rybakov

Good idea using double sided tape.
 
I have carving away on the stem and stern pieces and have now finished the rabbet for the planking.

This means that the pieces are ready for joining with the keel. As can be seen in the picture below the fit is not as exact as I wanted. This means that the glue joint probably is a bit weak. To strengthen it I have added some tree nails.
 

So, now I'm finally ready to start planking. I have progressed slowly up to this point, so that I could continue with my other clinker model, the Sloop from Roslagen. I use that as a practice and to learn from my mistakes.

 
 

The rabbet line in the stem and stern should be "stepped".

This makes it a bit of a challenge to trace it to both sides symmetrically.
 
My solution is to put first put some tape to a sheet of plastic and trace the outline from the plan using bold lines. After that I put another piece of tape on the other side of the plastic and traced a mirrored copy.

I then lifted the two pieces of tape and put taped them to the opposite sides of the stem and stern.
 
 

As I have no disc sander, or similar machine tool, I have made a jig for sanding down the scarf joints. Its basically a sled with constant angle where I hold the piece with my fingers.

In the picture I show a piece that is the connection between the keel and the stern. Such a piece was found in the the archeological find, and in the report from the find it was called undirlutr. It is the Icelandic word for it. Its seem that such a piece has fallen out of use in traditional clinker built ships in the Nordic countries, so no word remains except in Icelandic.
 
The boat builder that built the reconstruction wanted to make the scarf joints longer, which would have made them stronger. But was ordered to build as the original, which I also will do. The scarf joint are about twice as long as they are wide.
 
Next, the joints can be glued together, below I show the stem. I glue the two pieces making up the the stern and stem together first, so that I can cut a rabbet while they are still laying on a flat surface.

I have also started to bevel the keel to meet the garboard at the correct angle.
 

With experience from my "practice build" Sloop from Roslagen I have devised a way to keep the keel fixed in place. I have added two brass pins in the building form, and corresponding holes in the keel. The pins are placed where the frames will sit, so the holes in the keel will be covered later.
 

Cheers
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

sorry if I am overwhelming you. But I though it could be useful
 

Take a look this other idea
 

I just took a sewing pin. I flattened in a belt sander. Made the head squared (very carefully) and blued.  The sewing pin should be iron. Not steel 

The keel and the pieces for the stem and stern has been cut out and fitted on the inside (upside) to the build form. Unfortunately I think I need to redo the keel, the strip that I glued on top did not get fully centered.
 
Thus far I'm rather happy with walnut. Its easy enough to cut and sand, but gives much cleaner edges and more even surfaces than the lime and basswood which I have used before.
 

The next step is to figure out how bevel the edges for scarf joints. It would probably be easier with a disc sander, but I don´t have one. I will need to figure out some jig that gives exactly the same angle on all pieces. In the picture they are just overlapping and held together with the clamps.
 
The joins between the pieces in the keel, stem and stern where riveted in the original find. See the picture below of how it looks on the replica.

I have been thinking for some time on how to model the rivets. My current best idea looks like this:
 

Its made from bristles from a plastic brush which I have melted in a flame. The head was flattened before it cooled. The next step is to find a good way to model the other side of the rivet. Maybe black paper or card?
 

Cheers

After beveling the frames and checking again with a strip of wood I decided that I need to widen the first three frames and last two. I will start with 1 mm strips of wood on each frame. That should be enough in the aft, but may not be enough in the bow.

I have also started creating sawdust for the actual ship.
 
In my previous models I have only used soft wood (mostly Lime, Basswood and Obechi). For this model I wanted a harder wood that is not as easy to damage by clamps etc. I also want a darker wood. I have not decided on the finish I will give to the model in the end, but one option is to simply oil it. In that case I would still want a dark color that reminds of the tarred look of the reconstruction. So my choice for building material is walnut. I have not worked with that before, and still need to learn how it behaves.
 
The first pieces I started with are for the keel. The original has a T shaped keel, about twice as wide as it is tall on the widest part under the mast foot. The keel is also slightly curved upwards towards the ends, which means that it would be hard to cut from a single piece. And I don't have a mill, which would more or less be necessary. (In my other build of a Sloop from Roslagen I used soft wood and cut the keel from single piece using hand tools). For this build I have cut the keel in two pieces that will be glued (and plugged) together.

 
 

Thanks for your input, I think that I need to do a bit more research before I start with the rigging and sail. However, there is still a long time time before I come to that...
 
At the moment I'm starting to doubt the reconstruction of the hull. When I sawed out the frames for the build form I observed that the first two are concave rather than convex.

Fitting a strip of wood shows the approximate shape that the bow will have. Note that I have not faired any frames yet, and that the keel part is to wide, which probably exaggerates the concave shape.
 

But when I look at some of the pictures from the reconstruction there is some indications of concave frames. (The frames are approximately at the positions of the stations in the body plan.)
 

I also remember that one of the members of the crew mentioned that the boat builder had problems trying to build the bow according to the reconstruction plans. I imagine that it would be really hard to create the concave shape in a shell first build method. I will now need to study my references again and see if I can find any mention that the boat builder deviated from the plans. If so I will need to find a way to adjust the shape in a similar way in the model. If all else fails I would need to go out to the ship and take measurements.

Yes, I would have thought that from looking at the cross-sections. It has a very low freeboard - looks like it would get swamped easily.
 
By the way, here is a picture of a longship with a stern rudder, from about 1300 AD.
 

 
It's from Skamstrup Church, near Kalundborg, Denmark. Note that the tiller is curved, to go around the sternpost.

Hello and many thanks for your likes.
I'll tell the carpenters. 
 
Today they where also very busy to lay out the next rows. I hope that we get the rest tomorrow ready.
 

 

Hello,
the mortices for the carlings are ready and the first already installed. 
 

 

Thanks Mark and Mark. Just more question and answer good sir's. When the rule was made it was based on William Sutherland, Shipbuilding Unveiled 1717 and those passage can be seen in Peter Goodwin book Sailing man of war page 75, bottom right hand side. Thing is am not sure how many folks have read his book or the 1711 The Ship Builders assistant but if you have would love to hear your view points.  When you look at the first page of the 1717 book it seems to reference the 1711 book.  Now you wonder how am able to read the 1711 book being of its age but Jean Boudriot Publication in 1989 did a reprint of it and I just happen to pick up one for my young library. I also have a computer copy of the 1711, 1717, 1729, 1755, 1766, and the 1784 to help me research them.  Now in Goodwin book on page 75 he says The hanging Knees are placed in the same position with the timbers, bolted both to beams and timbers for holding the beams to the sides. He goes on to say The beams ought to be placed one between and one under the ports of each deck, with this caution that the hanging knee may be placed clear of the ports and lodging knees abaft the beams forward and afore the beams  abaft, for the benefit of making these knees as much greater than a square or as obtuse and angle as possible for the easiness of procuring them. Now what one doesn't read from Goodwin is in William Sutherland book which at one time was only a dream to own. In the book of 1711 page 36 at the bottom of page, he says, There ought to be always this special remark in spacing the beam of each deck, that the knees of each beam may be place clear of the ports, that you may not be put to the shift of using dagger knees, or those that are crooked, which are seldom strong, and more difficult to purchase than straight. Now on page 39 he says, The beams ought to be place one between and one under the ports of each deck, with this caution, that the hanging knee may be placed clear of the ports and the lodging knees abaft the beams forward, and afore the beams abaft, for the benefit of making those knees as much without a square, or as obtuse and angle as possible for the Easiness of obtaining them. 

I managed to build the grand scale:
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hi Gaetan, I am coming to the same conclusion, that the rules were something to aim towards, but not something that could be followed without adjustment. There are too many conflicting rules: 1) a beam under every port; 2) no excessive curved, compass timber in knees; 3) knees relative to fore or aft side of a beam different fore and aft of midships. Not all rules could be followed in every location. So it is up to the experience and judgement of the shipwright to find the best compromise among all of the rules.
 
Thank you, stuglo, for your kind comment.
 
Gary, I posted something on your postings about this. Also, I will look at whether I can get a hanging knee near the sheave for the tiller. And regards the tiller sweep, I am relying on Goodwin's Construction and Fitting book that the sweeps did not come into use until a few decades after the Bellona (1760), so I am having to do sheaves on the sides and ropes straight from the tiller to the sheave, and back to the sheave taking it up to the quarterdeck. I understand the tiller ropes go slack at some point in this older system, which eventually I will find out when I built it.
 
And, here is the starboard quickwork completed, and a template starting for the first standard. Once the red goes all the way up through all three decks, it is going to look like a red velvet liner inside a jewelry box!
Mark
 

 
 

 

Gary, thanks so much.
 
Your attached drawings showed me the way, I think. Inflexibly following the rule of hanging knees aft of the beam when aft of midships, I had to create very large and even improbable compass timber knees. Once I saw in your Hector drawings that the shipwrights periodically shifted to the fore side of the beam when needed for other reasons, it gave me the freedom to simplify the knee shapes and locations. In the drawing below, the purple shows where the knees violate the general rule, but simplify the construction. By the way, I looked again at the Dorsetshire plan, and it also shows places like this where two lodging knees fill the same space without hanging knees.
 
The most extreme compass timber on a hanging knee is at beam 23. But I left a hanging beam off of 24 to leave room for the sheave in the side for the tiller rope. So running the hanging knee at 23 aft seemed to give a little more structure to this area of the hull.
 
I don't know about the general pattern after about 1760, but within this period there was definitely some flexibility with the general rule, for good constructional reasons.
 
Thanks again,
 
Mark
 
 
 

 
 
 

Good morning and thank you all for the like, more photos...
 
 

 
 
 

 

 

 

 
Un Saluto.

So, Santa is on its way and the days are getting darker so lots of time for fun. (Althoug its getting colder to work in the shed)
 
After finishing the galjoen which took quite some puzzzling I started working on some ornaments, I am now the proud owner of a CNC machine for that.
I tried handcarving (followed even some lessons from a friend) but that's simply not my  'thing'.
 
And I started painting her.
 


 

 

 

 
 
As the deck will be closed soon I have to foresee some ropes as I cant reach the knight afterwards.

 
Captains quarters doors with selfmade ornaments by CNC


 

Thanks friends for your likes!
I have finished the structure of the decks:

 

 

 

 

 

Enough drawing; here are the first images of the quickwork being installed. The red is looking very dramatic.
Also note the thickness of the hull at the gunports. That was some substantial work.

 
The quickwork became quicker when I took a clue from Greg Herbert and David Antscherl, making up card patterns from multiple pieces. I taped a piece to the top of the spirketting that was not the full height of the quickwork; and then another piece under the clamp above, taped to the lower piece. When I pulled this off, I had the exact shape and width of the quickwork needed. I traced onto the wood, and bob's your uncle. The biggest challenge was keeping the notes clear on each piece as to which way is forward, and which edges are concave or convex.
 

 
I also set up a little drilling jig for the eyebolts. Since the quickwork pieces were not uniformly the same width and had different angles cut on the ends, I set the fence of the drill the desired distance up from the lower edge, and a stop that was pointed at the exact height above the lower edge needed for the hole. That way, different pieces were always registered at the right distance up and out from the lower edge of the port.

 
And finally, scoring and staining

 
Mark
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

I just saw druxey's earlier note, wondering if a lodging knee does anything in this short space between 15 and 14A. It has virtually no longitudinal arm, so really isn't doing much in the way of lateral support. Maybe 14A is acting as a massive knee for 15. Food for thought....
 
I'll bet when the master shipwright was done laying out ports, beams, etc., he left it to the poor assistant shipwrights to figure out these little details, and to swear a little at the master shipwright not thinking this through more fully!
 
Mark

It’s been a good weekend for painting.
 
The primer coat is always a pretty solid indicator of how uniform your surface prep was:

I love the primer coat because it homogenizes all of the different materials.
 
A few pics of the process:

My initial thought was to take the cerulean blue (Utrecht artist acrylic, heavy body), and add yellow ocher to arrive at a more greenish blue; a light blue with a greenish cast would be a more period-correct, common blue that would have been derived from copper salts.  What I arrived at was teal, and while I like the Charlotte Hornets uniforms, this is not quite the look for Soleil Royal!
 
So, I went back to my cerulean base.  After all, the following Corvette model was largely my inspiration for my color scheme.  I really liked the way this light blue relates to the yellow ocher, even if it is a more stylized choice for my period:

 
My cerulean base-coat looks like this:

Here’s the rest of the process:



Et, finalement:

I spent quite a lot of time dialing-back the walnut ink distressing so that it wouldn’t be too much.  I think the walnut ink does dial-back the blue enough to be plausible for 1689.
 
I also switched from my self-mixed Tamiya yellow ocher to Vallejo’s Mars Yellow, which is pretty exactly the shade I want right out of the bottle.  While I still have to go over the work 2-3 times for the color saturation I want, the next coat doesn’t lift the previous coat, as with Tamiya.  This characteristic of the Tamiya paint makes it extremely frustrating to work with.  Considering the sheer volume of ocher paint that is going onto this model, a change to something more user-friendly was imperative.
 
This is probably the best window into what the general paint scheme of the stern will be.  Ultra marine will make very selective appearances.  I thought about painting an oval of ultra-marine around the shells, but I didn’t like the only partial framing of moulding.
 
It’s obvious, I suppose, but worth re-iterating how much easier it is to paint these ultra-detailed surfaces, off the model; you can find whatever angle you need.  As I consider it now, I’m really starting to dread the paintwork I have waiting for me on the lower stern.  At the time, though, I couldn’t see any other way forward than to construct the stern in-place.
 
Tomorrow, I will start the waste-pipe rosettes.
 
As ever, thank you for the likes, comments, and for stopping by!

Good morning and thank you all for the like, more photos...
Thanks Schrader
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 
Un Saluto dall'Italia 

druxey, good suggestions. I drew the location of the gun carriage at the port to study this, and realized that the standard has to shift forward of the gundeck beam below it, to give enough clearance for the gun when it is run out. That then leaves room for the port tackle eyebolt to remain in its correct position, and the breeching ringbolt can move onto the face of the standard. And this only works if I shift the hanging knees at 14A and 15 to the fore sides of their respective beams. The dotted lines are my original idea, the purple lines are the proposed solution. Who says there are a lot of inter-relationships among the parts!☺️
 
Mark
 
 
 

I fixed the last beams of the formwork: