Boxing joint or scarph

[allanyed]

I have not been able to find any information on when boxing joints at the keel/stem junction came into use, so not sure if a boxing joint, or more likely, a scarph is appropriate for a 50 gun ship, 1695.   The following from a contract for two 50 gun ships of 1695 mentions scarphs for the keel, but nothing regarding a boxing joint.  

Keeles to be of Elme (Not More than in Three Pieces) and to be fourteen Inches Square in the Midships with Scarphs Four Foot Four Inches Long at least and Each Scarph Tabled and laid with Tarr & Hair, to be well bolted with Six Bolts by an Inch Auger.   

Assuming a scarph is appropriate, would it be a horizontal scarph or a vertical scarph as found along the rest of the keel.  Goodwin describes boxing joints and a horizontal scarph, but nothing regarding a vertical scarph at the junction of the keel and stem.  I would be grateful if anyone can confirm if one of the below or some alternative is correct.    Allan

 

[mtdoramike]

I say give it the old Butt and be done with it:)

[druxey]

Franklin, Navy Board Ship Models, 1650-1750, shows boxing joints on a 4th rate of 1690 (figure 13, page 15), Bredah, 1692 (page 16) and a medley of boxing joint variations on page 18. Definitely a boxing joint is a reasonable assumption!

[allanyed]

  Thank you very much.  I looked at the drawings in Franklin and he does show what surely looks to be a boxing joint from the model of Bredah., even though he calls it a short plain scarph   I was surprised to see the 5 additional types of scarph joints found on contemporary models and should have seen these before.  Big oops on my part :<(     But, would any or all of these be typical of the joints used on the actual ships as well, not just ship models?    This chapter shows frame construction etc. for admiralty models which is nothing like actual shipyard practice so I would not be surprised if these joints are not to be necessarily found in the actual ship construction.    Barring any other insights, I agree, I will not be amiss in using a boxing joint.  Thanks again.

Allan

[druxey]

But why would contemporary model-makers bother to show complex joints there if a simple scarph was actually used? I'd put my money on a boxing joint, Allan!

[allanyed]

Thanks Druxey.  By the same token, why would the model makers use a stylized type of framing rather than full framing?  Based on the information I have been able to dig up I really think either a vertical scarph or boxing joint could be correct but will err on the side of caution and go with a boxing joint as you are betting :>) 

Allan

 

[druxey]

I'll ask them, the next time I see them ;). Perhaps while this stylized framing method demonstrated the run of the joint lines, it saved time and materials in constructing the model.