CDR_Ret

Nice looking masks, Bob. My wife says she has enough elastic for the apocalypse, which she has been collecting for decades.

Well, with the coronavirus panic-buying depleting all the dust masks at our local home improvement stores, I was at a standstill with some of my workshop projects. However, my wife has been following some fabric arts forums where they are discussing making masks for hospitals to supplement those needed for non-critical care situations, so they can use the N-95-esq masks for critical care/COVID-19 cases. So, she found the pattern, we selected a fabric, got the elastic bands, and I made a nose-bridge support out of a piece of copper wire. The result looks like it will work fine!

This document from copyright.gov may provide guidance. I'm not a lawyer, but creating a detailed lines plan for sale from general lines plans in a published reference may not be considered a derivative work exempt from getting permission. Terry

Thanks, Wayne. Excellent summary of the problem. I haven't done much of this kind of research, so everything you said makes sense. Appreciate the input. Terry

Thanks, Bob. I'm in complete agreement with your assessment of the DTM draftsmen. During the field assessment, the engineers may have been able to obtain some verbal description of the hull's construction to add to what could have been visually verified from inside the hull. But trying to put all that together into dimensional drawings may have included some guesses. As I noted in several posts in my Galilee thread, Berger's plans, or at least the subject, seem to predate the HAMMS project, which occurred in 1936–37. That idea may be in error. Berger's plans show her as a brigantine, but by the early-30s she was a an aging three-masted fishing schooner and had many alterations to support the fishing industry. According to her history documented in R.A. Stradford's Brigantine, Schooner, Houseboat: Journeys of the Galilee, the vessel was purchased by an ex-pat British captain named John Quinn, who with his wife used it as a houseboat, beached in the Sausalito mudflats from 1934 until the late 1950s. The Berger plans include a note thanking J. Quinn as the last owner of the Galilee (as well as Ray Bowes) for assistance in the production of the plans. However, the plans show the ship as a brigantine, so he must have used the ship-as-houseboat mainly to confirm her overall dimensions and arrangement. His plans, which are now part of the HAMMS archive (and are copies of copies of copies ...) look very similar to C.G. Davis's Rudder magazine drawings from 1899, including the erroneous transom shape. With the ship moored and/or in the mud, I'm not sure how Berger could have validated much of the keel configuration. So, I think I will do the best I can to map out the rabbet assuming a more-or-less rectangular garboard strake that tapers from 6" to 3" thick in the vicinity of the bow and stern. Terry

Hi all. After a hiatus of nearly six months, I have been able to get back to working out some of the details of Matthew Turner’s brigantine Galilee. While attempting to clean up the rabbet along the keel, stem, and sternpost in DELFTship, I ran into some issues that call into question the original G.C. Berger plans I obtained from the Smithsonian. This isn't the first time this has happened. Check out my research and design log on this ship. So the following is a series of technical questions about rabbet lines and garboard strakes. Let’s start with a description of the rabbet at the dead flat. The following diagram was created by the scientist-engineers at the Department of Terrestrial Magnetism, Carnegie Institution, Washington, D.C. (DTM) sometime around 1904–5, when they were planning the conversion of Galilee from a merchant ship in the Tahiti trade to a magnetic research vessel. They needed to know where all the ferrous hardware was located in the hull to figure out the magnetic constants for the ship. For that reason, they took fairly good measurements of the hull, though their drafting skills could have used some work … Note that the inner rabbet line lies at the point where the frame intersects the face of the keel. This is a key factor in the following discussion. The back rabbet and rabbet as shown in the first diagram do not conform to the shape shown in many references. In most diagrams, the back rabbet line lies on the face of the frame, which intersects the rabbet at a right angle. Instead, in this diagram, the top surface of the garboard is beveled at the inner rabbet line, giving the inner edge of the garboard a point. The top surface of the garboard strake ends at the inner rabbet line, the “point” is at the back rabbet line, and the bottom corner is at the outer rabbet line. I’m not sure how the non-naval DTM engineers knew to draw the rabbet profile like this unless they obtained that detail from Matthew Turner himself. According to the DTM drawing, the garboard is about 6” thick. However, the vertical dimension of the rabbet as seen in the side profile view from the outer to inner rabbet lines should vary as the angle of the frame increases or decreases along the keel. The flatter the frame, the closer the distance between the inner and outer rabbet lines should approach the thickness of the garboard. The steeper the frame (e.g., toward the bow or stern), the wider the outer to inner rabbet line distance should be. This diagram illustrates the geometry: © Department of Terrestrial Magnetism, Carnegie Institution, Washington DC Curiously, the Berger plans don’t indicate a significant divergence of the outer (solid) and inner (dashed) rabbet lines except at the extreme ends of the keel: © Smithsonian Institution Now, let’s consider the thickness of the garboard in the first diagram. As mentioned earlier, the garboard strake is 6 inches thick. The lower hull planking is 3 inches thick. This makes the garboard twice the thickness of the adjacent planking. According to Rules for the Construction and Classification of Wood Ships (ABS, 1921), garboards must have the full scantlings for at least three fifths of the length amidship. Granted these rules were promulgated thirty years after Galilee was built, they seem to agree more-or-less with other contemporary references I have found. So, if the garboard strake stays the same thickness along most of its length, the inner rabbet line is going to curve upward as the frame angle increases. Only if the garboard thins gradually as it approaches the stem and stern areas, will the inner rabbet line stay more or less parallel to the outer rabbet line. Another factor is that several views of the Berger drawings show dashed lines inset at about 3 inches from the sides of the keel as shown below. These seem to indicate the depth of the back rabbet line. If the garboard strake’s thickness remains the same for most of the length of the ship as noted above, then the back rabbet line’s depth from the sides of the keel would also vary as the frame angle changes. (Another possibility is that the dashed lines show only the back rabbet line inset at the stem and stern, though they are visible in the plan view of the keel as well.) © Smithsonian Institution So, either Berger erred in drawing the inner rabbet line as a straight line for as long as he did along the keel, or the garboard changed in thickness as its angle to the keel changed to maintain that straight line. I'm in a quandary as to what the right answer is. Does anyone have thoughts or critiques of this analysis? A good resource for this question is this video of cutting a rabbet along the keel of a modern 150-foot wooden ship using traditional techniques. Also, check out the other links in the left margin of the video page! Thanks for the assist. Terry

This page may be more to the point. Looks like someone thought having a ship module (workbench?) would be a good idea, then abandoned the project.

I haven't checked this out yet, but there is an effort to incorporate a naval architecture feature into the FreeCAD software. The website owners are pretty up front with the fact that their work is buggy. Terry

Hi Chief. Don't suppose you have any photos of this situation? Changing the load line of a ship isn't a trivial thing. Either the ship had reserve cargo capacity built in or someone is playing with the stability tables. It would seem that seaworthiness certifications and insurance companies would have something to say about such an act. From my limited familiarity with marine physics, I would think that the main adverse effects to raising the load line would be reducing reserve buoyancy and some effect on the righting moment (the actual effect on stability might either reduce it or increase it, depending on a number of factors). As for the weld issues, I'm having a hard time visualizing the problem. Are there gaps (broken welds) at regular intervals along the keel, that would indicate some relationship to deep frame locations? Does this condition basically flood the keel structure with seawater? Overall, welding plates between the buckles seems to be a band-aid approach to the problem. There is obviously some serious structural issues at work. Terry

Just bought a used copy of Underhill's book today on Amazon for $32. I skimmed the openlibrary.org copy and it has amazingly detailed diagrams of the rigging and masting details not available in the photos I obtained from DTM/CIW of the Galilee. Since this book emphasizes 19th and 20th century sailing merchants, it will likely be a good source for rigging the model. Sadly, the one diagram that I needed to reference wasn't scanned in the digital copy from the Boston Library. Terry

Reserved a digital copy at openlibrary.org. That looks like a good place to obtain access to out-of-print books. Operating under a grant from California, so the site seems legit.

Thanks, Henry. I'll look into that reference. Terry

Hi all. Anyone know of an authoritative reference showing late 19th-century merchant pinrail diagrams? It is my understanding that belaying pin arrangements were fairly standardized by ship-type throughout most of the world, or at least within a nation's fleet, so that crew could be hired in nearly any port and would be able to serve with little additional training. I am looking specifically for the pinrail layout typical of a late-19th century, West-Coast, brigantine merchant of medium size. Any assistance will be appreciated. Terry Egolf Colorado Springs, CO, USA

I tried to get Shapeways to print a Cold-War submarine 7-bladed screw from an STL file I created in Blender. However, at the scale I intended, the online evaluation tool said the blades were too thin. Anything thicker would have looked wrong, so I gave it up. Terry

This past weekend, I received a packet from the Maine Maritime Museum*. It contained several scanned pages from a 1902 Hyde Windlass Company (HWC) catalog that related to their manual capstan and windlass machinery. Since the patents listed in the figure were several decades prior to the publication date, the design spans the time the Galilee was built, and is likely representative of the type she carried. This is the scanned engraving of the machinery from the catalog. Compare this design with the image in the previous post. The wildcat brake actuators consist of forked lever rods that engage the band brakes from the forecastle deck, rather than screw actuators mounted on the main deck as I drew them. It turns out that Galilee did indeed have this type of brake control, as indicated in the following photograph, which was taken in 1905 during her outfitting as a magnetic research vessel. I also discovered from this photo that the capstan was mounted on a base about 8–10 inches high. This is referred to in HWC catalog, so I will need to include that detail in the final plans. So I am now much more confident that I have identified at least a plausible anchor handling gear for this vessel, and can now move on to other deck furniture. Terry *Maine Maritime Museum contact information: Anne Witty, Chief Curator Maine Maritime Museum 243 Washington Street Bath, Maine (ME) 04530 Tel: 207-443-1316, ext. 328 Email: witty@maritimeme.org

FYI, Shapeways, the 3D printing company, shared an email today that lists five popular (and free) 3D drafting programs that you can use to create models suitable for 3D printing. They are: TinkerCAD Sketchup (good for creating deck furniture, rigging components, etc. Frames and planking are more difficult) Sculptris (a free version of Zbrush) 3D Slash (not recommended for ship modeling; too blocky) Ultimaker's Cura (checks models before 3D printing) And there are always Blender and DELFTship. These are also free, but their learning curves are pretty steep. Terry

Hi Matle, The items you labeled "1" and "2" in your original post are probably chesstrees. These are vertical timbers of wood fastened to the inside surfaces of bulwarks (or frames) for the purpose of redirecting the tacks and sheets of the lower courses for belaying. Their designs appear to be quite variable. Some have sheaves incorporated into their upper ends. Others seem to be more like vertically-oriented, one-ended cleats, with the "thumb" of lower end used to change the direction of the line. They are described in The Art of Rigging by George Biddlecombe and in The Ship Model's Assistant by Charles G. Davis, as well as on-line. Davis's book includes a diagram of a typical chesstree found in a 17th-century sailing vessel. Matthew Turner's Galilee (also a late 19th century, West Coast merchant) had four chesstress on both bulwarks. The Smithsonian plans identify them and show a cross section, regrettably not very clearly. The photo below shows a pair of chesstrees on Galilee's port bulwark. Hope this helps answer your question. Terry

Aaannd .... here is the final image in this topic showing the capstan and windlass in the context of the forecastle space. Based on my reconstruction of the Galilee plans, there will be about 39 inches of room between decks, so I had to downscale the windlass machinery to fit. I also flipped the clutch actuator so that I could maximize the size of the rest of the equipment. The image seems tilted because the equipment rests on the extreme forward sweep of the deck sheer. There is a 4-degree slope at this point on the deck. Anchor chain comes up from the chain locker through pipes in the deck immediately below the wildcats and lead forward through chain stoppers (not shown) to the hawse pipes in the bow.

Here is my reconstruction of the Galilee's capstan, based on the DTM photo of the upper 2/3 of the actual capstan, with reference to a 1915 Hyde Windlass Company catalog and a random photo of another similar capstan I found on a photo sharing site. While Sketchup can support creating such models, there is a lot of fiddly mesh editing that is required, involving many hundreds (thousands?) of faces and edges. To minimize this cleanup, I created a clean version of a one-sixth sector of the capstan, then did a rotational copy five times to duplicate the sector, resulting in a complete model. The next step will be to marry the capstan to the windlass, then place them in context with the decks and structural members as they would have been on the ship itself. This will help me work out the details for framing in the vicinity of this machinery. Terry

I finally finished drafting up my reconstruction of a Hyde windlass that could have been installed in Galilee. It uses components from Hyde and windlasses found in ships contemporary with Galilee that served on the West Coast of the USA. Since the prototypes were found on ships larger than Galilee, I will likely have to scale this down to a size that will fit in her forecastle. I am hoping to develop a model of her capstan, then show the combined capstan/windlass machinery as it might have been installed in the ship, with appropriate timbers and decking. Oh yeah, and that band brake operator contains a true 2-inch trapezoidal ACME thread developed from ANSI references. Quite fun to make! So far, most of the major components have been separately built in Sketchup Make 2017, and are manifold, which means they could be 3D printed if desired. Terry

You are correct, Druxey . Never heard of the play Paul Pry I wonder if that is where the phrase "prying into someone else's business" came from?

Update on my reconstruction of Galilee's capstan. I am three weeks out from a repair of a 25-year-old hernia repair, so I've been recuperating rather than sitting at a computer... (for you older guys, my surgeon informed me that redos of inguinal hernia repairs in men are quite common. The joys of aging!) These images show progress and corrections from the previous post. I have most of the key components modeled in Sketchup Make 2017. The only things left for the windlass are the controls (ratchet pawl, wildcat band brakes, and capstan clutch lever). I realized after the fact that the double pawl wheel shown previously was applicable to the lever-style capstan I was using as a reference. It has been replaced with just the windlass pawl ratchet wheel. Please feel free to ask any questions. Terry

Note that Sketchup's default image import resolution is pretty low. To maximize the line sharpness of imported images, which is essential for tracing plan lines, do the following (applicable to Windows systems): 1. Navigate to Sketchup Preferences. (Window|Preferences) 2. Select OpenGL 3. Check Use maximum texture size. 4. Click OK. I included a screenshot of a windlass plan in the default and max resolutions so you can see the difference. These are rendered using a high-end graphics processor, so you can see that it is Sketchup that is affecting the appearance. Large images at maximum texture sizes will slow down the editing process without a good graphics card. See the Warning screenshot.

Here is the current status on reconstructing Galilee's windlass using the resources I have available. The diagram is constructed in Sketchup Make 2017 using the basic tool set. This part is probably the hardest to create, with all the curved surfaces in the wildcats and the crown gear. All that remains is creating the operating gear and the mounts to the ship's frames. I suspect that the windlass was mounted to the deck structural timbers, similar to the Lucerne and Thayer, rather than having a separate metal foundation like the Balclutha. I'm hoping that this will be 3D-printable, but the level of detail at the anticipated scale of the model will probably be lost or not printable. Terry

Thanks Roger—good call. Sadly, the Thayer's windlass is actuated by a rocker-type mechanism. It has a standard capstan forward on the forecastle, but there isn't any indication it is linked to the windlass. However, it is a Hyde windlass, so I should probably be able to pattern the wildcats and related hardware based on these drawings. It seems this type of windlass was bolted to a pair of bitts. However, Galilee had only one large bollard samson post located centerline and forward of the capstan. Evidently, the windlass supports were incorporated into the forecastle deck framing.