allanyed
-
Posts
8,149 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Events
Everything posted by allanyed
-
Tailing deck beams
allanyed replied to allanyed's topic in Building, Framing, Planking and plating a ships hull and deck
Thanks Jaager, I really have no issues with dovetailing the ends of the beams if that is what is called for. I am mainly interested in getting into the details and matching actual construction whenever possible. There are limits of course, and I probably have more than many others here, but if it can be done accurately I usually like to at least give it a try if only for my own satisfaction. The more I look at the situation here though, the more I wonder if the answer is a dove tail in the French manner of construction or a variation as Mark mentioned in his reply. Frolich shows it very clearly in The Art of Ship Modeling as well as in a few build logs here that I recall seeing, but they are all French vessels. I have not yet seen anything remotely close to a dove tail type of construction in any contemporary or "modern" books on English shipbuilding Seems the more years I study, the more questions arise, and many, so far, without answers. Still having fun though :>) Allan -
Tailing deck beams
allanyed replied to allanyed's topic in Building, Framing, Planking and plating a ships hull and deck
So did I Paul. But, with the contract, I learned this as something new as well. Going through this contract, I have found a lot of major differences with ships from the 1719 Establishment and beyond. A lot had to do with timber supplies. Some examples, the keel for the 50 gun ship is stated to be made of no more than 3 pieces. From the 1719 Establishment it is given as 5 pieces. There are fewer futtocks for the frames, and the list goes on. I made a spread sheet of scantlings comparing dimensions and descriptions from the contract to those of the 1719 Establishment and there are many more differences than I would have guessed. Allan -
Tailing deck beams
allanyed replied to allanyed's topic in Building, Framing, Planking and plating a ships hull and deck
Thanks Druxey and Mark. Seems to be a never ending (thankfully) learning curve to be contended with these model building endeavors of ours. -
In reading a contract for two of the 130 foot group 50 gun ships (British) of the late 17th century there is the following description: Every Beame of the Deck shall be Tayled into the Clamps . I would really appreciate seeing a sketch of exactly what tailing means in his instance. I can envision the clamp being scored, or the beam end being scored or perhaps a dovetail of some sort, but not sure if one or none of these is what is meant by tailing. Thanks in advance!! Allan
-
Druxey I have tried using hacksaw blades as well and they work just as well as the razor blades regarding stiffness, in my experience. One advantage I have found with the razors is they are thinner and do not have to be heat treated and softened before grinding the shape. Both give excellent results as long as easy strokes on the wood are used at the start rather than trying to dig in and give the shape with one or two passes. Mark, I usually use my lathe, chucking the grinding wheel and resting the blade on the tool holder then manually moving it to the shape I want. I like to start by marking the shape as close as possible with a fine tip marker or better, coating it with Dykem Steel Blue layout fluid then scribing the shape into the blue so there is an accurate drawing to follow for the grinding. I have also clamped the Dremel in a vise and then use a block of wood or some such on which I rest the blade while I move it in and out. GO SLOW, as the thin disks will break very quickly if forced to work faster than they are meant to. AND WEAR SAFETY GLASSES OR GOGGLES!! If the grinding wheel breaks, bits fly all over the place. Allan
-
One other way to make moldings/rails scrapers. I like to use stiff backed razors, shaped as mentioned above with thin grinding wheels set up on my lathe or can be done with a Dremel or similar rotary tool. I make them as needed and save them for future use. I never found a problem with any shape or size. If small, several shapes can be cut into one blade. Allan
-
Thanks for sharing Joe and Druxey. A key point, IMHO, is that Druxey mentions use of white glue. It works perfectly and does not leave a hard and brittle finish which CA, as Joe shows, will do. Both methods look really good to me, just not a fan of super glue, especially on rigging. Thanks again to both of you. Allan
-
Hi Caroline Assuming you are building the 16 gun sloop of Pegasus 1776, according to what I can find in W.E. May's Boats of War, she would have carried a 19 foot longboat and 26 foot pinnace, although in 1777, 16's of more than 300 tons were given an extra 18 foot four oared cutter. Does this sound right for your model? Please keep in mind that you cannot necessarily just change the scale of a drawing to the size that you need without making alterations. For example, if the drawing you use is a 28 foot 16 oared longboat, when scaling to a 19 foot long boat, the number or size of the benches. number of oars, and other parts are not necessarily to be scaled. Even the shape is likely to be wrong when just scaling as the proportions of breadth to length vary for shorter or longer boats. For example, the proportion of length to breadth of a 32 long boat of about 1800 is 3.36 while for a 19 foot long boat the proportion is only 2.68. They are similar but slightly larger proportions given in Mays for 1745 as well, 3.45 for a 32' long boat for example. Cheers Allan
-
Pantograph to enlarge plans
allanyed replied to Sambini's topic in Modeling tools and Workshop Equipment
I add a scale to drawings that I print at home or at FedEx, Staples or architectural service places. If my own CAD drawings I take the drawings on a flash drive. I check the first print with a they make with caliper to be sure the scale on the printed copy is EXACT (6") . If it not, they can adjust accordingly. Once adjusted, the following prints on that machine at that time will be exactly right. The same can be done if you give them a small drawing that you want enlarged. If the small drawing has a scale of say 5", and the enlargement is 4X, the scale should be 20" I have seen the first copy be off as much as an 1/8" or more so it is good to check. They never charged me for their mistakes and happy to make the adjustment. $30?? For drawings from a flash drive, Staples charges $1.80 for Arch C (18X24"), $3.60 for Arch D (24X36") and $7.30 for Arch E (36X48) in black and white. Color is $3, $6, and $12 for the same three sizes. Not sure on enlarging copies from an existing paper drawing, but I think they are similar in price. Allan -
Curved deck
allanyed replied to Slok9000's topic in Building, Framing, Planking and plating a ships hull and deck
Hi Slok You do need to hold it down so it curves. Normally it will curve fore and aft as well as to match the rounding of the frames (bulkheads in this case) athwartships. If the initial decking is a piece of thin plywood and will get individual planks on top of this sheeting, pins are fine. When doing individual planks, you can just hold them in place for a minute or less with your finger using carpenters' glue and they will stay down in place. Welcome to this motley crew of ours. Allan- 1 reply
-
- 2
-
-
Thanks Druxey. Actually I am looking at rigged models. Several examples follow. The specific time period I am interested in is mid/late 17th to early 18th century. The following are a fourth rate of 1705, Grafton 1679, Royal William 1719, and a 3rd rate 1650. All models are at Preble Hall. Thanks again.
-
Thanks Mark and for the added information Druxey. My concern is that there are no English contemporary models that I can find for the 17th century or very early 18th century using belaying pins and as accurate as they usually are, I am surprised this is the case if belaying pins usage was the norm. Thanks again, this is definitely enlightening information. Allan
-
Great find Mark. Based on Mainwaring's dictionary, pins are stated to have been in existence as you point out, but was this common practice? Based on contemporary models of English ships of the early 18th century or earlier I do not recall ever seeing them present. The models and photos of models that I have seen invariably show such running rigging belayed to timber heads and cleats. From the standpoint of rigging a model, I would prefer belaying pins but I am not so sure this would have been the norm in the 17th or first half of the 18th century. Allan
-
gun ports
allanyed replied to Anthony Hearne's topic in Building, Framing, Planking and plating a ships hull and deck
Hi Pat I know very little of this vessel but I believe she was equipped with sweeps so would the main purpose of the small ports be for the use of the sweeps rather than the comfort of the crew? Allan -
Boxing joint or scarph
allanyed replied to allanyed's topic in Building, Framing, Planking and plating a ships hull and deck
Thanks Druxey. By the same token, why would the model makers use a stylized type of framing rather than full framing? Based on the information I have been able to dig up I really think either a vertical scarph or boxing joint could be correct but will err on the side of caution and go with a boxing joint as you are betting :>) Allan -
Boxing joint or scarph
allanyed replied to allanyed's topic in Building, Framing, Planking and plating a ships hull and deck
Thank you very much. I looked at the drawings in Franklin and he does show what surely looks to be a boxing joint from the model of Bredah., even though he calls it a short plain scarph I was surprised to see the 5 additional types of scarph joints found on contemporary models and should have seen these before. Big oops on my part :<( But, would any or all of these be typical of the joints used on the actual ships as well, not just ship models? This chapter shows frame construction etc. for admiralty models which is nothing like actual shipyard practice so I would not be surprised if these joints are not to be necessarily found in the actual ship construction. Barring any other insights, I agree, I will not be amiss in using a boxing joint. Thanks again. Allan -
I have not been able to find any information on when boxing joints at the keel/stem junction came into use, so not sure if a boxing joint, or more likely, a scarph is appropriate for a 50 gun ship, 1695. The following from a contract for two 50 gun ships of 1695 mentions scarphs for the keel, but nothing regarding a boxing joint. Keeles to be of Elme (Not More than in Three Pieces) and to be fourteen Inches Square in the Midships with Scarphs Four Foot Four Inches Long at least and Each Scarph Tabled and laid with Tarr & Hair, to be well bolted with Six Bolts by an Inch Auger. Assuming a scarph is appropriate, would it be a horizontal scarph or a vertical scarph as found along the rest of the keel. Goodwin describes boxing joints and a horizontal scarph, but nothing regarding a vertical scarph at the junction of the keel and stem. I would be grateful if anyone can confirm if one of the below or some alternative is correct. Allan
-
I still prefer to print (or make a copy) onto full sheet size (8.5X11) label paper and then cut out the individual parts on the paper, peel off the backing and apply it to the wood. No stretching or distortion and easy to scrape and sand the paper off the wood once the piece is done. Avery brand is good by pricey. Store brand from Staples in the US is much less expensive. Allan
-
Yes, the rounding on the sketch is exaggerated. It was likely squared off but with a radius, not a sharp edge. The scantlings for a 50 gun ship in Steel's Elements of Naval Architecture shows the knee to be sided 1' 3" at the stem at the upper end and is sided at the fore part at the upper end 5" , quite a bit of taper. Not sure if this would be exact for Leopard as she was 30 years prior to the Steel Scantlings being published but surely a taper would be appropriate. This taper is also described in the Swan series Fully Framed Model Volume I and Euryalus, Volume I. Allan
-
Hi Tom My apologies for jumping in so late in the game, but there is one thing that you may want to look at modifying. I only point this out as I made the same mistake on a model some years ago and was sorry I did not make the change. The knee of the head looks quite wide at the top forward portion. It should taper moving forward down to about 6 inches or so, where the figure head will sit. Where the pieces fit to the stem, they do widen as they rise as you show, but the top pieces should then taper a lot as they go forward. Maybe a difficult fix at this stage, but something to consider. As I had not made this change on my old model, the figure head looked bow legged. Again, my apologies for bringing this up now, I hope you don't mind. Allan
-
Greg, I have successfully used Sparex as well for a number of years but without heat which I will try going down the road. Definitely a better way to go than acetone or other solvents that I had tried prior to using the Sparex. Do you have any idea what temperature the crock pot gives you? I was thinking it might be as easy to heat some water, dissolve the Sparex and put the pieces in the solution. Thanks for the description, very well done and extremely useful. Allan
-
Mark T, thank you for your quick comment. Mark P. Great information in total. Severn and Burlington are part of the 130 foot group of 50s which includes Litchfield so quite valuable information for me. Thanks Bob, also super information, thank you for your response. Allan
-
Mary, If a ship was fitted with sweep ports, there are hinged covers to keep any water from splashing in when not in use. If the sweeps are deployed, it would be most likely be due to the ship being becalmed so no worries for water coming in those conditions. I see this as your first post. Welcome to MSW! Allan
-
Sorry for any confusion. I was only referring to the seams at joints of various pieces such as the keel scarphs and boxing joint, not coating the entire hull below the water line which I believe would have been with "White Stuff" prior to coppering. In the drawing below of for Litchfield (1695) the joint at "X" would be coated. I assume the lines "Z" would have no need for the coating thus would not be done, but would Y be lined with flannel and tar from bottom to top. Below the arbitrary waterline I have drawn, it should be lined, but would it continue to the top? Thanx, Allan
-
I cannot find anything contemporary and truly definitive on where in the construction of British warships the practice of "waterproofing" with tar and flannel took place. My understanding is that it would be outboard and below the water line, for the most part. This would include the boxing joint and at least the nib ends of the keel scarphs for example. I assume this would not be done on the stern post and inner post as the joint for these two pieces were inboard of the hull planking. For the stem area, it makes sense that this practice would be used at and below the waterline, but did it continue upwards on the seams where parts of the stem area were joined together and continued above the water line? This may be a pretty basic item but In the words of Albert Einstein, "I have no special talents, I am only passionately curious." Allan
Our Emblem ®
