AON

DOH! something new to play with

Tony, Thank you for the suggestions. I seem to have only the one "loft" button ... which means I do not understand the "how to" of lofting a surface. Giving up is not in my DNA so with a bit of time and the internet I will figure this out. I wish I had someone at the office that did this so I could just have them show me ... but alas this is not something we do. Hexnut, sorry I didn't "get it" earlier.

Completed two of four sections ... I think After I get the last two sections cleaned up I'll join them all and see if it's true! PS - In the middle is a reference grid I created to help me eyeball how far to move things PPS - Hexnut.... this was faster and cleaner My computer thanks you

Thank you Druxey. I did a couple other diagonal sections to get a different perspective ... and of course you are correct! I've learnt so much already and haven't built anything yet! Joined the NRG and just rec'd my Model Ship Builder's Book 1 .... wasn't able to put it down last night. Still waiting to receive my copies of the two Build Contracts (HMS Bellerophon and Elephant) from NMM. Tried nudging station lines in my model and the existing Loft Feature is making things difficult. I will have to work from a copy of the file, delete the loft feature, make mods suggested earlier by hexnut, adjust one station line and loft that small section alone to see results, then repeat as necessary. Once that station is faired I will move on to the next station of concern. Just realize that not only may the station identified be the problem for the section, but the adjacent stations may be part of the problem also. It is difficult to make progress but if I don't get this part right anything after will compound it.

To help identify areas that likely need adjustments I created sections from the top of the keel upwards at 1 foot intervals and then marked the stations. The PDF below is a select few of them. I've made screen shots of my station sketches with dimensions visible so I do not loose the original dimensions as I nudge things back and forth and then view the results. I am also presently thinking ahead to how to build the station frames. I am leaning towards making each frame as one piece and etching the chocks and scarf joints into them rather than building each piece individually. This will make them stronger and piece alignment will not be compromised. I am also considering hollowing (shelling) the 3D model to the moulded depth (thickness) of the frames and then putting the 1" gaps (slices) between teach frame and cutting out the futtock steps to create the templates. This would have the bevel in the 3D model/templates and reveal the maximum/minimum outside/inside sizes to which I can mark off and pre-shape to before the assembly. My thoughts at the moment, possibly the description isn't clear but as I develop the plan I will reveal it ... if it continues to make sense to follow this thought. Fairing the Hull - ship sections.pdf

Good evening Druxey! I inserted a geometrical reference plane at 45° from Breadth Line (Plane) 3 and sectioned through the hull along this plane to simulate a test diagonal. I also turned on the station planes to identify locations of any deformations. There is one at station 28 near the stern that was seen in the other views from this mornings post. I can change the angle or elevation to whatever I want to create other diagonal sections. I believe this is what you were suggesting. Does give a slightly different perspective. Alan

Good evening Bob (hexnut) Just visited your build and have to say that before I did I realized you had much greater 3D CAD talent than I, seeing your work just added proof. I understand your point 1, don't know what Hahn method means in 2 but do understand the rest, do not understand what lofting surfs are (will have to exercise my Google fingers on this). Thank you for the tips. I will try these out through the week JFTHOI. Alan PS: Google revealed your lofting surfs was an abbreviation for "lofting surfaces", and also what the Hahn method is....DOH !

Test diagonals. .... I'll give it a go tonight if I find a moment. The software is fine, it is the memory that is the problem (I know the feeling intimately) Like me the computer is getting on in years ... possibly 84 years old in dog years (the computer, not me ...yet)

CREATING BREADTH LINES TO FAIR THE MODEL I didn’t actually create lines. I created planes through the lofted model by offsetting the Breadth Plane (lowest plane) and then while looking from above, sectioned through each plane to see the hull outline. Although I only created four at 5 foot intervals I can easily create as many as I feel I need. Having done all the above I could see where things did not flow smoothly. These areas shouldn’t exist and will need to be cleaned up. I will now take my time to make adjustments and then see how she fairs! To recap, I think it is important when making a 3D model of the hull to inspect Breadth and Buttock lines to help identify areas of concern. I should create a few breadth sections in the upper half of the hull to see what is happening in that area. As always, I hope those in the know will point out my errors and keep me from straying too far.

USING THE SOLIDWORKS LOFT FEATURE TO CREATE THE SOLID HULL This is my second (or really fourth) go at this. I admit that even after having received good advice from forum members I still had to watch three videos to “get it”. · Created four guide lines using 3D sketch · Locked the lines to points on each section using “coincident” or “intersect” type mates · Opened the Loft Feature and picked four station outlines and all four guide lines · When these resolved I rebuilt and saved the file, luckily as my computer crashed twice near the end. Without the saving ritual I would have lost everything. · Note that the starboard side does not have guide lines and so has some extra waviness to the hull. I had manually made some adjustments for show afterwards but mainly I am just looking at the port side (with the guide lines). Although I can see the divit in the hull at the stern the bow seems good ... not so in the earlier Buttock line review.

CREATING BUTTOCK LINES TO FAIR THE DRAWING I created BUTTOCK LINES on vertical planes through the hull from stem to stern because I wanted to see how she faired as the original draughtsman might have done. BUTTOCK PLANES • I created a second plane by offsetting the shear plane 0.56 feet which happens to coincide with most station line termination points in the rabbet • I then created additional planes by offsetting them at 10 feet each • I then sketched polylines on each individual plane (buttock lines of my own making) and locked them (pierce mate) at each point they intersect with a station o Peirce mate by picking the station line, hold down the “Ctl” key and pick the polyline point (*) I want to mate to it, then pick “pierce” mate. The point then locks to the line where they intersect on the plane. o While doing this I found two errors in my sketches and as importantly can easily see irregularities in my lines!

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