Jump to content

AnobiumPunctatum

Members
  • Posts

    1,233
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by AnobiumPunctatum

  1. The design of the parallel frames is finished. I tried to follow the original drawing as close as possible without one change.

     

    If you have a closer look at the gun port position of the original drawing you will see a pencil note, which indicates that there was added a 5th deadeye, which is not common for cutters. I did not know any other cutter drawing with more than 4 deadeyes.

     

    post-380-0-30411900-1420292981_thumb.jpg

     

    So I decided that I like to show this update of the original design - the Marshall drawing also shows 5 deadeyes. For this change I modified the gun port position and the top timber heads in this area.

     

    post-380-0-94337900-1420293003_thumb.jpg

     

    My biggest problem during the design was, that the gun ports and top timber heads did not match the position of the double frames. I could not solve this problem with using another design, so I decided to shift the futtocks as I've seen in some contemporary drawings.

     

    If you compare this design with the known design of the Aots-book (I don't like adding a scan to avoid problems with Copyright issues) you will see that this design is much more rugged. The gunports ar not put on top of the framing as Goodwin did.

     

    I don't know but I hope that it's a little bit closer to the original framing. If you think that I can optimize the position of some frames, please let me know. Next I start with the fore cant frames.

     

  2. Happy New Year

     

     

    It's time for another short update. The design takes more time than expected. I notice that I don't have any experience in doing this. I reconstructed the square frames from station line H to station line 4 for both options.

     

    I don't know which one could be right.

     

    Both options have their advantages and disadvantages

     

    Option 1:

    + The real double frames are more common than the design in option 2

    +  The relationship of room and space is more common comparing with other (bigger) ships of that time

    -  The width of the floor timber given through the two station lines for station 0 does not fit.

     

    Option 2:

    +  The width of the floor timber fits two the station lines at station 0.

    +  The frame design allows a better ventilation between the frames

    +  The frame design is very light which is positive for a fast sailing ship

    -   The relationship of room and space is very uncommon

     

    post-380-0-29301500-1420140555_thumb.jpg

     

    In my opinion the given historical dimensions for framing a cutter are not very helpful for a cutter of the Alert-Class

    The shipbuilders repsoitory is from 1788 and Steel from 1805. There was a very important change in the armament of ships between the design of Alert and the two documents: the introduction of the carronades.

    In the older repositories the cutters would not mentioned.

     

    What do you think, which is the solution you would prefer?

  3. Back to the framing dimensions.

     

    I got the values of the SR, but there are mostly the same as in Steel. But both dimensions are for a 273 tons, 16 gun cutter which is much bigger than Alert.

    I also got the values for Weazle, a 201 tons brigantine, which is nearly the same size as Alert and has the same room and space. (Thanks very much for the help) Unfortunately the framing dimensions do not really fit with the proportions of SR and Steel.

     

    So I decided to go with two different options:

     

    1. On the basis of Steel I calculated the relationship between 2'2'' and 2'0'' room and space and make my frames 92.3% of the dimensions of Steel.

    2. I use the given distance between the station lines for frame 0 (8'') and calculate all other timbers in relationship to Steel.

    post-380-0-31952000-1419354691.jpg

     

    The first design I will do with option 2 and the frame layout of Cheerful and Racer. These drawings are around 30 years younger but the oldest which I found with framing information.

    If the design don't work, I will give the first option a try with real double frames.

     

    What do you think, could both options a possible solution for the framing of the small vessel? Which option would you prefer?

  4. Thank you for the "likes" and comments even when I've done a bone-headed stunt like that.  It keeps me honest and on my toes.

     

     

    Christian,

    The modified fence idea came from Grant and Danny and fences are just a bit of creative usage.   So.. no... I stole all the ideas.

     

    No problem, I think I will make another ripp-off ;)

×
×
  • Create New...