, but maybe there's a a fab shop near you that can tell you where they call for steel, think autobody shops, they use sheet steel, and their supplier also may be able to get thick stock in steel or alloy. 2549 From: richytill Date: Wed Nov 19, 2003 5:49pm Subject: Re: maze of frames Nothing against plasma--we use it to great advantage. Plasma is fast and clean. In this case tho', the bonus of flame cut is that shrinkage at the edge of the plate makes for improved hull form. You can still run flame cut from CAD if you want more curve. If we had not started with wood frame boats I question if, from a practical engineering point of view, transverse steel frames would be used on metal sail-boats today. rt 2550 From: Glen Date: Wed Nov 19, 2003 8:17pm Subject: Re: Purchasing Materials Jesse Try giving russel steel in C.R. a call. All prices are FOB to their down so you would have to find a way to transport the materials to your site! Glen 2552 From: brentswain38 Date: Thu Nov 20, 2003 10:56am Subject: Re: Purchasing Materials Russel can arrange to drop your steel off in Comox on their way north or south. Brent Swain 2553 From: brentswain38 Date: Thu Nov 20, 2003 11:04am Subject: Re: Rig vrs anchor rode?? Another advantage to having the foreward lower shroud on the cabinside as drawn is that it lets you use a staysail with a longer foot, getting a useful staysail size and a lower aspect ratio on the staysail, which makes it's sheeting point less critical. Having an extra three feet on the foot of the sail adds considerably to its area and improves it's aspect ratio considerably. If the foreward lower is on the rail, you couldn't sheet a staysail past it. Make sure you don't put a porthole directly under the chainplate or movement from the stress on the shroud could cause problems. Brent Swain 2554 From: brentswain38 Date: Thu Nov 20, 2003 11:18am Subject: Re: maze of frames I remember someone saying that when they mentioned origami boats some people roll their eyes . Don't take it personally, that's the same response that Columbus got when he tried to tell people the world was round and not flat.I'm sure some people responded the same way when someone tried to tell them that the earth went around the sun and that the sun didn't go round the earth.They are identifying with good company. Rolling the eyes is a first symptom of the dreaded luddites disease , a mental illness that causes some people to do incredibly irrational things like building frames , and spending months ,and in some cases years setting them up , then trying to force plates to fit over them to produce a very inferior product, while vainly trying to rationalize the proccess with the old puritan notion that "If it's fun and easy, it must be wrong." Puritanism has been accurately defined as " The terrible, nagging fear ,that someone, somewhere , just might be having a good time". Brent Swain 2555 From: brentswain38 Date: Thu Nov 20, 2003 11:41am Subject: RO Watermakers A friend built his own RO Watermaker using a General 3 GPM pressure washer pump with ceramic plungers ( Model TT9111 $325 CDN)a 540 gallon per minute membrane and has built his own housing out of ss type 316 sch 40 stainless pipe .He has been using it since 1998 , once a week with no problem. Membrane dimensions have been standardised and a 540 gallon per day membrane fits a 2 1/2 inch pipe perfectly. The membrane costs US $250 wholesale, much more retail.The whole rig costs undere $1,000 CDN. A watermaker of the same output costs $12,000 from West Marine and is made of much filimsier parts. Just set it up the same way as commercially made ones , belt driving the pump off the engine and use the above parts. Brent Swain 2556 From: fmichael graham Date: Thu Nov 20, 2003 1:30pm Subject: Re: RO Watermakers Brent: Would it be possible to get pictures of your friend's watermaker? It sounds like a good one. I see that there is a twin-keeler "Swain" for sale in San Fransisco. The name, I think, is "CHICA". Do you know who built it? Mike 2557 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Fri Nov 21, 2003 5:13am Subject: Re: RO Watermakers God Old Boat magazine had a good article on building your own watermaker about a year ago. You may be able to find it online or get a reprint. Gary H. Lucas 2558 From: blueiceicle Date: Fri Nov 21, 2003 11:45am Subject: Power Thanks Everyone for the quick response on where to get materials. I was wondering what the recomended power source for the 31' would be? Also if anyone knows how she handles underpower. Secondly any estimates on what rigging and sail would cost, (rough estimate). On the rough weather side has anyone every used a sea anchor? Ive been reading about them and just wondering if anyone in this forum has had some experiance with them. Thanks Again Jesse tunagouda@i... 2559 From: Len den Besten Date: Fri Nov 21, 2003 0:46pm Subject: Re: RO Watermakers Brent, Is there any way to get more info on this self built watermaker? I want to build it myself too. TIA, Regards,Len. 2560 From: blueiceicle Date: Fri Nov 21, 2003 1:18pm Subject: Any Thoughts Me Again Curious as to whether a 31' would be trailerable, as in not needing a commercial towing truck, if so if anyone has any thoughts on a trailer design. Thanks Again Jesse 2561 From: fmichael graham Date: Fri Nov 21, 2003 2:07pm Subject: Re: Power Jesse: I have used a sea anchor, twice; the first time was off of the west coast of the U.S., en route from Hawaii to Vancouver, and; the second time was in Nova Scotia. I have also experimented with warping lines. Succinctly, the sea anchor is a benefit in the most extreme of conditions to keep your vessel from turning beam-on to the predominant waves - avoiding a broach & subsequent roll over. It also allows you to slow the vessel from the "surfing" effect on following seas. When you are running "bare-pole", it will allow you to abandon the helm(made fast) and grab some sleep. Warping lines can be used to great effect in maintaining direction when your rudder cannot solely serve this purpose. Obviously, the sea anchor comes into use when you are at a point where you seriously question why you ever went sailing in the first place! There are many sea anchor designs - from simple webbings to parachutes. You can make a sea anchor, for next to nothing, that will rival any "professionally" made anchor. I made one out of harnesses that were used by telephone linesmen and had the sewing done at a local sail repair shop. I have seen numerous articles on sea anchors in various sail magazines & books. It seems to me, that Ferenc Mate had a fabrication example in one of his books, but sourcing out articles on this topic should not be difficult. In a subsequent post, you ask about a trailer for a 31'. You didn't specify the type of keel. I would think that the mass of the vessel would be the challenge and that the primary consideration in using a commercial mover or doing it on your own would be the number of times that you would want to trailer your boat. My 30' "plastic" boat displaced 12,500# and required a triple axle trailer, pulled by a highway tractor. unless you plan to regularly trailer your boat, I think that you would want to hire a hauling company. Regards, Mike 2562 From: blueiceicle Date: Fri Nov 21, 2003 3:51pm Subject: Re: Power Thanks for the reply fmichael graham Yeah the keel would be a dual keel design, and i guess your right the weight of the boat kinda makes it unrealistic to bother building a trailer. In regards to the sea anchor, I was kinda curious to see if it is a standard for offshore sailing saftey equipment. On another note, would built in flotation be a extrodinary cost for a Swain style boat (Weight, Design) ? Please excuse my questions that sound silly , Im just learning about sailing and i have no experiance whatsoever to do with sailing. (Something I plan to remedy!) Thanks Again Jesse 2563 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Fri Nov 21, 2003 4:41pm Subject: Re: Power Jesse, US Coastguard tests showed the Jordan series drogue to be very effective in securing a boat from being rolled. Their report can be seen at this web address: www.sailrite.com/droguereport.htm . If you type Coastguard series drogue into google you will find a lot of interesting information. There have been more discussions about built in flotation than you would want to shake a stick at. If you go back through the messages and use the search window you should find them. Regards, Ted 2565 From: Date: Fri Nov 21, 2003 5:27pm Subject: Re: Re: Power Circumstances and boats differ, but in general I have met few mono-hull sailors that have sea anchors as standard equipment. Most mono-hulls will heave-to with reefed sails in all but the most extreme conditions. I generally am not a fan of laying a hull, because of the possibility of getting rolled in a breaking sea. I always try and leave a sliver of sail up to help limit the motion of the vessel. A stout vessel, hove-to will survive amazing conditions. Often the best tactic is to heave-to and wedge yourself in a quarter berth with lots of pillows and get some sleep. A well built boat can take much worse conditions than you can, and fatigue quickly leads to mistakes. Survival in extreme conditions may require extraordinary tactics. Normally these will not be encountered if you pay attention to the weather and local conditions. Your aim is always to limit the motion of the vessel, so that it remains within its stability limits. I found good practical advice in "Heavy Weather Sailing - Coles" and "Oceanography and Seamanship - van Dorn". greg elliott yacht lazy bones http://www.origamimagic.com 2566 From: sad but TRUE Date: Fri Nov 21, 2003 8:41pm Subject: Re: Digest Number 644 Hi Brent and evryone, I have done the ridiculous thing and built frames and stringers for my 55ft gaff schooner. It was not that bad, I devised a new method for lofting and could make 3 frames a day when my back was good and one when it gave me trouble. The frames (24 of them) already contained all the profiles for the florr fastening and interior bunks, galley, seats and "office tower" as well as for a workshop where a lathe lives. That and the setting up on the keel plate took me six weeks, but I devised a number of new ways to lift - align - fasten the frames. However, IF I ever built another boat it will be smaller, simpler and ORIGAMI method. If people critisize your method here is the answer of the German Philosopher Schopenhauer: "All thruth has three stages, at first it is ridiculed, then it is violently opposed and eventually it is self-evident." Keep your ears up and good luck to all, if nobody ever had tried something new, we would still be using stone tools at best. Ongolo 2567 From: brentswain38 Date: Sat Nov 22, 2003 11:21am Subject: Re: Power Jessie Check out the Moon Raven in the slough in Courtenay. He has enough foam in a 36 to float the boat. A friend in Alberta has a trailer made to fit the 36 twin keeler and may want to sell shares in it. Brent Swain 2568 From: brentswain38 Date: Sat Nov 22, 2003 11:26am Subject: Re: Power Comming home from Tonga last summer I tried using a surplus 8 ft parachute for a drougue. It shredded in less than an hour.What looked and shone like nylon turned out to be cotton. I ended up using a tire with one side cut out ( except for the wire core)and turned inside out.That worked much better.I plan to make a drougue out of sailcloth and webbing. Brent Swain Brent Swain 2569 From: brentswain38 Date: Sat Nov 22, 2003 11:31am Subject: Re: RO Watermakers I have included the watermaker in the most recent printing of my book. There is lots of info on the net on the layout and use of watermakers, just substitute the parts I've mentioned . I've made the endcaps for the membrane housing out of 1/4 inch stainless plate and hold them on the pipe with two half inch stainless bolts welded to the 2 1/2 inch pipe . The only machining I've had to do is for the pipe which holds the O ring over the 3/4 inch plastic spigot on the end of the membrane. Brent Swain 2570 From: brentswain38 Date: Sat Nov 22, 2003 11:34am Subject: Re: Power i started out with 10HP on my 31 and that worked well for the first 12 years . I then went for a 22 hp Isuzu which is quieter than the 10HP aircooled diesel, but the increase in speed isn't that much. It does buck a headsea slightly better tho. Brent Swain 2571 From: gjm123smau Date: Sat Nov 22, 2003 3:14pm Subject: drouge,s They make drouges in oz out of shade cloth i have used them for drift fishing as it slows down for bottom bobbing real good. Graeme 2572 From: Len den Besten Date: Sun Nov 23, 2003 7:55am Subject: Re: Re: RO Watermakers Brent, I can find all the info on the net on the pump because you mentioned the article number TT9111. Could you mention the brand and the product-ID of the membrane you used? Thanks a lot in advance. Regards, Len. 2573 From: John Foster Date: Sun Nov 23, 2003 9:40am Subject: Drag Devices Database, Edition 4 Oh Brent, please consider some reading before you plan your next drogue, unless you already have the book and are following the advice it contains....(grin....) Anybody, Brent included, cruising offshore that has not looked at, and followed the advice in "Drag Devices Data Base (4th edition or later) is at serious risk of losing their boat and their lives in serous storm conditions. ISBN 1-878832-03-4 Author is Victor Shane This book separates fact from fiction by extracting critical insights from a large number of observations- the essence of the scientific method. It analyzes the evidence and data contained in more than 120 documented case histories to help you make more informed decisions in heavy weather offshore. Read the book to realize why the strategy used by Brent in the message below may have put him at serious risk of losing his boat and losing his life, and what he might have done instead. Please limit this discussion thread to impressions you have gained after you have read this book Drag Devices Database, Edition 4, or after you have successfully applied the methods of survival outlined in it. Have a nice day John 2574 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Sun Nov 23, 2003 2:09pm Subject: Re: Drag Devices Database, Edition 4 John, We have books everywhere on designing, building, rigging, sailing (including heavy weather sailing), navigating, and living on boats and not only has it made us poorer financially but it is making it difficult to move about. Several books ago we said that enough was enough so I would appreciate it if you could advise which system is recommended for a single hulled boat and how did the Drag Devices Database rate the Coast Guard / Jordan series drogue? Regards, Ted 2575 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Sun Nov 23, 2003 2:33pm Subject: Heavy Weather sailing Recently I was at a talk given by a very experienced competitive sailor who told us about a single handed transatlantic race when he got caught in bad weather with too much sail. It was too rough for him to go on deck to reef and he felt that at the speed he was going sooner or later the boat would break up or otherwise come to grief. His solution, which when you think about seems logical in the circumstances stunned me when he said it. He opened his forward hatch and as the waves crashed over let the boat fill up with water until his batteries were just clear. The extra ballast slowed his boat down enough for it to be "safe" although he said there were interesting inertial effects as the water surged around. A day or so later, when the storm subsided he emptied it out again. Regards, Ted 2576 From: prairiemaidca Date: Sun Nov 23, 2003 3:03pm Subject: Rigging Hey Brent; Regarding that attachment point on the cabin top. What would you consider as a reinforcement that would allow it to placed over a port? I was thinking a lenght of 1in.x 3/8 flat bar. Or will the welding distort the cabin roof to much? Also it seems that some people disconect their baby stay to eliminate interference with the anchor rode. Would it matter if I made two attachment points and then joined the stay in a Y configuration just high enough to allow the anchor rode to pass down the middle? Martin (Prairie Maid) 2577 From: Gord Schnell Date: Sun Nov 23, 2003 5:28pm Subject: Re: Rigging For what it's worth; I incorporated 4 tapered "shelf bracket" style beams of 1/2" plate, two running forward and two running back. They are welded at the outside limits of the mast step support beam. They parallel to the trunk cabin rail. The inner stay tabs are incorporated into the trunk cabin railing system and welded to the cabintop directly above the "shelf bracket" welds from below. Mast step, beam, beam supports to chines and inner stays are now all one contiguous unit. Gord 2578 From: bert andjan Date: Sun Nov 23, 2003 6:20pm Subject: Re: Trailering a Brent Swain 31 Jesse, I bought a Tartan 34C in Appleton, Wisconsin. I believe it weighs about the same as a BS31 at 12,500 lbs. The boat hadn't been in the water for years so I decided to trailer her home. I borrowed a friends 3 axle trailer (good friend) and another friend offered his heavy duty pick up truck (another good friend, I'd say) and I trailered her home...accross Wisconsin, over the Mackinaw Bridge with an escort as I was over-width, and through Michigan to Saginaw. No problems what so ever. The pro's bid the job at several thousand dollars and I was fortunate enough to do it for a couple tanks of fuel and a few thankyou lunches for the friends who refused any money. Later I tried out my welding skills on a mobile home trailer purchased for $600 with three axles. Now the Tartan 34 sits on that trailer in a barn close to home where I can work on her and trail her to Bay City to launch next summer. I avoid storage bills this way at the local marina. I have an 80 plus year old friend who regularly trails his Nonsuch 30 hundreds of miles, and a friend with a 32 foot wooden power boat with twin engines who does the same. So by using common sense, driving appropriately, using those welding skills, trailering a Swain 31 should be manageable. I've set my hopes on building a Swain 31 also. Bert Eggers...Saginaw, Mi 2579 From: John Jones Date: Sun Nov 23, 2003 9:05pm Subject: Re: Digest Number 646 "Water Maker" Ohhhh!, Soyou're say'n I bought the boat and plans too soon Eh? John ....No water maker plans..... How can I get 'em? 2580 From: Date: Mon Nov 24, 2003 8:38am Subject: Re: Heavy Weather sailing Sounds like you were having your leg pulled, except that it was a single handed race, and people under conditions of fatigue make decisions that they would not normally make. Opening a forehatch in extreme conditions - in which it is impossible to go on deck to reef - can result in the loss of the boat, as the force of the waves can rip the hatch from your grip and its hinges. If conditions were such that you could safely open the fore hatch, you could likely go on deck. Also, there are significant problems associated with a large volume of salt water inside a boat in storm conditions that are beyond the scope of this posting. If conditions were such that the boat could continue to sail and steer with unreefed sails and a flooded hull, you could likely go on deck. I would suspect the flooding occurred during a sail change via the forehatch. After the fact the human mind, with its infinite capacity to rationalize, retold the story in a different light - the sort of light commonly found when sailing around bars. greg elliott http://www.origamimagic.com 2581 From: fmichael graham Date: Mon Nov 24, 2003 0:07pm Subject: Re: Heavy Weather sailing Yes...and to add to Greg's comments; despite the storm conditions, the seas must have been "oh so calm" if the subject sailor was able to fill his interior just up to the point where the batteries were above "interior sea level", yet staying dry! Maybe, he could have just opened the sea valves and regulated his water intake that way! Perhaps, if he had had that book on the proper uses of drogues, he could have drilled a hole through it's centre and dragged it behind the boat to slow himself down... Oh well, at least I can go through this day with a smile on my face! Mike 2582 From: Stephen Wandling Date: Mon Nov 24, 2003 0:48pm Subject: Re: Heavy Weather sailing Was it the skipper of the Varua that claimed the weather was so heavy that he could not leave the cockpit due to the 50 or 60 knot winds, and all he had to eat were bowls of soup that were passed to him. Some wag commented that if anything remained in a bowl in those wind conditions it would be so salty to make it inedible. Pass the rum . . . . . 2583 From: svmoonraven Date: Mon Nov 24, 2003 2:16pm Subject: steel mast for sale For Sale: 47 ft steel mast, taken off a 36ft Brent Swain steel boat. Epoxy painted, mast steps, etc. No sail track or boom. Mast in Comox. $500.00 Call Karl at 250-703-6694 2584 From: ... Date: Mon Nov 24, 2003 3:43pm Subject: Re: Heavy Weather sailing I did not comment when that post first appeared as I also thought it was a leg pull, have you experienced a semi flooded hull, the water surges around inside the hull, it dose not stay just below the batteries, every time the hull rolls you pray the it will recover and right itself. Geoff 2585 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Mon Nov 24, 2003 5:07pm Subject: Re: Heavy Weather sailing The sailor who told the story is Australian Nick Maloney who is a professional sailor and has sailed in Americas Cups and the Whitbread Around the World race amongst others and now sails for Offshore Challenges, Ellen MacArthur's racing team. He was in the Americas Cup boat that broke in half off Perth, Western Australia. I saw that on the television when it happened. He said he has a book coming out soon so perhaps you will be able to read about his exploits then and make your minds up if it is fact or fiction as what I wrote was a precis. During his previous transatlantic race he told us that he was rolled under his boat when it capsized in a similar storm and held there some time by his harness before the boat righted itself and this had affected him phsycologically, as well it might. These yacht racers live in a very different world than I do, for example Steve Fosset sailed Playstation across the Atlantic from New York to the English Channel in 4 days, 17 hours and 28 minutes (according to CNN). Having watched videos of these blue water racers as the boats leap about with water everywhere and the crews wearing survival suits for days on end I can believe anything they say, although of course I cannot verify their truth as I wasn't there. Regards, Ted 2586 From: fmichael graham Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 1:49am Subject: Re: Re: Heavy Weather sailing Ted: Sorry, mate, I guess I was having a chuckle at your expense. Actually, I do believe that this fellow went through the experience as he told it to you. When I was a child, my great-grandfather used to tell me stories of his various adventures in the U.K., Africa, Asia, and Canada. These days, when I reminisce with my father, he carries a smirk on his face that says that he thinks his grandfather told some "tall" tales. Yet, at the age of forty, I could tell you stories of my experiences; in Asia, the Middle-East, and at sea, that you would have a hard time swallowing. But, I was there and so I know. For those of us whom live for adventure there is one commonality. After a period of time, even the Darwinists among us become believers. At sea, more than anywhere else I've been, you witness things that are truly without explanation, do things that - under less challenging circumstances - you would question the sanity thereof and when your "landlocked" you'll sell your soul to go to sea again, placing yourself willingly in harm's way. Such is the salt in our veins, that we'd rather live a tortured life at sea than the "life of Reilly" ashore. And, I say, "Good for us all". Regards, Mike 2587 From: Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 4:37am Subject: Re: Re: Heavy Weather sailing boat that broke in half off Perth - Americas Cup 1997???? Thought the only boat recently that broke in half regarding the Americas Cup was off San Diego about 2000 and that boat was flying an Australian flag? regards Peter 2589 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 11:05am Subject: Re: Heavy Weather sailing Peter, I think you are right. Dennis Connor won the cup in Perth in 1987 for the San Diego Yacht Club. His boat Stars & Stripes USA-77, one of two of his Americas Cup contenders cracked and sank while training, off California in July 2002. I remember seeing on television an Americas Cup boat sinking while training. The crew looked suprised but most managed to step into motor boats that came to their rescue. It had a crack by the mast, to me as if they had overtightened the fore and back stays. Nick is probably too young to have been sailing at Perth. My memory must have been playing tricks again. For those interested there is a more direct and one hopes reliable source of information at www.nickmoloney.com. Regards, Ted 2590 From: brentswain38 Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 2:15pm Subject: Re: Rigging Leaving a bit of extra metal above the port would help as would a bit of deck beam flatbar horizontal a couple of inches below the top corner of the cabinside . It's distortion of the 11 guage under load that the port is bolted to which could cause leaks there . The Y support for the innerstay would work, but would clutter the foredeck. The removable stay on a pelican hook would be best, as you often want to sail as a sloop while coastal cruising. I only use the inner stay on long passages. Brent Swain 2591 From: cain2abell Date: Tue Nov 25, 2003 6:46pm Subject: Steel and Aluminum sailboats 12' - 20' Why do you not see more small sailboats made out of these materials? I always see jon boats and motor boats, but never sailboats. Is it the weight? I want to build a 15' core sound type boat out of aluminum. Kind of like the boats Mr. Graham is making out of plywood at B&B Yacht Designs. I really like the cat ketch rig that he has on his boats and I like the durability of aluminum. I have Brent's bookand I have seen the dingy pics. Would this be possible? More to the point; would it be practical. I would really hate spending all my effort on something i could only use to sail downwind. -ABELL 2592 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 5:50am Subject: Re: Steel and Aluminum sailboats 12' - 20' There are really two issues. Aluminum and steel are both very strong in tensile strength so you don't need very thick material. Very thin materials are not stiff though. So it is difficult to take advantage of the strength without having excessively thick and heavy material. The second issue is welding. It is quite difficult to weld thin aluminum or steel. It can be done, there are lots of aluminum fishing boats made from thin aluminum. That takes more skill and better equipment and facilities than the amateur is likely to have. Gary H. Lucas 2593 From: Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 8:08am Subject: Re: Digest Number 649 To: Abel, Gary, I've been wondering about that too. After all, many lightweight, aluminum-hulled fishing boats are available on the web. They were intended by their manufacturers to be powered by oars or outboard motors, but I really don't see why they couldn't be converted to sail. Lots of canoe owners add sails to their wood or fiberglass canoes using non-destructive, bolt-on sailing rigs, leeboards, and rudders. It seems to me it would be a cinch to do the same thing with one of these mass-produced aluminum fishing boats. Some sell for approximately US $1000. An example of what I'm talking about can be found at: http://www.castlecraft.us/laker_meyers.htm Scroll down to the Meyers Laker 14 Semi Vee Boat. Now I'll be the first to admit I'm no naval architect, but I'll be damned if I can see THAT much difference between their hull shapes and the shapes of many expensive one class, planing hull fiberglass sailing dinghies. With a good sailing rig and adequately sized leeboards, wouldn't such a lightweight boat plane really well and achieve impressive speeds, even to windward? It would also have the advantage of durable, low maintenance aluminum construction. Or am I just abysmally ignorant and totally missing something here? I would really be interested in hearing the opinions of knowledgeable boat enthusiasts. Bevin 2594 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 8:30am Subject: Re: Digest Number 649 What you're missing is the tooling need to produce the shapes you see. Those boats are made in fairly large volume. The aluminum is stretch formed over a male mold. Some parts are pressed. Some parts are extruded. Seams are welded but seats and gussets are riveted. LOTS of technology in a SIMPLE fishing boat! Gary H. Lucas 2595 From: richytill Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 11:40am Subject: Re: Heavy Weather sailing So Mike, at my age, perhaps I should be thinking about therapy to quell this inexplicable urge to make this home made boat and shuffle off over the horizon? Perhaps heavy weather sailing should be conducted from the couch? If I wasn't boatbuilding I could afford furniture, more books and maybe a TV. A great big TV--ah luxury. I mean, is it rational to spend 5 years and your life savings to construct a small wind driven container that will be blown off into one of the world most un-predicable and harsh environments? Who needs sparks falling on you, paint fumes, sawdust in the eyes, scrounging in dumpsters for scraps of stainless steel--in the rain, more tools to buy and on and on . . . Lemmings I say, more anthropoidal lemmings. Well, at least the container is folded metal and that at least: seems rational. rt 2596 From: brentswain38 Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 2:15pm Subject: Re: Heavy Weather sailing I went through all that suffering in 1984 and got it over with. Since then I've only had to work a month or two a year, the rest has been playtime. Having a boat enables me to cut my cost of living to such a degree that I'm able to lie in bed and listen to the big city traffic reports , to find how the people who buy all the so called luxuries live, then go back to sleep. A couple I built a boat for in 1983 told me in 1988 " The boat's free. With what we would have spent on the cost of living ashore , plus the travelling we have done, the boat has paid for itself many times over.We could park thee boat on a beach and walk away and we would still be money ahead." Brent Swain 2597 From: brentswain38 Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 2:19pm Subject: Re: Steel and Aluminum sailboats 12' - 20' The dinghy in my book would make an excellent sailing vessel, just scale it up to the porportions you need , and give it a bit more beam. Brent Swain 2598 From: fmichael graham Date: Wed Nov 26, 2003 7:25pm Subject: Re: Re: Heavy Weather sailing R.T.: Rational? who said anything about us rationalizing, here? Personally, I hope that in another 30 years, or so, as I walk along the dock, I overhear someone saying " There goes that crazy old bugger, Graham. You remember, the one I told you about who claims to have sailed that old tin can all the way here from Canada? Talks to himself all the time and never makes any sense. He says he built that thing himself!" but I don't care, because I'm too busy looking for a young lad to climb that coconut tree for me over yonder. So, what's on t.v., tonight? A few channels talking about the arrest of Michael Jackson, some sit-coms that require a lobotomy to enjoy, a few psuedo-news programs where everybody in the world seems to be shooting at someone and so many politicians try to convince us that they are the honest ones(not those other guys over there!). Oh wait, is "survivor" on tonight? Now there's a group of people I wouldn't want to be stranded with! No, I guess I'll have a quiet night with the wife, walk my dog, and dream about the day when I can be thoroughly miserable; bobbing up & down in 20 foot waves with the cold rain pouring through the rip in the neck of my foulies, wondering if the storm force wind will buckle my mast, eating a cold can of ravioli, and loving every moment of it! It was my experience in the past that sailing a boat was not only free, it paid enormous dividends. Its only too bad that we have to pay at almost every place that we wish to land. Maybe, I should build a pirate ship and take a South Pacific island by force and ... 2599 SPAM 2600 From: Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 7:27am Subject: Re: Re: Heavy Weather sailing We all had a good laugh at the first "survivor" and the "deserted" tropical island they were on. We visited the island a couple of times sailing that part of the Borneo coast in 1998-9. Pulau Tiga is about 1 mile long, about 1 mile off the coast of Sabah state, Malaysia, in north eastern Borneo. It is mid way between Kota Kinabalu, Sabah and Labuan, Brunei - both good sized ports of call. It is part of the Malaysian National Park system, and "uninhabited" simply because most of the costal islands in Malaysia are national parks and by law "uninhabited" - which makes for great sailing. There is a ranger station on the west side of the island - with park rangers, a 1/2 dozen of so cottages, and a small "restaurant" on the island. The island is regularly visited small numbers of local tourists that vacation at the ranger station. The twice daily ferry between KK and Labuan passes within a hundred feet of the navigational buoy at the south end of the island, and makes a sharp turn into the channel between the Island and Sabah proper. Why is it called Pulau Tiga? Pulau means "island" in Malay. Tiga means "three". As you approach the island along the coast from east or west, it first appears as three island, because the island is composed of three small hills. Oh those plucky survivors, to have lasted so long in the wilds of Borneo. greg elliott yacht lazy bones http://www.origamimagic.com Oh wait, is "survivor" on tonight? 2601 From: blueiceicle Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 2:11pm Subject: Draft- 31' 36' ? Just wondering if anyone here knows what the draft is on the 31' and 36' design, I cant seem to find that info thanks Jesse 2602 From: richytill Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:08pm Subject: Re: Heavy Weather sailing Mike, went to see the therapist: she says it's irriversable and terminal . . . when you are born this way--just build the boat and cast off. There is only one sure cure: salt water. It come in the form of tears, sweat and the sea. Jest aside, in real life, I don't own a TV, have a therapist or a motor vehicle and I do Adventure Based Counselling as part of my work. I believe that real life adventure is a missing ingredient for many of the kids I work with. When they get the chance, they thrive on it and seem to engage life with a more positive attitude and a few extra life skills. So far, building MY ISLAND has been an adventure in itself. I told my kids: if I fall into some crevasse of go missing at sea--dont look for the remains--just have a party to celebrate the fact I didn't rot away in an old folks home. Folded metal, just make the venture more achievable. So, for this evenings entertainment we have: sand and varnish yellow cedar followed by another gripping episode of design the instrument panel and figure out where to put it. Thanks for the fun, it's the pirate life for me, rt 2603 From: cain2abell Date: Thu Nov 27, 2003 10:35pm Subject: Dinghy questions I want to make a 15' cat ketch version of the dinghy. I have been messing around with the pattern and I think i have it almost figured out. The width of the tabs is going to determine the freeboard and the distance between the inside cuts is going to decide the beam and the ammount of curve determines the shape of the hull. I think that is right. Where do I add length? The longer I make the tabs the longer the chine will be and i don't want that. Also, I read where you said something about scoring the inside so the ridge isn't so pronounced. I am deployed in the middle east(sand box) and plan on building when I get back to Alaska. All I Have is the Book and a lot of time. People can tell where i've been because i leave a trail of little origami boats around. I would like to have a pretty good idea of what i am going to do when I get back b/c the summer's aren't very long in alaska, and no welding allowed in the garages. Thanks for answering my other questions so quickly. -ABELL 2604 From: home/users/b/bevin Date: Fri Nov 28, 2003 5:09am Subject: Re: Digest Number 650 To: Gary, Appreciate the reply. I don't doubt the truth of what you said. I was merely thinking out loud about the feasibility of converting an inexpensive aluminum fishing boat to sail by adding some homemade rigging. I have no ambition to build one from scratch. That would be the last thing on my mind. My main question concerns hull shape. Is the hull shape of a typical mass produced aluminum fishing boat similar enough to that of a good sailing dinghy that it would perform like one if outfitted with sails? I wonder. Bevin 2605 From: Date: Fri Nov 28, 2003 7:56am Subject: Re: Digest Number 650 Fishing boats are optimized (usually) for higher speeds. Rowing and sailing dinghies are optimized (typically) for lower speed operation. One quick check is the transom. Look for a hull in which the transom is out of the water at rest, with the boat normally loaded. greg elliott http://www.origamimagic.com 2606 From: Rob Date: Fri Nov 28, 2003 1:36pm Subject: I'm thinking of a 22' to 27' Spray by Bruce Roberts For sailing the Chesapeake and maybe to the Carribean. I know I could build it in plywood, but he offers it in steel. I think steel should last me the rest of my life if I paint it right. I've never welded more than a broken piece of farm equipment. How hard is it to weld 1/8 inch sheet? Should I contract out the hull and deck? I am more interested in sailing than building. I tempted to buy an old fiberglass boat and be done with it, but I love the look of a Spray, and there is something special about doing it my way. Your thoughts are welcome. I retire in five years. rob 2607 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Fri Nov 28, 2003 2:37pm Subject: Re: I'm thinking of a 22' to 27' Spray by Bruce Roberts I think you are too close to retirement to complete a Bruce Roberts boat by the time you retire. Look closely at the pictures on his web site. There are LOTS of pieces and thousands of welds, and that is just for the hull. If you really want a Roberts Spray I'd suggest looking for one already built. I believe there is a huge stock of partially completed ones out there at bargain prices. Look too at the completed ones. Lots of people have ten to fifteen years invested in their boats. Which part of the idea are you really in love with? The building or the sailing? I'm a mechanical guy, with ALL the skills needed. I still would have a problem with the commitment a boat like that would require. Gary H. Lucas 2608 From: Date: Fri Nov 28, 2003 4:01pm Subject: Re: I'm thinking of a 22' to 27' Spray by Bruce Roberts A 22 foot steel boat would be useless as a sailboat for the Chesapeake. Like most of the US east coast our winds tend to be quite light puntuated by high winds. Steel boats that small are close totally useless as sail boats at either end of the wind range being too heavy for light air performance and also having too high a center of gravity for heavier air performance. This is especially true of a high wetted surface boat like the Sprays. Respectfully Jeff 2609 From: Michael Casling Date: Fri Nov 28, 2003 4:36pm Subject: Re: I'm thinking of a 22' to 27' Spray by Bruce Roberts I am with the other guys on this as well. A 22 foot boat is nice but too small for anything serious. A 28 foot or bigger can go anywhere if it is the right boat. I must be near your age group at 57, the difference is I have been sailing in the same solid plastic boat since 1979. Sailed other stuff before and after that date. I must say I am starting to get quite familiar with the boat. It is hard to form opinions or ideas on what is required unless you have some time out in the puddle in all kinds of weather, calms or storms. A smaller boat provides good sailing experience but does not have the feel of a bigger boat. There are probably 31 foot BS steel boats available if you like steel and plenty of plastic boats in various states of quality. Michael Casling 2610 From: Date: Sat Nov 29, 2003 5:13am Subject: Re: Digest Number 652 To: Greg, Aha. Thanks for the helpful information. Bevin 2611 From: Rob Date: Sat Nov 29, 2003 7:55am Subject: Re: I'm thinking of a 22' to 27' Spray by Bruce Roberts Gentlemen: I'm feeling a little defensive. I single hand alot. I like small. I've sailed the Atlantic and Pacific including the Bay of Fundy and Hatteras in ships and boats. I've sailed Oahu and Maui in an engineless 20 footer and I was comfortable. CAPT. bligh sailed home from the South Pacific in a small boat. He was not comfortable, but he got home. Spray 22 owners I've corrosponded with email say she will move in light air with the right sails, but they were all wood. Bruce Roberts says a steel one is feasable. Bruce Roberts lives on the Chesapeake. I agree it may be a little complicated, hence my interest in Origami boats. Apologies aside. Everything in the files seems to be >30'. Anyone here have any knowledge of a finished 26 footer with fairly traditional topsides? What kind of rigging, Marconi, cutter? Pictures? I like traditional, and I like sheer. How's the light air performance? Thanks Rob 2612 From: Date: Sat Nov 29, 2003 9:44am Subject: Re: Re: I'm thinking of a 22' to 27' Spray by Bruce Roberts Hi Rob, Just for the record, Bruce Roberts does not live on the Chesapeake. His US operations are based in Severna Park which is near the Chesapeake. I am not sure that is relevant to this discussion. More to the point, some of Roberts designs are more suitable than others for the type of venues that you are considering where sailing ability at both ends of the wind range spectrum are really needed. I personally an not a big fan of Bruce Roberts designs. I would suggest that you are more likely to find a suitable design that makes sense for you with a designer like Dudley Dix, Tony Dias, or Jay Benford (I believe they all have we sites). Beyond that I seriously question why you would want to restrict yourself to either a boat under 22 feet or a boat that small that is steel. To explain what I am getting at, I don't disagree with you that long passages can be made in small boats assuming great seamanship, an unusually high quality design, and a lot of luck such as in the case of Bligh's passage were the nearest safe port was located within predominantly broad reaching conditions. For most small cruisers, the traditional rule of thumbs apply. By the traditional rule of thumb, a distance cruiser needs somewhere between 2 1/2 to 5 long tons of displacement per person. Using the bottom figure, cramming 5600 lbs of displacement into a waterline that will be substantially less than 22 feet (proably somewhere down around 19 feet as a maximum on a 22' 'traditional' design) means that you will have a displacent to length ratio (L/D) in the neighborhood of 350. It is very hard to get decent light to moderate air performance in a small boat with an L/D that is much above 200. Similarly it is almost imposible to get decent light to moderate air performance with a sail area to displacement ratio (SA/D) that is much under 20 using 100% fore triangle to make your calculations. (see http://www.image-ination.com/sailcalc.html for the formulas) That means a standing sail area somewhere around 400s.f. which is enormous for a 22 footer (nearly double a J-22 sail area). In order to carry that much sail area,you need a lot of stability and if you plan to go ofshore that stability needs to be in the form of a low center of gravity. It is extremely difficult to achieve a low center of gravity on a small steel boat without having a large percent of the boat's weight in a high density ballast bulb located at an extremely deep draft. In order to keep wetted surface down that would probably mean a fin keel and spade rudder. In a general sense, if you are planning to build the boat yourself, the real cost of building and maintaining a boat, and the real energy required to handle a boat is in direct proportion to the displacement of the boat. Within reason, all other things being equal, of two boats of equal displacement, the longer boat will be easier and less expensive to build, more seaworthy, have a more comfortable motion, be easier to handle, and of course faster on all points of sail. Beyond all of that pound for pound steel is one of the weakest materials out there (I don't want to start this discussion again but go back and look at prior discussions for the relative strength to weight ratios of other materials) and all things being equal is one of the highest maintenance materials out there (based on a study performed by Boat Builder magazine.) If you plan to build a small boat than by all means try to minimize hull, deck, and rig weights so that you can carry less ballast and carry more stores and gear. On a boat the size that you are considering, I cannot think of a less expensive and faster way to build a strong and durable one off boat than a properly sheathed stitch and glue plywood boat. Respectfully, Jeff 2613 From: Michael Casling Date: Sat Nov 29, 2003 10:33am Subject: Re: Re: I'm thinking of a 22' to 27' Spray by Bruce Roberts Rob I am a fan of wooden boats of the type built in NZ so I know about feeling defensive with this group. This group though has a lot of good practical stuff that I find interesting. Shakelton made an incredible journey in a 22 foot boat but when the trip was re/enacted in a similar boat it foundered. For my money a Tanzer 22 is a capable 22 foot boat but in my opinion is not big enough. I insist on being able to stand up in a cruising boat. At 28 feet and 7400 pounds I feel our boat is just sufficient as a cruiser with offshore potential. Steel for these size boats is going to make them heavy and I have failed to discover how heavy is a benefit. On the larger Swain boats the extra weight is not as noticeable and the 31 and 36 have been a lot of places. If you are going to stay near the shore and you do not mind a small space then a 22 may be fine. Do what you feel is right for yourself, but you will get opposing opinions just as I will to this post. Michael Casling 2614 From: Alan Smith Date: Sat Nov 29, 2003 10:44am Subject: Re: Re: I'm thinking of a 22' to 27' Spray by Bruce Roberts Here's a link to something similar but it is located on the west coast. It shows one possibility of what can be done for a small steel boat. The price is in Canadian dollars. www.harbouryachtsales.com/Pages/page65.html Al 2615 From: newfield4u Date: Sat Nov 29, 2003 3:03pm Subject: Small Origami 2 twin hull barge? I was thinking that a small towable garage would be very handy craft to build with the Origami methiod. A craft that was easy to tow and carry extra tool and supplys. Big enough for my small off road Suzuki Samurai, a few work benches, MT bikes, Kayaks, a small genset, alternative energy systems and ground tackle. I think that would make for a practical portable tool box for working around the North Pacific. Something about the size of 12 by 24. Keeping it small so that a 40 foot sailboat could power this along, something that could be weather tight and beachable, big tides in Alaska. Regards Carl Nostrand Homer Alaska 2616 From: Andre Venter Date: Sun Nov 30, 2003 1:34am Subject: RE: Re: I'm thinking of a 22' to 27' Spray by Bruce Roberts Nothing wrong with a spray 28 - anywhere. Andre Venter 2617 From: Date: Sun Nov 30, 2003 2:25am Subject: Re: Re: I'm thinking of a 22' to 27' Spray by Bruce Roberts Some designs can be a handful if you need to go to weather. There was a 40' steel Spray trying to get to Hawaii from Palmyra when we were there, with an experienced crew, and for more than a few days they tacked over to end up after 24 hours within a mile or two of where they started from. People say you should cruise downwind, but winds don't always obey the pilot charts. One of the best things to have when cruising is a boat that sails well to weather, and one of the most frustrating things is a boat that won't. Windward ability is a big part of safety - being able to sail out of danger. Beating off a lee shore, or sailing to windward to escape a tropical cyclone. Because the wind is drawn towards the center in a rotating storm, simply sailing downwind can carry you into the center. greg elliott http://www.origamimagic.com 2618 From: sad but TRUE Date: Sun Nov 30, 2003 5:43am Subject: To Michael Graham, Michael, if you look for more adventure and free landing, try Africa for a change. Africa's east coast equals the Caribean coast. If you are interested I shall look up some links and post you some stories. To start off with, every Yacht club in Africa (southern anyway) will give a visitor 4 weeks free with all facilities available. Mocambique has thousand islands only three are currently inhabited. Think different think big. :-))) regards ongolo hey I am also living in a tin can, but not afloat presently. 2619 From: Rob Date: Sun Nov 30, 2003 6:19am Subject: Short Boats This is an energetic Group. I like that. I hear testimony of boats that can and can not sail to weather all of the time. Seldom is mentioned the condition of the hull and the condition of the main. Those things make a difference as does the occasional asymetrical home made hull. All due respect given, experience of the crew is relative too. I like short LOD. I do not like short headroom. I rather have 73" of head room than 90 degrees tack to tack. 1 to 2 knots an hour doesn't make that much difference to me as I will be coastal most of the time. Shallow draft is important because I love gunkholes that others avoid. Blue water capability means something to me because I like blue water, and while I do not enjoy being beat to pieces I kinda enjoy heavy weather in moderation. I'm not opposed to a plywood stitch and glue. I've built small stitch and glue boats, but I get conflicting reports on strength and durability. What happens when I hit a container full of tennis shoes from Korea in a plywood boat verses a steel boat? Also almost every glass or wood boat I've been on with any age on her has a deck or hull joint leak. I've been on metal boats almost as old as me that are just dusty in the bilge. Dove III, the 27' Swain: Anyone out there sail her? How did she move? Can one stand up in her without a pilothouse? Why does a steel boat have plywood on a bulkhead of the engine room? Just tell me what a short origami boat will do. Thanks for the enthusiastic responses. Rob 2620 From: greenguy2ca Date: Sun Nov 30, 2003 7:15am Subject: Perkins Notice: I know of a Perkins 4 cyl 0 hours re-built by marine diesel mechanic includes gear & panel in Nanaimo $5500 call Bent 250-802-0946 Gary 2621 From: Michael Casling Date: Sun Nov 30, 2003 7:41am Subject: Re: Short Boats Rob if you want 73" of headroom then a 28 foot boat is about right. If you go much shorter then the boat is going to be funny looking and perhaps top heavy. You now have the basis of a good comparison. The Harbouryachtsales site listed a Newport 28 and this boat has typical dimensions for a fiberglass boat; 28' LOA 23.5' LWL 9.5' Beam 4.5' draft 7000 disp. 3000 ballast. This is very similar to my boat, a Ranger 29, a Windward 28, a Cal 2/30. All of these boats should sail well and anywhere although I am sure that some mods and repairs would be required. What they do not have is very shallow draft and you will not get good windward performance if you limit the draft and especially add a lot of weoght. Dove 3 is listed as displacing 9000 pounds which as you can see is 2000 more than a typical 28 foot boat. That is heavy but nowhere near the Spray 28 at 13600 pounds, which has the shallow draft as well. I honestly can not see how the Spray 28 would be an improvement on the Swain 27 or 31. I am in complete agreement with Greg that a boat needs to be able to beat to windward in crappy conditions. A good boat in this size go do six to windward, in rough weather you will back of the five to preserve comfort. If you start at a lower speed and a wide angle then it just gets worse. Michael Casling 2622 From: Date: Sun Nov 30, 2003 7:46am Subject: Re: Short Boats If you built the two small boats, one glass over ply and the other steel to an equal weight, the glass over wooden hull would have roughly 4 times the resistance to pucture that the steel boat would have. Add kevlar to the exterior laminate and that ratio goes up dramatically favoring the plywood boat even more. If you search the archives there is a detailed numerical breakdown of this. Jeff 2623 From: Len den Besten Date: Sun Nov 30, 2003 7:55am Subject: Re: (unknown) Hi sad but true, I want to know more about the African coast. Presently i'm living aboard in Holland and I'm preparing our motorsailer for cruising. Could you post the links and stories you mentioned in this group? Regards, Len. 2624 From: Date: Sun Nov 30, 2003 11:11am Subject: Re: Re: I'm thinking of a 22' to 27' Spray by Bruce Roberts The crew in question had years of experience with the boat in the Pacific. The skipper was such that I doubt he would have been making the passage with a dirty bum. The rest of the boat was meticulous. When the trades are humped up you have maybe 20-30 knots against you, good sized seas, and 1-2 knots of current against you. If you are making 5 knots - which is hard for many loaded cruising boats in those conditions - because they start slamming, lose speed and have to fall off. Consider the impossible case of a loaded cruising boat making 90 degrees tacks in seas and strong winds. 5 x cos(45) = 3.5 knots - 1.5 knots current = 2 knots made good. Now take the case of a loaded cruising boat, tacking through a more likely 120 degrees because of the head seas: 5 x cos(60) = 2.5 knots - 1.5 knots current = 1 knot made good. From Palmyra to Hawaii is about 1000 miles, and the boat in question took more than 30 days to make the passage, which works out to a speed made good of less than 1.4 knots. I later heard the wife left the boat in Hawaii and filed for divorce. A bluff bow and bow sprit have a traditional look, but they can cause problems. Extend the bow, so that is finer, to the point where the bow sprit would normally end, and you get a boat that is better to windward, with the same length overall. Modern designs generally have a finer bow for upwind work, and a flatter stern to dampen hobby horsing than traditional designs, and for the most part this has been found to yield better performance overall. greg elliott http://www.origamimagic.com 2625 From: fmichael graham Date: Sun Nov 30, 2003 6:18pm Subject: Re: (unknown) ongolo: I am always interested in information to do with sailing off of the African continent. I had, at one time, planned to sail to the Seychelles from my home in the Philippines. I have read so many horror stories about the Indian Ocean, however, that, at that time, I changed my mind. My Nephew is planning to attend a university in Capetown, in 2005, and I was thinking of flying over for a visit and to "look around". My brother-in-law was born & raised in Swaziland, Kenya, and Johannesburg. Anything you can tell me about Africa - the continent that, I've been told, offers the "ultimate experience" in adventure - is greatly appreciated. As this group is for a different purpose, however, the other members may not appreciate the tangent that we have gone off at, and so, I give you an alternate e-mail address of mine: fmichaelgraham@y... Thanks again, Mike 2626 From: fmichael graham Date: Sun Nov 30, 2003 6:43pm Subject: Re: Short Boats Rob: I looked over Winston Bushnell's Dove lll, at Harbour yacht sales, some time ago. I bought a previous boat from Ray Donaldson(the broker) and have to say that, as with all Kiwis I've met, Ray is a "stand-up" guy. Of course, he's also pretty short so it's easy for him to stand up in Dove. As for me, I'm 6' 2" and would soon have resembled a comma if I had bought Dove. On the plus side; Dove is obviously well built, and could be valued as much for her construction as for her being a bit of Canadian exploration history. I guess that is why she is being sold for $39,000 (can.dollars) and that leads me to the minus side; the wood mast should be checked carefully, the standing rigging looks "all in", as does the pilothouse, and I would think her to be worth about half of the asking price, at best. Then again, If she is the right boat for you, I know she's been for sale for a long time - no doubt, because of the price - and I know that Ray would present any offer that you felt was fair. All interested parties should go and see Ray, if only to steal a few pearls of wisdom from a very knowledgeable sailor. Regards, Mike 2627 From: Mike Graham Date: Sun Nov 30, 2003 7:13pm Subject: Re: Short Boats Jeff: I would think that that article considered the thickness of material, not elasticity of the materials in question. I would assume that kevlar would greatly improve the surface strength of plywood construction, but at what cost? My reason for favouring steel as the material to use in the construction of my next boat was, and is, that it seems to me to be the best choice for the chance encounter of shipping containers, groundings, etc.. Too; if you had an alternator or generator driven welder aboard, you could temporarily patch a hole much easier and when doing a formal repair - at a later date - the material in the area of the damage would be as good as new. Regards, Mike 2628 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Sun Nov 30, 2003 7:34pm Subject: Re: Short Boats Jeff, This isn't quite a valid comparison. If you hit the hypothetical and very possible floating shipping container at speed a simple puncture would not be the issue. The wooden hull would most likely crack badly and tear out a chunk, precisely because it is so stiff. All of the collision energy will be borne by a small area in a stiff structure. The steel hull on the other hand will wind up with a huge dent. In making that dent the stored energy of the moving boat is dissipated in a way that greatly reduces the likelihood of a puncture. All you have to do is look at modern car designs. Yes a car from the 60s can resist a 5 mph impact better than a 2003 model. But you can survive a 45 mph collision in the 2003 model because so much of the energy is absorbed in bending and crushing the body of the car. Gary H. Lucas 2629 From: Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr Date: Sun Nov 30, 2003 8:18pm Subject: Re: Re: Short Boats I assume that you are talking about the article comparing the relative strength of materials by weight that is in the archives. That articla considered that for a given weight you would end up with a lot more thickeness with wood vs steel and that the greater amount of material meant that the wood has a greater bending, flexure and impact resistance when compared to steel on a pound for pound basis. In one of the earlier discussions of the cost of building a kevlar sheathed ply cored hull vs the same weight steel hulled boat and at the time the material costs were very similar but of course the kevlar sheathed plywood boat had a much higher abrasion resistance and resistance to impact. My point being if you are seeking the "best choice for the chance encounter of shipping containers, groundings, etc.." perhaps you should consider a material other than steel. Respectfully, Jeff 2630 From: ... Date: Mon Dec 1, 2003 4:54am Subject: Small Origami 2 twin hull barge? Hi Carl, That must be a first for origamiboats a tow able garage. It will give us all something to think about! Before I read it properly I visualised a sailing garage, how would it sail, will it sail to windward and all the other questions we normally consider. At least you will be able to stand up. It appeared to be an 1 April question I must have an odd sense of humour! But seriously, it would have a lot of wind resistance, high centre of gravity, might be a bit of a hand full. Towing another boat is not much with a yacht is not much fun. Might be better to build a single hull with a removable stern or stern ramp and drive your Suzuki down into hull, the garage floor being down at about chine level, this will get the Cof G as low as possible, like a landing craft but with the ramp at the stern. You could even power it for ease handling and safety. An interesting problem. Beast wishes Geoff England 2631 From: ... Date: Mon Dec 1, 2003 6:02am Subject: Small Origami 2 twin hull barge? 2 Hi Carl, Just had another thought if you built some rollers and fitted them into the car deck, you could drive your Suzuki onto them and and use the power to turn a propellor,generator or even paddle wheels. That would turn a few heads. How that for a Monday morning! Geoff 2632 From: Date: Mon Dec 1, 2003 7:23am Subject: Re: Small Origami 2 twin hull barge? When working on a boat for extended periods, if you are not at a dock, rather at anchor, progress can be slow because there is little room to work. Time is losts as materials and tools are moved from one place to another. Motion and spillages can cause extra work and expense, and dust and such can make living aboard unpleasant. One solution we have seen used successfully over the years is to anchor a raft in place, and tie the boat to the raft. You can then store much of your materials on the raft, and use it as a stable, flat workspace, making room aboard the boat in which to work. Surplus containers are found abandoned in surprising numbers around the world. Many have Russian markings on them, and were probably a result of the fall of the Soviet Union. There are often found converted to workshops, storage, and even housing in the third world, and might be added to a raft for working in cold or wet climates. Another alternative would be a travel trailer on origami catamaran hulls. While not suitable for offshore, this could make a low cost houseboat design. Use a motor home instead of a travel trailer and you have an engine to make the houseboat mobile. Many trailers and motorhomes already have 3-way refrigeration, gensets, and holding tanks to make then self-sufficient and comply with local regulations. The catamarn hulls could be used to carry large volumes of fuel and water. This is not as impractical as it might initially sound and we could design such a craft if anyone has a need. greg elliott http://www.origamimagic.com 2633 From: Len den Besten Date: Mon Dec 1, 2003 8:26am Subject: Re: (unknown) Mike, Ongolo, Would you please add my email-address : lendenbesten@y.... I sure would like to know more about the African coast. And this info isn't as widespread as the info about the carribean or the south pacific. In return I can tell you guys lots about the coast in northwest Europe. Thanks in advance, Len. 2634 From: richytill Date: Mon Dec 1, 2003 0:46pm Subject: Re: Short Boats Giving thought to the short boat question: I am in favour of steel for a one off home-built boat. For shorter boat I would seriously consider aluminum. Here is why: my uncle gave me a tip before I started "My Island." He said mathematics and experience have favoured boats over 35'--37'in steel. As a naval architect, he has dedicated a lifetime of experience sailing, surveying, testing and designing. Moreover, small water taxi's and crew boats on the BC coast are almost all turning to aluminum. Take a look at the mass of stray floating timber, the maze of rocks and rapids and you know why. Aluminum tends to dent and stay in one piece. You dont need to paint the decks and sides all the time. We have four crew boats where I work--all but one are aluminum now. These boats are folded--like origami. We repair the boats and for me there is no discussion when it comes to light and tough: Aluminum rocks every which way. With aluminum you need to build under cover--with a shorter boat you do not need a large shelter to build an aluminum boat in and you do not need to worry about handling heavy sections. Cut the stuff up with woodworking type tools; rent/borrow/lease the welding for one big session and you won't have to buy the wire-feed equipment (more-do- able witha short boat). With a larger steel vesel you can build outside--that's OK for steel; aluminum is an inside job. The anti- fouling problem is real but the design may help if you can make the vessel easy to dry out anywhere for the endless re-coating. Keep copper etc. out of the bilge. Light and strong--easy to put together- -good for maintainance--that why they do it. Just my experience so far, rt 2635 From: fmichael graham Date: Mon Dec 1, 2003 1:28pm Subject: Re: (unknown) Len, et al: I have formed a new group for members of origamiboats - and others - to swap "fish stories" on. I hope it is seen as complementary to origamiboats, if not, I'll shut it down. the group is as follows: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/bentboatsailors Regards, Mike 2636 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Mon Dec 1, 2003 5:43pm Subject: Re: Re: Short Boats Jeff, Our local paper once carried a picture of a homebuilt steel sailboat that had been hit broadside by a freighter going 25 knots. The 40 foot boat had a DENT 7 FEET deep in the side! It was bent like a banana. The owner was only slightly injured and sailed home on his own. It is ductility of the material that allows that kind of survival. Do you know what the ductility of plywood is? A Kevlar reinforced vest can stop a large caliber bullet. Surprisingly the same vest can't stop a sharp knife. The boat with Kevlar sheathing is a composite structure. When composite structures are properly designed they can do amazing things. The calculations for composite structures are incredibly difficult though. That is why America's Cup boats and ocean racers alike have hulls break in half and keels fall off. With millions invested in engineering they still can't reliably predict what the forces will really be and how a complex composite structure will react. If you'd like to place a small bet I'd be happy to oblige. I'm putting my money on the steel shipping container against the wood boat of your choice. Gary H. Lucas 2637 From: newfield4u Date: Mon Dec 1, 2003 11:59pm Subject: Re: Small Origami 2 twin hull barge? The catamaran hulls could be high-speed displacement hulls built out of aluminum. I think that they would tow easily if under 30' by 15'. Maybe a 11 to 1 beam to length ratio on the hulls. The weather prof utility box could be a light weight aluminum inclosed car trailer type, without the wheels and axles. Maybe ramps and doors on both ends. There will be all kinds of cargo carried supporting the many non profit science and beach cleanup programs. Who wants to carry bags of plastic's and oiled trash on there live aboard yacht? The light weight Suzuki Samurai would be powered by a VW diesel engine. This rockcrawler style SUV will have a 130 amp alt., so that there would be a power source to help run electric motors, winches, communication equipment, ext. . When not in tow, self powering around the harbor or small bays would be handy, I wasn't thinking about putting sails on this craft, at least not the first one, but having at least a 2500 watt inverter for ac power would be useful for us builder folks. One could winch this craft up the beach and build a small lodge or cabin with the power systems. I would like to keep gasoline out of this craft. There is plenty of solar radiation in Alaska to keep the batteries upin the summer. A small portable kitchen setup would be good cargo, lots of bears on the beach in Alaska, so that this little floating craft could also function as a food cash, for coastal cleanup and science projects. I surely wouldn't want to do a fall Gulf of Alaska crossing with this craft in tow, but getting across the bay to Seldovia or over to Kodak from Homer for a little deer hunting trip with this craft in tow would be a interesting adventure in the summer and early fall. Thanks for all the consideration. Best Regards, Carl Homer, Alaska 2638 From: Michael Casling Date: Tue Dec 2, 2003 7:54am Subject: Re: Re: Short Boats Gary this is not to disagree with you just to add a little. If being rammed by a freighter is a high priority on your design ideas then steel may have some benefits. I think they have good design calculations for kevlar and composites otherwise Boeing would not be planning their next new plane with it. The AC boats in general have a problem with the lack of deck aft of the mast. When you look at the numbers for these things it is not surprising that one broke. The suspension units on the F1 cars still break. Ron holland was able to show some pretty convincing numbers when the keel of Drum fell off. It was a welding problem not a design problem. Back to the topic. Rob mentioned a particular 27 / 28 foot boat in steel. It weighs 13600 pounds. I am among the group that thinks this is way too heavy. Again if collision by a freighter was our number one priority we might build this boat, but if any kind of sailing performance was desired, or a cost effective boat, then other options must be considered. 13600 pounds of anything will cost more than 7000 pounds of similar stuff. Even a 7000 pound glass boat is overweight from a design point of view but the early boats were built that weight as the number crunching was not the same. A 5000 pound 28 footer is quite feasable. If positive buoyancy was a priority then the heavy boat could not be considered. Another small wager: Today accross the land many home made boats are being built, do you want to bet that they are being built of steel or plywood or composite or solid glass. I do not know the answer but I think it would be plywood. Michael Casling 2639 From: Michael Casling Date: Tue Dec 2, 2003 7:59am Subject: Re: Re: Short Boats When I was selling boats I would try and convince anyone who would listen that an aluminum boat had a lot going for it. Better fuel economy when being towed, a smaller engine to power it. But the power boat buyer used to want heavy with a V8 so thats what they got. I have an 18 foot aluminum Crestliner with a small OMC stern drive that will someday get replaced, possibly with an inboard diesel. Michael Casling 2640 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Tue Dec 2, 2003 8:43am Subject: Re: Re: Short Boats Michael, I was mostly responding to the comment that "If you really wanted puncture resistance you wouldn't pick steel". I was trying to point out that comparisons are far more difficult to make than just pointing at the specs for various materials. I got a little carried away though. I know that Boeing has very good results with Kevlar, Carbon fiber etc. That knowledge is all but useless to the home builder though. It depends far too heavily on real engineering, including the engineering of the processes used in fabrication. You mention a weld failure not engineering as the cause of a keel coming off. That's not really weld failure, that's failure of the engineering of the weld process used. I'll bet the welds that failed were beautiful to look at, and doomed to failure by some condition not accounted for in the engineering. I've had it happen to me on simple steel brackets. I completely agree that an overweight slug of a boat that can't be sailed well to windward would be very poor boat to own. Steel tends that way, if you aren't very careful. I think it is important to simply recognize it isn't suitable for small boats. I happen to favor aluminum. Not because I consider it far superior to steel. Primarily because I work with it so much that I have a very high comfort level with it. Gary H. Lucas 2641 From: Michael Casling Date: Tue Dec 2, 2003 9:33am Subject: Re: Re: Short Boats Agreed then that the smaller steel boats can be too heavy. The Spray 28 at 13600 compared to the Swain 27 at 9000 with the option of twin keels is a no brainer for me. The Swain is the only option but it is still too heavy for my liking. So in a small boat we have to use something else. Aluminum, plywood, composites or glass. There are so many good glass boats available cheap that I think that makes a good option. The container crashes can be dealt with in other ways. Some structural changes to the pointy end and sufficient floatation would make me feel more secure. The incidence of these types of collisions is small and might not be sufficient to make us change anything if it were not for the fact that we could be miles from nowhere and sink. For me floatation is the answer to many of the problems we may encounter. I do not remember all the details of the Drum keel saga but the designer was not hung out to dry. He was able to show that he had many boats with similar designs and no failures. I think he said he used a 2 1/2 times factor. That is if the keel weighed 1000 pounds then the tip should be able to take 2500 pounds of pressure. The movie Deliverence showed aluminum to good effect. Michael Casling 2642 From: richytill Date: Tue Dec 2, 2003 5:27pm Subject: Re: Short Boats Gents', the next question we could ask might be: how much would a 27' Swain in aluminum wheigh? Perhaps someone can project a reasonable figure, or has built one? At 27' and folded, this would be a snap to build--with X 3 welding speeds over steel the reduction in total welding hours could make the whole concept more feasible. Stanchions and liflines could be aluminum reducing wheight above the bulwarks. Twin keel would go aways towards solving the persistant antifouling issue. Could this come in under the wheight of a Vancouver 27' or a BCC 28'--what do we think? rt 2643 From: Michael Casling Date: Tue Dec 2, 2003 7:02pm Subject: Re: Re: Short Boats The boat that I think represents a typical 28 footer is the Newport 28. LOA 28 LWL 23.5 Beam 9.5 Draft 5.25 Displacement 7000 Ballast 3000 Sail area 395. This is pretty much the same as our boat, we are 400 pounds heavier and that is all ballast. A friend and his wife built a Vancouver 27, it took them several years and cost them more money than my boat new ( 1979 ) While they were working I was sailing. The Sabre 28 at 7900 pounds is a heavy glass boat of typical proportions. The Vancouver 27 is 8700 pounds and the BCC 28 14000 pounds. The steel Swain 27 Dove 3 was listed at 9000 pounds so it would likely be lighter than the Vancouver 27 if built in aluminum. The BCC 28 is another very heavy boat. Personaly I think anything much over 7000 is a bit heavy especially if the LWL is less than 23 feet. The 28 foot boat also requires a fairly large aft area to get some storage room. I would much prefer the 31 foot BS boat which has more room and will not suffer as much as the smaller boat from weight. I have not seen first hand a Sabre, or Newport or many of the other 28 foot boats so I can not comment on the strength or quality. I know that the hull on my Tanzer 8.5m is rock solid. The rig needed heavier wyres, aft lowers and better anchor points. I have changed all this plus the rudder. We are a tad slower than a C&C29 most of the time maybe quicker downwind and in heavier weather. Michael Casling 2644 From: nomadakis Date: Tue Dec 2, 2003 8:01pm Subject: Deck plate over chain locker Greetings: I own a Swain 31 pilot house.Built in '91, I have been sailing in Sea of Cortez. My problem is the deck rusted through above the chain locker on the bow.I cut the steel off the top of locker,so I now have an open chain locker; which in theory, lets the "chain breathe". Unfortunately, the windless was also mounted on this peice of discarded deck, so I am windless less! How do I repair this without repeating the same mistake? I thought of using a stainless plate. Can this be welded to the steel deck with propper holding for the windless while weighing anchor etc.? 2645 From: Date: Wed Dec 3, 2003 0:21am Subject: Re: Re: Short Boats What is the weight of the steel in a BS 27? Divide this by 2, and subtract from the total weight to give the weight of a BS 27 in alloy. You save 1/2 the weight of the steel by building in alloy - a substantial difference. This weight saving can be used in one of two ways: 1. Keep the design displacement of the boat the same. You could then carry the weight difference as extra fuel, water, cargo. or 2. Reduce the design displacement of the boat to take advantage of the lower weight of the hull. You can reduce the size of the mast, sails, rigging, engine, winches, ballast, and therefore the cost of these items. This offsets the higher cost of purchasing alloy. Many designers and builders are moving to alloy in recognition that the economics of alloy and steel have changed in the last 20 years. Alloy boats do not cost much more to build than steel boats, yet they typically have better resale values. Check prices on the Internet. Yes, the alloy costs more to buy, but this is only a small part of the total cost. Alloy fabrication and welding is faster, the size of the gear can be reduced because of the weight savings, the performance under sail is typically better, and maintenance over the life of the boat typically costs less. Our computer generated patterns yield fair, modern hull shapes, with no knuckles a the chine ends. Two successful examples of our designs have been built in alloy, and another is under construction. We would be happy to work with builders interested in smaller sized alloy boats. We will produce a standard design for an alloy origami yacht in the 25-30 foot range, suitable for amateur construction, if there is an interest. Greg Elliott http://origamimagic.com 2646 From: Carl Nostrand Date: Wed Dec 3, 2003 0:23am Subject: Re: Small Origami 2 twin hull barge? 2 Hi Geoff, You have very creative ideas. A sailing shop/studio, that sounds a little nicer that a twin hull barge. I like Monday morning design. Can you draw? Best regards, Carl Nostrand Balance of the Sea Homer, Alaska 2647 From: carlmbentley Date: Wed Dec 3, 2003 11:18am Subject: ordering plans and currency conversions anyone in the US order plans recently and if so how did you do the currency conversion ? do i just send a cashiers check to brent's parents with a letter stating which design i want ? tia -carl 2648 From: fmichael graham Date: Wed Dec 3, 2003 11:41am Subject: Re: Re: Short Boats Michael, et al: Correct me if I am wrong, but I think that Dove lll was built with 1/4" steel. I know that it was built with the intention that it be strong enough to withstand a collision with an iceberg or crushing by moving ice flows, as it was constructed for the express purpose of surviving a jaunt through the Arctic. I would think that a 27' steel-hulled boat would come in at a lower displacement if built to "typical" standards. Then again, my last "plastic" boat, a Cal 3-30, displaced 12,500 lbs.. The hull was pretty thick, yet, this was a very fast boat for a performance cruiser. I have often heard that it is not wise to build a boat of steel of less than 40 feet, but I have seen a 31' Swain perform very well in 10 knot winds. I would think that an aluminum-hulled 27 footer would "fly". One point that I missed; are we discussing possibilities of a pocket cruiser, a weekend club racer, or the best of both worlds? Wouldn't a twin-keeler tend to be a bit too tender on this size/composition of boat? Regards, Mike 2649 From: daletrautman Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 2:51am Subject: wanderer 35 On Trevor Bolts site,his wanderer 35 design has me wondering if it is origami or not.The text describes an option of putting on the longitudinals and pulling it into shape,but frames are also mentioned.I liked the idea of buying the hull plates pre cad cut.Have you guys already discussed this design? Am interested in your comments on it.I have learned tons about sailboats on this site just reading your chatter.Someday we are going to build a steel sailboat for cruising ,and i liked the spray 40 with a junk rig.It sounds like that would have been a huge mistake unless we had lots of diesel tankage. Thanks again for the forum,read it every day. Dale 2650 From: jim dorey Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 6:59am Subject: Re: wanderer 35 go environmentally friendly, fill those tanks with veggie oil, then when you wreck you don't kill anything. yes it's been done, and still being done, just remember to start and stop it on regular petro diesel, unless you use converted oil. i imagine you can get vegetable oil in an emergency almost anywhere, so when you get in a storm near japan and end up in lake ontario you can find fuel easily. 2651 SPAM 2652 From: richytill Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 11:58am Subject: Re: Short Boats Greg, did you get a chance to check ou the conclusion of David Gerrs' article on metal boats in latest issue SAIL magazine. Puts the cost of aluminum construction at slightly more than steel. Seems to make sense for shorter boats anyway. rt, (My Island) 2653 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 0:08pm Subject: Re: Re: Short Boats I hate painting. The thought of sandblasting and cleaning the interior and exterior of a boat, then painting the whole thing inside and out with several coats turns me off more than just about any other part of building a boat! Then again I hate working with fiberglass for similar reasons. Gary H. Lucas 2654 From: brentswain38 Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 1:49pm Subject: Re: Short Boats Dove 111 was built of ten guage steel as designed. The twin keeler is plenty stiff enough as the centre of gravity is the same as it would be with a single keel of the same draft. Sailing south last year from Vancouver Island I was south of Hawaii in 14 days and took 23 days from Hawaii to Vancouver Island, same as the previous trip. This is not slow for any heavily loaded 31 footer.One trick to keeping a boat built of heavy material relatively light is to maximise the waterline within reason and minimise overhangs . 2655 From: brentswain38 Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 1:55pm Subject: Re: wanderer 35 I've been told of a guy living on Lasquetti who has a car on Vancouver Island which runs on greasy spoon grease. He starts it on Diesel, which warms the grease . Then he switches to cooking grease and goes back to diesel before shutting it off. The mom and pop restaurants give him all the fuel he wants for free. The only problems is hungry hippies tend to tailgate when they follow their noses a little too close. Brent Swain 2656 From: brentswain38 Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 2:00pm Subject: Re: Short Boats Thats why we usually buy the plate wheelabbraded and primed with a good primer. If you keep it up and don't take too long, there is no need to blast. I once painted a boat with a huge rented airless sprayer. It took about 15 minutes to put a thick coat on the inside. When you rent a sprayer, don't mention the words boat or epoxy or they won't rent it to you. Just say you plan to paint your house with oil based paint, and keep lots of thinner in it when you aren't actually painting.Get the biggest airless sprayer they have, it's worth it . Brent Swain 2657 From: brentswain38 Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 2:01pm Subject: Re: ordering plans and currency conversions What size of boat are you after? Brent Swain 2658 From: carlmbentley Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 2:37pm Subject: Re: ordering plans and currency conversions 36' footer twin keels aft cabin (center cockpit/pilot house) 1 USD = 1.31183 CAD but i'm not sure how you normally deal with it, and then there's shipping to florida too. tried e-mailing you, think i may have a wrong address. thanks much -carl 2659 From: richytill Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 3:52pm Subject: Re: Short Boats Brent, when I first read your book I noticed an emphasis on speed of construction. I approached the project as a hobby with little interest in speed. As an owner builder I now value the advantage of speed of construction. Even using wheelabraded and zinc primed steel, time in the rain and endless wear will take its' toll. I ended up having to sandblast and paint the whole project because of millions of micro scratches created during a year and a half of construction. The sandblasting, although we did a meticulous job, cost a lot of time and cash--then we had to put on new zinc paint. Speed of construction also means less rentals, less capital tied up and for some people less stress I think. Speed of construction also facilitates the flow of ideas and stages of building. Things tend to get bogged down when I get busy at work as I loose the threads details for comleting the current phase. We also made the mistake of using an airless sprayer with 2500 psi max.--3000 psi seems to be the minimum for a decent job with epoxy. I used Mare Island Epoxy from the military surplus on the inside of the hull. At that price you can really afford to pile it on--this is super tough paint: like for battle ships. We tried to chip the stuff of with a hammer. I am more than happy with the steel hull now it's done. As Greg points out--painting is probably the least enjoyable phase of the project. Folding up the plates is likely the most fun. rt 2660 From: Michael Casling Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 4:10pm Subject: Re: Re: Short Boats I think the general discussion for this group is for an offshore cruiser type of boat. And that does tend to call for a hull with volume, and sound if not slightly heavy construction. My point on a 28 foot hull is that there are a lot available in North America fairly cheap, so a person could be sailing rather than building, sooner rather than later. I would prefer a steel hull to be 36 feet but I can not argue with the performance of Brents 31 foot boat. I think twin keels on a slightly longer waterline than the typical 28 foot boat would be fine. I prefer a solid fin keel but the twin keels do have some advantages. My preference is for a much lighter cold moulded wooden boat of 36 feet, but this is the wrong forum for those thoughts. I own a solid 28 foot boat and it works fine. I will have questions for this group when I put a diesel in my fishing boat. Michael Casling 2661 From: jim dorey Date: Thu Dec 4, 2003 8:49pm Subject: Re: Re: wanderer 35 ya, the unconverted vegetable oil tends to clog fuel systems with soap, long as the pump and injectors are clear it should be fine. converted veggie oil can start and stop like a regular diesel, no probs, except that it'll eat the rubber components of the fuel system, so you gotta replace 'em with something like dacron, or use rubber in an emergency and replace seals and tube every few hundred running hours. greasy spoons in a place monitored by some kind of environmental agency have to pay for someone to take their used oil away, getting it free is good for all concerned, money wise anyways. the big chains sell their oil to soap manufacturers. so far there is a seriously large gray area where fuel taxation is iffy, there are very few places that actually have biodiesel taxed in any form, others charge based on mileage or amount of fuel produced. there's no tax as long as the vehicle doesn't go on public roads, big wide ocean and farm lands are open season. don't worry about the potheads, no matter how addled they are i don't think they'd try to order chips from a boat, specially if they have to swim out to it. perhaps there will be seaway taxes that will apply to bioD some day, and jet planes use kerosene, so there may be tax on veggie like for avgas 'n stuff, i suppose the air towers have to be paid for someway, and lighthouses. get while the gettins good. oh, and the chip shops would be able to replace their oil more often, fresh oil is healthy oil, so you'd contribute to the improving health of your local population to use it too, perhaps. 2662 From: Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 9:16am Subject: Re: Re: Short Boats Hi Rich, Haven't seen the article, though I agree with the conclusion. Once you factor in long term operating costs and resale value, I believe that alloy costs less over the life of the boat. greg elliott http://www.origamimagic.com 2663 From: richytill Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 2:56pm Subject: Tek Screws for Firring Strips When putting in the firring strip tabs I started drilling holes for bolts to attach the woodwork. This became tedious and un-rewarding. Then after a couple of experiments put in plain tabs without holes. Ended up buying a giant box of Tek screws to fasten the 1" X 4" firring strips/wood deck beams/whatever. Used a wood bit to make a hole to recess the head of the Tek screw and a nut driver on an electric drill to self drill and tap the screws. Put a dab of Sikaflex LOT on each tab to combat possible corrosion and firm things up. This proceedure eliminated a lot of messing around as far as I can see. Now the spray-foam has locked the wood in place the system looks functional. The screw heads are deep enough in the wood that they can be buried in Sikaflex before interior woodwork goes on. Unless I am missing an obvious flaw in the concept of using Tek screws it seems to cut down time and costs. For what it's worth, rt 2664 From: evanmoonjunk Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 5:02pm Subject: more Perkins info Just a bit more info about the 4 cylinder Perkins mentioned before. This is 50 hp with Borg Warner gear and would probably be suitable for a 40'. It was to go into a 36' but it was too large for the space available. I saw the engine at various stages of the rebuild, and it looks like new now...Evan 2665 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 5:17pm Subject: Re: Tek Screws for Firring Strips Tek screws are great, I used to buy them by the keg (10,000) at a time. One word of caution. Try to buy 'machined point' screws not forged point. Machined point screws have the drill point machined on in a secondary operation after the screw is formed. The forged point screws get the cutting edges just stamped in. The problem is that as the dies get dull the drill point gets larger. The drill then makes an oversize hole and the screw threads will strip out or vibrate loose. I found this out when I had a customer complain about screws I shipped them. Then I had to recall all the screws I had sent out to every customer (dozens) and replace them at my cost. A couple more useful hints. Hold the drill motor between your thumb and forefinger and pull the trigger with your pinky. You want the force exactly in line with the screw. Push REALLY hard while drilling. That point doesn't last long and you want it to cut not skid. If it skids it often work hardens the material and the point just burns up. Gary H. Lucas 2666 From: audeojude Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 8:23pm Subject: Re: hatches This one seems fairly simple to me. The miracle of the bungee coord. just have all your hatch's / door's with a bungee cord holding them open. It need just be long enough to keep the hatch or door open under the doors own weight yet have enought stretch left to close with a firm push or pull by you. Though not long lasting in strong sun ( maybe 2 or 3 months) they are very cheap and you could buy a couple years supply for 15 dollars or so. just weld a attachment point on boat and on hatch/door, bungee already has metal hook on each end that can be run thru and crimped on attachment points. Scott Carle PS. sorry to jump in so late on this thread. I'm a new member to the group and have been reading the last years messages and beeing good about not replying to old dead threads :) well old to most of the list members. Seeing as this topic wasnt much more than 30 days old I couldn't resist. 2667 From: audeojude Date: Fri Dec 5, 2003 9:00pm Subject: Vegitable oil fuel There is a slew of inforation on the internet telling exactly how to do this. The sites seemed the most reputable spoke of letting the used vegitable oil sit for a week or two and settle the larger particulate matter out. The to drain off the clearer top oil. Then to filter that oil. Then to have a real good filter system for the vegitable oil between the tank and the engine. The ones that had used it in a marine capacity recomended redundant fuel lines and filter systems so you could bypass one or the other without having to shut down the engine (this makes sense regardles of what fuel you run to me). They all also recomended starting and stopping on diesel fuel as the engines have problems starting on the vegitable oil when the engine is cold. Once at operating temperature the engine can start on vegitable oil also. About the only down side that I have thought of for using vegitable oil as fuel is the logistics of getting it. You need a truck and at least 4 or 5 large tanks to get it in as well as process it in. Then their is the difficulty of getting it from land to your boat. Pulling up to a dock and pumping diesel though more expensive is much more convenient. How much effort is it going to take to get enough oil to fill your tanks on a offshore cruiser. say 50 to 200 gallons? That seems like a lot of work unless you have a system in place with local restraunts and a fixed operation somewhere to process the oil. Personally I like the idea and would probably do it just for the novelty of it. (I am a sucker for alternative solution stuff) Scott Carle aka Audeojude 2668 SPAM 2669 From: Edwin Deveau Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 5:12am Subject: Re: Save the life of a mouse! Eat A Pussy Not what I would expect in a boatbuilding site. Is this site moderated? 2670 From: prairiemaidca Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 8:08am Subject: Teck screws... HI ALL; There is definitly some out of place stuff showing up on our site these days! On the subject of using these screws. Is Teck the actual trade or brand name of these items? If I go to a local Fastener store will they know that name. I am very interested in taking a look at them. Martin (Prairie Maid) 2671 From: jim dorey Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 8:47am Subject: Re: Vegitable oil fuel maybe setting up a free waste cooking oil dump, sure someone would eventually screw with it, but if you have a small pre-processing tank to make sure nobody puts apple juice, or other yellow liquids, or even motor oil in it, you'll probably have an ok time. as for large particles, all you have to do is heat it a bit, the particles fall to the bottom, cool it a bit, then filter it through some nylon stocking, then a cotton or felt filter like on home heating oil barrels. the stocking when you fill the barrel, the felt when you empty it. i'm sure there's at least one boat owner or entrepreneur near y'all that has actual land and a house. maybe having that person store the oil and use it as a second business, selling for loads less than for petro will make everybody happier. use a coin op fuel pump, dump a few rolls of coins in the hopper, as the pump measures it eats another coin, when you got enough you get a smaller bag of coins back. the less maintenance and tending the thing takes the cheaper the oil will be. and i remind you, there ain't nuthin' wrong with bein crazy. 2672 From: jim dorey Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 8:50am Subject: Re: Save the life of a mouse! Eat A Pussy that's a hit and run, with an open group anybody can do that, i don't know if the moderator/s whoever they is, can take care of that problem. must admit, it was a clever subject line. 2673 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 9:27am Subject: Re: Teck screws... The usual spelling is Tek, also called Self Drilling Screws,I believe it is a trade name but pretty much everyone that deals in hardware knows what they are. Note that they are also available in other head styles, like Phillips pan head and bugle head. A couple other technical tips. Tek screws have a point number 1,2, 3, 4 etc. The point number refers to the length of the drill point. The drill point MUST drill all the way through the steel before the threads engage, otherwise the threads strip or the screw breaks off. They make these screws with drill points long enough the penetrate 1 inch if structural steel! If you must fasten occasionally to steel thicker than the drill point you can do it by drilling a pilot hole the same size or a tiny fraction smaller than the drill point. Gary H. Lucas 2674 From: audeojude Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 10:10am Subject: Re: Vegitable oil fuel Actually for a group of individuals that might be one of the few ways that this would work efficiently. I think it would need to be sailers so that actual fuel usage would be fairly low comparatively. Have a co-op that gathered and processed the oil and have a place that it could be stored and pumped at a dock. It would take some working out of the details. Who would scavange the oil, if all members had to contribute oil and splitting costs on the processing equipment and facility. But with the right group and in the right situation I think that you could probably provide fuel to the group for around 20cents a gallon after it was initially setup. It would mostly entail members gathering and processing the fuel. This is all assuming that you can get the oil for free. It won't be long if enough people do this till the used oil will not be free but you will have to buy if from restraunts. But that is probably a couple years off :) Scott Carle PS. one thing i have heard is that the oil can be very very smelly/stinky if it goes rancid. something that you would need to taken into account. I have the feeling the process could lend itself a bit of mess and the potential for this in the long term. Neighboors might object. 2675 From: Graeme Mitchell Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 2:37pm Subject: Re: Save the life of a mouse! Eat A Pussy Yeppers The the moderator will get this lowlife and introduce them to the waste bin of life with all the other dross. I hope Graeme 2676 From: Graeme Mitchell Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 2:53pm Subject: Re: Re: Vegitable oil fuel There is some books out there one that I have it seems to cover most of the ways that it can be used "' From the Fryer to the fuel Tank'' The complete Guide to using Vegetable Oil as an Alternative Fuel by Joshua Tickell printed by Tickell Energy Consulting Tallahssee FL It covers from processing Waste oil to bio-diesel to a kero mix with waste oil .to heat exchanges for keeping oil fluid Cheers Graeme Mitchell Australia 2677 From: Graeme Mitchell Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 2:56pm Subject: Re: Teck screws... Tek screws are all good but one of the problems is to make sure the Drill you are using can be ajusted ,other wise you can twist them off when they reach what ever you are attaching . hell i hate that Graeme 2678 From: brentswain38 Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 4:11pm Subject: Re: Short Boats If you have to spend three times the amount of money for the materials and don't happen to have that much money, you have to pay rent and all the other costs of living ashore while you go to work to accumulate the money, which more than eats up any distant future gain in resale value .Savings on Maintenance are mythical. I spend around $25 per year on average on maintenance of the boat and a fraction what someone living ashore saving up for aluminium would spend on maintenance of a landbound lifestyle.I've seen too many people stranded ashore indefinitly,by worrying more about resale value than dealing with their present reality. Brent Swain 2679 From: brentswain38 Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 4:12pm Subject: Re: wanderer 35 Perhaps mixing a certain amount of cooking oil with diesel stove oil or kerosene would simplify things a bit. Brent Swain 2680 From: brentswain38 Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 4:16pm Subject: Re: ordering plans and currency conversions Plans for the 36 are US$350 for mail order to the US. My email address is brentswain38@y... Brent Swain 2681 From: robert anthony Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 7:02pm Subject: Re: Re: wanderer 35 I believe the glycerine in the oil should be removed before I would burn it in my diesel engine. 2682 From: fmichael graham Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 7:19pm Subject: Re: Re: Short Boats I Just picked up the December/03 issue of "48 North", while making the rounds at Popeye's. On page 42, under the title of "Ask the Surveyor", is a discussion based on a reader's dilemma of buying aluminum or steel. Unfortunately, the surveyor doesn't charge into the topic the way we do in this group. Too bad, but I guess they don't want to upset the proponents of one school of thought over the other. I'd scan the article for the benefit of the group, but I am pretty sure I could get legally smacked for it. Anyway, I just thought some of the members in the neighbourhood might want to pick it up and give it a read, though I wouldn't go to any trouble to get it, if I were you. Still, if you've been looking for an excuse -to give your significant other - to go to the local marine supply store, I hope that I have assisted in that endeavour. Regards, Mike 2683 SPAM 2684 From: mark_schlichting11 Date: Sat Dec 6, 2003 11:51pm Subject: Re: Aluminum vs Steel Aluminum construction is probably only slightly more than steel when you are paying someone to weld. Welding steel myself versus paying someone to weld aluminum(beyond my comfort level to try welding it structurally) makes the cost gap much wider. Mark S. Costa Vida Shearwater, BC 2685 From: Len den Besten Date: Sun Dec 7, 2003 2:29am Subject: Re: Teck screws... Hi, I am renewing my windows in an aluminum motorsailer. The new windows are made of anodized alu, every 5 inches a screw-hole. The decksaloon/pilothouse is also made of aluminum. My question refers to the screws I can best use. I still have to drill the holes, so I have at least two options: 1) SS (tek?) screws but this gives the risk of galvanic corrosion under the window-frame where SS meets alu. 2) alu screws to use with holes I drill and make a thread in. Which option do you think is the best ? Or is ther another option ? Regards, Len. 2686 From: jim dorey Date: Sun Dec 7, 2003 6:22am Subject: Re: Re: Vegitable oil fuel > Actually for a group of individuals that might be one of the few ways > that this would work efficiently. I think it would need to be sailers > so that actual fuel usage would be fairly low comparatively. Have a > co-op that gathered and processed the oil and have a place that it > could be stored and pumped at a dock. > It would take some working out of the details. Who would scavange the > oil, if all members had to contribute oil they'd contribute none, the environmentally conscious public, and small time eatery owners would supply it all. > and splitting costs on the > processing equipment and facility. But with the right group and in the > right situation I think that you could probably provide fuel to the > group for around 20cents a gallon after it was initially setup converted oil is unfortunately a bit more expensive than petro, but with large enough production it can be brought down to par, then it's only a morality issue. > It would mostly entail members gathering and processing the fuel. for converted oil it would take a lot more processing equipment. but using a veg oil powered heater to get the rest of the oil warmed, some crude filters, and some tanks, that's about it for non converted, and the tanks can be old crude oil barrels or heating oil barrels dragged out ot a scrapyard. the tanks don't have to be perfectly sealed or anything, if they tip over they won't cause an enormous environmental disaster, but losing a few hundred gallons can be depressing. mainly, the reason it has to be carted by a waste handler is that it slows down sewer systems in cities and towns that have them. > This is all assuming that you can get the oil for free. It won't be > long if enough people do this till the used oil will not be free but > you will have to buy if from restraunts. But that is probably a couple > years off :) as long as there are people who have to pay to get their oil trucked off, the oil will be free, so, more than a couple years, maybe 3-3 1/2. > PS. one thing i have heard is that the oil can be very very > smelly/stinky if it goes rancid. something that you would need to > taken into account. I have the feeling the process could lend itself a > bit of mess and the potential for this in the long term. Neighboors > might object. some kinds of oil can go rancid, but not the most commonly used oil for deep and pan frying, canola and corn is most popular. i personally haven't had any problems, and that's with me forgetting that i'd stored a few gallons to take to the oil collector, then sniffing to see if i hadn't accidentally got some fresh jugs in with the old, only the smell of fries, fish and chicken. olive oil goes rancid rather quickly, but deep frying stuff in it, in my opinion gives a flavour on the bad side of unpleasant, more like disgusting, fine for salads and stuff, but deep frying, ew. walnut and peanut oil goes rancid, but similar to olive, i don't believe many fry with it, for regional and import dishes sure, but that's more the kind that uses so little oil that there's none left to dump. there might be one objection, the neighbour kids sneaking into the tank fence and seeing all the things in it, then going away, never to come back to such a boring place, or always to come back, gets home full of french fry oil and the parents go nuts about the grease on the furniture. so there i guess i say, security is a good idea, but passive security. and keep wood structures away from the tanks, in the unlikely chance of a big fire, just keep the covers on the tanks with vents away from the tanks, and the fire will burn the outside and leave the oil in the tanks alone. 2687 From: jim dorey Date: Sun Dec 7, 2003 6:25am Subject: Re: Re: Vegitable oil fuel http://journeytoforever.org/ these guys have a biofuel library as well as other online sources. it includes bioD and alcohol, and what's more traditional for a sailor than lots of alcohol to get the job done. 2688 From: jim dorey Date: Sun Dec 7, 2003 6:45am Subject: Re: Re: wanderer 35 yes, the glycerine is there, but isn't a problem in a warm engine, it burns as a fuel when it's pre-warmed, wrap some of the fuel line around the exhaust manifold, it will get warm but not blistering hot by the time it gets to the pump and stuff. with glycerine removed it's converted, commonly lye and methyl alcohol are mixed into warm oil, makes the glycerine precipitate. left over methanol is what eats away at rubber components. 2689 From: jim dorey Date: Sun Dec 7, 2003 6:47am Subject: Re: Re: wanderer 35 been done, i haven't heard much about success with that plan though, may mean the people that tried it decided to later try something else for one reason or another. 2691 From: Date: Sun Dec 7, 2003 11:11am Subject: Re: Re: Aluminum vs Steel Comparing paid work to "free" work is the economics of slavery. It doesn't really make economic sense because everyone's time is worth something. To realistically cost something, you need to take into account the opportunity cost of doing the work yourself. The fact that if you were not welding steel, you could be making money, playing with the wife and kids, or off sailing. You only have so many hours in your life, and once you spend them they are gone. No amount of money can turn back the clock. Thus, when making informed decisions in life, you must calculate the value of your time in order to arrive at a realistic answer. If I offered you a job for $1 a week would you take it? How about if I offered you $10,000 a week? If you won't work for $1, but will work for $10,000 this puts the value of your time somewhere between $1 and $10,000 per week. Rather than spend 1 week of your own time fabricating a part for the boat, wouldn't you just buy it if the price was only $1? Otherwise, you are working for $1 per week. How about if the part was worth $10,000? If you could, you would probably fabricate the part because you would be working for $10,000 a week. This again puts the value of your time somewhere between $1 and $10,000 per week. How about a $100 part? How about a $1000 part? How about a $5000 part? Where is the point at which you would buy rather than fabricate? This is the value of a week of your time to you. You can then use this figure to compare hiring yourself, or hiring someone else to do the work, and thus make an informed economic decision. How does this relate to alloy and steel? Alloy welding and fabrication is generally considered to be 3 times faster than steel. So, you cannot compare 1 hour of welding steel with 1 hour of welding alloy. You must compare 1 hour of alloy with 3 hours of steel. 1. The alloy welding and fabrication will typically go 3 times faster, allowing you to finish the boat quicker - which is one of the main reason we are using the origami technique. By combining the speed of origami with the speed of alloy you arrive at the fastest possible way currently known to build a metal boat. 2. For those 3 hours you are not welding steel you can be doing something else. For 1 hour you can work as a fitter for the alloy welder. For the other 2 hours you can be working at another job to pay for the 1 hour of welding. If you have a trade yourself, 2 hours of overtime will pay for 1 hour of welding, with money left over in your pocket to go cruising. It is generally recognized in construction that two people on a job working together do three times as much work as one person working on their own. Building a boat on your own is a slow process. You can expect it to go three times faster if you have a helper. By costing the value of your own time, and the multiplier effect of a second person, you can then arrive at a figure to pay the helper. Thus, when considering the cost of steel and alloy welding, you really need to account for the cost of a fitter. You don't do final welding ("structural welding") on a boat until the boat is tacked together. Most people can tack alloy with minimal instruction. This allows you to pull an alloy boat together and tack it yourself with a small MIG unit, with your helper serving as the fitter. Once the hull has been tacked together, hire a professional alloy boat welder for the 2 or 3 days it will take to do the structural welding, with you working as the fitter. Most processional welders provide their own MIG unit, as they will do the best work with a unit they are most familiar with. Thus, for tacking you only need a modestly priced unit, and can resell the unit once the job is done. Plans change as people age, and almost everyone ends up selling their boat eventually. Resale value becomes very important at that time, as a good boat can go along way towards paying for an apartment or small house, so you can retire ashore without having to pay rent. I know people that have spend years building their steel boat, only to find that its market value when completed is less than the value of the materials that went into the boat. Less than they could have bought the same boat on the open market. In effect, they received nothing for their years of effort. This does not apply only to framed boats, but to origami boats as well. Based on the market value of alloy versus steel boats, this is less likely to happen with alloy. Our main reason we build in both alloy and steel, rather than exclusively steel, is that alloy appears to give the greatest economic benefit for the least amount of work. Thus for an amateur builder, hoping to create something of value in the end, it makes sense to take a very close look at alloy. Some of the figures I have seen on this site are "best case" and I believe are unrealistic for the average sailor. On average I believe that typically it costs more than $25 a year to maintain a boat, however I do know one cruiser that made money each year maintaining his boat. His would put his boat up in the yard, and contracted them to repair and paint the boat while he did a delivery. He returned from the delivery, paid the yard, and had $ in his pocket to go cruising for the year. There is always a problem with anecdotal evidence, because it doesn't give a realistic picture of what will typically happen. It is usually "best case" or "worst case", while most of us would rather know "typical case". This is why anecdotal evidence is not accepted in science as a proof. There is always someone in the right place at the right time to get the best deal. Life doesn't work that way for most of us, and we typically end up having to pay the same price as everyone else. From my experience and talking with many cruisers over the years, a typical experience for a 40 footer might be as follows: You could spend $50,000 and three years to build and outfit in steel, or two years and $60,000 to build and outfit the equivalent boat in alloy. After 10 years of cruising with equivalent maintenance, the steel boat would be worth $50,000, and the alloy boat would be worth $100,000. If your time is worth nothing, and you never sell the boat, then steel can make sense. For most people time is money, and eventually most people do sell their boats, which is why alloy can make sense for most people. We could debate this question forever. A better method would be to compile a database of case histories for frameless construction. I would be willing to maintain such a database and do the statistical analysis. My degrees are in math and comp sci. I am pretty familiar with the methodologies involved. I will publish the results on this forum and make them public domain. We need a sample at least a large as the square root of the number of frameless boats that have been built. David Gerr and others have already done this for framed construction. Replaced anecdote with science and have found that alloy construction only costs slightly more than steel construction. We should do the same for frameless construction. I'd be interested to hear from other owners - how much did it actually cost in $ and time - to get your boat in the water and ready for cruising. How much time elapsed between the time you started construction and the boat was launched, outfitted, and finally completed. When did this happen - because costs have changed considerably over the years - and out of date numbers must be regarded as such. For those builders with work in progress, it would be instructive as well to hear how far along you are and the $ and time that have gone into the boat, and how much you estimate is left to go. One of the rules of thumb we used in project estimating was this - ask the people working on the project how close to finishing they were. When they said the project was 90% complete you could be pretty sure they were 1/2 way there. Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com 2692 From: Henri and Cathy Naths Date: Sun Dec 7, 2003 0:17pm Subject: Re: Re: Aluminum vs Steel cool ! I love the learning curve this group provides. Lurker- Henri 2693 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Sun Dec 7, 2003 3:23pm Subject: Steel origami cabin roof beams What are the recommended size and spacing for the cabin roof beams? Are there corresponding cabin wall uprights? Regards, Ted 2694 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Sun Dec 7, 2003 3:25pm Subject: Transom hung rudder stops Are stops recommended either side of the rudder to stop it slamming against the transom when hard astern or when hit by a following wave? If so what is the best way to make them? Regards, Ted 2695 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Sun Dec 7, 2003 3:26pm Subject: Origami fabrication sequence. Obviously it is easier to fit the engine bearers and exhaust etc if there is little or no deck above. That said it is necessary to have all or most of the deck in place to stiffen the hull before lifting to fit the skeg, which has to be in place before fitting the stern tube and aligning the engine etc. How much deck is necessary to stiffen the hull? Regards, Ted 2696 From: audeojude Date: Mon Dec 8, 2003 7:40am Subject: Re: Vegitable oil fuel > they'd contribute none, the environmentally conscious public, and small > time eatery owners would supply it all. I didn't mean that they would contribute their own cooking oil :) just that the duty of collecting it from restraunts would have to be arranged between the members of the co-op. > converted oil is unfortunately a bit more expensive than petro, but with > large enough production it can be brought down to par, then it's only a > morality issue. I'm not sure what your talking about as in converted oil.. The processing im talking about is just settling and filtering the oil. This would make the cost of the oil very much cheaper than diesel. > using a veg oil powered heater to get the rest of the oil warmed, some > crude filters, and some tanks, that's about it for non converted, and > the tanks can be old crude oil barrels or heating oil barrels dragged > out ot a scrapyard. the tanks don't have to be perfectly sealed or > anything, if they tip over they won't cause an enormous environmental > disaster, but losing a few hundred gallons can be depressing. mainly, I wish they were as laid back here. DHEC (department of health and environmental control) here would probably have a lot to say about a hundred gallons of spilt cooking oil :) Most likely make you lick it up in a groveling posture. They are pretty tough about everything. Actually if they new what you were doing there is the very real possibility that they would want to you have a license and to meet their standards for handling, processing and transporting the oil.. One reason that I put up a 8 ft privacy fence and go out of my way not to ivolve offical dom in my affairs. I live about 15 miles out in the country back off the main road and have no neighbors adjacent to my land, just woods and fields. A couple years ago I had the county cops come out to cite me for having grass in my yard longer than 12 inches long and to clean up the junk in the yard calling it a health hazard because someone had complained. I put up the fence to hide things and they went away. I still get hot under the collar thinking about it though. One of the reasons I don't live in a city is that I want to be able to build things and have projects going on. Yes its unsightly but I'm doing it on my property.... grrrrrr... ok im going to stop now.. getting hot under the collar thinking about it. Scott steps down off his slightly off topic soap box. > some kinds of oil can go rancid, but not the most commonly used oil for > deep and pan frying, canola and corn is most popular. i personally > haven't had any problems, and that's with me forgetting that i'd stored > a few gallons to take to the oil collector, then sniffing to see if i > hadn't accidentally got some fresh jugs in with the old, only the smell > of fries, fish and chicken. olive oil goes rancid rather quickly, but > deep frying stuff in it, in my opinion gives a flavour on the bad side > of unpleasant, more like disgusting, fine for salads and stuff, but deep > frying, ew. walnut and peanut oil goes rancid, but similar to olive, i > don't believe many fry with it, for regional and import dishes sure, but > that's more the kind that uses so little oil that there's none left to dump. This is interesting .. I know little about the different varieties of oil and which will go bad and which not... good information Scott Carle 2697 From: Henri and Cathy Naths Date: Mon Dec 8, 2003 8:21am Subject: Re: Re: Vegitable oil fuel That's ok Scott, get it off your chest we,re good listerners, you ought to go to http://journeytoforever.org/ excellent info for biodiesel fuels processers etc etc etc 2698 From: audeojude Date: Mon Dec 8, 2003 9:14am Subject: Re: Vegitable oil fuel That site is a virtual clearing house for information on the subject. Thanks for the link. Scott Carle 2699 From: Date: Mon Dec 8, 2003 10:52am Subject: why twin rudders This article examines the reasons for twin rudders on modern yachts. Traditional yacht balance has relied on maintaining symmetry of the waterline, while the yacht is upright or heeled. This "static balance" allows the yacht to maintain the same course, regardless of angle of heel. By necessity, this results in a yacht that has a narrow stern, which restricts both performance and living space, and can make a yacht prone to pooping. Static balance has inherent limitations. As a yacht heels, the center of effort of the rig moves to leeward, which tries to force the yacht to round up - a weather helm. The helm or sails must be adjusted to maintain course. In a traditional low aspect ratio rig this is not much of a problem, as even heeled the center of effort does not move outboard very much. However, on a modern high aspect ratio rig, the problem can be very pronounced, and only gets worse as the yacht is loaded for cruising. To counter this effect, traditional designers move the mast forward, so that in light airs the yacht has a lee helm, and only in heavy airs does it have a weather helm. The main is reefed first as the wind increases to maintain balance, and then the headsails. However, modern yacht designs rely on a different solution. The traditional yacht shape, wide in the middle and narrow on the ends is not the fastest shape for a yacht. A more triangular shape has better performance. A narrow bow provides upwind ability, while a broad stern minimizes hobby horsing and wave induced drag. The bonus for a cruiser is that a wide stern provides extra living space, the increased buoyancy in the stern provides protection from pooping, and the increased width of the stern allows for davits to handle the dinghy. The problem for modern designers is to balance such a shape, because such a boat cannot hold a course under traditional design theory. Clearly modern designers have been successful. How is it done? As a modern yacht heels, the wider stern sections press deeper into the water, which moves the lateral resistance of the yacht aft. This is the same effect as traditional designers achieve by moving the mast forward, but it happens every time the boat heels, without having to move the mast. At the same time, the yacht rises in the stern and down by the bow, which moves the center of effort forward, similar to reefing the main ahead of the headsails. The net effect is that the balance in a modern yacht relies on "dynamic balance" - the yacht's shape dynamically adjusts the centers of lateral resistance and centers of effort to counter changes in balance brought about by heeling forces. Twin rudders have proven to be very effective on modern yachts, because they contribute positively to this dynamic balance. A traditional single rudder provides less lateral resistance as the boat heels, which moves the center of lateral resistance forward, increasing the weather helm. The exact opposite of what is wanted. With twin rudders, the lateral resistance of the rudders increases as the yacht heels (as compared to a single rudder), which moves the center of lateral resistance aft, which is precisely the effect wanted to balance the yacht. Also, twin rudders solve another problem. With a broad stern, as the boat heels the stern lifts out of the water at the centerline, and a single rudder can become ineffective, making the boat prone to broaching. By moving the rudders outboard, the leeward rudder is pressed deeper as the boat heels, increasing its effectiveness. Our 50 foot design was built with twin rudders, and extensive offshore sailing has proven the benefits. The design is well balanced and tracks well in seas. How about twin keels? Twin keels do not provide the same effect as twin rudders. On a twin keel design, as the boat heels the lateral resistance of the keel increases (as compared to a single keel), which moves the center of lateral resistance forward - opposite to what is desired. To counter this effect, twin keels must typically be located further aft than a conventional keel, but this is not an idea solution. Common sense would suggest that you want the lateral resistance of the keel to increase as you heel, to counter the increased wind, which is what twin keels provides. However, this ignores the requirements to balance the movement of the center of effort to leeward. You want to increase the lateral resistance as the boat heel, but you want this to increase in the stern, which is what twin rudders provides. As a result, twin keels have not gained the widespread acceptance, except in areas of extreme tides. And then it is not for sailing ability, rather for beach ability. Contrast this to twin rudders, which have gained rapid acceptance, as the benefits have been quickly realized for modern hull designs. Could twin rudders be used as an alternative to twin keels? If the center of gravity of the yacht is aft of the forward edge of the keel shoe - as is the case in most yachts - a single keel, twin rudder yacht could stand on its keel and rudders. Strengthening of the rudders would be required - as is typically done for offshore cruising - but the yacht could stand. Twin rudders provide improved balance and handling, especially in more modern designs, and can prove a necessity as the width of the stern is increased. With attention to strength and weight distribution, they could be used as an alternative to twin keels to allow a yacht to stand upright on the hard, without compromising handling or performance. greg elliott http://www.origamimagic.com 2700 From: fmichael graham Date: Mon Dec 8, 2003 2:43pm Subject: Re: why twin rudders This makes a lot of sense, Greg. But how would you engineer twin rudders to be strong enough to allow the boat to stand on its own while keeping the rudder weight low enough to be functional? The rudders would have to be exceptionally long (deep) to allow a reasonably level stance, yet "stiff" enough not to buckle. I would be interested in your thoughts on this, utilizing steel or aluminum. Regards, Mike 2701 From: Date: Mon Dec 8, 2003 4:57pm Subject: Re: why twin rudders Hi Graham, Actually, the problem is more one of too little weight on the rudders, allowing the boat to tip over forward is one doesn't pay attention to loading. When the boat is sitting on the hard, most of the weight is on the keel. However, this doesn't mean the rudders would not be designed to take the weight. In a cruising design, one of the real weaknesses I've seen over the years is the rudders. They need to be able to take the weight of the boat, because it is only a matter of time before you drift over a bommie (coral head) at anchor and slam one, or dry out unexpectedly with the tide, or hit a log while in motion. If your rudder(s) can't take the load, you well and truly have a problem. One advantage of twin rudders is that you have a spare in an emergency. Whether steel or alloy, our rudders are designed to take the weight of the boat, plus reserve for shock loads. We do not design spade rudders for cruising boats for this reason. They are too prone to damage, and can be impossible to repair while cruising. Strength in a skeg does not require weight so much as adequate floors to spread the loads into the hull and stringers. The rudders would not be lengthened so that the boat sits level on the hard. They would typically be slightly shorter than a conventional single rudder. You could beach the boat as follows: 1. At high tide, set the bow anchor in deep water. 2. Back down on the beach stern first, until the rudders and/or keel touch. 3. Secure the boat with lines from the masthead angled out to trees/anchors ashore, and wait for the tide. 4. Step ashore/aboard from the sugar scoop in the stern. 5. When the tide returns, let go the lines ashore, and kedge off with the anchor in deep water. Choose a beach with about a small slope, and the boat will sit level enough. The lines to the masthead are for safety, to prevent the boat from tipping, should a wind come up while you are working underneath. In a yard you would use traditional blocking to secure the boat. If you did not have a sloping beach available, the boat would simply lean backwards slightly (about 10 degrees). Fine for doing the bum between tides. In fact, by having the boat lean backwards, the weight on the rudders is increased, making it more difficult to tip the boat over, increasing the safety all around. While it may seem that a boat is secure, you cannot be too safe working under a boat. We had the Bones resting against some piles one day, sitting on 12x6 planks under the keel to keep her out of the mud. The planks broke due to worm damage, and she feel 3 feet into the mud before stopping. Flattening me, but leaving enough space underneath to crawl out. I believe you only get one warning like that in your life, so I always take pains to stress safety when a boat is on the hard. If anything can go wrong, it will. greg elliott http://www.origamimagic.com 2702 From: jim dorey Date: Mon Dec 8, 2003 8:16pm Subject: Re: Re: Vegitable oil fuel > I didn't mean that they would contribute their own cooking oil :) just > that the duty of collecting it from restraunts would have to be > arranged between the members of the co-op. i figure a drop off location would do for most, and you may be able to get some environmentally conscious high schoolers suckered into collection from the commercial users, might even make an enviro club out of it with waste oil collection being part of the duties. > I'm not sure what your talking about as in converted oil.. The > processing im talking about is just settling and filtering the oil. > This would make the cost of the oil very much cheaper than diesel. ya, that is cheaper. converted oil takes the glycerine out of it so an engine doesn't need to be started on regular petro. > I wish they were as laid back here. DHEC (department of health and > environmental control) here would probably have a lot to say about a > hundred gallons of spilt cooking oil :) Most likely make you lick it > up in a groveling posture. They are pretty tough about everything. > Actually if they new what you were doing there is the very real > possibility that they would want to you have a license and to meet > their standards for handling, processing and transporting the oil.. > One reason that I put up a 8 ft privacy fence and go out of my way not > to ivolve offical dom in my affairs. I live about 15 miles out in the > country back off the main road and have no neighbors adjacent to my > land, just woods and fields. A couple years ago I had the county cops > come out to cite me for having grass in my yard longer than 12 inches > long and to clean up the junk in the yard calling it a health hazard > because someone had complained. I put up the fence to hide things and > they went away. I still get hot under the collar thinking about it > though. One of the reasons I don't live in a city is that I want to be > able to build things and have projects going on. Yes its unsightly but > I'm doing it on my property.... grrrrrr... ok im going to stop now.. > getting hot under the collar thinking about it. Scott steps down off > his slightly off topic soap box. passion, a good thing, not enough of it these days. maybe somebody with a bit of time on their hands, maybe someone waiting for some sheet steel, can look up the regs for non-toxic waste, i'm sure people that make soap the hard way has dealt with the problems before. might be that there are no regs, because of the low toxicity, danger only coming from long term exposure through ingestion, but the little bugs might get heart trouble if it's spilled. > This is interesting .. I know little about the different varieties of > oil and which will go bad and which not... > good information environmentally safe fuels that also cost very little is a little hobby of mine, like computers and boats. there's a dieting aid called chitinol, it's ingested, it causes oil and fat that is in food to be clumped and passed through the body without being digested, that same stuff was first intended as a way to prevent oil spills from being dangerous. mixed into crude, no affects on the refinery's ability to use it by the way, the oil could be spilled into the ocean, it would float as clumps, waves would not knock it apart, it would sit on the shore instead of sinking into it, and the only thing needed to get it out of the ocean is a rotating drum and a scraper. now how many oil companies use it? most likely none, so the way that it's used is to give some person with way too much money, who is thin as a rake, some new way to lose more fat, that gets me on a soapbox. imagine, a tanker crashes, spills it all, the gulls and ducks just walk on the oil, the seals see it as a massive jellyfish and avoid it, i cry now for all the little aminals that is dead. anybody here thought about steam power on their boat? i bet the efficiency would make it possible to only need half as much fuel aboard to get where they wanna. well, these boats innovate, perhaps it's time to step back a bit in time and combine the best history has to offer. 2703 From: fmichael graham Date: Tue Dec 9, 2003 0:07am Subject: Re: why twin rudders Greg: If I follow you correctly, you are talking about using two rudders, each skeg-hung. would there be a vertical support, aft of each rudder? wouldn't the aft-end of each skeg be subject to twisting when aground - due to sea & wind state? My chief concern would be that the steering system on a boat is of paramount importance. I wouldn't want to risk damage of any part of the system. I also wonder about the stresses that would be placed on the hull- to-skeg joint. I also am interested in the type of keel that you would use (e.g. wing, or?). Wouldn't you need an aft anchor to prevent the boat from tipping toward the bow? Mike 2704 From: Henri and Cathy Naths Date: Tue Dec 9, 2003 10:44am Subject: Re: Re: Vegitable oil fuel Jim, read the "Hydrogen Economy" by Jeremy Rifkin. I recommend it for all who are interested in energy. I look at the world in a different perspective now. (my soapbox) H. 2705 From: Date: Tue Dec 9, 2003 11:05am Subject: Re: why twin rudders Hi Mike, Do you see a problem with the concept of a yacht standing on twin keels and a single rudder? If one rudder is strong enough to take the weight, why would there be a problem to take the weight on two? greg elliott http://www.origamimagic.com 2706 From: fmichael graham Date: Tue Dec 9, 2003 0:05pm Subject: Re: why twin rudders Greg: To be honest, I see a meriad of problems with sitting the weight of a cruising sailboat on two rudders. That is why I am interested in how you would go about engineering such a feat. I would also be concerned with the ability of a twin-keeler to "stand alone" - the stresses on the keel to hull joint must be tolerable, if this is to be achieved - I can, however, visualize that the concentration of vessel weight is on the more "skookum" built keels than that of the rudders, in the twin rudder scenario. But, I am asking these questions in the spirit of learning from someone who has suggested a possibility that I can not quite see, but from whom I may be able to gather the information that would lift the veil of ignorance from my eyes. A mariner's first responsibility is to his ship, so I would rather appear skeptical to any design philosophy, than to simply "trust" that the designer knows best, and that I should not question his word. The twin-keelers that I have seen, sit on their keels, often with a log under the fore-end, for support. Can you answer my questions? Your post lead me to believe that you had tried and succeeded in this design endeavour, yet, your response to my questions leaves me wondering if I touched on a sore point and that maybe this is all just "design fantasy". I would hope not. Regards, Mike 2707 From: Paul J. Thompson Date: Tue Dec 9, 2003 0:42pm Subject: RE: why twin rudders Mike, The loads on the keels and the rudders are considerably greater when sailing. When sailing the loads are dynamic and constantly changing. Peak loads can potentially be greater than the displacement of the boat. Especially if you are hitting something. When standing on the keels and rudders, only a portion of the displacement will be on them. Any properly designed keel/rudder can easily support these loads. Paul 2708 From: fmichael graham Date: Tue Dec 9, 2003 2:47pm Subject: RE: why twin rudders Paul: Thanks for a clear and concise answer. I would suggest that the static load placed on a rudder that is "holding up" a sailboat is substantially more than any similiar effect found by sailing the same vessel. Also, due to dynamic stresses placed on the keel/rudder - seas, wind, angle and constitution of bottom - when vessel is "beached", complicated by the mass of the vessel which is distributed to each leg of the "tripod", I would seriously question your assertion . But, that is why I am asking these questions, so please, convince me. I am still not clear as to whether Greg was talking about a skeg-hung rudder that has an aft support, or not. This complicates the topic somewhat. I see that you use "la-chica" in your signature. Am I correct in assuming that that is your "Swain" for sale in San Fransisco? Thanks, Mike 2709 From: Date: Tue Dec 9, 2003 3:52pm Subject: Re: why twin rudders Hi Mike, Keep in mind that the hull/keel and hull/skeg joints are not structural joints in properly build offshore yachts. Maybe I can put the engineering in perspective. What puts more force on a rudder? Standing on the hard on the keel and two rudders, or hitting a large log with the rudder at 6 knots? greg elliott http://www.origamimagic.com 2710 From: blueiceicle Date: Tue Dec 9, 2003 5:42pm Subject: Re: why twin rudders Hello All Ive been following this thread and just have to ask a couple questions. I would ask that you humor me because im not much of a engineer. In regards to the force of a log hitting a rudder versus the static load on the hard, I fail to see how they can be compared so. The stress on a rudder if being hit by something would place the strain quite differently on the rudder and the hull/skeg/rudder joint i would assume. I the rudder was hit it would put the stress in a horizontal plane against the joint, obviously on the hard would be a vertical stress, once again im assuming. Im not sure what type of rudder mount you have in mind to compensate for both types of stress? Further more the surface area on the bottom of both rudders would be considerably less then the surface area of twin keels, leaving me to wonder with the weight of the boat on the twin rudders, would it not sink considerably? (like a knife into the sand ) ( compounded more i would think if the boat were on a 10 degree incline Putting alot of weight on the stern ) If this has any merit at all i would also be worried about the rudders being torqued from side to side causing more strain on the joints and such, as it sinks into the hard? Anyhow thats my thoughts on that, Once Again please forgive my lack of engineering no how (and my spelling) lol Cheers Jesse 2711 From: Date: Tue Dec 9, 2003 7:54pm Subject: Re: Re: why twin rudders A force is a force, regardless of the direction from which it acts, and as such two forces can be directly compared in magnitude. You are correct in your understanding that the forces must be analyzed differently. A skeg can be considered a beam, fixed at one end. When used to support the boat, it is primarily a column. When hit by a log, it is primarily a cantilever. Typically a beam in column can resist a greater force than it can as a cantilever. Thus if the forces were equal the skeg would be more likely to fail from a log hit than from the weight of the boat. Since it is a valid design goal to make a cruising boat that can resist a log strike to the rudder, this could tell us if such a boat could stand on the rudders. Are the forces equal? We could do the numbers, but this is pretty meaningless to most people. How about a demonstration instead? Lie face down on the ground, very slowly, as a boat would as the tide went out in a protected anchorage. Judge the force of the ground on the front of your body. Now start jogging, get up to 7 miles an hour (6 knots), it isn't a sprint, but it is a brisk pace for most people. Run into a tree without slowing down. Judge the force of the tree on the front of your body. Which force was greater? Remember the crash tests you see on TV. 5 mph and almost no car on the road is undamaged. Yet the same car could easily stand on end on its bumper without anything more than a scratch on the paint. That is at 5mph. At 7mph the force is doubled. The reason that dynamic loads are so significant is that they increase as the square of the speed times the weight, while static forces only increase in direct proportion to the weight. As the speed goes up, the static loads become insignificant. Thus, a rudder designed to take a log hit at 6 knots should have no problem supporting the boat. Anyone wanting to do the numbers for their boat, the basic principle is this. For any structure to stand, its center of gravity must be within the perimeter outlined by its legs, and the force on each leg must be less than the buckling strength of that leg. Skenes has the formulas to calculate beams strengths. Remember, the closer the center of gravity is to the perimeter, the less stable the structure is on its legs, and the greater the need to secure the boat before working under it. greg elliott http://www.origamimagic.com 2712 From: jim dorey Date: Tue Dec 9, 2003 8:23pm Subject: Re: Re: Vegitable oil fuel do they mention in the book that absolutely pure water is rather acidic? might make the economy really good for road repair crews. i think hydrogen is rather impractical for boats, but if you plan on sitting at anchor for a few days in a really sunny spot, you can electrolyse enough hydrogen with solar panel power for a few hours running time. making liquid nitrogen is not impossible for somebody with a large boat or some land to hold the equipment. fill a pressure vessel to 3500psi(i think, maybe less), turn on refrigeration coils around it, the nitrogen precipitates out down a pipe into a tank. run a regular old fashioned steam engine on it, but that's slower than hydrogen production, though you do get lots more run time, seeing as compressing hydrogen is so dang dangerous and complicated. currently the only way production quantity hydrogen can be produced is by steam reforming methane. this of course is from petroleum, mostly cause nobody has infrastructure for producing large amounts of methane from enviro safe methods. i'll wait for safer methods before i jump on the bandwagon. however, hydrogen is a great fuel once the downsides are taken care of. there's a thing i've taken to mentioning, the reclamation time of the fuel, time from combustion to original form. vegetable oil fuel takes about a season, maybe half to become grass or beans again. trees take about 25 years from being burned to being harvestable trees again, mostly used for methanol and woodgas, or burned to make steam. oil takes a few million years at best. so, while it's waiting to be reformed it's floating in the atmosphere, so if all fuel was something that reformed quickly without using things that reformed slowly to make it we'd have the earth back on schedule. schedule of course being to lock up all carbon and have nothing but grass and anaerobic bacteria for a long time being the only living things on earth, course the earth then freezes solid. there are three fuels that are really available anywhere for diesels, petro diesel, vegetable oil and woodgas. back in one o them there world war things woodgas was used on vehicles cause the armed forces needed diesel and gasoline, so everybody burned trees in their cars and trucks, and passenger busses. back then they used bags to store the gas after it was made, big ones on top of the vehicles and filling the gas generators required held breath from the toxic fumes, things are better now with new safer converters. thing being, you can have a garbage can on your boat, toss in some wood, light it, clamp the lid on, the heat of coals boils out the volatile gasses that can be used to run your boat. the newer generators don't have to be held tightly sealed, they're called stratified inverted woodgas generators. even straw can be used, basically any vegetable matter that can be made to smoulder. anyplace you can find a wharf with a fuel pump, or a chip shop nearby, even trees, can have you fuelled for a trip of any length. personally, i've been thinking about hydrogen fuel cells, and the stuff that comes out of the pipe won't be pure water, it'll be hydrogen peroxide, i could be wrong, i haven't finished thinking about it, but it quickly would become pure water. there's the idea of putting threads that are coated in silicon, doped as N going one way, doped as P the other, clip on some leads and you can weave solar panels and cut them into shapes roughly reminiscent of sails. it of course was originally thought of as a way for people with lots of energy hog gadgets to charge the beasts, with coats and shirts that were solar panels. it's odd, but i think i actually kept partly to topic, my message is actually about boats, now to fit in the origami aspect, hmm....origami engines? 2713 From: Paul J. Thompson Date: Tue Dec 9, 2003 9:16pm Subject: RE: Re: why twin rudders Mike, Greg has explained it as well or better than I could. Bear in mind the dynamic forces involved in striking a log or falling off a wave or being in a wave induced knockdown are many magnitudes greater than the static loads you will get when standing on the hard. When I design structures in a boat, I typically will work out what I think the greatest loads will be and then factor in a safety factor of between 3 and 7. The factor I use will depend on how critical the component is and also on how well I understand what the loads will be. On a cruising boat I would say that most designers would be quite conservative and therefore most cruising sail boats will cope with static loads such as you get on the hard with ease. Also most small steel (and aluminium) sail boats are way over strength as the material used is typically thicker than it needs to be so as to make welding easier and the boat fairer. The heavy construction also helps with corrosion resistance. Paul 2714 From: Mike Graham Date: Tue Dec 9, 2003 9:59pm Subject: Re: why twin rudders Paul: Let's start at the beginning. What type of a rudder configuration are you thinking of? In other words, are you suggesting that there is an aft support that completes a "frame" about the rudder? Or, a typical sailboat skeg, fore of the rudder? 2715 From: fmichael graham Date: Wed Dec 10, 2003 2:04am Subject: RE: Re: why twin rudders Paul: It is most frustrating to me - and, I am sure, to others in this group - to find that questions, addressed to a member whom has introduced a topic of discussion of interest, go unanswered. It is, I think, akin to the feeling of trying to get a straight answer from a politician. Yes, I could have - and, in fact, did - researched the topic of twin rudders. Yet, it seems to me that my questions regarding twin rudders could have been easily answered if the proponents of the concept were willing to impart their wisdom to the rest of us. To wit; when we are discussing a topic to which I have a greater level of familiarity, I give reasons for my opinions. I believe that to do so is in keeping with the spirit of this group. I cannot fathom why a member would do otherwise. Too, I really do not consider a crash course in grade 11 physics, on dynamic/static forces, to be a useful response to my queries. Nevermind, next time I will check the message author's name, prior to responding with a suggestion or question, as I realize that there are, still, many members whom wish to share knowledge of why they are promoting a method of design, construction, or the benefit of a specific product. Sincerely, Mike Graham 2716 From: carlmbentley Date: Wed Dec 10, 2003 6:51am Subject: Re: twin rudders if a picture were worth a thousand words. http://www.reducostall.com/HTML/pages/Armelle2_jpg.htm 2717 From: Michael Casling Date: Wed Dec 10, 2003 8:10am Subject: Re: Re: twin rudders The idea of twin keels and or twin rudders is good for parking on the beach. On a moderate displacement boat with a fin keel and spade rudder it is still possible to do this. Assuming the keel and hull are strong enough to support all the weight then four poles can be attached to the hull to provide the stability required. This is similar to what you would do in the boat yard, they plunk the boat down on the keel and provide four supports to stop it tipping. If you had your own supports you could do this. Michael Casling 2718 From: Henri and Cathy Naths Date: Wed Dec 10, 2003 9:40am Subject: Re: Re: Vegitable oil fuel Jim , In all hydrocarbon fuels the energy derived is from hydogen. Some hydrocarbon fuels have more hydrogen atoms per unit than others. It makes that fuel more powerful, like diesel is more powerful than say propane. There is so much biomass (hydrogen) that we humans throw away, and then go out kill ourselves working for the energy companys, it really makes you think if we are at all so advanced and civilizied.( sorry , a little soapbox time I quess). Oil does not have to take a zillion years,a few different companies from various places on this planet produce it in a few seconds from biomas, ( thermo depolymerization process). The balance of nature is an ongoing thing, it's not just a freak phenomonon(sp), things are happening the way the way they're suppose to.It"s a balance you or I and in fact anybody else on this planet is incapable assertaining/ understanding, thats another subject. Fuel cell ; the opposite of electrolisis. H2o + electrons= h2+o . H2 +o= electons Anyway, we should discuss this in another forum, anybody interested could email me directly H. 2719 From: Date: Wed Dec 10, 2003 10:37am Subject: Re: why twin rudders A boat's ability to stand on its appendages relies solely on its physics. Once you have satisfied the physics, all other questions are simply construction details, to be decided by the builder and owner to best suit the intended service of the yacht. greg elliott http://www.origamimagic.com 2720 From: jim dorey Date: Wed Dec 10, 2003 10:49am Subject: Re: Re: Vegitable oil fuel i don't remember saying anything about more powerful, just that storage is a problem, liquid hydrogen is powerful, sure, but getting liquid hydrogen when you have to walk from the shoal your boat is hung on, to the nearest village staffed by sword and spear weilding gents that seem to not understand english, and accountants which you can't understand, then back, ain't that easy. thermo de-polymerisation sounds neat, but, they are making oil from something that can be used for fuel, as is, or with less usage of energy from electricity or original oil. for the fuel cell equation thar, O don't stay O for long, has become O2 long before getting to the cell, so it ends as H2+O2=H2O2, peroxide breaks down fast, but not so fast that it never was there in the first place. other forum, there are a few alt fuel groups on yahoo, i already belong to a heavily trolled one, but at the time i'm more interested in the practical applications for boats, and for my steam motorcycle project. hydrogen is practical for vehicles that have a sure source of fuel, i.e. land craft. another possibility is to set up a still, put all the compostable matter in a separate tank with yeast, boil off the alcohol for emergency fuel, getting space for a reflux still on a boat may be a minor trouble. problem is, it'll take a few months to get a few hours worth of fuel, perfect if you are just in doldrums and need to push out, may as well hook up a stationary bike to the prop shaft. 2721 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Wed Dec 10, 2003 0:44pm Subject: Re: Re: Vegitable oil fuel Those of you interested in alternate energy sources should find this link very interesting, especially since there seems to be so much money being spent on a 'hydrogen economy' http://www.tinaja.com/glib/energfun.pdf Gary H. Lucas 2722 From: Henri and Cathy Naths Date: Wed Dec 10, 2003 1:48pm Subject: H2O Jim, your fuel cell equation is: 2H2+O2=2H2O+electons Your electrolisis equation is: 2H2O+electons=2H2+O2 2723 From: Henri and Cathy Naths Date: Wed Dec 10, 2003 2:16pm Subject: Re: Re: Vegitable oil fuel Jim ,The purer the energy ( the purest being hydrogen and the carbon ladden fuel our ancestors used being at the other of the scale, ie coal etc..) the harder it is to handle. The power being in how many hydrogen atoms locked in by carbon atoms. I.e. liquid fuel at atmosphere pressure (say diesel) has quite a few hydrogen atoms per carbon and it is easly transported and used thus makes it a better chose than say propane (purer but does not yet equate to power in our energy eficiency evolutionary ratio). At the end of the day you go farther on a liter of diesel than a liter of hydrogen. Unless........ your fuel efficency evolves...The energy efficenty ratio for thermo depolymeriztion has merrit because you have taken 10tons of biomass and tranformed into a few gallons of powerful fuel oil that can be transported and used by anyone. Hypotheticly, you could than reform it on your boat or house or where ever you are into pure hydrogen and use it in your fuel cell on your boat to electric power the prop.. or... use it to unlock the other hydrogen atoms around you in the sea water. or.......H 2724 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Wed Dec 10, 2003 4:02pm Subject: Re: why twin rudders Greg C.A. Marchaj in his book "Seaworthiness, the forgotten factor" ISBN 1- 888671-09-2 argues that modern yacht design often sacrifices safety for speed. He says among other things that transverse stability in wide flat stern boats is reduced by a broad margin compared to that predicted by conventionally applied calculations of hydrostatic stability and uses as an example tuna clippers of the US Pacific Coast, 75 of which were lost in a 3 year period and which had wide flat low freeboard sterns and a V-shaped forebody. He backs up his views with numerous examples, calculations and tank test results. While it is very tedious to be overtaken by everything my idea of a cruising boat is one that does not sacrifice safety for speed and having read Marchaj's book and also my own experience of the lack of steering in wide stern boats when heeled leads me to be wary of them for a cruiser. Last spring I was on a wide stern 37' GRP boat in a following sea Force 6 with short steep waves. As one wave and a gust caught us the boat lifted a cheek and spun round 180°, much to everyone's confusion. An interesting point in Marchaj's book is that boats suffer an apparent loss of weight and therefore a change in stability as they go over a wave. Much the same as folks in some fairground rides. That said Marchaj's examples are all single keel, single rudder as were my interesting experiences. Modern round the world monohull racing yachts are triangular with a wide flat stern. Most of the pictures of them that I have seen recently have twin rudders and twin dagger boards. In general they sail with much too much excitement for me to cope with but they must be reasonably stable for single handled operation over thousands of miles, albeit with auto-tune autopilots. Boeing's very heavy planes land on retractable undergear so strength is not an insurmountable problem. There is also the LEROUGE Twin Keel System www.lerouge-yachts.com, which comprises relatively high aspect twin keels with winglets and is, according to them very good and can stand on the hard. This might be more suitable together with twin rudders to provide a seaworthy wide stern boat that will not fall on its nose. Carl introduced in his email Meta's reducostall boat with twin keels and twin rudders. Meta is a member of the Metal Boat Society. Greg you might find it worthwhile to put your ideas on the MBS forum as well as there are other professional boat designers there who may have something interesting to say. Regards, Ted 2725 From: Henri and Cathy Naths Date: Wed Dec 10, 2003 1:09pm Subject: Re: Re: Vegitable oil fuel Jim ,The purer the energy ( the purest being hydrogen and the carbon ladden fuel our ancestors used being at the other of the scale, ie coal etc..) the harder it is to handle. The power being in how many hydrogen atoms locked in by carbon atoms. I.e. liquid fuel at atmosphere pressure (say diesel) has quite a few hydrogen atoms per carbon and it is easly transported and used thus makes it a better chose than say propane (purer but does not yet equate to power in our energy eficiency evolutionary ratio). At the end of the day you go farther on a liter of diesel than a liter of hydrogen. Unless........ your fuel efficency evolves...The energy efficenty ratio for thermo depolymeriztion has merrit because you have taken 10tons of biomass and tranformed into a few gallons of powerful fuel oil that can be transported and used by anyone. Hypotheticly, you could than reform it on your boat or house or where ever you are into pure hydrogen and use it in your fuel cell on your boat to electric power the prop.. or... use it to unlock the other hydrogen atoms around you in the sea water. or.......H 2726 From: Henri and Cathy Naths Date: Wed Dec 10, 2003 2:51pm Subject: Re: Re: Vegitable oil fuel I quess it's a step up the thermodydamic evolutionary ladder,steam engine 10% efficent, steam turbine 40% internal combustion engine70% fuel cell 80+%?? H. 2727 From: worldbukkakegurl2 Date: Wed Dec 10, 2003 3:46pm Subject: Are you a married man looking for some sex? Are you looking for some on the side without the wife finding out? http://www.InternetSexAds.com/landing.asp?afl=ZYHO 2728 From: jim dorey Date: Wed Dec 10, 2003 10:34pm Subject: Re: Re: Vegitable oil fuel i think maybe you've got the numbers a little out of order. 2729 From: S.V. NOMADIC Date: Wed Dec 10, 2003 11:24pm Subject: Greetings I am new to this sight. I would like to comunicate with other members. I am the owner(for ten years) of the S.V. NOMADIC.Shes located in San Carlos,Sonorora, Mex.She has been listed for sale with a broker, but has'nt sold yet. I may be taking her off the market.She needs a little work and some tlc.I had a problem, where the deck above the chain locker rusted through.I cut the rusted deck off, and I have an open chain locker now. The anchor windless was removed as part of the process.I need some help and avise. If I go with a Swain desighn windless, what do I do with the open chain locker. Is it possible to purchase a Swain windless pre manufactured? Looking forward to meeting some of you. Mark Reiss 2730 From: Henri and Cathy Naths Date: Thu Dec 11, 2003 10:09am Subject: Re: Re: Vegitable oil fuel Jim, I quess I could back up my quessatimations with the accual proof for the numbers (I don't think would vary more than 5-7%) but a person has to do the lesson for themselves, you got to do the math, physics. It would be like telling you about a movie, it just not the same. ( scrible on a cave wall---internet, firepit in a cave---hydrogenfuel cell= thermodynamic evolution ; less carbon more efficiency) H. 2731 From: Date: Thu Dec 11, 2003 10:54am Subject: Re: Re: why twin rudders Thanks Ted, I suspect the problem with hydrostatic formulas is in the word "static". All yachts represent a compromise. In general, all other factors remaining unchanged, an increase in performance leads to a decrease in stability. This is not limited to sailing yachts, but generally to any machines in motion. Are you more likely to fall down walking or running over a rocky surface? Thus, removing a full keel from a boat, and replacing it with a high aspect fin and spade rudder will increase performance and reduce stability, and broachings as you have described are common in such configurations, regardless of yacht shape. Whether it is better to have a slow, stable yacht, or a fast, unstable yacht has been a question many cruisers have faced. A lot of this has resulted from designers compromising safety to minimize wetted surface. In general I have found good speed to be an important safety factor for a yacht. However, we have always insisted that offshore boats at a minimum have a big, strong, skeg hung rudder to provide stability along with speed. The trend towards twin rudders is simply a refinement of the concept of using a big rudder to improve stability. It is not our idea. Twin rudders have proven effective in aircraft as well as yachts. However, we are hardly shy about adopting new ideas when they make sense. As the benefits of increasing the transom width have become apparent, so has the need to further increase stability, which is why we add twin rudders to our designs. The advantage of twin rudders is that they use the heeling of the yacht to increase their effectiveness, and provide redundant steering for the offshore cruiser. Steering failures being a major causes of loss. The interesting thing about twin rudders is that they can allow a single keel cruising yacht to be self-standing. This forum has a great deal of interest in self-standing yachts, which is why I published the concept. A self-standing yacht, without a performance compromise, is an area I think many people would take an interest. We have not found acceptance for the origami concept on other forums, with the general view being that historically origami boats have been cheap, rather rough looking boats. We expect to change this, but Rome was not built in a day. We are committed to creating high quality origami designs through the introduction of high quality computer generated patterns, and techniques that maximize value. Our overheads are kept at a minimum, and we pass these savings along to our clients. We believe that if you are going to take the time to build a boat, you should get the best value for your time, not simply the cheapest possible boat. After all, no matter how long or hard you work, you can't make chicken soup from chicken shzt. greg elliott http://www.origamimagic.com 2732 From: carlmbentley Date: Thu Dec 11, 2003 10:48am Subject: ballast options well, looks like lead is next to impossible to scrounge down here in florida. has anyone considered railroad rails ? obviously they'll take up more volume but if i can get the weight i need for free and it only costs me an extra ~41% volume i'd be happy. related question. the rails are high carbon (i'm told), would there be any issues welding one onto the bottom of each keel ? painting it afterwards of course. thanks -carl on a funny note, someone suggested i dive old sailboat wrecks in the bahamas and scrounge lead that way. now if i had the set up to anchor off wrecks in the bahamas and spend my day diving, would i really care about the price of lead ? 2733 From: newtech122003 Date: Thu Dec 11, 2003 1:59pm Subject: oxy/acetylene cutting hope this doesnt seem silly to you all but how do you get smooth cuts with the long radius cuts required on a hull plate? its marked out on the plates but following these lines should you use guide for torch?(or a wheel on the cutting tip?)i,ve completed the layout but i dont want to mess up cutting for obvious reasons.i have to cut both plates seperately, no plasma cutter.local welders are telling me to cut large and grind to line,bloody hell thats alot of grinding!!thanks for any tips .happy holidays! stu newton. 2734 From: Henri and Cathy Naths Date: Thu Dec 11, 2003 5:54pm Subject: Re: oxy/acetylene cutting practice practice practice. bloody hell 25 years . Bite the bullet, start uncomfortable and end comfortable. Sorry that's all I got.O yah be happy. Happy holidays. H. 2735 From: jim dorey Date: Thu Dec 11, 2003 9:46pm Subject: Re: ballast options just build the boat as a banana shaped closed tube, it'll self right and you won't need nearly as much ballast, and if it does tip over you'll have the hatch shut while you control the boat by wire. 2736 From: blueiceicle Date: Thu Dec 11, 2003 11:01pm Subject: Re: oxy/acetylene cutting To cut or how to cut, is the question. Well my friend heres my two bits, Take it or leave, If your not very profecient at cutting, i would recommend getting your hands on some plate of the same thickness and doing many long cuts to practice up, as much possible. That being said when it comes time to cut you hull plate, I would recommend cutting a 1/16 to a 1/8 out side of your mark. When cutting your "angle and speed" of cut is the key, bear with me if you know this already. If you know this or if you dont you will noticed if not done properly you will have huge kerf lines along your cut, if cut on the mark, but with big kerf lines you will have to grind them all of before welding! If on the mark you will be noticibly on the short side of you mark so a margin on a 1/16 and a bit of grinding is well worthwile That being said, as my welding instructor always says, take your time, and most of all "get comfortably " In short give your self room for error Also if not already known, be carefull of restarting you cut if you to close to your mark, blowing out a hole in the plate is not all that hard to do when restarting the cut. Anyhow cheers and good luck Jesse 2737 From: John Jones Date: Fri Dec 12, 2003 8:17am Subject: ballast OPTIONS Re Ballast Options: apparantly an option for ballast is "spent Plutonium", and I understand they'll shape it the way you request. That with a coating of lead would be great ballast for your vessel. John 2738 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Fri Dec 12, 2003 10:38am Subject: Re: ballast OPTIONS As I recall Baron Bich (Bic pens) used a spent uranium keel on an America's Cup boat back in the 70s. The protests forced him to withdraw it though. Since spent Uranium is nearly twice as dense as lead it would have given him a huge advantage. Gary H. Lucas 2739 From: jim dorey Date: Fri Dec 12, 2003 11:16am Subject: Re: ballast OPTIONS trimming messages is a good thing, good, not bad, good. 2740 From: Gary H. Lucas Date: Fri Dec 12, 2003 11:39am Subject: Re: ballast OPTIONS I usually do if the previous message was long, but forgot this time. Gary H. Lucas 2741 From: richytill Date: Fri Dec 12, 2003 1:12pm Subject: Re: oxy/acetylene cutting Hey Henri, are your guys using a lot of plazma out there? You are right about the practice. An extra thing or two we could pass on about cutting basics might be: try propane instead of acetylene for light plate; incline the torch at about 45% or so towards the direction of the cut so that the jet of oxygen cuts more metal at a time (to make it as if you are cutting thicker metal); use the least heat possible for the pre-heat flame; use good bright lighting to follow the line; keep the tip up off the plate to prevent the main orifice from getting dirty; keep the tip clean. Often people ask how to get the cut "to look like that," --I may mention points from the list here but above all things it is important to position the hands and body so that you have control through the whole range of motion for a given cut. Cradle the torch lightly and practice the motion without a flame--visualise a smooth precise cut--light the torch and do it. Like so many skills in life it is a matter of pre-concieving the finished product in your mind and hands and letting error receede into the back-ground. And as H points out, hey, practice. Have a great break, rt 2742 From: sae140 Date: Fri Dec 12, 2003 1:19pm Subject: Re: Vegitable oil fuel sorry to be argumentative re: this statement - but in case it's of interest to any budding chemists or physicists out there, pure water has a neutral pH of exactly 7.000' i.e. there are zero loose hydrogen or hydoxyl ions floating around. Such pure water has a most interesting characteristic - because of the absence of any ions or impurities it becomes almost electrically non-conductive, having an unbelievably high resistance. Tall columns of such water are used as in-line resistors to protect power sources during Ultra-High Voltage testing of insulators, for when the insulators eventually break down (and they always do, eventually) a direct short is created, which would knacker the power source big time unless a current-limiting resistor had been installed. Yes - another useless piece of information you couldn't possibly have lived a full life without knowing .... :-) Colin 2743 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Fri Dec 12, 2003 1:29pm Subject: Re: oxy/acetylene cutting Stu, In order to cut out the steel for my boat and not having used a gas axe much before, I bought a set of little wheels that clamp to the cutting nozzle. I got them from a welding supply shop. One can adjust the height of the nozzle above the sheet or plate. I found them very useful as they not only keep the torch at the same height but also steady it. I made curved guides from 1/8" x 3/4" flat bar tacked to a 1" angle frame. These where offset to allow for one of the wheels to run alongside it. This was a disaster as the heat from the torch distorted the cutting guide. I tried using hardboard patterns as a guide, running one of the wheels alongside it. This was OK as long as I didn't go to slow and set fire to it. The best was to use the little wheels and follow a chalk line. Practice a bit first to see how much offset you need to allow for errors. I found that using the wheels and the smallest cutting nozzle and amount of heat I needed very little offset. If you do try using patterns as a cutting guide remeber the offset and also draw a line where the cut edge will be so that if the guide slips or they wheel rides over it you can see straight away that you are going wrong. Regards, Ted 2744 From: Robert Date: Fri Dec 12, 2003 2:12pm Subject: twin keel placement Hi all. I'm a long time luker here in Florida. I need some advice on where to place the twin keels. I understand,I think, the lateral position and the angles from Brent's plans and his book, but I don't see the fore-and-aft positioning explained. Can someone enlighten me? I'm building the 36 footer and having a great time doing it. Bob Meade Leesburg FL 2745 From: Henri and Cathy Naths Date: Fri Dec 12, 2003 2:42pm Subject: Re: Re: oxy/acetylene cutting Hey Richard , No we aren't using alot of plazma, thats way to efficient for us , (I think it's part of the " chaos is cash " senario). One thing I think is prevelent in metal work is the stress factor. Like a cwb or any welding test guys fail because of being stressed out. Almost better to have a few stiff drinks than drink to much coffee. The fear factor!?? Oh ya. It's grandpaw H.(as of the 4-12-03) 2746 From: Henri and Cathy Naths Date: Fri Dec 12, 2003 2:51pm Subject: Re: Re: Vegitable oil fuel Thats the intinsic chanllenge and beauty of H2O, Does purity equate to pure energy?....(deep thoughts)..H. 2747 From: jim dorey Date: Fri Dec 12, 2003 3:04pm Subject: Re: ballast OPTIONS oh, then i'll call back my ultra mega spank squad, your butt is safe from a rosy red this time bud. 2748 From: jim dorey Date: Fri Dec 12, 2003 3:10pm Subject: Re: Re: oxy/acetylene cutting i be thinkin again, i belong to a robotics yahoogroup, perhaps a rolling line following robot with the tanks and torch mounted on the robot itself, monitor progress, cut perfect every time, but that's too much, or is it? hmm, could make somebody some money to cut for others to tight tolerance. maybe somebody could consider just going to a never technology than flame cutting, water knives are good. 2749 From: jim dorey Date: Fri Dec 12, 2003 3:15pm Subject: Re: Re: Vegitable oil fuel some of the things that make hydrogen power good are what make electricity good. how is the hydrogen and electricity produced? with a gas engine you have inefficient gasoline engines, spewing out loads of toxins at rates that sicken, all to produce the power where needed, when needed. hydrogen and electric uses central power production to make it. pollution is handled in a central location by facilities that are lots cleaner and way more efficient, so it's better all round than gasoline and diesel for that reason alone. 2750 From: jim dorey Date: Fri Dec 12, 2003 3:18pm Subject: Re: twin keel placement i remember from a long time ago, the reasoning behind placement, further forward makes a boat that is stable, but also harder to turn, further aft makes it turn better, but go anywhere besides straight ahead. not that it's important or anything. 2751 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Sat Dec 13, 2003 3:41am Subject: Re: Greetings Mark, I guess you could get a local fabrication shop to make and fit a Brent Swain type of anchor winch. Interestingly the latest newsletter of the Royal National Lifeboat Institution has a picture of one of its inshore lifeboats with the anchor chain and rope rode on a drum similar to Brent's design although I cannot see how it is turned. Regards, Ted 2752 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Sat Dec 13, 2003 3:51am Subject: Re: ballast options Carl, If I wanted to weld something that I thought might be dissimilar steels such as your rails to mild steel I would ask advice from the technical person at two or more welding rod manufacturers. Always ask more than one as experience tells us that experts may have differing levels of understanding. Regards, Ted 2754 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Sat Dec 13, 2003 3:26pm Subject: Re: twin keel placement Bob, I emailed Brent about this some time ago, as I am building a 36' bilge keeler and this is his reply dated April 22 2002: "The leading edge of the bilge keels is six inches behind the mast on the bermuda rigged boat. This is shown on the drawing of the bilge keels. This mast is 14 feet from the top of the stem. When you have the hull together, level it, measure 14' back from the point of the bow horizontally, transfer the measurement in side, then to the centreline with a level or plum bob. The leading edge of the keels should be 6 inches behind this point." Regards, Ted 2755 From: Date: Sat Dec 13, 2003 8:28pm Subject: Re: Re: twin keel placement Lord Riverdale researched this question in detail. Starting the keels just forward of midships (45% DWL), with the maximum section well aft of midships seemed to work best. Forward twin keel locations were not favorable. greg elliott http://www.origamimagic.com 2756 From: Edwin Deveau Date: Sun Dec 14, 2003 11:57am Subject: Re: Re: Aluminum vs Steel With common sense like this, you should run for president. You really have to step out of the box to look at things sometimes. Alot of people could machine a valve out of solid brass, spending all day doing so. Or take $5 and go to home depot and buy one. It all depends on what else you have to do and the personal satisfaction quotient. Myself?, I'll be spending the $5. But it is hard for most of us to put a $$$$ on our own time. I never could understand it. But almost everyone I know think their time is free. How wrong they are. 2757 From: Edwin Deveau Date: Sun Dec 14, 2003 0:06pm Subject: Re: ballast OPTIONS Hence the reason we use them as anti-armor rounds in our a-10 warthogs and abrams tanks. These are deadened uranium, still somewhat radioactive. I really don't think you would want it on your boat. 2758 From: Date: Sun Dec 14, 2003 1:38pm Subject: Re: Re: Aluminum vs Steel Thanks Ed, Anyone with enough sense to truly be qualified for the job would of course have enough sense to not want it. :-) greg elliott http://www.origamimagic.com 2759 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Sun Dec 14, 2003 3:02pm Subject: Re: twin keel placement There is a picture of Lord Riverdale's boat 'Bluebird of Thorne'in the latest copy of 'Sailing Today'. The 48' steel yacht was built in 1939 and sank off Jersey recently when a transducer mount caught the Rouget Rock. The boat has been refloated and the photo shows it on the hard in Jersey. It has twin keels and twin skeg mounted rudders. The twin keels are much like a hockey sick with the flat bit stuck up into the hull and the handle, parallel to the water line tapering off to the bottom of the skegs and rudders. There is one propeller. It is now called the 'Inversanda' has a pointed stern and is a very good looking vessel. The article says that Lord Riverdale built several designs with twin keels and twin rudders and built and tested models before building the actual boats. Regards, Ted 2760 From: gjm123smau Date: Sun Dec 14, 2003 3:10pm Subject: Twin keels There is a article on this site regarding twin keels http://www.boatbuilding.com/content/twinkeels/index.htm Graeme 2761 From: winslow59 Date: Mon Dec 15, 2003 0:55pm Subject: Two metal Boatbuilding books: Nigel Warren & Brent Swain These are for sale as a package... 1) Metal Corrosion In Boats, by Nigel Warren. Sheridan House, 1998, 2nd edition, hard bound. 2) How To Build A Better Steel Boat, by Brent Swain. soft cover. ...plus a couple articles from Pacific Yachting: The master Of Origami Boatbuilding (May '98) Dove III (Mar '95) $25 plus the actual cost of postage 2762 From: Don Taylor Date: Mon Dec 15, 2003 6:37pm Subject: Re: Aluminum vs Steel And the next thing you know is that you are buying everything from West Marine and are no longer self-reliant. There are many reasons other than $$$ that make folks want to build stuff for themselves. Don. 2763 From: Michael Casling Date: Mon Dec 15, 2003 7:51pm Subject: Re: Re: Aluminum vs Steel Well said Don. A lot of boat work, and other work takes place in the evenings and on weekends and ideed to many this time is free. To suggest that we should be using this time to work at our regular jobs and make more money so that we can afford to pay somone to do whatever it is we are doing seems to me to be misconstrued. We mow the lawn and do a million things that may not be cost effective to some, but there are many reasons why we do the things we do and they are not just monetary and they can not be evaluated in just a monetary fashion. There are people that flat out can not afford to have someone build there stuff, so putting value on their time does not mean so much, but they can build it and they get satisfaction from building it, and it does not matter if a pro could have done a better job, nor if the item could be produced cheaper in Taiwan. Let folks build what they want out of whatever material they want, and whether they do a good job or a bad job, or whether they have fun or not, let us not be the ones to tell them what to do. Michael Casling in Kelowna BC 2764 From: Michael Casling Date: Mon Dec 15, 2003 7:59pm Subject: Re: Two metal Boatbuilding books: Nigel Warren & Brent Swain I am interested in the books. What currency and what location? You can send me a note at casling@s... Michael Casling 2765 From: Date: Tue Dec 16, 2003 2:59am Subject: Re: Re: Aluminum vs Steel I would not recommend you buy everything from West Marine, any more than I would recommend you become self-reliant and weave the fabric for your sails, or mine and smelt the metal for the hull. The logic of "free" time leads to bad choices when building a boat, and in life in general. By the logic of "free" time, it is better to take an extra 10 years to build a boat, if you can save $100. Most of us know intuitively that it is better to spend an extra $100, and save 10 years of labor, but we don't have a good technique to do this when the choices are less clear. There are hundreds if not thousands of such decisions to be made when building a boat, and every time you make the wrong choice you will either waste money or time. The point of my earlier article was not to say you shouldn't build. It was to show there is a simple technique to determine what components you should build and what components you should buy when building a boat, so that you complete the boat in the most economical fashion, and don't waste time or money along the way. greg elliott http://www.origamimagic.com 2766 From: Date: Tue Dec 16, 2003 10:39am Subject: Re: Aluminum vs Steel I find this decision criterion rather simplistic. As an economist, I will add that the idea that people maximize "utility" simply by earning and spending income to obtain more "stuff" went out of fashion a century ago. Life and the pursuit maximum "utility" or wellbeing is more complex than that. As an example, I am currently finishing a home built airplane. I could have easily purchased an equivalent aircraft and then some if I had spent my time working at my profession rather than puttering around building. In return, I have had a tremendous learning experience. One of the things I learned is that I can build almost anything mechanical by myself. All it takes is some thought, a few tools, and time. After my current project, I believe I could build almost every part of a boat from basic materials if I so desire. I get a lot of "utility" out of creating something with my own hands. Sure, I could buy it by spending far less time on one more consulting project, but then I would loose the learning experience and satisfaction of creating something myself. I guess what I am getting at is there is more value in creating something yourself than simply the cost of the item, there is the educational experience and the satisfaction of creation. This can be worth far more than the cost of the item. 2767 From: Henri and Cathy Naths Date: Tue Dec 16, 2003 10:42am Subject: Re: Re: Aluminum vs Steel Time is money . No question . Education cost money. How much and for how long is up to the individual. We renovated a $20,000 house for $50,000 or $60,000. Today the value is $120,000. The cost 50 or 60 thousand could have been spent on a mortage and bought a house with no work involved other than working out to pay for it . ( the real-estate value would probably be in favour of the bought house). The difference is I had to engineer stuff no one else would have. That knowlege and learning to get along with wife, kids, supply depots, no money, stress and a host of other problems, no monetary value can be put on it. There is personal satisfaction I get from my house. I can now use that knowledge to make more money and or build a boat . If I build a boat, I would want to learn more than how to do the basics, because in the end, dust to dust, the only thing left is our learning curve. Comes down to personal choice. If you're satisfied in redundant work, pounding out the same product day after day or shuffling the same papers, than maybe personal satisfaction comes from mowing the lawn. (Don't get me wrong, there's nothing wrong with that.I'm not the judge of someone else.) For me it's unecononmical, but so is trying to figure this computer. I personally would like to learn how to build 10 boats rather than the one.As Greg put it " anyone with enough sense to be truly qualified for a job would of course have enough sense to not want it" 2768 From: Stephen Wandling Date: Tue Dec 16, 2003 11:37am Subject: Calling in Well I am encouraged by the views of an engineer and an economist below. You both sound downright human. I may have to revise my prejudices toward your professions! I am also reminded of a line in a Tom Robbins novel where the protagonist 'Calls in well.' "I have been sick for years and coming to work every day. But, now I am well and I am never coming again." Or something to that effect. [Sorry Tom] Let's get well! 2769 From: Date: Tue Dec 16, 2003 7:10pm Subject: prime time Monday evening down at the wharf with my son: it's dark and blowing rain like shrapnel. Boat rocks gently as we screw row on row of yellow cedar planks up to the roof. This is new territory, we have never attempted boat joinery before. Clear satin finish varnish arcs across under the flush deck with silicon bronze roberts head screws set even, honest like, with no wood plugs to put in or take out. The rain pours down on deck and we joke as the drill motor grinds and pokes another 11 holes with countersinks ready to recieve the next salvo of screws. Efficient? Cost effective? Logical? I would be hard pressed to uncover the logic involved in this process. I build this boat like a duckling following Lorenz--like a moth to the flame. First solo as wee brat was off accross a deep pond in a wheelbarrow. Mother was so traumatised she let me go out into the ocean for lobsters with the fishermen in an open skiff: figured it was safer. It was. Logic and going out to to sea for pleasure are two concepts that somehow just don't seem to fit together. Yet, here we are ordering pizza in the storm and when it arrives, cramming steaming slices into dumb grins among the sawdust and extension cords down inside MY ISLAND. If I was running my life on the principles of logic and cost effectiveness, I would neither build a boat, nor engage in winter mountaineering. The drive to create and explore is there like the certainty of rain tonight and trust for sunny days to come. If you are really driven to it--you will likely build, launch and sail a boat. Maybe the first step is to forget the logic--or you may never do it. Just the thinking between the planks. rt MY ISLAND. 2770 From: Date: Wed Dec 17, 2003 6:44pm Subject: The two boatbuilding books are sold. nm nm 2772 From: kingsknight4life Date: Thu Dec 18, 2003 0:37pm Subject: interior area Hi. I'm in the process of attemtping to price out what it will cost to build a 36 ft. twin keel BS boat. I know that it varies greatly from boat to boat and builder to builder but i'm only looking for guidelines. One thing that is hindering my "investigation" is that I don't know the square footage of the hull interior. To get quotes for painting, foaming and for wood this figure would be very helpful. Does anyone out there know the inside area of the boat? Or the area from the cabinsole up? Also can anyone out there reccommend or where to get the boat sandblasted or foamed? The boat will most likely be fitted out in Richmond BC or possibly on Vanc. Is. Actually any sources for materials, parts or work like blasting would be appreciated. lease post here or e-mail me. Thanks Rowland 2773 From: kingsknight4life Date: Thu Dec 18, 2003 0:53pm Subject: Best or worst Hi all. It looks like I will finally be building my own BS boat. In an attempt to be more efficient and to avoid costly and time consuming mistakes I'd like to ask the group the following questions; What are some of the best features on your boat? (ie. the things you wouldn't change or couldn't do without.) Also what things did you learn while building that you'd definitely do or do differently if doing it again? Secondly, what are the things that you'd change on your boat? And what would you defintely NOT do if building a boat again? Thansk for your help. I'm sure this info. will benefit everyone on here who is building or thinking about it. Sincerely, Rowland 2774 From: richytill Date: Thu Dec 18, 2003 4:46pm Subject: Re: interior area Rowland, it will likely cost $2200 -- $3500 cdn to do the sprayfoam if you get the good high density stuff. We built the hull slowly over 2 years as a hobby and allowed the zinc primer to get scratched and hard so we had to sandblast. Had we adopted a more aggressive building schedule (see Brents' book)we could have avoided sandblasting. We borrowed a large home made sandblasting unit, a resurected '56 compressor and made helmets etc.. The sandblasting still cost around $750 in grit, filters and clean-up. Sandblasting is slow if you do it right and we had a big compressor at that. Plus: we learned alot about sandblasting--cost: more time and money. Add to this we had to buy Cathecoat 302 stabilised inorganic zinc primer to replace the stuff that came on the steel from the supplier. Don't forget to factor in the cost of fittings and fastners--I am continually shocked at the ever mounting cost of bolts, screws, glues, lexan, sealants, unions, filters & etc. We managed to get top of the line 2 part epoxy marine paint from US military surplus at very reasonable cost. We got more epoxy free (you have to pay for the converter)as off tint paint in a wharehouse in Vancouver. I just blended up a green (hull)and grey (deck) of my own from the off tints. Almost all of our wood came from wood boat builders who got to old, or gave up, got ill or got side tracked. Wood has not turned out to be a major expense so far. The engine and drive system can be a huge expense--presently have a VW 16 D Rabbit diesel from a wreck hooked up to a rebuilt BW 71C. Drive and prop, shaft and so on from Popeyes. Dry exhaust loops into underwater system; that is still under development. Saved a fair amount on auxilliary but--as is so often the case--it took time. Again we learned a lot and the bonus with the VW engine is that there are parts and spare engines almost everywhere. Ah, one last thing ballast--we used everything from wheel wheights to sheet lead for roof fittings--try North Star Metals on Franklin Street for a price per lb to get an estimate. Once you get started, it's an adventure-- what ever you do--don't forget to have fun, rt (MY ISLAND) 2775 From: mat_man22 Date: Thu Dec 18, 2003 7:58pm Subject: 31' 1992 Brent Swain Sloop on EBAY Hi Nice interior pics: http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll? ViewItem&item=2449356644&category=26433 I have no connection to this boat. Mat 2776 From: blueiceicle Date: Sat Dec 20, 2003 11:43pm Subject: Current metal prices 2 sheets 3/16 8 x 32 - 3922# $2834.04/lot ( Mill run ) delivery late Jan./05 for this item. 1 sheet 3/16 4 x 8 245# 177.04/lot 10 sheets 10 gauge .135 4 x 8 1860# 1344.04/lot 1 sheet 10 gauge 6 x 12 419# 322.93/lot 1 pce 1/2" 18" x 144" burned to size 368# 409.77/lot 1 lgth 3/8 x 1 flat bar 20' 36# $22.08/lot 1 lgth 1 x 1 x 1/4 angle 20' 30# 25.66/lot 1 lgth 2 1/2 x 2 1/2 x 1/4 angle 20' 82# $62.19/lot Above all zinc wheel and primed 1 lgth 2" sch.40 galvanized pipe 21' $75.81/lgth 1 lgth 1 1/2" sch. 40 galvanized pipe 21' $43.47/lgth 1 lgth 1" sch.40 galvanized pipe 21' $41.37/lgth Im missing some materials but this is a rough guide for metal for the 31' twin keeler From A J FORSYTH & CO Victoria This is a rough guide, hope it helps anyone just wondering about material costs. And a merry christmas to all blueiceicle 2777 From: blueiceicle Date: Sat Dec 20, 2003 11:47pm Subject: Re: Current metal prices Whoops ah If you dont have the materials list get it from the files section and multiply what ever numbers neccesary. As I forgot to do some mutiplying on the list I posted. Anyhow later 2778 From: Glen Date: Mon Dec 22, 2003 11:56am Subject: Displacement I was wondering if there was a way to figure out the displacement of a hull if the information is not provided? I understand that if a hull displaces more water than itself it will float, however is there a desired displacement to weight rule of thumb? ie if you built a hull from aluminum and it displaced 30,000 lbs and wanted to build the same hull in steel it will displace more due to beeing heavier material. So how would you calculate the numbers from one hull shape to another or is this even possible? 2779 From: Glen Date: Mon Dec 22, 2003 0:01pm Subject: cats I understand how mono-hulls displace an amount of water to float. Catamarans are a little different story, yes? How does one come up with a set of numbers regarding length, beam, draft, and weight when thinking about building one. I have been told that for tri's the rule of thumb is 8 - 1. Being for every 8 feet of length the boat is 1 foot in beam. 40 foot boat would be 5 foot beam for the center hull. Does anyone know of a rule of thumb for cats? Any info would be greatly appreciated! 2780 From: Date: Mon Dec 22, 2003 1:15pm Subject: Re: Displacement The rule of thumb is that while you can build a boat designed for steel in alloy, you cannot build a boat designed for alloy in steel. The reason is this: A boat designed for steel is designed to carry the weight of the steel. Building the same boat in alloy results in a lighter boat, which allows you to carry extra fuel, cargo, etc. As a result, when you build a steel boat in alloy, you end up with extra capacity, which is often very handy to have in a cruising boat. A boat designed for alloy is designed to carry the weight of the alloy. Building the same boat in steel results in a heavier boat, which requires that you carry less fuel, cargo, etc. As a result, when you build an alloy boat in steel, you end up with less capacity, which is not at all what you want in a cruising boat. An alloy boat built in steel can be impractical, because it has insufficient capacity to carry the required fuel, cargo, etc. In fact, an alloy boat built in steel can be overloaded even when empty, making the boat unsafe. Confusion results because the terms "displacement", and "weight" are not the same. The weight of the vessel is equal to the weight of the water it displaces, but this is not the displacement of the vessel. The displacement of a vessel is a measure of its volume, which does not change. The weight of a vessel changes as you add or remove things from the vessel. When a vessel is loaded to its waterline, the "designed displacement" and "weight" of the vessel are equal. To adjust a design for steel, typically you add volume to the vessel below the waterline, and strengthen the scantlings, increase the size of the mast, sails, engine, winches, anchors, etc. to take the additional weight. To understand the difference between alloy and steel, compare our steel and alloy designs. Our JM50 in alloy has a displacement of 13.64 tons. Our LB39 in steel has a displacement of 13.57 tons. Almost identical displacements, but the alloy boat is more than 10 feet longer. In steel, the JM50 would have to be re-designed for a displacement of about 20+ tons. greg elliott http://www.origamimagic.com 2781 From: Date: Tue Dec 23, 2003 0:09pm Subject: Re: cats Dear Glen, I believe this answer u will find at yahoo groups multihull_boatbuilder Further what i have learnt is this that a catamaran has to have a ratio of any where between 1:8 to 1:6 Meaning the distance between a catamaran 10 feet long should be roughly 6 feet Sharad Sharma 2782 From: Date: Tue Dec 23, 2003 0:14pm Subject: Re: cats Dear Glen, the best thing will be to look at some of multihull sites u will get in fo easily but they are all composite or wood i havent had any metal ones for crusing 2783 From: Jim Phillips Date: Tue Dec 23, 2003 1:40pm Subject: Re: cats Glen, Some rules of thumb for cats. Overall length:overall beam from 1.5 to 2.0 Individual hull waterline length : WL beam from 8.0 to 12 Wingdeck clearance should be a minimum of 1" for every foot of overall length. Good luck, Jim. 2784 From: brentswain38 Date: Tue Dec 23, 2003 2:52pm Subject: Re: cats Comparing a great number of different designs is the best way to get an idea of what the parameters are. Brent Swain 2786 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Tue Dec 23, 2003 3:41pm Subject: Re: Displacement Greg, When you say, " Confusion results because the terms "displacement", and "weight" are not the same. The weight of the vessel is equal to the weight of the water it displaces, but this is not the displacement of the vessel. The displacement of a vessel is a measure of its volume, which does not change. The weight of a vessel changes as you add or remove things from the vessel." What volume do you mean and what units do you use to measure it? I ask this because vessel displacement is usually given in units of weight, pounds, tons etc. Units of volume are usually given as cubic feet, yards, metres etc. Regards, Ted 2787 From: blueiceicle Date: Wed Dec 24, 2003 9:16pm Subject: Re: Current metal prices For anyone who was wondering, The Victoria I reffered to in my first post is located in British Columbia, on Vancouver Island. Currency = $$can.$$ Hope this clarifies things P.S. Merry Christmas Blueiceicle 2789 From: Pierre Date: Sat Dec 27, 2003 9:52am Subject: Need trailer Hi all, Looking for a trailer like the one posted in the photo album. Perferably near Portland, Oregon Thanks, Pierre 2790 From: brentswain38 Date: Sat Dec 27, 2003 0:11pm Subject: Re: Displacement A hull displaces as much water as it weighs, thus displacement and weight of a vessel are the same .There will probably be a difference between designed displacement and actual displacement as no designer can determine ahead of time what kind of packrat any owner will be and what various people will put in a boat. Brent Swain 2791 From: brentswain38 Date: Sat Dec 27, 2003 0:22pm Subject: Twin keel positions I found a much simpler way to determine the positions of the leading edge of the twin keels.I measured from the point of the stem in a straight line keeping the tape straight and tight ,along the outside of the hull of a well balanced 36 footer to the leading edge of the keels where they meet the hull and it came to 15ft 11 inches. For the 31 footer it came to 13ft 3inches . Measure out from the centreline 2ft 6 inches. This can be laid out on the plate flat on the ground and a tiny hole burned in at this point in the initial layout stages , or along the outside of the hull after it is together. Differences of an inch or two can be adjusted for by varying the rake of the mast a couple of inches.Measure straight accross the inside of the hull to make the keels parallell and to get the position of the trailing ends. Don't follow the stem , just go straight accross the hull.I hope to get similar measurements for a single keeler ASAP. Brent Swain 2792 From: greenguy2ca Date: Sun Dec 28, 2003 6:24pm Subject: Stuffing box Anybody using non-drip stuffing box? Price seems not too outrageous and will eliminate leaking. "The PSS shaft seal replaces a standard stuffing box with a drip free solution to an age old problem" www.pyiinc.com Also since I will soon be at the stage of shaft & prop, just wondering if anyone has installed cutting device on the shaft for fishing line, nets, plastic bags etc.. Regards.. Gary 2793 From: Date: Mon Dec 29, 2003 10:37am Subject: Re: Re: Displacement Hi Ed, The universal standard of measure to convert volume to weight is "ounces". 16 ounces is as every drinker knows a pint. 16 ounces is also a pound. Thus, the more pints you drink the more pounds you gain. Glen wants to know why the JM50, a superb sailing boat with a "displacement" of 30,000 lbs cannot be built in steel. My explanation to Glen was not "textbook". However, from my many years of cruising I've come to rely on practical solutions and explanations over theory. We know from Archimedes that displacement equals weight. However, when we say a boat has a displacement of 30,000 lbs, we don't mean it weighs 30,000 lbs. We mean it was DESIGNED to weigh 30,000 lbs. This is where the confusion arises. Over time, colloquial usage has shortened the term "designed displacement" to simply "displacement", which is inaccurate and misleading. Boats have many different displacements, and a boat's actual weight can differ widely from its designed weight, or may be hidden through under ballasting, with the resulting compromise in stability and safety. Rather than split hairs over definitions, I find it simpler to see "designed displacement" in terms of volume. While this may well be a heretical viewpoint, this site should not object on those grounds. Boats are designed by taking their internal volume at the waterline, and multiplying this by a standard weight of sea water. Thus we can use "volume" in place of "weight" as a reliable measurement of a yacht's "designed displacement". This is recognized in the term "tonnage", which is a measure of volume. Glen's reasoning is perfectly sound when you see "displacement" simply as weight. Just recalculate the weights and build the boat. However, when you see "designed displacement" as volume, the problem is clear. You cannot change the volume without changing the shape of the hull, which means changing the patterns. The JM50 is a well proven offshore yacht. The owner has left it unpainted without problem, and the cost of construction was not significantly different than it would have been in steel, given that the same boat in steel would weigh approximately 50% more, and have required much bigger mast, sails, rigging, winches, ballast, engine, tanks, etc. to deliver an equivalent level of performance. regards, greg elliott http://www.origamimagic.com 2794 From: edward_stoneuk Date: Mon Dec 29, 2003 3:05pm Subject: Re: Displacement Greg, Your universal standard of measurement is only universal in countries that use US measures. In the UK there are 20 fluid ounces in a pint. The US fluid ounce is larger then the UK fluid ounce and the pint is smaller. This can, of course, lead to confusion, arguments and excessive alcohol consumption, but not necessarily in that order. When you say "This is recognized in the term "tonnage", which is a measure of volume." and "You cannot change the volume without changing the shape of the hull", are you refering to the International Convention on Tonnage Measurement of Ships, 1969 Regulation 3, which defines gross tonnage as being equal to K1V where: V = Total volume of all enclosed spaces of the ship in cubic metres, and K1 = 0.2 + 0.02log10V (or as tabulated in Appendix 2). This volume does not change unless the hull shape is changed. This is not usually applied to vessels under 24 metres (79') so there may be some confusion as to how you work out the displacement of your designs. It is important for folks wanting to use ratios such as the Sail Area/ Displacement ratio, the Displacement/ Length ratio, the Cruising Club of America's Capsize Screening Formula or Ted Brewer's Comfort Ratio to choose or compare boat designs that the method designers use for calculating their design displacement is much the same. Regards, Ted 2795 From: Michael Casling Date: Mon Dec 29, 2003 4:51pm Subject: Re: Re: Displacement That is why most of us prefer the Brent Swain description. The boat displaces what it ways. The more junk you put on board the more it weighs so it also displaces more. A trip over the weigh scales can be a very good low tech way of checking weight. It works for cows. Michael Casling 2796 From: goodsail2003 Date: Mon Dec 29, 2003 6:00pm Subject: Re: Twin keel positions i have designed a few twin keeled boats and also cntr keelers built them and sailed them from my obs the position of the keel/keels in unimportant a few ft iether way wont alter the helm. whats more important is the hull desighns balance and the final triming. keel position is relative to triming so therefor has a sway altering mast rake seems to have only a small efect. to sum it up its in the hull body shape that has the biggest efect on balance Roy 2797 From: kingsknight4life Date: Mon Dec 29, 2003 6:32pm Subject: stainles steel mast? I need to build a mast for my 36 ft. boat and was wondering if SS would be a better choice than mild steel? A guy I know has a folkes 39? and it has a stainless steel mast. He says it will save him on time on maintenance and paintng costs?? ideas or thoughts? 2798 From: locky m Date: Mon Dec 29, 2003 7:00pm Subject: Re: stainles steel mast? i know it has been done, but after the sch40 ss legs of my salon table cracked in half at sea, as i was leaning against it , i have become weary of ss's brittleness. locky 2799 From: Glen Date: Mon Dec 29, 2003 8:19pm Subject: Re Displacement I understand that when a hull is place in the water a certain amount of water is " displaced" this is equall to the weight of the vessel. I also understand that two boats being built in two diferent materials like: steel and aluminum will not weight the same. I'm looking at ted brewers site and he offers several designs and some are even the same design from alum to steel. Length, beam, LWL, are the same. The displacement is also the same so how is this achieved? The hull and others items like ballast must be altered to arrive at the same numbers. Does this included to shape of the hull? It must as there is now way you can build identical hulls of two different materials and have them displace the same amount! The JM50 is a very good design however the can always be improvments to any finished product. I feel that it can't go without beeing unsaid but the owner has told people that the hull which can reach speeds of unbelieveable amounts if had to choose between aluminum and steel for a second boat would choose steel! He has said that the hull was very noisy and transmitted sounds easily. I have also talked with and believe Brent has posted the same of aluminum hulls in the sun can become uncomfortably warm. I am not a big fan on painting aluminum...in my 36 years I have yet to see a good paint job on an aluminum anything....... My two cents worth. 2800 From: Date: Mon Dec 29, 2003 10:19pm Subject: New file uploaded to origamiboats Hello, This email message is a notification to let you know that a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the origamiboats group. File : /PSJan69Airhouse.pdf Uploaded by : dart70ca Description : How to build a large air-filled plastic enclosure for large projects. Popular Science. January 1969. You can access this file at the URL http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/files/PSJan69Airhouse.pdf To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/files Regards, dart70ca 2801 From: bilgekeeldave Date: Mon Dec 29, 2003 10:31pm Subject: QUARANTA y DOS Hi! I just found this group. I have owned a Brent Swain boat (QUARANTA y DOS) for 20 years. I always thought it was 31'10" long, maybe it's a 31? I haven't ever measured it! Brent knows the boat, maybe he can tell me how long it really is. It has spray foam insulation and I haven't had any rust problems. The mast is hollow spruce, stepped on deck. I put a new butt on the mast about eight years ago. Phil, the original owner, told me it was Brent's first bilge keel boat. It is powered with a 20 Hp Vetus diesel. It has been a very low maintenance boat. My father and I put the interior in it and I have always done all the 'yard' work on it, it looks as good as it did 20 years ago. I had no idea a group like this existed! I'll have to start reading the past posts. Dave 2802 From: John Jones Date: Mon Dec 29, 2003 9:36am Subject: Re: Digest Number 678 It's a good idea, those lobster pot bouys are set out like a mine field an sometimes two bouys are attached to one-another.....Feces John > Anybody using non-drip stuffing box? 2803 From: Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr Date: Tue Dec 30, 2003 4:59am Subject: Re: Re Displacement Generally, when you see a boat design that can be built in two different materials, (say aluminum vs steel, or FRP vs steel) but which has the same displacement in both materials, it means one of a number of things. In most cases when you see an equal weight, the plating or hull thickness for the lighter material is much thicker than the steel plating. If the weights are actually equal this results in the boat built of the lighter material (aluminum or GRP) being substantially stronger than the steel boat. The other way that this works is that the designer goes for equal strength, in which case the ballast (and/or tankage) is reduced on the steel boat in order to equal the lighter hull and structural weight for the aluminum or FRP boat. As an example, when I worked for Charlie Wittholz in the early 1980's, I did some work on the aluminum version of the previously steel Departure 35. The aluminum version had more ballast, more sail area and calculated out to be slightly stronger, much stiffer, and more impact resistant since it had considerably thicker plating than the steel version. Professionally built the aluminum version was roughly the same price. Jeff 2804 From: bahadiregi Date: Tue Dec 30, 2003 8:19am Subject: Re: Stuffing box Gary, Also I am intrested in PSS shaft seal for dripless operation but graphite which is cathodic to all metals is used as a sealant on PSS.Electrolisis is most important subject to beware of it on steel boats.If there is someone experienced PSS for long time on steel boat can give us a idea. Regards, Bahadir 2805 From: Paul J. Thompson Date: Tue Dec 30, 2003 11:19am Subject: RE: Re: Stuffing box HI, I have a steel Tahitiana (31ft 9in L.O.A..), La Chica. I have now had a PSS seal in the boat since 1997. During that time I have cruised over 30 000 sea miles and clocked up 1200 engine hours. I can report no electrolysis problems of any kind. The graphite seal did become a bit scored by sand (causing it to leak a little) following a cruise up the intra coastal waterway (Fort Myers Beach, FL to Annapolis, MD) but following the advise of the manufacturer, I placed a piece of 1200 wet/dry paper (while in the water) between the stainless steel rotor for a few minutes (while running the engine in gear) and the seal. This polished the interface and the problem disappeared. I am 100% happy with the seal. Regards, Paul 2806 From: goodsail2003 Date: Tue Dec 30, 2003 0:14pm Subject: Re: Current metal prices I build steel boats and use all pre cut profiles from my own designs (a kit is a good description ) I pay around £450 per ton for these profiles which save hours on labour uncut steel is around £320 per ton finaly A 42 ft yacht I do comes out at 5 ton profiles using 4/5/6/mm some boat using lighter gauges 3/4/5/6mm comes out at 4.13 ton also 5/6 bottles of argon 8 rolls of mig wire 20 sanding disks 300 amp set I hope this is of use to any one thinking of building. ROY 2807 From: Andre Date: Wed Dec 31, 2003 0:20pm Subject: Happy New year To everyone - Let 2004 be the year that brings you the blessings you have prayed for. My prayer is for the kids I work with in Cape Town. This year we will finish our project build up our kids to be useful, productive citizens. Fair winds and following seas 2808 From: brentswain38 Date: Wed Dec 31, 2003 3:45pm Subject: Re: Re Displacement If you hire someone to do all the work , labour is the biggest part of the price , and materials costs are a much smaller factor. Savings from being able to use a skillsaw, and high speed wire feed welding can reduce the manhours involved in a project , which can offset the extra cost of the materials. Having a shop to build in also helps save a lot of man hours.The profesional shop has the equipment already and it's cost is spread over many boats When you build for yourself as something of a hobby , you can save the expense of a shop,the expense of wire feed welding equipment, labour involved isn't such a big issue , and the cost of materials and tools is a much bigger part of the total cost of the boat.Steel definitly is far cheaper here.Origami construction narrows the time advantage aluminium may claim by drastically reducing the overall time involved anyway.I had my 31 footer sailing for under $6,000 CDN in 1984, and was living aboard. Is there a shop which could build her for that amount. If you have to take out a loan to have a boat professionally built in a shop,instead of building her yourself, interest payments can double the final cost of the boat when compared to a backyard project built on a pay as you can basis . Brent Swain 2809 From: brentswain38 Date: Wed Dec 31, 2003 3:51pm Subject: Re: QUARANTA y DOS Dave I built Quarante Dos in January 1982 for Phil.She was launched in August or September of that year. It was the first 31 ft twin keeler I built. I had built a 26 footer before her. We gave the transom a bit more rake than I do now which made her a bit over 31 ft but she is of the 31 ft design. Great to hear she's still in good hands. Brent Swain 2810 From: brentswain38 Date: Wed Dec 31, 2003 3:54pm Subject: Re: Digest Number 678 Sharp stainless line cutters are very easy to build on a steel boat and they work very well. Brent Swain > It's a good idea, those lobster pot bouys are set out like a mine > field an sometimes two bouys are attached to one-another.....Feces 2811 From: locky m Date: Wed Dec 31, 2003 4:26pm Subject: aluminum frameless twinkeel came across this pic. of a swain looking bilgekeeler http://www.reducostall.com/HTML/pages StMarthe11_jpg.htm 2812 From: locky m Date: Wed Dec 31, 2003 4:28pm Subject: http://www.reducostall.com/HTML/pageStMarthe11_jpg.htm thats better 2813 From: locky m Date: Wed Dec 31, 2003 4:31pm Subject: aluminum twinkeel this url works: www.reducostall.com/HTML/pages/StMarthe11_jpg.htm 2814 From: Date: Wed Dec 31, 2003 5:29pm Subject: Re: Re: Displacement My comment was not intended to be taken seriously. It was a play on words, in keeping with the holiday season. Drinking, not ounces, is the universal standard to convert volume to weight. For yacht design, a simple conversion from volume to weight is (for seawater): 1 ton displacement = 1 cubic meter = 1 long ton = 2240 lbs. All standard performance and stability numbers are included with our designs. We report this data in whatever units are most suitable or convenient for our customers. Not all designers do this, leaving the builder the responsibility of ensuring the boat is suitable for its intended service. When considering building a boat, make sure that the plans include the relevant performance and stability numbers. I am hoping to get more time and cost data from builders so that we can publish actual data showing the advantages of origami construction. I have data from 10 boats, and would like to get more to ensure the sample is representative. Any builders willing to help, please email me at the address below. No personally identifiable data will be published, just a graph showing the distribution of costs and times to build. If you don't help, don't complain later about the results. Regards, and Happy New Year. greg elliott http://www.origamimagic.com