JohnE

Thanks Druxey, that's nice to know. Speaking of translations ... had to do quite a bit of Vial du Clairbois for the lovely Cornélie.
 
The compound curvatures of the fashion frame (estain) and the filling transoms have always been quite painful to get right. The main reason is no one has done those for a Sané design before, so there is nothing to use as a guide or make intelligent judgments from. The British didn't take off enough lines in the right places to provide a suitable guide, and even the lines in the Chaumont Papers are way too few and far-between, besides being completely unidentified. Woof! Everything was a guestimate, and wrong, as it turns out. I had to go back to the well.
 
Vial has a section on this. Very informative, but superficial, and lacking in the very details that I needed for a proper understanding. Then I just happened to open Vol II. I had previously assumed Tome II was simply an 1805 retitling and reprint of Tome I with some additions. Wrogn again! I was fooled by the totally similar table of contents. Turns out that Tome II begins where Tome I leaves off. Seems that Tome I is the undergrad book having all the basics and sufficient gloss to get one started. Tome II, however, is the graduate level "design and construction theory" course book. Every section begins with the assumption you have Tome I open to the appropriate place and the Tome I drawings are at hand. Then it launches into detail ... thought I would have a heart attack! Woof!
 
All right! Design the darn things from scratch! This is better than buttermilk pancakes! So I did. And it worked. And it didn't just work, the lines flowed directly into those of the well documented sections from Sané's devis. My estain was a bit off in body plan and profile views, and the waterlines and buttock/bow lines behind the estain needed considerable adjustment. Before, they were smooth, but arbitrary. Always subject to tweaking back-and-forth depending on which curve I started with - body, waterline, diagonal, ...
 
Finally, after much sturm, drang und todesangst, I really think I have an understanding of French stern construction. Some pics. Waterlines (level lines) just flat look good. Not just that, but they grid out such that each level-line point projects right smack dab where it is supposed to on the profile buttocks and body plan, and arsey-versey.
 
All this was the basis of the loft of the filling transoms. Easy peasy once the surface was completely defined.

The problem of wood movement of the keel has been observed by many of us. With this build, I  took sometime to observe it and it was well worth. At scale 1/24, I find it difficult to have every parts to fit always at equal distance of the center line. I have often asked myself how it was on 1 to 1 scale. It surely would be an interesting observation to do on a real one!
 
Humidity and Assembly Pressure are factors influencing wood movement. Humidity is the smallest one.   Pressure used during assembly to fit the spacers is the main one. The first  effect of excessive pressure are observable on the straightness of the keel. For this reason, the assembly method used has the advantage that you can turn the keel upside down. A method using MDF or plywood to hold the frames would be useless to check the keel fairness.
 
1/3 of the frames front and back were  assembled with no pressure, just by adding layers of frames and spacers. The middle third was assembled with some pressure mainly for the last spacers. I did some assembling and disassembling of that last third and I think that 2 factors can correct this fault :
 
- eliminate as much as possible the pressure by reducing the thickness between spacers
- unglue 1 side of spacer each 4 to 8 frames.

Thanks all. Have to admit that I had some frustrating periods, but once the lights came on the journey became a lot of fun. Only wish I had known this sooner when poor Mark was having such problems with the stern of his Licorne.
 
Herask and Bava are both encouraging me to get up to speed in Blender so I can do visualizations in 3D. They are really helping me focus the learning curve. The ability to see a complex piece of wood and how it fits with the other pieces, before I pull out the saw, will be I think invaluable.
 
Ciao. John

Something else that happened is I was able to import quarter-beam and mid-beam lines into the MATLAB hydro program and evaluate the curves for performance. Turns out that Jacques-Noël knew exactly what he was doing. They fall within acceptable modern parameters. Howard Chapelle and Merritt Edson would approve.
 
It also becomes apparent why French ships (although can only speak to Sané types) were so sensitive to trim in order to get most out of their performance regime. The lines purty near say outright that if they have a bit too much load drag, or sailed with a squat, they will suffer and become sluggish, like a lovely lady on the arm of a boor.
 
The kicker comes from Sané's famous 6 inch stretch after Villemaurin's sail trials in the historical Cornélie. Villemaurin noted stern trim sensitivity in great detail, load trimming both up and down, altering mast rake, and the sail suite. It told a lot to Sané. All of the stretch was put from Frame VII aft. Frame VII stayed where it was in the Venus (Hébé) and Virginie series. Frame VIII moved 3 inches farther aft from Frame VII and the aft perpendicular moved 3 inches farther back from Frame VIII. This centers the majority of the stretch smack dab in the region where the quarter buttock crosses the load waterline and stretches out the buttock lines in this area so they are considerably straighter.
 
I was amazed at what a simple 6 inches could do, until I realized that the difference between the "right" design curves and my "wrong" ones were the matter one inch or less, back and forth, up or down. Whoda thunk?
 
Wonder what Jacques-Noël would have done with access to a CAD program. I shiver to think.
 
Ciao. John

Thanks all. Have to admit that I had some frustrating periods, but once the lights came on the journey became a lot of fun. Only wish I had known this sooner when poor Mark was having such problems with the stern of his Licorne.
 
Herask and Bava are both encouraging me to get up to speed in Blender so I can do visualizations in 3D. They are really helping me focus the learning curve. The ability to see a complex piece of wood and how it fits with the other pieces, before I pull out the saw, will be I think invaluable.
 
Ciao. John

Hi Gaetan,
 
I live on the Gulf coast in Alabama, so humidity changes are very large. It really messes with the guitars. I use a humidifier and a dehumidifier to keep things on a relatively even keel (ha, ha). I don't try to climate control, just keep the changes from being too radical. Might help le vaisseau.
 
Love the work on the rablure.
 
John

Been too long since this has been updated.  Things around the household have become rather busy and hopefully a calm is coming.
 
I'm doing the inner planking and fitting the planks to the gunports as I go.  Rather fiddly but it's cut, glue and then sand to shape.   I'm trying to cut the planks more to the size between the ports just cut down the amount of sanding to fit.  I have at least the bottom of the ports done which will give me clearance and a clear demarkation of the ports, Hopefully the rest of this will go a bit faster.
 

 

Something else that happened is I was able to import quarter-beam and mid-beam lines into the MATLAB hydro program and evaluate the curves for performance. Turns out that Jacques-Noël knew exactly what he was doing. They fall within acceptable modern parameters. Howard Chapelle and Merritt Edson would approve.
 
It also becomes apparent why French ships (although can only speak to Sané types) were so sensitive to trim in order to get most out of their performance regime. The lines purty near say outright that if they have a bit too much load drag, or sailed with a squat, they will suffer and become sluggish, like a lovely lady on the arm of a boor.
 
The kicker comes from Sané's famous 6 inch stretch after Villemaurin's sail trials in the historical Cornélie. Villemaurin noted stern trim sensitivity in great detail, load trimming both up and down, altering mast rake, and the sail suite. It told a lot to Sané. All of the stretch was put from Frame VII aft. Frame VII stayed where it was in the Venus (Hébé) and Virginie series. Frame VIII moved 3 inches farther aft from Frame VII and the aft perpendicular moved 3 inches farther back from Frame VIII. This centers the majority of the stretch smack dab in the region where the quarter buttock crosses the load waterline and stretches out the buttock lines in this area so they are considerably straighter.
 
I was amazed at what a simple 6 inches could do, until I realized that the difference between the "right" design curves and my "wrong" ones were the matter one inch or less, back and forth, up or down. Whoda thunk?
 
Wonder what Jacques-Noël would have done with access to a CAD program. I shiver to think.
 
Ciao. John

Thanks Druxey, that's nice to know. Speaking of translations ... had to do quite a bit of Vial du Clairbois for the lovely Cornélie.
 
The compound curvatures of the fashion frame (estain) and the filling transoms have always been quite painful to get right. The main reason is no one has done those for a Sané design before, so there is nothing to use as a guide or make intelligent judgments from. The British didn't take off enough lines in the right places to provide a suitable guide, and even the lines in the Chaumont Papers are way too few and far-between, besides being completely unidentified. Woof! Everything was a guestimate, and wrong, as it turns out. I had to go back to the well.
 
Vial has a section on this. Very informative, but superficial, and lacking in the very details that I needed for a proper understanding. Then I just happened to open Vol II. I had previously assumed Tome II was simply an 1805 retitling and reprint of Tome I with some additions. Wrogn again! I was fooled by the totally similar table of contents. Turns out that Tome II begins where Tome I leaves off. Seems that Tome I is the undergrad book having all the basics and sufficient gloss to get one started. Tome II, however, is the graduate level "design and construction theory" course book. Every section begins with the assumption you have Tome I open to the appropriate place and the Tome I drawings are at hand. Then it launches into detail ... thought I would have a heart attack! Woof!
 
All right! Design the darn things from scratch! This is better than buttermilk pancakes! So I did. And it worked. And it didn't just work, the lines flowed directly into those of the well documented sections from Sané's devis. My estain was a bit off in body plan and profile views, and the waterlines and buttock/bow lines behind the estain needed considerable adjustment. Before, they were smooth, but arbitrary. Always subject to tweaking back-and-forth depending on which curve I started with - body, waterline, diagonal, ...
 
Finally, after much sturm, drang und todesangst, I really think I have an understanding of French stern construction. Some pics. Waterlines (level lines) just flat look good. Not just that, but they grid out such that each level-line point projects right smack dab where it is supposed to on the profile buttocks and body plan, and arsey-versey.
 
All this was the basis of the loft of the filling transoms. Easy peasy once the surface was completely defined.

Something else that happened is I was able to import quarter-beam and mid-beam lines into the MATLAB hydro program and evaluate the curves for performance. Turns out that Jacques-Noël knew exactly what he was doing. They fall within acceptable modern parameters. Howard Chapelle and Merritt Edson would approve.
 
It also becomes apparent why French ships (although can only speak to Sané types) were so sensitive to trim in order to get most out of their performance regime. The lines purty near say outright that if they have a bit too much load drag, or sailed with a squat, they will suffer and become sluggish, like a lovely lady on the arm of a boor.
 
The kicker comes from Sané's famous 6 inch stretch after Villemaurin's sail trials in the historical Cornélie. Villemaurin noted stern trim sensitivity in great detail, load trimming both up and down, altering mast rake, and the sail suite. It told a lot to Sané. All of the stretch was put from Frame VII aft. Frame VII stayed where it was in the Venus (Hébé) and Virginie series. Frame VIII moved 3 inches farther aft from Frame VII and the aft perpendicular moved 3 inches farther back from Frame VIII. This centers the majority of the stretch smack dab in the region where the quarter buttock crosses the load waterline and stretches out the buttock lines in this area so they are considerably straighter.
 
I was amazed at what a simple 6 inches could do, until I realized that the difference between the "right" design curves and my "wrong" ones were the matter one inch or less, back and forth, up or down. Whoda thunk?
 
Wonder what Jacques-Noël would have done with access to a CAD program. I shiver to think.
 
Ciao. John

Thanks Druxey, that's nice to know. Speaking of translations ... had to do quite a bit of Vial du Clairbois for the lovely Cornélie.
 
The compound curvatures of the fashion frame (estain) and the filling transoms have always been quite painful to get right. The main reason is no one has done those for a Sané design before, so there is nothing to use as a guide or make intelligent judgments from. The British didn't take off enough lines in the right places to provide a suitable guide, and even the lines in the Chaumont Papers are way too few and far-between, besides being completely unidentified. Woof! Everything was a guestimate, and wrong, as it turns out. I had to go back to the well.
 
Vial has a section on this. Very informative, but superficial, and lacking in the very details that I needed for a proper understanding. Then I just happened to open Vol II. I had previously assumed Tome II was simply an 1805 retitling and reprint of Tome I with some additions. Wrogn again! I was fooled by the totally similar table of contents. Turns out that Tome II begins where Tome I leaves off. Seems that Tome I is the undergrad book having all the basics and sufficient gloss to get one started. Tome II, however, is the graduate level "design and construction theory" course book. Every section begins with the assumption you have Tome I open to the appropriate place and the Tome I drawings are at hand. Then it launches into detail ... thought I would have a heart attack! Woof!
 
All right! Design the darn things from scratch! This is better than buttermilk pancakes! So I did. And it worked. And it didn't just work, the lines flowed directly into those of the well documented sections from Sané's devis. My estain was a bit off in body plan and profile views, and the waterlines and buttock/bow lines behind the estain needed considerable adjustment. Before, they were smooth, but arbitrary. Always subject to tweaking back-and-forth depending on which curve I started with - body, waterline, diagonal, ...
 
Finally, after much sturm, drang und todesangst, I really think I have an understanding of French stern construction. Some pics. Waterlines (level lines) just flat look good. Not just that, but they grid out such that each level-line point projects right smack dab where it is supposed to on the profile buttocks and body plan, and arsey-versey.
 
All this was the basis of the loft of the filling transoms. Easy peasy once the surface was completely defined.

Thanks Druxey, that's nice to know. Speaking of translations ... had to do quite a bit of Vial du Clairbois for the lovely Cornélie.
 
The compound curvatures of the fashion frame (estain) and the filling transoms have always been quite painful to get right. The main reason is no one has done those for a Sané design before, so there is nothing to use as a guide or make intelligent judgments from. The British didn't take off enough lines in the right places to provide a suitable guide, and even the lines in the Chaumont Papers are way too few and far-between, besides being completely unidentified. Woof! Everything was a guestimate, and wrong, as it turns out. I had to go back to the well.
 
Vial has a section on this. Very informative, but superficial, and lacking in the very details that I needed for a proper understanding. Then I just happened to open Vol II. I had previously assumed Tome II was simply an 1805 retitling and reprint of Tome I with some additions. Wrogn again! I was fooled by the totally similar table of contents. Turns out that Tome II begins where Tome I leaves off. Seems that Tome I is the undergrad book having all the basics and sufficient gloss to get one started. Tome II, however, is the graduate level "design and construction theory" course book. Every section begins with the assumption you have Tome I open to the appropriate place and the Tome I drawings are at hand. Then it launches into detail ... thought I would have a heart attack! Woof!
 
All right! Design the darn things from scratch! This is better than buttermilk pancakes! So I did. And it worked. And it didn't just work, the lines flowed directly into those of the well documented sections from Sané's devis. My estain was a bit off in body plan and profile views, and the waterlines and buttock/bow lines behind the estain needed considerable adjustment. Before, they were smooth, but arbitrary. Always subject to tweaking back-and-forth depending on which curve I started with - body, waterline, diagonal, ...
 
Finally, after much sturm, drang und todesangst, I really think I have an understanding of French stern construction. Some pics. Waterlines (level lines) just flat look good. Not just that, but they grid out such that each level-line point projects right smack dab where it is supposed to on the profile buttocks and body plan, and arsey-versey.
 
All this was the basis of the loft of the filling transoms. Easy peasy once the surface was completely defined.

Wonderful pictures and outstanding work. Prekrasan !!
 
ciao
John

Wonderful pictures and outstanding work. Prekrasan !!
 
ciao
John

thx, bava. I had a node setup for PBR textures before. then Andrew Price (blenderguru) came up with his setup, and now there's a native principled shader bundled with latest blender. and that's all what you need for PBR materials. other than that, no special node setup. whichever works, mate... ;-) 

Good to see another blender modeller here
Got any special node setup for cycles? The pictures look pretty nice!
 
And, of course, it´s a magnificent model!

hi all!
 
now that cat's out of the bag I can make an appearance here . David and Greg have contacted me after seeing my work on Pandora and have given me the opportunity to create 3D build log of their swan class ship. it's been an awesome experience and I've learned a lot in these few months. also big thanks to both of them for having patience with my inexperience and oh-my-god-can't-believe-he-just-asked-that questions... 
 
Danny, a big thank you is in order for you too. I'm using your build log as one of the references when I get stuck.  so it's the other way around, haha!
 
 
Wayne, as with Pandora I'm using Blender, free modeling tool. unfortunately no drawing and BIM export option, as it's not a CAD program but a general purpose one.
my computer is (now ageing) Core i7 4770k paired with Nvidia GTX770. would really like to nail new GTX1080 though. rendering on GPU literally flies but I could use more powerful one now that the model is becoming more complex...
 
also big thx to all of you for nice comments. glad you like the pics ;-)
 

Unfortunately, no. The Mungo Murray treatise includes an abridgement of parts of Elemens de l'architectue navale by Duhamel du Monceau, but I think that's about it. So far as I know, Olivier, Ozanne, Morineau, Monceau, Forfait, Clairbois, Lescallier, even de Freminville, have not been translated except privately.
 
John

Hello Dan,
 
French gammoning hole positions are often different from British practice. Boudriot mostly places his in the fill piece (garniture) between the cheek curves (courbes de jottereau) as you note. There is no 'rule' per se, and I have seen different designers position them in different places. Vial du Clairbois just says "make sure there is good purchase". It's no surprise that the French rig out different since their bowsprit steeve is 30 some degrees rather than the British 22 or so degrees, at least for frigates.
 
Hope this helps.
 
John

Salut Gaetan
 
I am doing exactly that for my Cornélie. I have the quille and contre-quille in 3D and am lofting each frame with special attention to the rabbet angles. It is interactive - I place a frame/couple and then tweak the keel assembly underneath it to reflect a proper shape to receive the garboard strake. It is fun and interesting to watch the rabbet shape evolve as I move farther and farther aft. When the process is finished, I will have a set of suitable plans for the keel pieces, as well as lofted frames/couples that fit.
 
3D is a bit of a challenge, but a great deal of fun. If you enjoy drafting plans and figuring out fiddly-bit details, 3D is a rewarding exercise.
 
John

There was a bow in the keel, about 1/8 inch… too much pressure, I guess.
Off the spacers, rechecked 5 frames still not glued, keel is also in 2 parts.
And the bow disappeared, replaced spacers and lucky I am.

Salut Gaetan
 
I am doing exactly that for my Cornélie. I have the quille and contre-quille in 3D and am lofting each frame with special attention to the rabbet angles. It is interactive - I place a frame/couple and then tweak the keel assembly underneath it to reflect a proper shape to receive the garboard strake. It is fun and interesting to watch the rabbet shape evolve as I move farther and farther aft. When the process is finished, I will have a set of suitable plans for the keel pieces, as well as lofted frames/couples that fit.
 
3D is a bit of a challenge, but a great deal of fun. If you enjoy drafting plans and figuring out fiddly-bit details, 3D is a rewarding exercise.
 
John

My perception of 3D model ship changed with the years. Even if I am not able to draw 3D I have admiration for those who can do it.
 
Here is what I would like to do if I knew how to do it. I would like to have the 3D  model ship I am  building  actually in wood.
I do not know if what I write is a stupid idea but here is how a 3D model could help me:
 
Let's take an example: I am building a keel for the 74  guns. It is difficult to visualize how will the planking will touch the keel and in which angle.
With access to the 3D model, it would be possible to visualize the keel as a finish product and rotate it as we wish to see details.
I suppose I would need a program to open these files, but as an addition to the plans, I would love to buy such 3D plans.

Thanks for the likes. I was a bit remiss and forgot to put up some pics. Here's some of the guidelines for the lofting. This part makes sure that the lines are ok in all three views and everything checks against the Devis. There are a (very) few places where the Devis is inconsistent by a (very) small amount, but they are all in the fiddly-bits category. All things considered, she's coming along beautifully; everything is falling right into place. That means it's time to be extra careful so I don't get bit in the Coulomb.

Thanks for the likes. I was a bit remiss and forgot to put up some pics. Here's some of the guidelines for the lofting. This part makes sure that the lines are ok in all three views and everything checks against the Devis. There are a (very) few places where the Devis is inconsistent by a (very) small amount, but they are all in the fiddly-bits category. All things considered, she's coming along beautifully; everything is falling right into place. That means it's time to be extra careful so I don't get bit in the Coulomb.