Young America 1853 by EdT - FINISHED - extreme clipper

[druxey]

To save bad language and lost deadeye blanks down the chuck, I turn the end of a piece of brass rod with a shallow cup the diameter and depth of the deadeye. I tap and drill into one side with a tiny thread (00-90) and use a screw to secure the blank from moving around while drilling the three holes. Try that, Ed.

[EdT]

I like your fixture, Druxey, if you have just a few sizes - and if you reuse it on succeeding models.  Young America has virtually every size from 16" down to 6" diameter, so I guess that would mean several different fixtures, right?  I have used two methods.  On the larger deadeyes a smaller diameter dowel in the chuck to act as a platform for the deadeye, shown in a previous post.  And then there is the tape that works quite well on all sizes.  In both cases the drill can pass out through the lower face.  I assume the drill bottoms on the cup in your fixture.  I assume the fixture also serves as a good holder for final sanding/buffing?

 

Ed

[druxey]

Correct on your assumption, Ed. I've a number of sizes made for different diameters. To prevent damage to the holder, a small hole is bored all the way through first. This allows a wire to be poked through, should the deadeye be unwilling to drop out after processing. Next the bore is drilled slightly smaller than the deadeye for about twice its thickness, then the hole opened out to the diameter of the deadeye for its depth. The deadeye then sits on a slight step and the drill bit doesn't chew up the holder.

[vonstetina]

Hi Ed,  Awesome work as usual. Ah....deadeyes....so many. The tiny blocks are a real treat to do when you get there. I made a special pair of block holding tweezers. I took cheap tweezers and turned the tips the other way so they met flat on edge, and filed little depressions across from each other. They grip deadeyes and blocks well for shaping. I have sent many tiny deadeyes and blocks into the 4th dimention [sp?]. They sure can't be found anywhere else. Plink! off they go.

 

Nice having the accuracy of machines and their tooling. I finally got a few.

 

Bruce

[Richard Griffith]

Beautiful work, great ideas~!   Thanks Ed.

 

Duff

[Remcohe]

Excellent metalwork Ed.

 

 

Correct on your assumption, Ed. I've a number of sizes made for different diameters. To prevent damage to the holder, a small hole is bored all the way through first. This allows a wire to be poked through, should the deadeye be unwilling to drop out after processing. Next the bore is drilled slightly smaller than the deadeye for about twice its thickness, then the hole opened out to the diameter of the deadeye for its depth. The deadeye then sits on a slight step and the drill bit doesn't chew up the holder.

Druxey, could you show a picture or a drawing of your setup. I have trouble understanding what your holder looks like.

 

Remco

[dgbot]

Remco, The fixture I made for my model was a rectangular piece of wood with a hole drilled partway through.  Then I added a strip of brass with three holes

drilled into it.  I tried to locate it but I guess my sister missed it.  I learned this method at a club meeting a long time ago.

David B

[EdT]

Young America - extreme clipper 1853
Part 160 –Deadeye Chains continued

 

Making the channel deadeyes went like lightning compared to making and installing the chains, but finally the fore and main channels on the starboard side were completed.  The first picture shows the fore starboard channels after painting the cap rails.

 

 

The completed main channel on the same side is shown below.

 

 

The photo highlights the need for some more liver of sulfur on some of the chains.  The deadeyes in all these pictures show very little luster – less than I would like. Repeated doses of Tung oil and buffing have left them flat and lifeless.  Obviously all of the oil has been sucked into the end grain faces of the deadeyes.  To remedy this I am now treating them over the oil coats with my old wood finishing standby, Wipe-on polyurethane.  I have also learned that all this finishing needs to be completed before fitting the deadeyes to the straps – unless they are perfectly aligned beforehand – not impossible but difficult.  In trying to rotate one after some post-application of oil, I broke the strap joint.  You may recall in the last post that I sized the slots in the channels to pass the lower eyes of the chains in case this happened and one had to be replaced.  That was a good idea.

 

The next pictures show work on the fore port channels.  In the first picture the first two deadeye/chain/chain cleat assemblies are installed and a shaped piece for the third is being fitted for cutting off.

 

 

In the next picture it has been cut to size and the top end crimped for the strap joint.

 

 

The size is being rechecked before fitting the strap.  Work continues in the next picture.

 

 

The fit on these is again checked after soldering the straps.  The next picture shows all six shroud chains fitted – minus deadeyes and blacking at this point..

 

 

This picture shows the next (7^th) chain.  This simply has an eye at the top to take the standing end of the fore upper topsail halyard. 

 

As a side note, I must say that taking these pictures and writing the text for this blog is often very helpful in finding and avoiding mistakes.  In the above picture you will notice notches cut into the channels between the 5^th and 6^th shroud chains, supposedly for the halyard standing end chain.  Seeing this located in that position in an earlier photo - when writing its caption - caused me to wonder about that location which indeed turned out to be incorrect – a drafting error.  The incorrect placement of the chain for line 240 can be seen in the first photo of the previous post (159).  The drawing was corrected and the chain was relocated as shown above, aft of the shrouds where it will be free of interference.  The companion chain for the halyard tackle on the other side also had to be removed and relocated – again making use of the increased slot width described above. 

 

There is still quite a bit of this work to do and it is going slowly as I am diverted by the usual list of springtime chores.

 

Ed

[Mirabell61]

Super work Ed   !!

 

Nils

[albert]

Hi Ed, fantastic ship model building.

[Mahuna]

Continuing great work Ed, even the re-do's!  I do agree with your comment on the look of the deadeyes, although on most full-size ships I've seen (not many, I'll admit) the deadeyes are fairly worn-looking.  However, the rest of the work on your model is so crisp that I do understand why you'd want to improve the finish on the deadeyes.

[druxey]

Nice progress, Ed. BTW, I've successfully used Clapham's paste wax on my blocks and deadeyes to give a low luster shine.

[EdT]

Thanks, everyone.  

 

Druxey, I think you are right about the wax.  Its almost too simple a solution, especially for one (me) who uses wax finish on virtually everything else.  I've been staying away from the wax solution since reaching the open decks because there are still lots of glued attachments to make, but the deadeyes could clearly be waxed without compromising that - probably applied after blackening the deadeye/chain assembly and before installing - will give it some thought.  Thanks.

 

Ed.

Edited April 30, 2016 by EdT

[Capt.Bob]

Hi Ed,

 

While you're out doing spring cleanup, I thought I'd pass along my appreciation of your pin alignment system. I'm just finishing up the forward half & cant frames.  After hand finishing them individually, I decided to double check each as a matched pair. I've gotten much better at sanding to the profile lines, but didn't want to risk a mismatch between port & strb.  The pin holes are 0.024" and I used 0,026" pins for a nice tight fit.  I am very pleased with the results.  Each frame pair fits perfectly without further finishing.  I am really impressed with the capability of your alignment system.  It even makes old guys like me look good.  Setup and installation is going to be my next hurdle.

 

Always look forward to your next post.  Now I have to get after my spring yard work.

 

Bob

[EdT]

Thank you for this note, Bob.  Using the approach described I became fully confident in the ability to bevel frames completely before erection, leaving only final finish sanding necessary on the framed hull.  I trust you will have the same experience with your frames.  The primary enabler for this and for the pin-indexed frame fabrication process is, as I am sure you realize, the precision of the pin placements on partner frames and also the precision of the three profiles drafted on the patterns for each frame pair.  This is my best example of a holistic modeling process that begins with drafting methods specifically tailored to support the modeling steps.  In his build log for the Irish famine ship, Frank (mahuna) adopted (and enhanced) this method of drafting and is using it in his framing as another example - an excellent one at that.

 

The key to this method is CAD drafting technology, and specifically the use of it's precision in taking and setting measurements.  While CAD can certainly be used to trace over imported images, this is much like using a Ferrari to do grocery shopping.  This method has error implications that may be more or less serious, depending on the modelers expectations for accuracy.   In the case of Young America, the original builder's table of offsets (accurate to 1/8" actual) was used to precisely draw waterlines.  With the fore and aft edges of every frame drawn over this plan, the precise dimension to every point on every profile could be measured and transferred to a body plan view to accurately draw each required profile.  Duplicate pin placement on paired frames was an easy next step.

 

Having an original table of offsets is not a prerequisite to use this method.  Rather than tracing frame profiles or even half-breadth lines from an imported image, measurements of waterlines and ribband lines can be taken from the print and used to create a derived table of offsets.  These dimensions can then be used as described above to create a half breadth plan for the model.  This method requires fairness checking of the half breadth plan to account for potential manual measurement errors and/or distortion in the print used.  This can be done by inspection of the half-breadth lines themselves and by drafting and checking some representative frame profiles from this plan.  When the half breadth lines have been checked to satisfaction, the dimension capabilities of CAD can be used to take and set profile dimensions. Using snap-to-intersection capability and keying in of dimensions to set points assures precision.

 

Some will say, "Is all this precision necessary?"  The answer is, of course, no.  While, it is true that imprecision in drafting model plans can lead to construction problems, nth degree precision is not needed to avoid that.  Each modeler's goals are different - as they should be.  Not everyone is bitten by the structural precision bug.  If you are, the above comments may prove helpful.  

 

Ed

[michael mott]

Ed your thoughts about precision are well taken. Working at such small scales requires a level of it in my view. To come close to replicating something that is often 50 to 100 times larger we forget that small measurements expand into enormous ones. We speak of the table of offsets being accurate to 1/8th which seems practical in full size lofting. We forget that that 1/8 reduced to the scale we work at as being of little consequence in some cases, it all being relative as you say. That said I personally find great satisfaction in being able to work by the numbers in most cases. This always for me brings to mind the precision of watch and clock making, which do not function properly without it.

 

Your work on the 6 inch dead eyes is akin to that sort of precision in my view. drilling three holes in a piece of wood that is .083 inch in diameter was no doubt challenging. I take my hat off to you now thinking about threading all those lines to set the shrouds at a future date.

 

Michael

[EdT]

Very good comments on precision and scale, Micheal.  Thanks for giving me an excuse to continue with the subject.  You are quite right and I agree that 1/8 at 1:72 scale - an actual .0017" - has little meaning on the model - a mere swipe of sandpaper or two.  When one considers that the original offsets table was created by taking physical measurements from a 1:48 scale half hull model where 1/8" = .0026", the idea of this precision becomes even foggier.  

 

Considering that even in the presence of measurement error from the 1:48 model to the offsets table, shipwrights still lofted patterns using these table dimensions.  So, we can take some confidence that the table is fairly representative of the constructed ship.  From the modeler's perspective, precise drawings based on the table can - in a way - be considered to have "zero" ( i.e. < .0017") error, since the precision of the CAD drawing is set at 1/8" real world. (When drawing a part - say a deadeye - and displaying it at say half the size of the screen, a 1/8" (actual) change in a dimension is easily detectable.)

 

 With this in mind the modeler can proceed confidently with construction, comfortable that the drawings and patterns do not already contain an accumulation of error from measurements, tracing, setting out, pencil width, and the like.  This accumulation of error - when added to construction error - can have noticeable effects.  I have seen this evidenced at various times in postings on this site as modelers wrestle with the issue - to say nothing of the accepted practice of heavy sanding/paring to fair hull framing.

 

Don't get me wrong.  I would not for a moment represent that my modeling achieves anything like this high level of precision, nor would I suggest that anyone set such a standard as a goal.  However, it is of comfort to me that I have only to deal with my own modeling error and not error built into the drawings.  So, to me, that is the value of all this.  I can accept the drawings and deal with or accept my own inability to duplicate them in wood.  

 

The other value of this somewhat arcane but useful discussion is that understanding error and precision can only be helpful in improving one's work. 

 

In reading all the above comments, I trust everyone recognizes the distinction between the concept of error and the entirely separate issue of drawing mistakes.  If not, I will be happy to try and explain.

 

Comments welcome!

 

Ed

 

Almost forgot, Micheal.  On the 6" deadeyes, the largest source of drilling error: flexing of the drill bit.  The only remedy: keeping the bit projection very short.

Edited May 1, 2016 by EdT

[Jeronimo]

Hi Ed,

beautiful work.

Karl

[ggrieco]

Looking beautiful Ed!

 

I really appreciate your in depth descriptions of what you're doing. I come away with a new technique every time I stop by. You're making me really want to get back to sailing vessels!

[EdT]

Thank you, Glenn and Karl.  Seems like a while since the last update.  Not too many pictures lately - unless there is interest in some of me at the computer working on rigging information - a major task.

 

Ed

[EdT]

Robin, I usually do not let the camera lens wander above my wrists, but for you I make an exception - per your request....

 

 

Please excuse the typical clutter.

 

All the best,

 

Ed

 

ps. should have an update posting shortly.

[EdT]

Young America - extreme clipper 1853
Part 161 – Bower Anchors 1

 

Work on the channel deadeyes and chains has been progressing, but a change of pace was necessary, so I began work on the ship’s anchors. 

 

Like most ships Young America carried several – probably two bower anchors, a smaller stream anchor and an even smaller kedge anchor.  This last was probably small enough to be stowed in one of the forward lockers or below the forecastle so I will not model it.  Over her very long career she carried different types of bower anchors, and very likely more than one type at a time.  The photo taken at San Francisco, probably in the 1860’s shows her swinging a wood stock type from her starboard cathead.  The New York photo, which I believe was taken later, shows a Trotmans anti-fouling type on the port cathead.  These two types span the range of development during the period.  I decided to make one Woodstock and one bar stock – bypassing the Trotmans type for now..

 

The first picture shows the arms of one of these being sawed out of some 1/8” thick brass plate.  This took a while and used a few jeweler saw blades, but it worked well to rough out the pieces using a drawing fragment as a pattern.

 

 

The next picture shows both bower anchors during fitting of the two main pieces.

 

 

The shaft was silver soldered to the arms using copper-phosphorus solder.

 

 

The anchor to the right has been soldered and given a first filling.  This joint took some heat.  I used a full sized propane torch.  I would have used the small oxy-propane torch but was out of O2.

 

In the next picture the side plates that thicken the shaft around the hole for the bar have been soldered on.  The second fluke is set up to be soldered.

 

 

In the next picture the flukes have been soldered on and the holes drilled for the bar and the shackle.

 

 

In this picture the filing and smoothing is well along.  The final anchor, less the bar stock is shown in the next picture.

 

 

This is almost ready for blackening.  I expect to mount this anchor on the port side of the forecastle in roughly the position shown in the last picture and may secure the stream anchor to its shaft.

 

 

These anchors obviously took up a lot of deck space and also added considerable weight to the bow, but this seems to have been where they were stowed.  They were not easy to move around.

 

Ed

[Mirabell61]

Ed,

 

that anchor is beautiful, also the surface treatment of the brass material

 

Nils

[allanyed]

Ed,

 

The anchors are beautifully done!   And as far a clutter, I think you added some just for the photo.  When I was lucky enough  to visit you and your shop many moons ago, there was not even  a spec of dust thanks to your central vacuum set up and duct work going to each work station.  Heck, even the wood scraps were neatly separated and neatly stored if I remember correctly.  Then again the remembering part is always an issue.  As Bette Davis put it so well, old age ain't no place for sissies.

 

As always, thanks for sharing so much on your building log.

 

Allan

[ianmajor]

Ed,

 

Beautiful work on the anchors and great to be able to see you next to your developing masterpiece.

[albert]

Hi Ed,very wonderful work.

[archjofo]

Phantastic work!

[druxey]

Nice photo: it should go on the flap or rear of the next volume's dust jacket!

[Mike Y]

It is a very charming photo, the man and his model.

Agree, it would be perfect on a book cover!

[EdT]

Thank you all very much, but lets not go overboard.  I'd much rather talk about anchors - or even deadeye chains.

 

Ed