lehmann

I just go a notice from Seaforth/Pen&Sword publishing that the latest Trafalgar Chronicle yearbook of the 1805 Club (http://www.1805club.org/)has been released.  
 
http://www.pen-and-sword.co.uk/The-Trafalgar-Chronicle/p/12463?utm_source=seaforthpublishing.com&utm_medium=subsite

I just go a notice from Seaforth/Pen&Sword publishing that the latest Trafalgar Chronicle yearbook of the 1805 Club (http://www.1805club.org/)has been released.  
 
http://www.pen-and-sword.co.uk/The-Trafalgar-Chronicle/p/12463?utm_source=seaforthpublishing.com&utm_medium=subsite

Lee Valley  (Veritas) not only makes tools, but they also have a large collection of old tools.  This rope maker from 1880 showed up in their recent newsletter.  
 
http://www.leevalley.com/en/newsletters/Woodworking/2114//collection.htm
 
Those of you in the US mid west may want to start hunting in the antique shops. 

Lee Valley  (Veritas) not only makes tools, but they also have a large collection of old tools.  This rope maker from 1880 showed up in their recent newsletter.  
 
http://www.leevalley.com/en/newsletters/Woodworking/2114//collection.htm
 
Those of you in the US mid west may want to start hunting in the antique shops. 

Lee Valley  (Veritas) not only makes tools, but they also have a large collection of old tools.  This rope maker from 1880 showed up in their recent newsletter.  
 
http://www.leevalley.com/en/newsletters/Woodworking/2114//collection.htm
 
Those of you in the US mid west may want to start hunting in the antique shops. 

Lee Valley  (Veritas) not only makes tools, but they also have a large collection of old tools.  This rope maker from 1880 showed up in their recent newsletter.  
 
http://www.leevalley.com/en/newsletters/Woodworking/2114//collection.htm
 
Those of you in the US mid west may want to start hunting in the antique shops. 

John,
 
Anything is possible.  Not sure if this is a good idea though.  I haven't worked with a wobble saw, but unless there's some special grinding of the top of the teeth it won't produce a flat bottom on the dado.  The smaller the diameter of the saw relative to the kerf, the more pronounced the rounding will be.  (To produce a flat bottom, the saw kerf would have to be zero.)
 
Secondly, does the motor on the Dremel saw have enough torque to plow a dado?
 
On your math, a 1/8" wedge in say a 1" diameter washer and a 4" diameter saw will produce an approximately 1/2" + kerf wide dado.
 
Not sure why you want to make dados on the Dremel.  Not much need for wide dados in model ship building.  If you're making grating, then generally you have to use jeweler's saws anyway.   If you want to do dados for cabinet work, but don't want to spend the money on a stacked set, then just do multiple kerf cuts.  I do this on my 10" Delta when I don't want to take the time to set up a dado blade.

John,
 
Anything is possible.  Not sure if this is a good idea though.  I haven't worked with a wobble saw, but unless there's some special grinding of the top of the teeth it won't produce a flat bottom on the dado.  The smaller the diameter of the saw relative to the kerf, the more pronounced the rounding will be.  (To produce a flat bottom, the saw kerf would have to be zero.)
 
Secondly, does the motor on the Dremel saw have enough torque to plow a dado?
 
On your math, a 1/8" wedge in say a 1" diameter washer and a 4" diameter saw will produce an approximately 1/2" + kerf wide dado.
 
Not sure why you want to make dados on the Dremel.  Not much need for wide dados in model ship building.  If you're making grating, then generally you have to use jeweler's saws anyway.   If you want to do dados for cabinet work, but don't want to spend the money on a stacked set, then just do multiple kerf cuts.  I do this on my 10" Delta when I don't want to take the time to set up a dado blade.

John,
 
Anything is possible.  Not sure if this is a good idea though.  I haven't worked with a wobble saw, but unless there's some special grinding of the top of the teeth it won't produce a flat bottom on the dado.  The smaller the diameter of the saw relative to the kerf, the more pronounced the rounding will be.  (To produce a flat bottom, the saw kerf would have to be zero.)
 
Secondly, does the motor on the Dremel saw have enough torque to plow a dado?
 
On your math, a 1/8" wedge in say a 1" diameter washer and a 4" diameter saw will produce an approximately 1/2" + kerf wide dado.
 
Not sure why you want to make dados on the Dremel.  Not much need for wide dados in model ship building.  If you're making grating, then generally you have to use jeweler's saws anyway.   If you want to do dados for cabinet work, but don't want to spend the money on a stacked set, then just do multiple kerf cuts.  I do this on my 10" Delta when I don't want to take the time to set up a dado blade.

I had a look at the practicum and the pictures certainly imply there's lots of material.  However, I suggest making the templates to see what they tell you. 

As is now, the choice between iron and bronze is based on a trade-off between costs and corrosion resistance (life).  However, if the corrosion can be controlled, then iron would probably the the best choice.   I'm not sure what grade of iron would have been used, so I can't say there would be a strength advantage for either metal.
 
Bolts were used extensively in the keel and skeg - anywhere where the larger timbers needed to be connected.  Not sure of building practice in early 1700's but, later, bolts were used to hold the clamps to the frames.  
 
Also, they were not bolts as we know them, with a thread on the end(s) for a nut.  The fastening was a clinch ring (washer) or plate put over the end of the "bolt" and then the end was clenched (flared over), so they are more like rivets than bolts.  In a sense, a treenail is a wooden rivet.
 
Bolts that come out the bottom of the keel are covered with a shoe board.  Other places for bolts that would be exposed on the exterior  would be the channel iron fastenings, and other anchor points for rigging.  

As is now, the choice between iron and bronze is based on a trade-off between costs and corrosion resistance (life).  However, if the corrosion can be controlled, then iron would probably the the best choice.   I'm not sure what grade of iron would have been used, so I can't say there would be a strength advantage for either metal.
 
Bolts were used extensively in the keel and skeg - anywhere where the larger timbers needed to be connected.  Not sure of building practice in early 1700's but, later, bolts were used to hold the clamps to the frames.  
 
Also, they were not bolts as we know them, with a thread on the end(s) for a nut.  The fastening was a clinch ring (washer) or plate put over the end of the "bolt" and then the end was clenched (flared over), so they are more like rivets than bolts.  In a sense, a treenail is a wooden rivet.
 
Bolts that come out the bottom of the keel are covered with a shoe board.  Other places for bolts that would be exposed on the exterior  would be the channel iron fastenings, and other anchor points for rigging.  

As is now, the choice between iron and bronze is based on a trade-off between costs and corrosion resistance (life).  However, if the corrosion can be controlled, then iron would probably the the best choice.   I'm not sure what grade of iron would have been used, so I can't say there would be a strength advantage for either metal.
 
Bolts were used extensively in the keel and skeg - anywhere where the larger timbers needed to be connected.  Not sure of building practice in early 1700's but, later, bolts were used to hold the clamps to the frames.  
 
Also, they were not bolts as we know them, with a thread on the end(s) for a nut.  The fastening was a clinch ring (washer) or plate put over the end of the "bolt" and then the end was clenched (flared over), so they are more like rivets than bolts.  In a sense, a treenail is a wooden rivet.
 
Bolts that come out the bottom of the keel are covered with a shoe board.  Other places for bolts that would be exposed on the exterior  would be the channel iron fastenings, and other anchor points for rigging.  

In wood working, hand-made joints, such as dovetail joints, are always done by making one side of the joint first, then using that part to scribe the other part.  There is no way to get a tight joint by making the two pieces independently.  Since the devil in in the details, they are:
 
1.  Whatever the profile of the joint, scarf, dovetail, miter, or a simple butt-joint, the surfaces of the joint must be exactly square to the surface of the profile. Otherwise, you may be tight on one side and have gaps on the other.  Using a file to finish joint by hand will  always end up with a convex surface and gaps on the edges.  So, have a good small square, with a light behind so you can see gaps.  For small parts there may not be a good surface to place the square, place both the piece and the square on a flat surface.  
 
2.  To help make a square cut, place the piece on a cutting board, then cut straight down, at 90 degrees to the board, with a sharp chisel.  You can use a block of wood to keep the chisel at 90 deg.  Cabinet makes us what is called a "paring chisel" for this which sharpened to 15 degree angle instead of the usual 25 degrees used on general purpose chisels.  An X-Acto chisel (#17, #18) is a good choice for model work.  The tool needs to be razor sharp, and do not take off too much in one cut - just take off shavings.  Use other tools to get the rough shape.
 
3.  With one piece made, the shape is copied to the other piece with a scribing knife, which has been sharpened on only one side of the blade so the cutting point is tight against the part you are tracing.  There is no way a pencil tracing is accurate enough.  You could use a #11 blade, but since it is sharpened on both sides there is a good chance that the scribed line will be 1/2 the blade thickness away from traced part.   A razor blade may work, but you may want to break if off to look more like a #11 so you can scribe in to corners.  Commercial scribing knives can be expensive, but Lee Valley Tools sells a reasonably priced one.  There's no reason you couldn't make your own by re-grinding a dull #11.  I've tried using scratch awls and needles for scribing, but I found they tend to follow the wood grain.   I would only use a point scriber for tracing concave curves that a flat knife couldn't follow: however, I can't think of any ship joints like this (unless you change you hobby to making jig-saw puzzles.)
 
4.   After you have roughed out the shape of the second piece to close to the line, the benefit of the scribed line comes into play.  Just hook the edge of the chisel in to the scribed line and cut straight down.  Even if your eyes can't see the line, you can feel when the chisel hooks.  In some cases, you could scribe both sides of the joint and cut from both sides.  One trick when cutting from both sides is to make the surfaces slightly hollow (concave) to ensure the edgers are tight.  Some people consider this a bit of a cheat, but it does ensure the joint line has no gap, which easily happens if the joint surfaces are evenly slightly convex.
 
After a test-fit of the joint, some paring cuts or scraping may be needed, but you will be very close to a perfect joint.  If a joint surface is convex, you can scrape it in the middle with the edge of a knife with a round profile (#10 knife).
 
If my description of the process is not clear enough, there are lots of places on the web that have good pictures.  Start at www.finewoodworking.com.   
 
Bruce

In wood working, hand-made joints, such as dovetail joints, are always done by making one side of the joint first, then using that part to scribe the other part.  There is no way to get a tight joint by making the two pieces independently.  Since the devil in in the details, they are:
 
1.  Whatever the profile of the joint, scarf, dovetail, miter, or a simple butt-joint, the surfaces of the joint must be exactly square to the surface of the profile. Otherwise, you may be tight on one side and have gaps on the other.  Using a file to finish joint by hand will  always end up with a convex surface and gaps on the edges.  So, have a good small square, with a light behind so you can see gaps.  For small parts there may not be a good surface to place the square, place both the piece and the square on a flat surface.  
 
2.  To help make a square cut, place the piece on a cutting board, then cut straight down, at 90 degrees to the board, with a sharp chisel.  You can use a block of wood to keep the chisel at 90 deg.  Cabinet makes us what is called a "paring chisel" for this which sharpened to 15 degree angle instead of the usual 25 degrees used on general purpose chisels.  An X-Acto chisel (#17, #18) is a good choice for model work.  The tool needs to be razor sharp, and do not take off too much in one cut - just take off shavings.  Use other tools to get the rough shape.
 
3.  With one piece made, the shape is copied to the other piece with a scribing knife, which has been sharpened on only one side of the blade so the cutting point is tight against the part you are tracing.  There is no way a pencil tracing is accurate enough.  You could use a #11 blade, but since it is sharpened on both sides there is a good chance that the scribed line will be 1/2 the blade thickness away from traced part.   A razor blade may work, but you may want to break if off to look more like a #11 so you can scribe in to corners.  Commercial scribing knives can be expensive, but Lee Valley Tools sells a reasonably priced one.  There's no reason you couldn't make your own by re-grinding a dull #11.  I've tried using scratch awls and needles for scribing, but I found they tend to follow the wood grain.   I would only use a point scriber for tracing concave curves that a flat knife couldn't follow: however, I can't think of any ship joints like this (unless you change you hobby to making jig-saw puzzles.)
 
4.   After you have roughed out the shape of the second piece to close to the line, the benefit of the scribed line comes into play.  Just hook the edge of the chisel in to the scribed line and cut straight down.  Even if your eyes can't see the line, you can feel when the chisel hooks.  In some cases, you could scribe both sides of the joint and cut from both sides.  One trick when cutting from both sides is to make the surfaces slightly hollow (concave) to ensure the edgers are tight.  Some people consider this a bit of a cheat, but it does ensure the joint line has no gap, which easily happens if the joint surfaces are evenly slightly convex.
 
After a test-fit of the joint, some paring cuts or scraping may be needed, but you will be very close to a perfect joint.  If a joint surface is convex, you can scrape it in the middle with the edge of a knife with a round profile (#10 knife).
 
If my description of the process is not clear enough, there are lots of places on the web that have good pictures.  Start at www.finewoodworking.com.   
 
Bruce

I posted some instructions for making close fitting joints at http://modelshipworld.com/index.php/topic/11685-how-to-get-close-fitting-connections/#entry357279.
 
I agree with Capt. Chaos, you need to use a scoring knife to layout joints accurately, especially for scaled work.  Even for cabinet scale woodworking (dovetails, tenons, etc), I use a scoring knife to layout the joints to ensure a tight fit.    To use an Aubreyism, pencils ain't in it.

I posted some instructions for making close fitting joints at http://modelshipworld.com/index.php/topic/11685-how-to-get-close-fitting-connections/#entry357279.
 
I agree with Capt. Chaos, you need to use a scoring knife to layout joints accurately, especially for scaled work.  Even for cabinet scale woodworking (dovetails, tenons, etc), I use a scoring knife to layout the joints to ensure a tight fit.    To use an Aubreyism, pencils ain't in it.

I posted some instructions for making close fitting joints at http://modelshipworld.com/index.php/topic/11685-how-to-get-close-fitting-connections/#entry357279.
 
I agree with Capt. Chaos, you need to use a scoring knife to layout joints accurately, especially for scaled work.  Even for cabinet scale woodworking (dovetails, tenons, etc), I use a scoring knife to layout the joints to ensure a tight fit.    To use an Aubreyism, pencils ain't in it.

In wood working, hand-made joints, such as dovetail joints, are always done by making one side of the joint first, then using that part to scribe the other part.  There is no way to get a tight joint by making the two pieces independently.  Since the devil in in the details, they are:
 
1.  Whatever the profile of the joint, scarf, dovetail, miter, or a simple butt-joint, the surfaces of the joint must be exactly square to the surface of the profile. Otherwise, you may be tight on one side and have gaps on the other.  Using a file to finish joint by hand will  always end up with a convex surface and gaps on the edges.  So, have a good small square, with a light behind so you can see gaps.  For small parts there may not be a good surface to place the square, place both the piece and the square on a flat surface.  
 
2.  To help make a square cut, place the piece on a cutting board, then cut straight down, at 90 degrees to the board, with a sharp chisel.  You can use a block of wood to keep the chisel at 90 deg.  Cabinet makes us what is called a "paring chisel" for this which sharpened to 15 degree angle instead of the usual 25 degrees used on general purpose chisels.  An X-Acto chisel (#17, #18) is a good choice for model work.  The tool needs to be razor sharp, and do not take off too much in one cut - just take off shavings.  Use other tools to get the rough shape.
 
3.  With one piece made, the shape is copied to the other piece with a scribing knife, which has been sharpened on only one side of the blade so the cutting point is tight against the part you are tracing.  There is no way a pencil tracing is accurate enough.  You could use a #11 blade, but since it is sharpened on both sides there is a good chance that the scribed line will be 1/2 the blade thickness away from traced part.   A razor blade may work, but you may want to break if off to look more like a #11 so you can scribe in to corners.  Commercial scribing knives can be expensive, but Lee Valley Tools sells a reasonably priced one.  There's no reason you couldn't make your own by re-grinding a dull #11.  I've tried using scratch awls and needles for scribing, but I found they tend to follow the wood grain.   I would only use a point scriber for tracing concave curves that a flat knife couldn't follow: however, I can't think of any ship joints like this (unless you change you hobby to making jig-saw puzzles.)
 
4.   After you have roughed out the shape of the second piece to close to the line, the benefit of the scribed line comes into play.  Just hook the edge of the chisel in to the scribed line and cut straight down.  Even if your eyes can't see the line, you can feel when the chisel hooks.  In some cases, you could scribe both sides of the joint and cut from both sides.  One trick when cutting from both sides is to make the surfaces slightly hollow (concave) to ensure the edgers are tight.  Some people consider this a bit of a cheat, but it does ensure the joint line has no gap, which easily happens if the joint surfaces are evenly slightly convex.
 
After a test-fit of the joint, some paring cuts or scraping may be needed, but you will be very close to a perfect joint.  If a joint surface is convex, you can scrape it in the middle with the edge of a knife with a round profile (#10 knife).
 
If my description of the process is not clear enough, there are lots of places on the web that have good pictures.  Start at www.finewoodworking.com.   
 
Bruce

I posted some instructions for making close fitting joints at http://modelshipworld.com/index.php/topic/11685-how-to-get-close-fitting-connections/#entry357279.
 
I agree with Capt. Chaos, you need to use a scoring knife to layout joints accurately, especially for scaled work.  Even for cabinet scale woodworking (dovetails, tenons, etc), I use a scoring knife to layout the joints to ensure a tight fit.    To use an Aubreyism, pencils ain't in it.

For a part that big (mass) you'll need a very large soldering iron to get the metal hot enough to allow a good bond for solder.     Large irons don't lend we to small parts, so this is therefore probably a job for a torch.   However, with either solder or brazing rod, you'll have to set up a jig to hold the flanges to the tube while you're heating it because this job will have to be done in one go, or, as you say, if you try one joint at a time, the others will slip off.  
 
One alternative is a micro-torch, which has a small, hot flame, but you have to be quick before the heat gets to the other flanges.  And, they're not cheap and work best on a hot fuel like oxy-acetylene.  Even with a micro-torch, I'd set up a jig.
 
Nice sketch, and I which I were working on such a large scale.

For a part that big (mass) you'll need a very large soldering iron to get the metal hot enough to allow a good bond for solder.     Large irons don't lend we to small parts, so this is therefore probably a job for a torch.   However, with either solder or brazing rod, you'll have to set up a jig to hold the flanges to the tube while you're heating it because this job will have to be done in one go, or, as you say, if you try one joint at a time, the others will slip off.  
 
One alternative is a micro-torch, which has a small, hot flame, but you have to be quick before the heat gets to the other flanges.  And, they're not cheap and work best on a hot fuel like oxy-acetylene.  Even with a micro-torch, I'd set up a jig.
 
Nice sketch, and I which I were working on such a large scale.

For a part that big (mass) you'll need a very large soldering iron to get the metal hot enough to allow a good bond for solder.     Large irons don't lend we to small parts, so this is therefore probably a job for a torch.   However, with either solder or brazing rod, you'll have to set up a jig to hold the flanges to the tube while you're heating it because this job will have to be done in one go, or, as you say, if you try one joint at a time, the others will slip off.  
 
One alternative is a micro-torch, which has a small, hot flame, but you have to be quick before the heat gets to the other flanges.  And, they're not cheap and work best on a hot fuel like oxy-acetylene.  Even with a micro-torch, I'd set up a jig.
 
Nice sketch, and I which I were working on such a large scale.

For a part that big (mass) you'll need a very large soldering iron to get the metal hot enough to allow a good bond for solder.     Large irons don't lend we to small parts, so this is therefore probably a job for a torch.   However, with either solder or brazing rod, you'll have to set up a jig to hold the flanges to the tube while you're heating it because this job will have to be done in one go, or, as you say, if you try one joint at a time, the others will slip off.  
 
One alternative is a micro-torch, which has a small, hot flame, but you have to be quick before the heat gets to the other flanges.  And, they're not cheap and work best on a hot fuel like oxy-acetylene.  Even with a micro-torch, I'd set up a jig.
 
Nice sketch, and I which I were working on such a large scale.

I agree with Druxey - - Wales are uniform width planks-they don't taper towards the ends, which is what is on the drawing. However, since the distance from the deck to the bottom of the gun ports should be somewhat constant, the edge of the deck should be parallel to line along the bottom of the ports. On the other hand, the lower edge of the wales should be below the deck line so they can be tied to the deck knees.