EdT

Young America - extreme clipper 1853 Part 28 – "Pin-Indexing" Next on the agenda is a long slog of repetitive work – making and setting the 29 full frames of the afterbody. This will be followed by 13 pairs of half frames and 6 pairs of cants – then the eagerly anticipated circular stern Essentially, this framing will be a repeat of the installation in the forebody. I previously showed pictures and described the frame assembly using pin-indexed pieces. This has greatly improved efficiency and accuracy in assembling the 13 pieces of each full frame pair. This process can only be used if indexed bolt/pin holes are provided on the pattern sheets. I thought it might be interesting to give a short overview of how that step in the lofting process was done. I put this post together a few days ago thinking I might post it. The discussion on pre-beveling of frames prompted me to do so, since the lofting described is one of the enablers for that. This is an overview only of the pin/bolt hole placement on the patterns. I will not describe the entire frame lofting process here, except to say that profiles for the true fore and aft faces of each frame must added to the normal body plan and used for lofting beveled frames. Using profiles from the next frame forward and aft does not provide sufficient accuracy for bolt placement in beveled frames. The first image shows the fore and aft half-pattern objects for forward frame R, created from the enhanced body plan. In each pattern green is used to show the forward profiles and red for the aft profiles. Every frame “bend” on Young America is constructed with offset, sistered fore and aft timber segments. The segments are delineated by the cut lines on each pattern. In this image no pin holes have yet been placed on either pattern, but the objects for the hole marks are scattered to the left of the forward pattern. The two patterns are then aligned to their final relative positions as shown below. This is a highly beveled frame pair, as can be seen in this image. With the patterns aligned, the pin/bolt hole objects are placed on the combined patterns between the line for the forward outboard profile and the aft inboard profile. This assures that they will not break through either the inboard or outboard faces – hence the need for accurate profiles. The placement of some of these near the top of the frame is shown below. In this highly beveled frame, these hole objects just fit between the lines. The actual pin/bolt holes will be smaller than these objects. Note that the top of the forward frame is higher since it includes the stanchion for the main rail. With the holes placed, the aft frame pattern object is selected along with all of the hole objects. This combination is then copied and pasted to the right in the next image. The aft pattern is then deleted from its position atop the forward pattern leaving just the forward frame and the original hole objects in place. The two pattern halves now have precisely indexed pin/bolt hole marks. The two objects in this image are then mirrored and combined to form the full frame patterns shown below. This same basic process is also used for the half and cant frames. After cutting out the timber segments, the patterns can then be used to drill indexing pin holes to locate the timbers on a pattern sheet for assembly and later for insertion of model bolts. This was described in previous posts. Assembly accuracy is very dependent on accurate drilling, but that is another topic. Besides the advantages in assembly time, the final frame emerges with patterns on both fore and aft faces – one of the important enablers for pre-beveling before erection. I believe this process has reduced the frame assembly time to half of what I expected so far. The above description is, of course, simply an overview, hardly a tutorial. The jury is still out on whether this and the other process features will enable frames to be completely beveled before erection. Sorry, no photos. Next time. Ed

Looking good, Albert. Ed

Richard, The Naiad model described in the two volumes was always intended to be a structural model - aka a fully-framed model - of the hull. There is no plan to rig the model or for additional volumes. There are many good sources of information to assist in masting and rigging. There were standard specifications covering all of this for RN ships of various classes. Probably the best primary - meaning 18th Century - source for this is Steel's Masting and Rigging. Secondary sources include James Lees Masting and Rigging English Ships of War, Longridge's Anatomy of Nelson's Ships, David Antscherl's The Fully Framed Model Volume IV and others. The last two describe modeling. David White's Diana in the Anatomy of a ship series also describes masting and rigging for a ship of the same class and very similar to Naiad. Ed

Perhaps you are right, Druxey. I may be overly optimistic about this. As with most of this work, my attittude is: With the right process, even I can do it.

Thank you all for your comments. Ben, it is never good to generalize, but I believe that it was not common on American clippers to fill the gaps between frames below the floor heads as was done in 18C RN ships like Naiad. Because the clippers used suction pumps that could reach to the inboard face of the garboard strake at the bottom outboard face of the frames, the spaces between frames along the keel could be drained. This could not be done with the chain type pumps used earlier so there would always be stagnant water between frames. On the clippers a roughly 3-4" limber channel was cut on the bottom of every frame near the keel to allow water to flow to the pump under the frames. These were normally fitted with chains so the debris could be cleared out as necessary. So-called "hogging chocks" were used on some ships between frames but these did not extend to the keel. These were wedged between the frames to put the hull structure into compression that would help resist hogging. Evidently these were used all the way up the frame, but I cannot see how any but those at the bottom would be useful. So, simple answer: no. Druxey, interesting point. You are quite right that the long sleek hull form would apparently reduce frame bevels. Your observation perked my interest because I have been struck by how few cant frames were used on YA as opposed to Naiad. YA has only six pair forward and the same number aft (19% of hull length). Naiad had the equivalent of 11 and 9 pair fore and aft respectively (34% of hull length). So, on YA the square frames (full or half) were taken much closer to the ends of the hull. On older ships much more of the hull curvature was taken up by cant frames - at least on Naiad, which I beleive is representative. Recognizing that ships differed, I looked at Naiad's most beveled frame, which turned out to be 24a, the last square frame aft. The maximum bevel on that frame was just under 20 degrees. On YA the most beveled frame is forward (surprisingly), frame Zf. The maximum bevel angle on this frame is just over 23 degrees. So, in fact, the frame beveling on YA is comparable, at least, perhaps slightly more and due entirely to using fewer cant frames. I really do not like the idea of beveling the frames by sanding the final hull shape. I did some pre-beveling of frames on Naiad, but it had to be limited because after frame assembly there was a pattern on only one side. With the assembly method used on YA, patterns remain on both sides and they are more accurately placed. This should permit beveling to be completed before frame erection - at least theoretically. I have been working up to that slowly - gaining confifence in the method. I have just started frames aft of 0 and I am beveling those right to the line. We'll see how that works out. Thanks for raising this interesting point. Ed

Young America - extreme clipper 1853 Part 27 – Forward Hull Sanding/Bolting First, thanks everyone for the recent comments. I hope all those who celebrate Thanksgiving Day had a good holiday. The view from directly forward in the last post seemed popular so here is another from a slight angle. All those unsightly wood spacers between frames are temporary and will be coming out at some point. After this picture was taken the model was inverted for fairing and sanding. There is not much to say about this, since it turned out to be less work than anticipated. Below is a picture of part of the bottom after sanding. Not much fairing was needed – nothing like the work I had to do on Naiad, where very little pre-beveling of frames was done. On this model almost all of the beveling was done before the frames were set, so the sanding was mostly for cleanup and finishing. The next picture shows an area slightly forward. This picture shows some of the bolts – inserted after sanding – to secure the half frames to the keelson/deadwood. These are copper wire, epoxied deep into the holes to give strength to the model joints. These frames are end-grain glued to the keelson/deadwood, so the joints are not strong. These bolts were iron so they will be blackened before the lower hull is finished. I am considering installing the garboard strakes – at least – later on both sides. On these ships the garboards had an important structural role. They were quite thick (7”) and were edge bolted through the keel and face bolted to the frames. This reinforced the attachment of the frames to the keel and will serve that purpose on the model as well. You will recall that the frame floors are merely glued and pinned to the top of the keel – not notched to fit over a rising wood as in 18C ships – and some clippers. This is not a strong joint. While the model was inverted the remaining forward bolts were installed. The bolts through the stem can be seen in the next picture. These were long copper bolts. Eventually, the forward side of the stem – actually the false stem – will be tapered down to about 4 or 6 inches in `breadth. The last picture shows the iron bolts securing the hawse timbers to the stem/apron. Like the cant frame bolts, these are black monofilament. All these bolts were riveted flush. The model has now been re-aligned on the shipway so the afterbody framing can begin. Ed

Thank you, Allan. And Druxey - spot on! Falconer's 18th C Universal Dictionary of the Marine: "Cambered-Deck, the deck or flooring of a fhip is faid to be cambered when it is higher in the middle of the fhip's length and droops toward the ftem and ftern, or the two ends." Whatever will we all do with this (relatively) useless knowledge. Daniel, you have awakened us all out of our post-holiday slumber. Cheers, Ed

Smac, I am glad to hear of your Naid build and I believe you will be pleased with Volume II. Thank you for the support. I would love to see your progress. Why not start a build log on MSW? Ed

Thank you, Daniel. With regard to terminology, please keep in mind that I use that of the time and place, in this case the 18th Century England, so terms will often differ from those of today. "Round up" was the common usage at that time - in contracts, marine dictionaries, and Naval Architecture references. I am sure there are many instances of this in the books and in my postings on this site. I have still not absorbed all of the American mid 19th century terms that apply to YA. An example is "shoe" vs. "false keel". Another - "fancy rail" vs. "roughtree rail" I could go on. As far as YA's configuration is concerned, one side will be left unplanked to reveal the structure. I may leave some viewing panels on that side open to view the internal structure. I have not decided whether to plank and sheath the starboard side. I may leave it in frame below the waterline. I am leaning toward rigging but have not yet decided. Stay tuned. Ed

So, on Thanksgiving morning, I just have time to say thanks for these compliments and to everyone who has made comments and watched Young America as she emerges from that large slab of swiss pear in my workshop. Your following is very much appreciated. Now, time for real work. Where is that vacuum cleaner? Ed

Young America - extreme clipper 1853 Part 26 – Forward Half Frames/Ribbands To provide space for work on the forward cant frames, I deferred setting of the remaining half frames. In the first picture that work is proceeding. The next picture shows all of the forward frames installed. The sleek forward hull shape is really visible at this stage. The next picture shows a different perspective. And another view. At this stage the alignment and spacing of the frames are set by the softwood spacers between each frame about midway between the keel and topside. More strength is needed for final fairing of the lower hull. Also, as the above photo shows, there is some irregularity in the line of the toptimbers that needs to be corrected before final fairing. I decided to fair the forward hull before proceeding to the aft frames. To provide additional strength and align the frame tops I installed temporary “ribbands” on both sides at the height of the planksheer. I found this a very useful device in constructing Naiad. The next picture shows the starboard ribband being fitted. These were made from single 3/16” strips of clear white pine. One end was boiled to set the curvature and in the above picture is being clamped for drying. In the next picture installation is proceeding. The strips are secured to every frame by short pins through drilled holes. These are bent over on the inside to pull every frame tightly into the fair line of the ribband. I cut off the points of the pins before bending to avoid all the scratches I got from these while working inside Naiad. The holes in the frames will later be used for sheer strake bolts. The tops of the strips are set at the height of the bottom of the planksheer rail, so these can be used to trim off the tops of the aft upper futtocks. The next picture was taken from above after the strips were installed. The center marks on the cross-spales cannot be seen under the thread line. This is a good thing. In addition to this centering check, the outside of the ribband was also checked by squaring up from the base drawing. In the next picture I cleared all the clutter from the shipway to focus on the lines of the very sharp forward entry. At this stage the frames have only been given the bevel described earlier before they were set. Some additional sanding to refine the fairness is needed. The model can now be removed from the base and upended for sanding and also for installation of quite a few bolts, especially those holding the half-frames to the deadwood. These joints are quite weak so the model bolts will have to provide strength. I will cover this in the next post. Happy Thanksgiving everyone. Ed

Looks, geat, Gary. Glad to see you posting again. Ed

Frank, I neglected to respond to your comment on the string line. This, combined with centermarks on the upper cross-spales may be the single most important tool in maintaining alignment in models built upright. I had previously used thin wire wrapped taut between two pins, but found it always in the way and a pain to move and replace. Thread held taut with a hanging weight is a simple and easy to apply solution that can be moved without bother when necessary. These features help assure that it will be used. Highly recommended. Ed

Thank you all for these kind words. The lines are indeed sweet, Druxey, a fact that I can take little credit for. The beauty of the full forward hull shape will become more apparent in the next post as the remaining forward frames are placed. I really appreciate the comments on the bolt pattern. This is one case where the bolts actually compliment some of the attractive structural lines. The top row parallels the cutting down line and the lower row the bearding line. This is structurally correct and aesthetic at the same time. Unfortunately this is not always the case as many authentic bolt patterns appear quite random - and often, on models, sloppy. I am sure there will be plenty of such cases on this model. On Naiad I learned that while this effect of realism cannot be eliminated, with care it can be moderated. There is always something to learn. Thanks again. Ed

...and thank you, David. The screw clamps are home made. The are generally described in the MSW Naiad posts and complete dimensioned drawings are included in the book, the Naiad Frigate, Volume I. Ed

Thank you both. Greg, the reduction of the images to 600 pixel width is a throwback to the old site limitations. I will up the resolution for posting in future, but for a number of reasons I prefer not to post at the full original resolution. Ed

Young America - extreme clipper 1853 Part 25 – Forward Cant Frames 2 American Clipper Note: William Webb foresaw the end of the extreme clipper craze. He came down to the dock to see Young America off on her first voyage in 1853 and remarked to the mate, “Take good care of her Mister, because after she’s gone there will be no more like her.” (Dunbaugh) Webb turned his yard to the future. Young America was his last extreme. Within the next few years there was a glut in clipper capacity and the premium freight rates they had enjoyed dropped off, ending demand for the type. Some were slow to see the change, but Webb’s yard continued to prosper building medium clippers, steamships and even a huge ironclad, finished too late to enter the Civil War. This part will bring the forward cant framing to completion. All of these frames were almost completely beveled before installation, as I became more comfortable with accuracy of the pin-indexed assembly. With patterns left on both faces of the assembled frames, each could be cut back to the green lines on the forward face and the red lines on the aft face using disk and spindle sanders. The sides were then shaved flat to those lines as shown below, using a carver's rasp. This tool leaves a very smooth surface requiring little or no sanding. The work can be held by hand and/or with the aid of a vise. The next picture shows the clamping of the second frame on the port side. The clamping of these can be awkward, requiring long-reach clamps and gripping of angled surfaces. A starboard side frame is being installed below. In the next picture the last frame is being installed – with simpler clamping. The position of each frame was checked with the square from the base drawing when glued in place. Although the bevel angles of the joint faces were put on each pattern during lofting, there was still need for some refinement to get the proper installed angle. Each mortise also required some trimming for a good final fit. With all the frames installed, fair lines for the bolt holes were drawn and the simulated iron bolts installed. In the next picture a black monofilament bolt is being cut off at the surface after gluing. The excess CA glue was washed off with acetone and the bolts leveled off with a file. The next picture shows the finished bolting on the port side. The last two pictures show the finished bolting - six 1 1/8" iron blunts per pair driven flush.. The thread line seen in these pictures was used to center the half frame pairs. It is hung by a weight off the center of the sternpost so it can be pushed out of the way or removed when required. In the next part the remaining half-frames will be installed, completing the frame setting of the forward hull. Work is progressing much more rapidly than I expected. I think this is mainly due to the pin-indexed frame assembly and the improved beveling method. Ed

Rob, As I have said, there is clear documented evidence - for example 20 years of American Lloyds Registry listings - that YA was iron strapped - not at issue and not a guess. By the way, if you look at Table 12.1, p. 198, in Crothers, you will see that McKay used iron bracing as well. My statement(s) about Webb using lighter structures is based on the many diagrams and tables in Crothers book as well as drawings and other sources that list timber sizes and layouts. Have a look. I do not believe that Webb was "fond" of less wood, but rather that he was confident in the sizes and designs he used and that confidence was justified by the performance and longevity of ships like YA - 30 years, 50 trips around Cape Horn - pretty good. I call this good engineering. I admire it and the courage it takes to pactice it. This attracted me to Webb. No criticism of McKay or any other builder is intended. As to the question of whether sufficient information is available to build an authentic structural model of Young America, the answer is yes. If this were not the case, I would not be building this model. I am usually pretty up front in the postings on sources and where any discretion has to be applied. For the configuration and details of iron strapping, I would refer you to Crothers, p, 197. I will discuss the strapping on the model when we get to it. I think we have beaten this subject to death on this log. Perhaps this would be a good topic in the Research section. With your permission, lets move on. Ed

Rob, Forgive me if my comments on cross-bracing were confusing or unclear. I do not believe I have ever disputed that wood cross-bracing was used on American clippers or that Donald McKay employed it in his designs. In fact, when I was initially researching clippers in search of a subject, I found it on the drawings for Lightning made by Bill Crothers based on McKay's extensive papers. Also, Crothers book on American clippers, Figure 12.4, pp 210-211, also shows it, if you have the book. The unamed ship in this drawing is in fact Lightning. Crothers book and other sources make it fairly clear, I believe, that Webb and McKay took some different approaches in strengthening their hulls. The differences and similarities between the two builders are of interest to me, of course, but I am mainly focused on Young America - a Webb ship. Ed

Fantastic work, Remco - as usual, I must say. Ed

Nice work, Rob. Ed

Thank you for the comments and for all the "likes". Bruce, the stern will be the most interesting construction in the framing. Going aft from the already installed midship frame, there are 29 full frames, then 13 pairs of half frames and finally 6 cant frames. The circular stern is the formed by four radial counter timbers on each side supported off the last cant frames - sometimes called the fashion pieces. The two frames at the center are parallel to the keel and bolted to the sides of the deadwood and sternpost. I decided to use this transomless stern, which was one alternative. Again no specific original design data is available, but I believe this type was common on ships of his size. Elia, the iles and rifflers I use most often are Grobet - generally coarse cut #0 on wood. They are a top quality Swiss-made file and somewhat expensive, but I really only use a few. Below is a link to one source that has most of the line. Since I rarely throw a tool away, I have a ton of others in various sizes, but the ones you will see most often in the pictures are Grobet. http://www.contenti.com/catalog.html Ed

Young America - extreme clipper 1853 Part 24 – Forward Cant Frames American Clipper Note: American Clippers not only sailed fast, they were built fast. Impatient customers demanded it. A yard would normally launch two from the same slip in a year. Many were built in close to three months time and one 200-footer, John Bertram, in 61 days. There were a number of reasons for this productivity. First there was increased division of labor and the creation of trades. Gone was the all-around shipwright in favor of gangs for specific tasks. Steam driven machinery was widely deployed. McKay, and perhaps other large yards, used steam driven bevel-saws that could be adjusted to the angle of the frame bevel while running. This alone cut frame fabrication time by a factor of six, using but three men. Steam derricks were used to raise frames and other heavy timbers, vs. a common practice of everyone dropping what they were doing to lend a hand. Making treenails was no longer a rainy day make-work job done manually with axes and spoke shaves. Instead treenails were rapidly turned out in by steam driven lathes. Back in the model shop, the all-around shipwright plods along. The first picture shows the most forward cant frames being assembled. Exactly the same pin-indexed alignment method is being used. After assembling these roughed out pieces, the frames are beveled and the patterns removed. The sidings of the upper futtocks are then reduced and the bolts installed. In the next picture this has been done and the starboard frame is being fitted up into the mortise cut for it earlier. Some paring of the mortise sides and bottom was done to neatly fit the frame. In the next picture, the clamping has been set up in preparation for gluing the frame in. The clamps were then removed, glue was applied and the clamps replaced. After drying, the clamps were removed, the frames faired and the six iron bolts into the deadwood installed, as shown in the next picture. Stem supports had to be removed for much of this work – usually one side at a time. In the next picture the port frame has been installed and is being faired with a flat riffler, followed by sanding. No project is without rework. I have normally been making toptimbers from smaller 9-inch stock so these very visible members will be consistently sized - unlike lower timber sidings that have been filed or machined back after pattern removal. In the case of these first cant frames, this reduced siding at the top left a small gap at the adjoining hawse timbers that can be seen in the last two pictures. This was an oversight when I lofted the frames. Rather than delay the erection, I decided to install the frames, then replace the toptimbers - before the glue had set overnight. The next picture shows the starboard toptimber being removed with the aid of a razor blade in the glue joint. No glue was applied on the forward side of this piece, so it was easy to separate with light taps along the joint. The next picture shows the piece being removed, essentially intact. In this picture the port side toptimber has been removed and not yet replaced. In the last picture the new larger top timbers have been installed and the joints with the hawse timbers closed up. Installation of the forward half frames has been suspended until all of the cants are in place – to leave room for that work. Ed

Young America - extreme clipper 1853 Part 23 – Forward Half Frames American Clipper Note: In the last part, the three types of frames were discussed. To shed some further light on that subject, before moving to the half frame work, I have included some images pf patterns that illustrate the types and also the way the shape of Young America’s hull changed from midship to the bow. The first image shows one of the midship patterns. Young America had relatively flat floors for an extreme clipper compared to the early versions like Griffith’s Sea Witch, McKay’s Staghound or Webb’s own design for Challenge. In all these ships the angle of the lower timbers to the turn of the bilge was much greater giving the midship a pronounced V shape. By 1853, designers were learning that extreme deadrise did not contribute to speed to the degree previously thought. Later extreme clippers had fuller bodies, like the one shown above. Moving forward the next image shows frame a, the most forward of the half frames and the last one going forward to be set at right angles to the keel. The most striking feature of this pattern is the extremely sharp v-shape of the hull at this point – a defining characteristic of all the extreme clippers. Notice that the frame is in two pieces separated by the keelson in the center. These will be bolted to the sides of the keelson. Also note that the bolt holes are becoming perilously close to the forward (green) outer profile at the top. This is necessary on this highly beveled frame pair so the bolts can be driven through this forward frame of the pair and not break through the inside profile on the aft frame. Some are actually over the line, but remember that the sidings on the upper segments are reduced so the bolt holes will actually be inside of the profile when the sidings are reduced. The pattern is at the forward face of the wider floors. Finally, the most forward cant frame, f, is shown below. This pattern shows the extremely narrow section just aft of the hawse timbers. This frame, when assembled with is aft partner, will fit into the forward score of the five cut out in the last part. So, with that background the installation of the forward frames may be less confusing. The first picture shows assembly of the two sides of the first half frame pair. The vertical strip between the frames was used to size the separation at the keelson for an easy fit. Next is a picture of a later frame with two horizontal temporary cross-spales to allow the frame to be installed like a full frame. This is much easier than dealing with two separated frames. Unfortunately the first frame was a bit loose on the keelson, so the bottom cross-spale was removed and replaced with two pieces, each glued only on one opposite side. This allowed the joint at the bottom to be closed up with a clamp as shown below. The next [picture shows a close up of the other side during assembly. Note that the bottom of the frame is aligned with the top of the keel rabbet. The lower cross-spale resting on the keelson was installed to set this height. When the glue had set at the keelson, the usual spacers were installed above to maintain spacing and adjust the centering – as shown in the last picture. In the next part, the most forward cant frames will be set. Ed

Thank you, Wayne. I am familiar with these drawings and have been spending a fair amount of time going through the registers. For those not familiar with these, they were for the purpose of classifying ships for insurance purposes. They set construction standards for each category of risk and presumably classified ships on that basis. The New York Marine Register soon became American Lloyds Register (1859). These registers, each year, listed every American merchant vessel, assigned its classification and noted basic contruction parameters - including some details like the iron strapping that has been discussed here. This first Register in 1857 was issued three years after the launching of Young America, so her construction was not governed by the standards, but each year she was classified at the highest level - A1. To what degree she complied with the later standards is open to question. It is pretty clear that before the issue of these standards, American builders, owners and underwriters were essentially on their own - probably relying more on the reputation of the builder than construction standards. Lloyds (Britain) standards were known and available but did not govern American ships, nor did Lloyd's register American ships, even apparently, those in British ownership. Also, there was still post-revolution tension between the countries and America was flexing its muscles as an independent nation. The question becomes: Did ships like Young America influence or provide some of the basis for the standards and to what degree? I believe they are quite representative with some exceptions. Daniel, thanks again for your compliments and for your continued interest. Ed