HMS Bellona 1760 by SJSoane - Scale 1:64 - English 74-gun - as designed

[SJSoane]

Hi druxey,

 

I am thinking I need a little help with an obsessive/compulsive disorder....😗

 

Actually, there was some method to the madness. I am having to reconstruct the stern only from the evidence of the photos of the two models, and the original admiralty drawings which I now know are not very consistent with the models in regards to the stern. I discovered that the key foundation for this stern is the line of the mouldings at the edge of the balcony deck. You can see in the original model that the hull frame projects out six inches, like a notch, just below the balcony deck line.

 It turns out that this notch is lower than it should be, compared to the later model. In the later model, we can see that the notch is used to jut the upper stern works 6" further aft of the windows below, forming a little overhang over the windows, all the way to the sides of the quarter galleries. We can see this here, as a heavy shadow line just above the windows:

 

In this detail, the lower orange moulding is below the notch, while the upper orange moulding is above the notch.

However, once we turn the corner of the quarter gallery, the two mouldings are brought back together without the 6" offset. Now, the width of the overall upper works are determined by how far out these mouldings project on the side of the quarter galleries, as indicated with the red circle below. When I didn't understand what the mouldings were doing, this projection on the side varied by a considerable amount as I experimented with various moulding profiles, throwing off all of the proportions of the upper works. So, now I have a solid foundation for reconstructing the rest.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Gaetan Bordeleau]

Hi Mark, your perception of the details is outstanding as an architect. I would like to have a book for the construction of the Bellona with such  attention to the details.

 

I have a simple word of caution. I did not studied the Bellona, but I like to see your vision. As I see it, you use 2 different models and I think it is dangerous. These models were made by different peoples with different experience and different vision to build the models. Working on the stern requires precision and sometimes even if we do our best, it does not want to fit. Here is an example, as a modeler I would never want to do a notch in the moulding, I would cut the window at an angle so that it fits below the moulding. Just to shape the molding is already a big task and meeting half the angle for 2 moldings is easier to do on the construction site than on the drawings.

 

 

[SJSoane]

Thank you, Gaetan, this is good advice.

 

I am quite uncertain about how I am going to construct this balcony railing, with its lacy decorative pattern on a serpentine curved surface. I was originally thinking that the railing might help give shape to the lower surface. But I have no idea how I would cut that notch. If I made the lower surface solid rather than pierced, then I could shape it maybe by laminating layers of thin wood to the right curvature, and then it would not need the railing to make its form. I think this is going to take a lot of trial and even more error.

 

I highly value your advice on construction details. You are the master at that.

 

Best wishes,

 

Mark

[Gaetan Bordeleau]

I learned something very interesting with the 74 by Boudriot. Often when I build, I think as a home builder. On the stern of the 74, many moldings are not installed directly, they are installed on a "structure". Exactly as we would build a door.: a structure to hold the door, moldings all around the perimeter and the door itself. This "holding structure" make it easier to see it and build.

[druxey]

If the balcony is 'solid' a laminated construction over a shaped mold is the way to go.

[SJSoane]

I am drawing the section through the quarter gallery, learning much about how these were constructed. This shows just how tiny these spaces really were. And look at how short the doors are, to the left of each space. I wonder why these were not made taller?

 

So a quick question came up about the upper finishing, or the roof over the quarter deck. Steel says, "the upper and lower finishings may be found at pleasure, making them as light as possible, to please the eye, and containing sufficient room in the upper finishing to hold a cistern." (p. 365). I am showing a recess in the finishing below. Does anyone know what the cistern was used for? Was this a primitive flushing device?

 

Mark

 

 

[druxey]

Yes, apparently the cistern was used for that purpose. The entry to the quarter gallery was deliberately made small. In heavy seas the gallery could get carried away and it was easier to defend a small opening with a deadlight in emergencies.

[SJSoane]

A good day of drawing. Now I understand this complex structure more completely, I am just about ready to start mocking up some parts on the model!

 

Mark

 

Edited April 27, 2020 by SJSoane
added section drawing

[Beef Wellington]

That looks spot on.  I would love to be able to work with these drafting tools, very educational.

[SJSoane]

Thanks so much, Jason.

 

I am using TurboCad Deluxe for the Mac, a relatively cheap CAD program, about $150, as opposed to thousands for AutoCad.

It is a little buggy sometimes, but it is getting the job done. I started out drafting this project many years ago by hand, and I have become a convert to CAD as I started to refine the drawings I needed for the model. It is so easy to try things and change, duplicate and mirror, put things on layers to see how they relate to each other.

 

Mark

[SJSoane]

Well, I got it out of my system. I am a long way from actually being able to construct the stern-a few decks still to install--but at least I can see an outline of what the stern will look like.

Back to planking....

 

Mark

 

Edited April 28, 2020 by SJSoane

[Kurt Johnson]

Mark,

 

Drawing everything out the way you do seems as if it would almost be as enjoyable as the actual building. You’re lucky. Two hobbies in one! And a master at both, too.

 

Kurt

[Beef Wellington]

That looks good Mark.  Did you adjust the stern profile to account for the curvature of the fascia?

[SJSoane]

Hi Kurt, yes, I always liked drawing, which I learned long before CAD was invented. I learned from an architect who was a master at drawing, although I never reached anywhere near his level. I like the way drawing can help me visualize things, before committing time and material to making even more mistakes than I do already. Although it is nice to be able to make a quick freehand sketch now and then, CAD really has made the production of drawings easier.

 

Jason, no, I did not adjust the profile to the curvature--yet--I am thinking about it. I confess that I don't understand how to account for the round back on the stern, as well as the round up of the decks. I suspect that I have to do a true projection accounting for the curve one way, and then do a true projection on that second drawing. But I am not sure what I will end up with, because it will not help me shape the mouldings in the two directions. So the paper stern I put on this morning is indeed a tiny bit short, good enough to see what it will look like.

 

Does anyone know how to flatten out a curve to get a true projection of its actual length unfolded? I have not figured this out yet. Looking at Steel's drawings, he seems to show how, but I don't really understand it. Maybe an evening studying it more closely...

 

Best wishes,

 

Mark

 

 

[AON]

Mark

If the curve is one radius:

1. calculate the circumference of the circle (360°)  at Circumference = π × diameter = 2 × π × radius.  where π = 3.1416

2. determine the portion of the arc of the radius in degrees (a portion of the 360°)

3. the flat length is the ratio of the two (#2 above/360°) times the circumference of the circle (#1 above).

 

To determine the location at lengths along the arc of the circle simply break it down to smaller ratios of portions of the arc.

Then multiply these smaller ratios by the circumference and you have the flat length location for the smaller segment along the arc.

 

If the curve is comprised of a number of conjoined but different size radii, break them down, and do the steps above for each.

 

I hope I have explained this clearly.  If not I am certain I have an old draughting book here with an example that I might scan and send you.

Alan

[druxey]

One can do the 'uncurving' as Alan suggests, or the other way is to see the curve in plan, then take a paper tick strip, place it against the curve at one end and 'walk' it along the curve bit by bit, marking off the counter timbers or whatever as you go until you reach the other end. The tick strip then becomes the 'unwrapped' curve.

Edited April 28, 2020 by druxey

[SJSoane]

Hi Alan and druxey,

I will likely use a mechanical means of laying out a paper strip when it comes to cutting wood, since I will have to be bending it in two directions, but the mathematical method is interesting to see, a simple means of proportion--thanks, Alan!

 

So in the example below, the curve of the stern at the balcony level (minus the balcony itself) is a 50' radius. the angle between the lines at the ends of the chord is 26.8º.

 

The formula would be:

 C= 2 × π × radius = 314'-2"

angle = 26.8º

 

x/C = 26.8/360

x = 24' 4 5/8"

 

Nice! Working out a ratio between the curved and un-curved could be used to stretch the original drawing in Turbocad.

But now I am back to cutting wood...

 

Mark

 

 

 

 

[druxey]

I should have added, correct one axis of distortion at a time. Trying to do both axes simultaneously will bring you a free white jacket with extra long sleeves.

[AON]

sorry for the late reply

the wife decided to shampoo the rug and I lost access to the computer!

 

seeing the shape in your post above, I would suggest Druxey's simplified method would be much easier, and for modelling, be more than adequate!

[SJSoane]

On with more planking. I am working on the channel wale, which blessedly does not have any ports interrupting it until the last 4 ports astern.

I am finding it quite efficient to plot the upper edge of each plank at various points along its length, and then put in a fair line using the artist's tape. Much easier than trying to fit a flexible curve, which is also impossible once the piece is steamed and bent. Also, I have learned to cut the upper edge of the planks a little full, so I can fair the whole edge with a curved sanding block once installed.

A plank in the second strake up makes a wicked curve from convex to concave as it proceeds aft, and it also twists quite dramatically. That would have been something to see in the actual shipyard. that one plank took about 5 hours to shape and install:

 

And here is progress to date. Nice to see those boo-boos from 15 years ago disappear under planking at last. I see that I will have to make a sanding jig to later level the channel wale to an even projection from the lower planking. Not sure why this is wavering a bit.

 

Mark

 

 

 

 

 

[druxey]

Looking very nice, Mark. Thank goodness there's a bit of wiggle room to even out that channel wale if you need to!

[SJSoane]

As I got closer to topping out the planking at the head, I notices some discrepancies between the drawings and the model I had built so far, relative to the height at which I had trimmed the frame right at the bows for the small deck afore the beakhead bulkhead. So I had to go back and reconstruct what had gone wrong. As it turned out, when I trimmed the hull around 15 years ago, I had trimmed it to the top of the deck, whereas the decking laps over the top of the hull at this point. So I will have to trim the edge down to accommodate the thickness of the deck planking.

 

While studying this, I also realized that I had drawn the little deck with a sheer matching the rest of the ship, but on closer inspection, it is horizontal. The following drawing fixes this. However, in changing this, I notice that the opening to the roundhouse has gotten pretty short. Even if I put the seat only 8" above the deck as seen here, the opening is only 2'-4" high. This would take some agility to twist around into this opening, and then sit with your legs spayed out in front of you. I have double checked the heights of the various beams controlling this, and it is accurate. Maybe the seat opening is closer to the aft end of this opening, maybe even over the top of the beam? Or maybe at the level of the floor? Then your legs would hang down the ladder at least.

 

It nonetheless would still be better than doing your business out in the weather afore the beakhead bulkhead!

 

Mark

 

 

Edited May 11, 2020 by SJSoane

[druxey]

I don't think that the head was part of the beakhead platform. It was beside it at upper deck level. See:

 

https://collections.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/81298.html

https://collections.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/81196.html

 

and, in particular

 

https://collections.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/81164.html

[SJSoane]

Hi druxey,

 

I thought that for a long time, but on closer inspection of the 2nd Bellona model, it shows the roundhouse base sitting on top of the platform, not the upper deck. In this photo, we can see the ledges or grating that extends out from the level of the platform, and it is the same level as the bottom of the roundhouse that is just peeking out beyond the main rail. 

in the drawing below, the upper dotted line is the level of the platform and grate, the lower level is the level of the upper deck.

 

 

or, what if the seat is the part cut off at the level of the platform, but the access from the upper deck is at the level of the deck? It would be a cantilevered seat of sorts...

 

Mark

 

 

 

 

Edited May 11, 2020 by SJSoane

[SJSoane]

quick update on my last post's last question about access from the upper deck; the access could not be from the upper deck because the beam forming the aft edge of the platform is in the way.  We can see the beam in the photo below as the lower red beam, with the doorway to the roundhouse above it just at the extreme port end of the bulkhead.

 

And we can see the beam here in the cross section. This leaves the roundhouse as a very tiny affair!

 

 

[Mark P]

Good Afternoon Mark;

 

Do you have Rob Napier's book 'Legacy of a ship model', about the repair of the Princess Royal in the Annapolis Collection. This shows many pictures of the inside parts of a model which one normally cannot see. 

 

If you have got this, look at chapter 6, pages 90, 91, 92, 98 & 99. There are lots of lovely pictures of the roundhouse from in and out, and removed; showing its internal structure quite clearly. It also shows quite clearly that there was a door in the bulkhead, to give the petty officers some privacy.

 

As she was a 3-decker, the prow deck is not such a step up, so presumably on a 2-decker one had to duck carefully to squeeze in. The seat would have been higher than you show, as the deck of the prow deck formed the floor of the roundhouse.

 

All the best,

 

Mark 

[druxey]

The base of the roundhouse (and actual seat) is set at beakhead platform level.

[rlb]

Hi Mark,

 

You always have the most interesting questions!   I'm not sure this is any help, again photos from Victory--not your ship--but the first photo shows the access door to the roundhouse as a small vestibule with a door at the deck level.  You can just see the ladder steps (look under the hammocks that are in the way), and that horizontal gleam just below eye level inside is the "seat".

 

 

Here is the interior of the roundhouse (looking from deck level)--

 

And finally from a little farther back showing the vestibule and door on the left, and on the right edge the steps leading up to the bow platform--

 

 

Ron

 

PS. If you would rather not have these photos cluttering your excellent log, let me know, I'll delete them.

 

Edited May 11, 2020 by rlb

[SJSoane]

Hi druxey and Ron,

 

By jove, I think you two together got it! Pushing the seat off center into the outboard side leaves plenty of room to actually crawl in the roundhouse with room to sit. Just no room for the rack for copies of the London Times.😏 It is a bit of a bend to get in, but not hugely worse than the quarter gallery doors for the officers. They all were just more nimble back then, I guess.

 

And Ron, please do keep posting pictures like that. It was immensely helpful!

 

Mark

[SJSoane]

Further evidence that the roundhouse has to be at the level of the platform; the side slopes in so far that access to it would disappear at the upper deck level. I am now showing the seat tucked around the corner, as in the last post. But interesting question as to how a door would be hung on the roundhouse. It would have to be hung on the inboard post, and would be a trapezoid (trapezium outside North America?) in shape. And I would think pretty annoying to try to get around it while squeezing into the opening.

 

OK, enough of this, back to planking!