AON

The following three groups of images explains the process I am using to fair my lines. You might ask why am I creating a new lofted hull? Although my first attempt was very clean (see image below with all connectors showing (those are the light blue points the computer tacks to the model to connect everything) I could not get my first or last station in the model. I needed to add guide lines and didn’t know how. Three plus years ago I couldn’t model a simple pencil in 3D so I’ve come a long way. The guide lines help the computer connect the various sketches (frames) made on all the different levels. In the end the stern sketch would not connect because the lowest guide line did not extend to it. While learning how to do this I discovered my first lofted hull was easier than when I added the guide lines. Without additional mirrored guidelines on the other half the computer seemed to be confused and inserted connectors in the oddest places creating artificial wedges and twists in my model. When I right click the mouse and pick show all connectors I can see connectors out of alignment and need to manually move them. My final attempt (yes I had to do it more than once) had only one connector out of alignment…. As you will see. Even though I have the lofted hull I think it is important to visually inspect Breadth and Buttock lines as they are more revealing than the lofted hull. I could turn on what is called a Zebra line view to reveal pattern issues on the 3D image but it seems too much information confuses this old man

We use Draftsight at the office strictly for 2D drawing or opening customers AutoCad files (using Solidworks for 3D models and 2D prints) and so I loaded it at home to do some office work here. It is cheap (free) and you get what you pay for. Many times I have to close and re-open the darned program because it forgets what it is... or simply refuses to work for free?

Thank you Druxey Of course you are correct, the "plans" drawing is as built. Anxiously awaiting the copies of the contracts Alan

Received my framing drawing image from NMM Funny how a framing drawing said to be specifically for HMS Elephant disagrees with the plans made specifically for HMS Elephant. As I mentioned earlier HMS Goliath shows it completely removed. I prefer the look of the rail rising over the gun port for a consistent port open area. One nice thing, as opposed to some of the 74 gun framing plan thumbnails on NMM this one I rec'd that had no thumbnail on the website is very simply and clean.... few bent frames. Alan

Thanks Hexnut (and I am left wondering ... why hexnut?) I can see myself sitting through a few Solidworks online tutorials before I will be able to get this to work. Alan

Hexnut Just reread your suggestions and compared to what Don did (see posting in Scantlings forum) I will have to give this a try and see if it resolves my SW conflicts for those two stations Alan

Hexnut, The purpose of lofting at this early time was to see if the hull faired well with the dimensions I took off an electronic image ... paper stretch and all. A friend had shown me exactly how much stretch could be experienced in 200+ old drawings! My intention is to create my templates for my build in CAD from the 3D model. This way everything should fit like a glove (if my wood working skills are up to the task). I do not intend to 100% create a completed 3D ship model... just as much as I need ... and I suspect I will continue draughting through the physical build as I discover I need more. After having been recently schooled in scantlings I have considerable work ahead of me to check my measurements to that of Steels and then possibly to the build contract(s). I just received my quote (50 pounds sterling) and thumb nail image for a framing drawing of HMS Elephant from NMM and having validated it as what I want I will be ordering it tomorrow after they send me the form. From this I will be better able to complete framing modelling, knowing which frames extend to where and how. I also found out today that electronic images of the ship build contracts (HMS Bellerophon and Elephant) are outrageously expensive and so will be ordering the photocopies at 21.28 pounds sterling each. Hope you and others stick around as I am sure I will need some direction as I proceed. Alan

Minor progress... I moved all my stations and Keel down so relevant dimensions are off the base line of the Sheer Plan not the underside of the keel. This makes all scantlings (dimensions) off Steels tables relate directly to my dimensions. I then attempted to loft the features and had three problems 1) my computer kept crashing 2) the lines off the stern plan (plane) caused major defects due to its extreme references not relating directly to the next fuller section. 3) similar issue with the bow end Station Y except it caused a major inwards fold to appear between Stations 10 and 12 This was fixed by doing small groups of 4 stations at a time, rebuilding and saving the file before going to the next group. I also did not include the Stern Plan nor Station Y I also did my loft feature as a solid as opposed to a thin skin as was done by a member in an earlier posting under Scantlings. There are a few ripples revealing themselves on my hull that will need some attention (particularly at station 28). I will also be comparing the tables from Steels to my dimensions and making some adjustments. A lot of work ahead ... and still waiting on some word from NMM for a frame drawing of HMS Elephant and build contracts for it and the Bellerophon. Until next time. Alan

What have I been up to? (I didn't give up) Just bought a copy of Rees's Naval Architecture 1819-20 as a companion reference to the PDF of theThe Shipwrights Vade Mecum as the plates (figures) in Rees are very similar to those missing in the PDF ($80 versus $500-$1000).... so I am now busy re-reading parts of the Vade Mecum. Many thanks to YKWYA for recommending the book. Reviewing my sheer plan(s) versus scantlings and all and noticed I am missing the hollow that helps create the flat where the futtock meets the keel at the dead flat section -O- . NMM quoted me printed copies of ship's contracts but this department won't take payment via credit card. They suggested I might rather have electronic images and I thought I should see what they cost... Haven't heard back from NMM regarding images as yet. Also looking at purchasing framing drawings. Hoping to be moving forward very soon.

I just purchased a planer and intend to use it to quickly level out rough stock to size. It will dial down to 3/16" but 1/8" pass at a time I could rip this with my band saw to individual board (i.e.. plank) thicknesses or scroll saw to make other individual pieces I would use a sander to finish.

My short journey (so far) with The Shipwrights Vade Mecum Started with a quick browse and was lost. Came back to it fresh and took my time… a dim light illuminated. Came back yet a third time and opened a second copy in another window and kept it on the Glossary (definitions of words) section. This made unraveling some of the words and phrases a bit quicker and so easier to digest. What have I learnt so far is mind boggling! I know why the body is shaped the way it is: Length and breadth, fitting the guns, carry more sail, reduce water resistance, stability, stiffness, speed, steering, preventing rolling and pitching and simply looking damn good. (I enjoyed this section so much I honestly wished it didn't end) I learned why the 74 gun ships and the single deck 44 gun ships were the best at what they did and considered near perfect. Plans and Lines: I have quite a bit better understanding of most of the lines. The red lines in the body plan are the diagonals … and what they represent. I know what the green line in the sheer means (and that my plans don’t seem to have it) I know about flats and dead rising and rising of the floor. I also learnt about water coming in through the rudder hole (helm port)! I learnt a lot of terms and names that some are understood but most are still a bit of a mystery so I need to go back for a fourth, fifth, sixth… reading until I get it. The “Rosetta Stone” plates would have been an invaluable aid! And the tables… OMG! In short this has been one fantastic ride so far. Thanks to the forum and members who steered me to it. I highly recommend any and all other beginners out there should take this journey.

Ed Regarding your posting 26FEB at 6:47... had to take some time to re-read your post. I am still absorbing the Vade Mecum; trying to make notes, sketches with labelling, to better understand what it describes and it is slow going. The 3D Model vs. normal drawing: I drew the Half Breadth first from (hopefully) very careful measurements on what one might call the bottom view (plane); then drew the Shear Lines on the front view (plane); and finally the Body Plan(s) on individual end views (planes). Drawing all in 2D on separate planes in Solidworks. I used the shear lines to help develop the body plan and then compared the body plan to the Half Breadth. I admit to not knowing what all the lines mean and hope to rectify that shortly… followed by drawing updates. To make 3D models one would extrude from the appropriate lines on a 2D plane. Normally each individual item becomes it’s own detail file and 3D model. I use the original sketches as my master to create all other individual files (parts). This way they should all fit (mate) properly. The major difference between a normal 2D (paper or AutoCAD) drawing and drawing 2D on 3D planes is that in 3D you cannot relate directly one to the other until you make the 3D model. The closest you can come before that is to turn all 2D sketches on and view them in three planes (X, Y and Z) together… as I did. I noticed how one person in the forum faired their plan by creating a “shell” of their 3D model and inspecting it for flaws (dimples, folds, etc). I will do this also but need to define the limits (outer edges of the shell) first. I am not quite there as yet. Yes I took dimensions from the bottom of the keel. Honestly, I had suffered from draftsman blindness, staring at the line in the shear diagram that suggested it should be used but didn’t really see it (register in my thick skull) until I was well on my way. I will not make that mistake again. I intended to do all station frames and then possibly those in between afterwards. It seems no one bevels the inside/outside faces in the actual model builds, but rather simply sands them to shape afterwards, so I am not sure I need to go to that detail in the model… so long as I leave enough (a smidgen at scale) material to allow physical shaping (sanding). Room and Space: From what I was referencing (and it did not qualify a time period) it seemed frames were cheek to jowl. Earlier this week I read how there was a material scarcity in the late 1600s so the latter half of the 1700s likely had made allowances for this (?). Still learning about this and hope to have better direction soon. I am still waiting for my quote on the Bellerophon & Elephant Contracts and so once these are received I will possibly have a better defined direction to follow. The 74 Gun Frames.pdf Allen supplied has opened my eyes. Dimensional error: I know I mentioned 5/8” to 2”. A couple were as much as 6” or 7” at full scale. Presently I’ve cleaned them all up … or so I want to believe. At the reduced model build scale (whatever it will be) I feel I might be too finicky with some of the smaller dimensional deviations but I’d rather spend the time now as opposed to wondering what happened later… or I am just being to ALAN (re-arrange the letters and you will get it). Presently I am not making much headway in my virtual part of the build but there is a flurry of activity in the self-schooling portion. I know I should have done more of this earlier but you know what they say about hindsight. My head was inflated and I am humbled by the experience. Hope to be posting minor progress soon. On another note, I picked up a 12.5” planer last night (adjusts down to 3/16”), got it out of the box and the outer casing was cracked. Exchanging it tonight! Alan

Thank you Ed and Druxey (now that I know what druxey means) I am determined to 1) become reasonably and competently knowledgeable and 2) complete this build; expecting it to take a considerable amount of time and willing to document my struggle. By then I may be truly one of you (that would be the goal) Alan

Steel's Vade Mecum for the Shipbuilder Browsed through it last night and I have to say it was like reading "The last of the Mohicans" which is a book I particularly enjoyed but took awhile to get the language prose. This is a completely and totally new language. I thought it would be English (there is that learning curve again) I particularly enjoyed the one table where Google took great care in copying (see image below) And I really needed a "map" that would explain what all the items listed were to the layman... then I came to the folded images at the end and got all excited as I might have the key or Rosetta Stone if you will to understand it all. Flipped the page and ..... nothing.... to my great disappointment I find they didn't bother to unfold it. (see image below) I love a challenge ... I love a challenge .. I love a ... Alan

Allan, Opened your PDF and 2 pages of 4 are blank. I am assuming they were meant to be. Printing it off and will try my very best to learn, understand and better appreciate it's value. Thank you very much for this info. I just e-mailed Julie at NMM for a quote on the contracts so hope to have a message back by mid-day tomorrow. I will now begin the study of the PDF of Steel's Vade Mecum for the Shipbuilder that my darling wife had downloaded for me this morning! Alan

Thank you everyone for the guidance and help. (what a fantastic group) I will contact NMM again tonight.... and will be reading through the download PDF through the weekend I imagine. I suspected I would not get to touching wood (forgive me) until mid summer. Being a "scheduler" at heart I always leave room for "do overs" in my time estimates and I am in no rush to get it all wrong. My horizontal dimensions in the sheer plan as compared to the breadth plan were out as much as 5/8" to 2" in full scale. On an entirely other note... Picked up a nice 10" drill press on the weekend and have my eye on a 13" planer at the moment (on sale at $100 off regular price) Breaks over .. time to "work". Alan

Ed Thank you for the info and guidance. The link I was given was to the one you provided above. My darling wife downloaded it for me as I just had to break away from the computer to go to work this morning .. if it wasn't for work getting in the way I might get something done! I will ask if NMM has the contract for Bellerophon or Elephant. When I did my search I did not see them but that does not mean they are not there! Alan

Joe: you are very welcome Druxey: I agree the floor timber is too thick, that I read the print wrong, a newbie misteak (sic) Still struggling to find info on frame moulding dimensions. What I have found has cast doubts on the direction I was going with the framing. I will continue digging into this and would greatly appreciate any and all help. Update: two members helped with a link to download the free Google Steel's PDF format book. I will be busy tonight! Alan

Steel's Tables on line at http://hnsa.org/doc/steel/index.htm is massive volumes about masts, yards and rigging. I cannot yet find tables for moulded dimensions on the floors. I will keep searching but could you please help point me in the right direction? Alan

Thank you all for your comments and likes! DRUXEY: image below is from the sheer plan at frame -0- and shows what I took to be every other timber sectioned on the plan showing the Siding (width) and Moulding (height) so I could get the dimensions. Please steer me back on course if I am drifting. I haven't any references that suggest otherwise. What I do have suggest all frames were full with joints staggered (I was going to do one of these next to show this) and place face to face making a solid hull. My confession: I thought I knew more about ship's construction than I find I actually do (the rude awakening) and the learning curve is steep... but I love a challenge! Wacko Joe: image below shows the 3 planes used (always have a minimum of three) but everything was drawn on the one and extruded from it. If anyone sees I am doing anything wrong please let me know and send me an image if possible for reference. Alan

SKETCHING FRAME –0- 1. Copy the original plan sketch out and rename FRAME –0- 2. Remove all other Planes and Frames not relating to –0- 3. Measure the deck levels off the original plan and add lines to the Frame drawing to represent the levels NOTE: all deck levels should have been drawn onto the Sheer Plan already to assure they shape/blend properly but I jumped ahead on this one because I needed to do something different at this moment. As I will start from Station –O- when I do this I should be okay with this frame. 4. Measure the frame thickness at the deck levels at Frame –O- and add points to the Frame drawing to represent these thickness 5. Draw a spline line for the inside of the frame joining the few points 6. Add a series of new spline points to the spline and adjust them to reshape the inner shape of the frame 7. Sketch in the Deadwood on top of the keel 8. Sketch in Futtock Lines (where the frame joints will be). These are done “by eye” guessing where the best break would be in a length of timber due to change in grain direction. 9. Layout the Scarph (scarf?) Chock, Hooked or Plain Scarf Joints. Using the rules stated on pages 29 and 30 of “The Elements of Wood Ship Construction” by Curtis 1919 (length not less than 6 times the depth) I could not fit a plain or hooked scarf joint anywhere along the curved sections of the frame as the material became too thin. These type joints seem to be meant to be used on less curved sections. Therefore I used the Scarph (scarf?) joint as referenced in "Historic Ship Models" by Wolfram Zu Mondfeld (pg 78) and "A Ship Model Makers Manual" by John Bowen (pg 77). (Thank you yet again for the books!) 10. Copy the file out and rename it TEMPLATE Frame -0- and change all lines to be construction lines. Use this template to begin all individual models for frame -0- 11. Copy the file out again and rename it CROSS CHOCK. Change all cross chock lines to object lines. Add points on the curved lines and draw a splined object line over it. Fully dimension/define the object lines and extrude the shape to complete the model of the Cross Chock. (Fully define means to lock each point and line in position so it cannot accidentally float away in the future and create havoc and total chaos). 12. Repeat for all Butt Chocks and then for all Futtocks. 13. Assemble Frame –O- 3D model.

Thank you Allen That will certainly challenge things for me! The green line is the aft or stern body plan. It is green only because I "picked it" to highlight it in the view, otherwise it would have been grey/black as in the two views immediately above it. Alan

Sorry! A picture is worth a thousand words.... this should be better than my trying to explain it in just words. I think they must have made them with an angled face but I do not know for certain. Alan

Thank you Joe. It just doesn't seem as exciting to look at as the physical build. My frame -0- model is about 50% done. Had some issues with the "joinery" between futtocks... but I'll explain that later. (A question for all the experienced modellers out there...) I have often claimed 'there is no such thing as a dumb question' but I am beginning to doubt that at this moment. I am wondering, do the actual inner/outer frame surfaces angle to mimic the inner/outer profile of the hull? One "square" frame up against another "square" frame set in or out a bit to follow the half breadth doesn't seem right. Looking at the plan I believe the framing is full/solid, one nested against the other. Alan

I completed the finicky tweaking of all points on all section lines. Had to make compromises, blending well and looking aesthetically pleasing won out over clashing dimensions. This is the last batch of section line development sketches. I am going to model section -0- frame because I need to do something different before I go back to more sketches... I am certain many following may be getting as bored as I am at the moment (plus my head hurts!). I think the momentary change will recharge my batteries! Alan