3001|2980|2004-02-09 23:28:07|Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr|Re: building my own boat!! need help!|Actually the article with the building instructions said that no more than a 12 hp engine was required and mentioned the Universal Twin (also called a Blue Jacket) which was half of an atomic four and which produced less than12 HP as measured in the 1950's but which would be roughly 8 hp as we measure hp today, Jeff| 3002|2980|2004-02-10 10:21:10|info@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: building my own boat!! need help!|The anchor is sometimes the fastest method of travel when the tide goes against you. We have anchored during a race, and beaten the boats that kept sailing. 1 to 3 HP per ton displacement might serve as a rough guide to engine size, with 1 HP being typical in older boats, and 3 HP (or more) typical in newer boats. Engine RPM, transmission ratio, and prop size are just as important as engine HP (probably more important). For a displacement hull, a big, slow turning prop can generate more thrust, and much better punch into a head sea, than a small, fast turning prop, even if the small prop is driven by a more powerful engine. In general, try and fit the biggest prop possible to the boat, then select the transmission and engine to match. A 2 bladed prop in the aperture can minimize drag while sailing. Reserve HP is not a bad thing. If you can cruise at near hull speed in calm waters at 1/2 to 2/3 of red-line you will have a reserve to punch into a head sea in storm conditions. It can make the difference between making harbor in daylight or not. In general you never want to enter any new harbor/anchorage in the dark. One boat we know spent two days at sea in a storm in the Red Sea, and was severely tested, because they did not have enough punch to motor against the wind/sea for 2 miles through the reefs to make an anchorage before dark. greg elliott Engine H.P and the size of boats. It depends on where you are and the size of tides that you have to live with. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3003|2980|2004-02-10 13:22:14|Cameron|Re: building my own boat!! need help!|Hey all, thanks for the help so far. I knwo the original plan was for a wooden boat, but that could be fairly tough to build. yes i dream, but i also have a rough representation of reality in my head. Thats why i found out about steel hulled boats and came here. I can weld, and have worked at a metal fabrication shop before. so i have a little bit of skill. So engine wise, and in a storm, should i just take the 400 ci big block out of my trans am and use it as an engine? yeah it might take up room, but that would go through a storm i would reckon. ;) maybe a tad bit overkill eh? Can you use 16 or 12 guage or whatever guage sheet metal for hull contruction, and weld it on a frame? what king of paint should you use for the metal to stop the water from raping it? where can i find cheap pumps? I want this ship to be mostly a sailer/cruiser, rather than by motor, so what would this invovle? rookie question here, but how hard is it to sail in a storm by yourself? what kind of matress would ya'll recommend for sea? i here the normal ones get pretty rotted after a while in the ocean. I know i shouldn't have a timeline, but i kinda do have have one, because in a year i have to go back to school to become smart and function in society instead of being a vagabond ocean drifter (although that would kick ass if it didn't mean me starving to death after i ran out of food. i could also eat dogfish though...) so to have my one big sailing trip i want to be finished in the srping of 2005. maybe it will take a lot of money, but remember i am a farm hand. anything goes. second hand matress and my arm as a pillow is heaven. Scrounged plywood from an old barn and 80 old paints cans is okay by me. When the boat is finished, she'll be the ugliest thing you'll ever see, but hopefully she floats and sails. Call her a Heinz 57 of the sailing world. now theres a name for her... So like i said, 20 000$ is out of the question. second hand parts and wool blankets are okay by me. any tips on where to find everything i will need? and if i drown, meh, thats okay. nobody lives forever. and at least you'd die doing something entertaining. like a ww1 officer said before going over the top "c'mon ya bastards, do you want to live forever?" -Cameron| 3004|2980|2004-02-10 13:59:08|Cameron|Re: building my own boat!! need help!|sorry to double post, but i had some more thoughts. I was looking at the http://www.stevproj.com/VacLnDrg.jpg boat, and that looks fairly decent. i don't htink its steel, but thats beside the point. What i noticed was it had an outboard motor on it, and not an inboard. what are your thoughts on that? Is a outboard enough power to get you out of a strong tide? how are they in storms. what are the dangers? my dad and i used to go out at our cabin in a aluminum hulled fishing boat with an outboard and bomb around on the crappiest days hitting six footer waves, and she did really well. I reckon the ocean is different (understatement i know) but water is water. plus i hope to be using the sails cause i am a cheap bugger and wind is free. So any info on this outboard dealy for an ocean going/mostly coastal sailer would be wicked. i just wonder where i can put a fresh water tank, caues the boat seems a tad bit small. maybe not. thanks again- Cameron| 3005|2980|2004-02-10 15:59:24|Jack Gardiner|Re: building my own boat!! need help!|Hi, Been lurking around here for sometime, Hello everybody, I am building the smaller version of that boat, the weekender. These boats are very small and light, without ballasted keel, the one piece keel helps it track without blowing away. These boats are often powered by a small electric or a small outboard mainly to get home when the wind dies, or get thru the current under a bridge. also they are not considered "bluewater" boats. mostly protected waterways. swamping is a real danger. heres a cool little coastal cruiser im in the building stages, I have a hull and starting to install floor and infloor ballast/drinking water tanks. http://home.triad.rr.com/lcruise/paradox1.htm Its a Paradox by Matt Layden. Its a lug rigged sharpie hulled coastal cruiser, if you check out this link http://www.microcruising.com you will find some great info on these smaller cruisers. These are both plywood and epoxy construction and since they are 2 folded hull sides that are joined I guess they fit the oragami method. I settle for these small boats as I cannot at this point in my life afford the time and money req to go at it full size full time in steel as I do have a background in welding/fabricating. Also starting off building the smaller boats is a good idea as you can get your skills up to par on a much smaller scale, mistakes are not a serious or as expensive I understand your lust for traditional boatbuilding as you envision it. In todays world you can get alot of boat built with just epoxy and wood for not too much $$ as opposed to old school boatbuilding. You are on the right track as you are researching the options. good luck!!! Jack, Frozen in R.I. ----- Original Message ----- From: Cameron To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 1:58 PM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: building my own boat!! need help! sorry to double post, but i had some more thoughts. I was looking at the http://www.stevproj.com/VacLnDrg.jpg boat, and that looks fairly decent. i don't htink its steel, but thats beside the point. What i noticed was it had an outboard motor on it, and not an inboard. what are your thoughts on that? Is a outboard enough power to get you out of a strong tide? how are they in storms. what are the dangers? my dad and i used to go out at our cabin in a aluminum hulled fishing boat with an outboard and bomb around on the crappiest days hitting six footer waves, and she did really well. I reckon the ocean is different (understatement i know) but water is water. plus i hope to be using the sails cause i am a cheap bugger and wind is free. So any info on this outboard dealy for an ocean going/mostly coastal sailer would be wicked. i just wonder where i can put a fresh water tank, caues the boat seems a tad bit small. maybe not. thanks again- Cameron To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3006|3006|2004-02-10 16:13:31|kingsknight4life|bilge keel questions|Can someone help me with these questions? What is the distance between the keels at the top and the bottom? I also need to know the distance from the hull bottom to the keel bottom? I'm trying to get quotes to move my boat but it's on Van. Isl. and I'm on the mainland and I'm trying to avoid going over just to measure it. all the movers are asking these questions. Does anyone know of somone with a lowbed flatdeck and crane that wants to make some money? I could always move it like that, too? thanks Rowland| 3007|3006|2004-02-10 17:35:18|brentswain38|Re: bilge keel questions|Rowland Ken Smith of Smoky Lake Alberta has a trailer he built for the 36 ft twin keeler. He moved his boat out from Alberta on it and was moored in Ladner last I heard. He would probably be willing to rent his traier to you. Marcel's 36 foot single keeler was shipped from Vancouver to Montreal on a standard lowbed with no problems and it's a lot higher than your boat ,being a single keeler.I'll check the drawings for height and get back to you.You are probably around ten feet from the bottom of the keels to the tiop of the wheelhouse. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "kingsknight4life" wrote: > Can someone help me with these questions? What is the distance > between the keels at the top and the bottom? I also need to know the > distance from the hull bottom to the keel bottom? I'm trying to get > quotes to move my boat but it's on Van. Isl. and I'm on the mainland > and I'm trying to avoid going over just to measure it. all the movers > are asking these questions. > Does anyone know of somone with a lowbed flatdeck and crane that > wants to make some money? I could always move it like that, too? > thanks Rowland | 3008|2980|2004-02-11 03:53:25|Ben Tucker|Re: building my own boat!! need help!|>The vacationer is a nice boat built out of plywood. A freind of mine is nearly finished building one and i am looking foward to sailing her. They are not oceangoing and only just coastal, more suited to inshore waters. With no ballast they are not self righting and are more of a big dingy. Still should be lots of fun, and has been very easy to build. Outboards are very good on small boats and don't have to be as big as you might think, but they arn't any use in a 'storm' so your sails become the primary system and must be good+ good crew. I had a great time on a 2.5 ton 27 footer for years with no engine (big oars) and then fitted a 3.5 hp dingy outboard which pushed her in and out of berths and calms quite well. Grey hair can be a problem with all this, especally in new waters and strong tides. Read Annie Hills Voyaging on a small income for some good ideas. Ben| 3009|3009|2004-02-11 08:25:58|bubblede|got the book yesterday ;-)|Thanks Brent, that was fast from there to here in no time First impressions: - Good investment, lots of good ideas and overall a very clear no- nonsense approach that - if somebody has the courage to adopt - will safe tons of cash and sweat in fitting out _any_ boat. - The part on building the hull is so short that i was always waiting for a more detailed explanation later on... ;-) actually, it's all there, and it's short because there is probably not much more to say about it. I guess that the 10 or so pages (including the pictures) on building the hull represent the amount of time that will go into building it as opposed to the rest of the work - that would fit with my experiences with other assembly methods, and I can not see anything in there that would not work, it all makes sense and I only w2ish I had known about that 20 years ago. - a bit disappointing: I had expected more on the process of adapting/converting hull-designs to origami, on creating the model, the cuts, experimenting with different hullshapes or cuts for darts - all ther is is once lonely sentence to take the measures from a designers plan of from a model... Well, that's what I will have to to do then ;-) if anybody has any practical experiences and experiments with other hull shapes, I would appreciate all tips and input. Overall well worth the money and a good way to review your own approach to boats and building and general expectations in life and to help you focus on what really counts and what is worth what and why... and no doubts at all in that regard for Brent's book, whatever boat you want to build or buy. Gerd, Budapest www.justmueller.com/boats/| 3010|3009|2004-02-11 12:23:20|jim dorey|Re: got the book yesterday ;-)|there's a paper craft software package i was thinking of using, can't remember where, but there's a guy who made that rifle from the movie aliens out of paper using it, and some other very round sci-fi things, he has a link to it, which i've lost in the pile. if it's adaptable to boat design of the origami type it should be easy to see if the hull you've chosen can be converted. bubblede wrote: > > - a bit disappointing: I had expected more on the process of > adapting/converting hull-designs to origami, on creating the model, > the cuts, experimenting with different hullshapes or cuts for darts - > all ther is is once lonely sentence to take the measures from a > designers plan of from a model... Well, that's what I will have to > to do then ;-) if anybody has any practical experiences and > experiments with other hull shapes, I would appreciate all tips and > input. -- http://www.skaar.101main.net http://www.PetitionOnline.com/spcdvd/ http://www.petitiononline.com/impjapan/petition-sign.html? moderator of wildsteam@yahoogroups.com DOM and proud!!!| 3011|2980|2004-02-11 16:42:29|fmichael graham|Re: building my own boat!! need help!|Cameron: I would strongly suggest that you send for Brent Swain's book. It will cost you about as much as a case of beer and will give you a lot of insight into building a proven off-shore boat on a tight budget. The book and this web site will help make you realize your dream. I bought the book and it really is worth its weight in gold. In the mean time, read all of the previous posts and you will find that the members of this group have varying degrees of experience in building boats & sailing them, from "zero" to "pro". I wish I had had these resources when I was your age. Good Luck! Mike Graham Cameron wrote: My name is Cameron Ware and I am a 17 year old student. I finish High School this year, and my plan is to build a 27ft yacht and sail around the canadian coast in the winter of 2004, and in the spring of 2005 try to sail to mexico. The trouble is i have grown up a farm hand in the middle of the canadian west, and have no boat building or marine experience. Now i know all of you will tell me to take a marine course and all the PR crap that everyone is required to say, but what i really want is some down to earth sailor jargon about what i need to know. http://www.svensons.com/boat/?p=SailBoats/StarLite this is the boat i plan on building, but i will name is something cooler and paint it red ochre or something like that. I need to know is this a good idea for a boat to sail around like i want? Are there any other boats that you would suggest? You have to remember i am on a student budget here and have next to no money. They suggest an engine of around 35hp. where do you find a 35hp engine other than the pull kind? i was just gonna pick up one of those 4cyl volkswagon microbus engines; any input? As for construction tips, anything would be appreciated. do i have to tar the bottom? or is resin covering ample enough? can i use a nail gun to staple together the frame, or should i use glue, screws etc. Whats the difference between a marine toilet and a regular toilet. how hard is it to put a shower in these things? And how do you get a marine stove? Can you just use those propane ones that screw on the top of a propane bottle? And what about sleeping quarters? How do you go about making the mattress holder thing? I know i sound stupid, and most likely i am when it comes to sailing matters. I know the generalities of most everything, but in this case it is next to nothing. Any help would be greatly appreciated. To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links --------------------------------- Post your free ad now! Yahoo! Canada Personals [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3012|2980|2004-02-11 17:08:51|fmichael graham|Re: building my own boat!! need help!|Cameron: I should read all of the posts before I start replying to any, but... So, you've got welding skills. perfect! As Alex has just told us, the hull material will run you about $7,500. You can buy a small offshore capable boat - like an International Folkboat (26 foot) - for $7,000-$10,000. I would suggest that you go bigger. A boat seems to shrink a foot a day when your off exploring! I highly recommend that you buy a book written by Robin Lee Graham called "Dove". He wrote it after sailing around the world between the ages of 16 and 19. It gives a very clear view of the general subject of offshore sailing, and is a good read. As far as engines are concerned, they are all a pain in the butt and only needed when entering/exiting ports, transitting narrow channels and to run electronics. I sailed my 30' Cal around B.C. for one summer without an engine and will probably use an outboard when I build my "Swain". Outboards are crap, they need to be removed for all but port entrys/exits, and if the authorities in most ports still allowed it, I would prefer to use a sweep(oar). Regards, Mike Graham Cameron wrote: sorry to double post, but i had some more thoughts. I was looking at the http://www.stevproj.com/VacLnDrg.jpg boat, and that looks fairly decent. i don't htink its steel, but thats beside the point. What i noticed was it had an outboard motor on it, and not an inboard. what are your thoughts on that? Is a outboard enough power to get you out of a strong tide? how are they in storms. what are the dangers? my dad and i used to go out at our cabin in a aluminum hulled fishing boat with an outboard and bomb around on the crappiest days hitting six footer waves, and she did really well. I reckon the ocean is different (understatement i know) but water is water. plus i hope to be using the sails cause i am a cheap bugger and wind is free. So any info on this outboard dealy for an ocean going/mostly coastal sailer would be wicked. i just wonder where i can put a fresh water tank, caues the boat seems a tad bit small. maybe not. thanks again- Cameron To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links --------------------------------- Post your free ad now! Yahoo! Canada Personals [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3013|3013|2004-02-11 19:20:48|edward_stoneuk|Welding Details|What is the recommended specification for welding deck to hull; continuous welds both sides, continuous weld weather side with stitch welds underneath, continuous weld weather side only? And the same for deck to deck and deck to cabin sides? Regards, Ted| 3014|3014|2004-02-11 19:46:26|Steven Schofield|material specifications & costs|Hi all! I have been lurking around here for almost a month and I've learned a lot and gotten a lot of ideas for my next boat. I am primarily interested in building with aluminum. I've done some searches on the net trying to find what common sizes aluminum sheets come in and the cost, but haven't come up with any useful specifics. Does anyone know any good sources for costs for certain thicknesses and size sheets? I've been reading the posts regarding Cameron with great interest. If I'm reading him right, he doesn't have $7000 for metal, etc. He's truly on a shoestring budget. He needs to think outside the box. He should watch the film "Waterworld". Look at the trimaran made from steel tubes and tanks. Fast, bulletproof, very easy to build and it would cost less than a thousand dollars to acquire the necessary used tubes and tanks and odd steel pieces to build a boat like that. Forget the silly sailing rig and mechanical system that that boat has. Get on the net and learn about Chinese junk sail rigs. Any one can make a serviceable junk sail out of tyvek, woven tarp, or plastic sheet for less than a couple hundred dollars. If you build it yourself you will never have any problem repairing it. Need a mast, a tree trunk doesn't cost much. You can make all the fittings you need for very little. I'd bet a person could build a boat like this for a couple of thousand. Something to think about! _________________________________________________________________ Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/photos&pgmarket=en-ca&RU=http%3a%2f%2fjoin.msn.com%2f%3fpage%3dmisc%2fspecialoffers%26pgmarket%3den-ca| 3015|3013|2004-02-11 20:20:24|Richard Till|Re: Welding Details|Ted, I opted for continuous welds both sides for everything: albeit in small lengths and well spread about. Other folks may have other opinions but for structural integrity and corosion resistance--this is the only approach that works for me. All the best, rt >From: "edward_stoneuk" >Reply-To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com >To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com >Subject: [origamiboats] Welding Details >Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 00:19:52 -0000 > >What is the recommended specification for welding deck to hull; >continuous welds both sides, continuous weld weather side with stitch >welds underneath, continuous weld weather side only? And the same >for deck to deck and deck to cabin sides? > >Regards, >Ted > _________________________________________________________________ MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus&pgmarket=en-ca&RU=http%3a%2f%2fjoin.msn.com%2f%3fpage%3dmisc%2fspecialoffers%26pgmarket%3den-ca| 3016|3014|2004-02-11 20:35:02|graeme mitchell|Re: material specifications & costs|Steve Sizes seem to depend on transport and from where they have to transported too, if what you want is made locally you seem to be able to get larger sizes of what ever you want eg ali or steel. Look at local mills in your area for larger sizes. ----- Original Message ----- From: Steven Schofield To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2004 8:46 AM Subject: [origamiboats] material specifications & costs Hi all! I have been lurking around here for almost a month and I've learned a lot and gotten a lot of ideas for my next boat. I am primarily interested in building with aluminum. I've done some searches on the net trying to find what common sizes aluminum sheets come in and the cost, but haven't come up with any useful specifics. Does anyone know any good sources for costs for certain thicknesses and size sheets? I've been reading the posts regarding Cameron with great interest. If I'm reading him right, he doesn't have $7000 for metal, etc. He's truly on a shoestring budget. He needs to think outside the box. He should watch the film "Waterworld". Look at the trimaran made from steel tubes and tanks. Fast, bulletproof, very easy to build and it would cost less than a thousand dollars to acquire the necessary used tubes and tanks and odd steel pieces to build a boat like that. Forget the silly sailing rig and mechanical system that that boat has. Get on the net and learn about Chinese junk sail rigs. Any one can make a serviceable junk sail out of tyvek, woven tarp, or plastic sheet for less than a couple hundred dollars. If you build it yourself you will never have any problem repairing it. Need a mast, a tree trunk doesn't cost much. You can make all the fittings you need for very little. I'd bet a person could build a boat like this for a couple of thousand. Something to think about! _________________________________________________________________ Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/photos&pgmarket=en-ca&RU=http%3a%2f%2fjoin.msn.com%2f%3fpage%3dmisc%2fspecialoffers%26pgmarket%3den-ca To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3017|3014|2004-02-11 20:38:36|graeme mitchell|Re: material specifications & costs|Steve What is that site for kevin Kosner boat ---- Original Message ----- From: Steven Schofield To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2004 8:46 AM Subject: [origamiboats] material specifications & costs Hi all! I have been lurking around here for almost a month and I've learned a lot and gotten a lot of ideas for my next boat. I am primarily interested in building with aluminum. I've done some searches on the net trying to find what common sizes aluminum sheets come in and the cost, but haven't come up with any useful specifics. Does anyone know any good sources for costs for certain thicknesses and size sheets? I've been reading the posts regarding Cameron with great interest. If I'm reading him right, he doesn't have $7000 for metal, etc. He's truly on a shoestring budget. He needs to think outside the box. He should watch the film "Waterworld". Look at the trimaran made from steel tubes and tanks. Fast, bulletproof, very easy to build and it would cost less than a thousand dollars to acquire the necessary used tubes and tanks and odd steel pieces to build a boat like that. Forget the silly sailing rig and mechanical system that that boat has. Get on the net and learn about Chinese junk sail rigs. Any one can make a serviceable junk sail out of tyvek, woven tarp, or plastic sheet for less than a couple hundred dollars. If you build it yourself you will never have any problem repairing it. Need a mast, a tree trunk doesn't cost much. You can make all the fittings you need for very little. I'd bet a person could build a boat like this for a couple of thousand. Something to think about! _________________________________________________________________ Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/photos&pgmarket=en-ca&RU=http%3a%2f%2fjoin.msn.com%2f%3fpage%3dmisc%2fspecialoffers%26pgmarket%3den-ca To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3018|3014|2004-02-12 00:42:53|vinnie_barberino2000|Re: material specifications & costs|Rumour has it down here that the trimaran in 'waterworld'is Sir Peter Blakes old Steinlager 1.Looks similar to his boat Steve --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "graeme mitchell" wrote: > > Steve > > > What is that site for kevin Kosner boat > > ---- Original Message ----- > From: Steven Schofield > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2004 8:46 AM > Subject: [origamiboats] material specifications & costs > > > Hi all! > I have been lurking around here for almost a month and I've learned a lot > and gotten a lot of ideas for my next boat. > > I am primarily interested in building with aluminum. I've done some searches > on the net trying to find what common sizes aluminum sheets come in and the > cost, but haven't come up with any useful specifics. Does anyone know any > good sources for costs for certain thicknesses and size sheets? > > I've been reading the posts regarding Cameron with great interest. If I'm > reading him right, he doesn't have $7000 for metal, etc. He's truly on a > shoestring budget. He needs to think outside the box. He should watch the > film "Waterworld". Look at the trimaran made from steel tubes and tanks. > Fast, bulletproof, very easy to build and it would cost less than a thousand > dollars to acquire the necessary used tubes and tanks and odd steel pieces > to build a boat like that. Forget the silly sailing rig and mechanical > system that that boat has. Get on the net and learn about Chinese junk sail > rigs. Any one can make a serviceable junk sail out of tyvek, woven tarp, or > plastic sheet for less than a couple hundred dollars. If you build it > yourself you will never have any problem repairing it. > Need a mast, a tree trunk doesn't cost much. You can make all the fittings > you need for very little. > I'd bet a person could build a boat like this for a couple of thousand. > > Something to think about! > > _________________________________________________________________ > Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. > http://join.msn.com/?page=features/photos&pgmarket=en-ca&RU=http% 3a%2f%2fjoin.msn.com%2f%3fpage%3dmisc%2fspecialoffers%26pgmarket%3den- ca > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ADVERTISEMENT > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- > Yahoo! Groups Links > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3019|3014|2004-02-12 02:29:49|info@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: material specifications & costs|I'd heard that two identical tri's were built for the movie. Jeanneau design. 70 feet. More than $1,000,000.00 US. Not sure if the report is accurate. Some alloy origami designs can be seen on our web-site. Alloy in our area (BC) comes in 8x20 foot sheets. greg elliott http://www.origamimagic.com ----- Original Message ----- From: vinnie_barberino2000 To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2004 9:42 PM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: material specifications & costs Rumour has it down here that the trimaran in 'waterworld'is Sir Peter Blakes old Steinlager 1.Looks similar to his boat Steve --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "graeme mitchell" wrote: > > Steve > > > What is that site for kevin Kosner boat > > ---- Original Message ----- > From: Steven Schofield > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2004 8:46 AM > Subject: [origamiboats] material specifications & costs > > > Hi all! > I have been lurking around here for almost a month and I've learned a lot > and gotten a lot of ideas for my next boat. > > I am primarily interested in building with aluminum. I've done some searches > on the net trying to find what common sizes aluminum sheets come in and the > cost, but haven't come up with any useful specifics. Does anyone know any > good sources for costs for certain thicknesses and size sheets? > > I've been reading the posts regarding Cameron with great interest. If I'm > reading him right, he doesn't have $7000 for metal, etc. He's truly on a > shoestring budget. He needs to think outside the box. He should watch the > film "Waterworld". Look at the trimaran made from steel tubes and tanks. > Fast, bulletproof, very easy to build and it would cost less than a thousand > dollars to acquire the necessary used tubes and tanks and odd steel pieces > to build a boat like that. Forget the silly sailing rig and mechanical > system that that boat has. Get on the net and learn about Chinese junk sail > rigs. Any one can make a serviceable junk sail out of tyvek, woven tarp, or > plastic sheet for less than a couple hundred dollars. If you build it > yourself you will never have any problem repairing it. > Need a mast, a tree trunk doesn't cost much. You can make all the fittings > you need for very little. > I'd bet a person could build a boat like this for a couple of thousand. > > Something to think about! > > _________________________________________________________________ > Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. > http://join.msn.com/?page=features/photos&pgmarket=en-ca&RU=http% 3a%2f%2fjoin.msn.com%2f%3fpage%3dmisc%2fspecialoffers%26pgmarket%3den- ca > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ADVERTISEMENT > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- > Yahoo! Groups Links > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3020|3009|2004-02-12 02:55:02|bubblede|Re: got the book yesterday ;-)|That might be interesting - would be nice if you find that ;-) At the moment I am playing around with Rhino, seems very powerful for anything that is straightforward developable, but I have not found yet how to expand a surface that is not strictly speaking flat. What I still fail to see is how to design the lines including the conical parts for and aft and _then_ cut... Looks like this is much by trial and error, starting out with a normal chine hull, then cutting and then you get what you get. Nothing wrong with that I guess, but how would you design the finished shape _before_ actually making a model and then lifting the points of that? Gerd, Budapest --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, jim dorey wrote: > there's a paper craft software package i was thinking of using, can't > remember where, but there's a guy who made that rifle from the movie > aliens out of paper using it, and some other very round sci-fi things, > he has a link to it, which i've lost in the pile. if it's adaptable to > boat design of the origami type it should be easy to see if the hull > you've chosen can be converted. | 3021|3014|2004-02-12 03:06:26|bubblede|Re: material specifications & costs|Hi Steven good points here, but just for the record: the trimaran in Waterworld is the ex "pierre Premier", sailed in transatlantic racing by Florance Arthaud. She was I believe the first women in solo-transatlatic racing that was equipped with competitive material and actually won the race, don't remember wich one (OSTAR?). after that it became quiet about here, she spent a lot of time on tv and promotion and was on the cover of evry europeean magazin, but I think I have seen her preparing for something again recently. Originally the boat was painted beautifully shiny gold, quite a sensation at the time, and its only for the movie that they painted the junk-look over it ;-) Gerd Budapest --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Steven Schofield" wrote: > Hi all! > I have been lurking around here for almost a month and I've learned a lot > and gotten a lot of ideas for my next boat. > > I am primarily interested in building with aluminum. I've done some searches > on the net trying to find what common sizes aluminum sheets come in and the > cost, but haven't come up with any useful specifics. Does anyone know any > good sources for costs for certain thicknesses and size sheets? > > I've been reading the posts regarding Cameron with great interest. If I'm > reading him right, he doesn't have $7000 for metal, etc. He's truly on a > shoestring budget. He needs to think outside the box. He should watch the > film "Waterworld". Look at the trimaran made from steel tubes and tanks. > Fast, bulletproof, very easy to build and it would cost less than a thousand > dollars to acquire the necessary used tubes and tanks and odd steel pieces > to build a boat like that. Forget the silly sailing rig and mechanical > system that that boat has. Get on the net and learn about Chinese junk sail > rigs. Any one can make a serviceable junk sail out of tyvek, woven tarp, or > plastic sheet for less than a couple hundred dollars. If you build it > yourself you will never have any problem repairing it. > Need a mast, a tree trunk doesn't cost much. You can make all the fittings > you need for very little. > I'd bet a person could build a boat like this for a couple of thousand. > > Something to think about! > > _________________________________________________________________ > Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. > http://join.msn.com/?page=features/photos&pgmarket=en-ca&RU=http% 3a%2f%2fjoin.msn.com%2f%3fpage%3dmisc%2fspecialoffers%26pgmarket% 3den-ca| 3022|3022|2004-02-12 03:12:10|bubblede|waterworld... ooops !|just checked it out - it was not Pierre Premier, (later LAKOTA), but a specialist _replica_ of pierre premier!!| 3023|3014|2004-02-12 06:42:33|Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr|Re: material specifications & costs|The Trimarran used in waterworld was an obsolete Formula 60. Kevin Cosner was not a sailor and was very prone to seasickness making filming difficult. One of the hot multihull jockies (I am drawing a blank on his name) operated the rigging and steered the boat from an enclosed and chamoflaged steering station. The boat was not a Jeaneau design and Jeaneau had nothing to do with it. Jeff| 3024|3014|2004-02-12 07:32:16|bubblede|Re: material specifications & costs|Jeff, if you google for :florence arthaud waterworld you will find tons of info, among others at:http://jeanneau.tripod.com/id177.htm "In 1994, Jeanneau Advanced Technologies (JAT) who produced the LAGOON range of catamarans, manufactured two specialist trimarans for the film WATERWORLD. The film provide dynamic exposure of the fantastic designs of Marc Van Peteghem and Vincent Lauriot- Prévost's as well as Jeanneau craftsmanship to a massive worldwide audience. The trimaran is a specialist replica of Florence Arthaud's "Pierre 1er" (Lakota), and was able to sail at speeds reaching 33 knots. ... " JAT is part of jeanneau and was supposed to cater for the high-tech image of the yard. Both jeanneau and Benetau are situated in the area north of la rochelle, in Vendee, and in the meantime jeanneau was sort of eaten up by beneteau I think. actually I know the boat, visited it several times in la rochelle and met florence briefly. Gerd, Budapest --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr" wrote: > The Trimarran used in waterworld was an obsolete Formula 60. Kevin Cosner > was not a sailor and was very prone to seasickness making filming difficult. > One of the hot multihull jockies (I am drawing a blank on his name) operated > the rigging and steered the boat from an enclosed and chamoflaged steering > station. The boat was not a Jeaneau design and Jeaneau had nothing to do > with it. > > Jeff | 3025|3009|2004-02-12 08:52:39|Gary H. Lucas|Re: got the book yesterday ;-)|Gerd, I use Rhino in my job. I scanned in Brent's lines off of the plans I bought for the 31' What I found out is that there is compound curvature at the bow and stern that makes modeling it difficult. If you try to make a hull to his lines that is full developable you get a crease from the end of the chine to the bow and stern. that definitely isn't there on a real boat. I think I found a solution though. It occurred to me that this crease wouldn't happen with real metal because it would require a reversal of the bend, which isn't going to happen. So after doing the developable model. I tried adjusting the lines keeping the length of the lines exactly the same while curving it to fit into the actual lines Brent provides. This seems a reasonable assumption because the physical size of the sheet edge to edge can't be changed using only the hand tools one uses to pull a hull together. The curves can then be lofted to produce a fairly accurate model of the real hull. One can then flatten the developable surfaces with the crease to give you an actual flat pattern for steel cutting. Gary H. Lucas ----- Original Message ----- From: "bubblede" To: Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2004 2:54 AM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: got the book yesterday ;-) > That might be interesting - would be nice if you find that ;-) > At the moment I am playing around with Rhino, seems very powerful > for anything that is straightforward developable, but I have not > found yet how to expand a surface that is not strictly speaking flat. > What I still fail to see is how to design the lines including the > conical parts for and aft and _then_ cut... > Looks like this is much by trial and error, starting out with a > normal chine hull, then cutting and then you get what you get. > Nothing wrong with that I guess, but how would you design the > finished shape _before_ actually making a model and then lifting the > points of that? > > > Gerd, Budapest > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, jim dorey wrote: > > there's a paper craft software package i was thinking of using, > can't > > remember where, but there's a guy who made that rifle from the > movie > > aliens out of paper using it, and some other very round sci-fi > things, > > he has a link to it, which i've lost in the pile. if it's > adaptable to > > boat design of the origami type it should be easy to see if the > hull > > you've chosen can be converted. > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > | 3026|2996|2004-02-12 10:14:24|edward_stoneuk|Re: Pictures Project YAGO 31 on my website|Gerd You have a very interesting website. I agree that a gaff rig is probably the best looking of all the rigs. I sailed on a single masted junk rigged 34' boat with inboard bilge board, hinged dagger boards if you like. It went very well indeed. It was a plywood and cold moulded hull. The difficulty with a steel boat would be painting inside the slots for the daggerboards. Regards, Ted| 3027|3014|2004-02-12 10:53:46|Steven Schofield|Re: material specifications & costs|8 X 20 must be a common industry size for aluminum. 8 foot wide is perfect for the boat I would want to build. I'm in Nova Scotia which makes the closest aluminum producers that I know of to be in Quebec(about 500 miles away). If I could get my order sent with an order to an industry here it probably wouldn't cost anything for shipping(I've ordered aluminum pipe for masts in the past and shipping ended up being free because it came in a load of irrigation pipe: I had to drive 10 miles to pick it up). For sheet I could rent a flatbed truck or a large car trailer to move it to my construction site. Somebody was wondering how to close up the open ends of a pipe. I took a toilet paper roll(to simulate a steel tube), cut darts in it on opposite sides of the end and squeezed the sides together. You could cut away some of the end material to give your "stem" or "stern" whatever shape that might please you. If you do this experiment you will also notice the deck area and underbody are elongated. A little rise to your deck at the end of the boat looks good and the dart at the underbody are can have a triangular piece of material inserted into it which will give a skeg to protect and attach your rudder to. I'm sure there are many ways to shape the ends to both keep out water and reduce drag. The elongated underbody is a problem that can be eliminated by putting in more darts, although it's actually only a problem of looks. If you look at traditional flatbottom chinese junk boats they actually added material under the bows of their boat. These sailboats had no keel and lateral resistance was provided by the rudder and this piece sticking down from the bow. This system worked. People don't tend to do things for centuries that don't work! People have built boats out of steel tanks in the past. I remember a zany craft some people had constructed out of corrigated drainage pipe, I think I saw it in Cruising World within the last ten years. They used corrigated because they could get it for nothing and they weren't interested in going fast. When steel tanks are no longer being used anymore people will let you have them just to get them off of their property. Weld them together end to end, cut out large access holes between the tanks for access, build and install hatches with plexiglass tops to allow in light......hmmm....I originally thought of this as a solution for someone else, but I think I've just sold myself on this idea. I'm going to go now and work this idea out a little further on paper. >From: >Reply-To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com >To: >Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: material specifications & costs >Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 23:29:16 -0800 >MIME-Version: 1.0 >X-Sender: info@... >Received: from n16.grp.scd.yahoo.com ([66.218.66.71]) by >mc4-f24.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6824); Wed, 11 Feb 2004 >23:30:27 -0800 >Received: from [66.218.66.94] by n16.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 12 Feb >2004 07:29:51 -0000 >Received: (qmail 36806 invoked from network); 12 Feb 2004 07:29:49 -0000 >Received: from unknown (66.218.66.172) by m1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; >12 Feb 2004 07:29:49 -0000 >Received: from unknown (HELO host20.ipowerweb.com) (12.129.211.120) by >mta4.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 12 Feb 2004 07:29:49 -0000 >Received: from 139-142-112-135.dialup.islandnet.com ([139.142.112.135] >helo=2000xp)by host20.ipowerweb.com with asmtp (Exim 3.36 #1)id >1ArBGR-0004jG-00for origamiboats@yahoogroups.com; Wed, 11 Feb 2004 23:28:00 >-0800 >X-Message-Info: JGTYoYF78jF1zVWcI6ldp5dTXMYiYVp/ >X-eGroups-Return: >sentto-1579488-3020-1076570990-cpt6pk=hotmail.com@... >X-Apparently-To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com >Message-ID: <004601c3f13a$02919b80$87708e8b@2000xp> >References: >X-MSMail-Priority: Normal >X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106 >X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 >X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with >any abuse report >X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - host20.ipowerweb.com >X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - yahoogroups.com >X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [0 0] >X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - easysoftwareinc.com >X-eGroups-Remote-IP: 12.129.211.120 >X-Yahoo-Profile: easysoftware99 >Mailing-List: list origamiboats@yahoogroups.com; contact >origamiboats-owner@yahoogroups.com >Delivered-To: mailing list origamiboats@yahoogroups.com >Precedence: bulk >List-Unsubscribe: >Return-Path: >sentto-1579488-3020-1076570990-cpt6pk=hotmail.com@... >X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Feb 2004 07:30:27.0515 (UTC) >FILETIME=[15F300B0:01C3F13A] > >I'd heard that two identical tri's were built for the movie. Jeanneau >design. 70 feet. More than $1,000,000.00 US. Not sure if the report is >accurate. > >Some alloy origami designs can be seen on our web-site. Alloy in our area >(BC) comes in 8x20 foot sheets. > >greg elliott >http://www.origamimagic.com > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: vinnie_barberino2000 > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2004 9:42 PM > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: material specifications & costs > > > Rumour has it down here that the trimaran in 'waterworld'is Sir Peter > Blakes old Steinlager 1.Looks similar to his boat > Steve > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "graeme mitchell" > wrote: > > > > Steve > > > > > > What is that site for kevin Kosner boat > > > > ---- Original Message ----- > > From: Steven Schofield > > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2004 8:46 AM > > Subject: [origamiboats] material specifications & costs > > > > > > Hi all! > > I have been lurking around here for almost a month and I've > learned a lot > > and gotten a lot of ideas for my next boat. > > > > I am primarily interested in building with aluminum. I've done > some searches > > on the net trying to find what common sizes aluminum sheets come > in and the > > cost, but haven't come up with any useful specifics. Does anyone > know any > > good sources for costs for certain thicknesses and size sheets? > > > > I've been reading the posts regarding Cameron with great > interest. If I'm > > reading him right, he doesn't have $7000 for metal, etc. He's > truly on a > > shoestring budget. He needs to think outside the box. He should > watch the > > film "Waterworld". Look at the trimaran made from steel tubes and > tanks. > > Fast, bulletproof, very easy to build and it would cost less than > a thousand > > dollars to acquire the necessary used tubes and tanks and odd > steel pieces > > to build a boat like that. Forget the silly sailing rig and > mechanical > > system that that boat has. Get on the net and learn about Chinese > junk sail > > rigs. Any one can make a serviceable junk sail out of tyvek, > woven tarp, or > > plastic sheet for less than a couple hundred dollars. If you > build it > > yourself you will never have any problem repairing it. > > Need a mast, a tree trunk doesn't cost much. You can make all the > fittings > > you need for very little. > > I'd bet a person could build a boat like this for a couple of > thousand. > > > > Something to think about! > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. > > http://join.msn.com/?page=features/photos&pgmarket=en-ca&RU=http% > 3a%2f%2fjoin.msn.com%2f%3fpage%3dmisc%2fspecialoffers%26pgmarket%3den- > ca > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- > unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > ADVERTISEMENT > > > > > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > ---------- > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of > Service. > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: >origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ADVERTISEMENT > > > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Yahoo! Groups Links > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of >Service. > > > >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > _________________________________________________________________ Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963| 3028|3009|2004-02-13 02:57:08|bubblede|Re: got the book yesterday ;-)|Thanks for the tips, Gary, I think I know what you mean and will play around with that a bit. Avtually it's a more for fun really, because the other way around - designing hard-chine and then make a coutout from model that will appoximate this - should already work. As I do not know rhino rally, I still try to find out it's possibilities. what I have not found out is how to make rhino first join the 2 plates along the chine, then make a cut vertical and partial along the chine and then let it try to develop (expand?) the entire surface. Should I merge the ssurfaces? I managed to loft all the hull nice and smoth as developable surface, and trimmed bow and stern. after that I can't merge them anymore.. so what is the order? should I start over and - make surfaces that are to loong fore and aft - merge them - trim bow and stern - split (trim?) the cut vertical in the lower and partially along the chine - develop/expand? how do you expand a sheet that is not developable? well looks like lots of hours of fun still to come ;-) Gerd www.justmueller.com --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gary H. Lucas" wrote: > Gerd, > I use Rhino in my job. I scanned in Brent's lines off of the plans I bought > for the 31' What I found out is that there is compound curvature at the bow > and stern that makes modeling it difficult. If you try to make a hull to > his lines that is full developable you get a crease from the end of the > chine to the bow and stern. that definitely isn't there on a real boat. I > think I found a solution though. It occurred to me that this crease > wouldn't happen with real metal because it would require a reversal of the > bend, which isn't going to happen. So after doing the developable model. I > tried adjusting the lines keeping the length of the lines exactly the same > while curving it to fit into the actual lines Brent provides. This seems a > reasonable assumption because the physical size of the sheet edge to edge > can't be changed using only the hand tools one uses to pull a hull together. > The curves can then be lofted to produce a fairly accurate model of the real > hull. One can then flatten the developable surfaces with the crease to give > you an actual flat pattern for steel cutting. > > Gary H. Lucas > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "bubblede" > To: > Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2004 2:54 AM > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: got the book yesterday ;-) > > > > That might be interesting - would be nice if you find that ;-) > > At the moment I am playing around with Rhino, seems very powerful > > for anything that is straightforward developable, but I have not > > found yet how to expand a surface that is not strictly speaking flat. > > What I still fail to see is how to design the lines including the > > conical parts for and aft and _then_ cut... > > Looks like this is much by trial and error, starting out with a > > normal chine hull, then cutting and then you get what you get. > > Nothing wrong with that I guess, but how would you design the > > finished shape _before_ actually making a model and then lifting the > > points of that? > > > > > > Gerd, Budapest > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, jim dorey wrote: > > > there's a paper craft software package i was thinking of using, > > can't > > > remember where, but there's a guy who made that rifle from the > > movie > > > aliens out of paper using it, and some other very round sci-fi > > things, > > > he has a link to it, which i've lost in the pile. if it's > > adaptable to > > > boat design of the origami type it should be easy to see if the > > hull > > > you've chosen can be converted. > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > | 3029|2996|2004-02-13 02:59:21|bubblede|Re: Pictures Project YAGO 31 on my website|--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "edward_stoneuk" wrote: > Gerd > > You have a very interesting website. I agree that a gaff rig is > probably the best looking of all the rigs. I sailed on a single > masted junk rigged 34' boat with inboard bilge board, hinged dagger > boards if you like. It went very well indeed. It was a plywood and > cold moulded hull. The difficulty with a steel boat would be > painting inside the slots for the daggerboards. > > Regards, > > Ted | 3030|2996|2004-02-13 03:10:20|bubblede|Re: Pictures Project YAGO 31 on my website|Hi Ted - yes, gaff is lovely, and living here in Hungary it is also very difficult to get real cheap stuff to build a more modern rig with all the fittings and sails. If I wanted a marconi sloop, it should be a fully battened mainsail, i have good experiences with that, except that you must buy the very best stuff you can get if you don't want trouble later - and that is too expensive for me. Gaff I can make with local raw material... plus, being my last boat (I always say that...) this time around I want to do things not only for rational reasons but also do something for my soul. I loved sailing on all sorts of very modern boats, but if today I really had the millions to do what I want I guess I would take over a classic boat and restore, cruise and maintain it for the rest of my life - I would be the happiest man on earth ;-) Gerd --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "edward_stoneuk" wrote: > Gerd > > You have a very interesting website. I agree that a gaff rig is > probably the best looking of all the rigs. I sailed on a single > masted junk rigged 34' boat with inboard bilge board, hinged dagger > boards if you like. It went very well indeed. It was a plywood and > cold moulded hull. The difficulty with a steel boat would be > painting inside the slots for the daggerboards. > > Regards, > > Ted | 3031|2996|2004-02-13 04:37:56|Ben Tucker|Re: Pictures Project YAGO 31 on my website|Hi gerd Had a look at the website, a very nice design and very similar to the kind of boats I have been drawing and dreaming about. Have a look at the gunning designs for interesting comparision. http://www.alcyone- archive.org/. The only problems I keep running into is the Angle of vanishing stability on an inside ballasted small steel boat? also flat bottom maintenance? I Guess you could engineer the daggerboards to be strong enough to hold the boat over on its side for painting. I keep coming back to lift keels but the engineering scares me. The raised deck and gaff rig looks great and this combination is working very well on a 29 foot boat I helped build. the rig was cheap and all the fittings were easily home made(just make the gaff saddle strong as i've broken two sets of jaws on other boats)Gaff rig is easy to handle as long as the boat has twin topping lifts and a gaff that is long enough to be contained by the lifts and lazyjacks at all times. with this setup the sail can be raised, lowered and reefed on all points of sail easily and without the usual headboard/batten under spreader or shroud games or batten caught in lazy jack fun. It might even make battens more worth than their trouble! It would be great to get more info on your design like the hydrostatics, rig and accommodation layouts. Ben PS also enjoyed your boatbuilding notes, and still want to build a boat| 3032|3032|2004-02-13 10:40:42|Steven Schofield|auto-darkening welding shields|Does anyone here use an auto-darkening welding shield? How well do they work? _________________________________________________________________ Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/photos&pgmarket=en-ca&RU=http%3a%2f%2fjoin.msn.com%2f%3fpage%3dmisc%2fspecialoffers%26pgmarket%3den-ca| 3033|3009|2004-02-13 10:53:05|info@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: got the book yesterday ;-)|We found that starting with a chined hull, and trimming the bow and stern resulted in a knuckle at the chine ends, because there is a rapid change in the rate and axis of curvature as you transition between the chine sections and the end sections. Rather than cut the bows and sterns of a chined boat to form an origami hull, we first design the bows and sterns in origami to match a round bilged boat, then use the chine section as though it was a large batten, bent around to join the bow and sterns This results in a fair hull with no tendency to form knuckles of other hard points. This alternative method of generating an origami hull has resulting in a significant improvement in the hull shapes as compared to the traditional method. Anyone interested in building origami boats should take the time to take a look at one of the boats built using this new method. We have received nothing but positive comments from experienced origami builders that have come to see the boats. The only change required to build an origami boat using this alternative design method is to change the patterns. All other techniques remain the same, and all the benefits of origami remain unchanged. greg elliott http://www.origamimagic.com I managed to loft all the hull nice and smoth as developable surface, and trimmed bow and stern. after that I can't merge them anymore.. so what is the order? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3034|3032|2004-02-13 11:58:41|bilgekeeldave|Re: auto-darkening welding shields|--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Steven Schofield" wrote: > Does anyone here use an auto-darkening welding shield? How well do they > work? > Yahoo was doing some weird stuff when I posted this before. Auto-darkening wleding sheilds are a good thing, especially when welding in a confined space where it is difficult to reach up and close your standard welding sheild, and you won't get arc flashed anymore either! Dave| 3035|3035|2004-02-13 18:43:49|kingsknight4life|NeedHelp!!|Does anyone know the weight of a 36 ft. bare hull and decks? I need this info. so the trucking companies can quote me a price on moving the boat. I know the displacement is 18,000 lbs. but that includes the weight of the twin keels?? that should mean the actual weight of the boat is closer to 13,500 lbs? Is there anyone out there with a lowbed flatdeck truck, preferably with a boom attached who wants to make some money? I'm moving the boat from Ladysmith to Richmond BC. I'm trying to avid having to hire a crane to get the boat on the flatbed trailer. Thanks, Rowland Ps the time frame is a week from tommorrow. (Feb. 21)| 3036|3036|2004-02-13 18:43:54|prairiemaidca|auto helmets and mast weights|HI All: Check the postings for auto helmets, there was some discussion not that far back on that subject. Has anyone else done the numbers for the weights of tubing and pipe for the mast. I've come up with the numbers as follows and would like to know if I'm in the ball park. 5 1/2 5 1/8 @ 10.6 lbs/ft. for 491lbs. 5in. shd 40 pipe @14.6 lbs/ft for 672lbs. and 6in. shd 40 pipe at 18.97lbs/ft for 872lbs. based on a 64ft. length. Martin Forster (Prairie Maid)| 3037|3032|2004-02-13 18:47:45|fmichael graham|Re: auto-darkening welding shields|Steven: We went through quite a discussion on this topic around New Years. I, subsequently, bought one and it has replaced my wife as my 2nd most favoured possession (oh-oh,chauvinism). It may soon knock my dog from top spot. Regards, Mike Steven Schofield wrote: Does anyone here use an auto-darkening welding shield? How well do they work? _________________________________________________________________ Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/photos&pgmarket=en-ca&RU=http%3a%2f%2fjoin.msn.com%2f%3fpage%3dmisc%2fspecialoffers%26pgmarket%3den-ca To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links --------------------------------- Post your free ad now! Yahoo! Canada Personals [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3038|3035|2004-02-13 20:15:38|Courtney Thomas|Re: NeedHelp!!|With preparation, you should be able to winch it up onto a flatbed. HTH kingsknight4life wrote: > Does anyone know the weight of a 36 ft. bare hull and decks? I need > this info. so the trucking companies can quote me a price on moving > the boat. I know the displacement is 18,000 lbs. but that includes > the weight of the twin keels?? that should mean the actual weight of > the boat is closer to 13,500 lbs? > > Is there anyone out there with a lowbed flatdeck truck, preferably > with a boom attached who wants to make some money? I'm moving the > boat from Ladysmith to Richmond BC. I'm trying to avid having to hire > a crane to get the boat on the flatbed trailer. > > Thanks, Rowland > > Ps the time frame is a week from tommorrow. (Feb. 21) > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > -- Courtney Thomas s/v Mutiny lying Oriental, NC WDB5619| 3039|3039|2004-02-14 08:15:40|David|Mediterranean Liveaboards and Cruisers|If you are interested in Living Aboard or Cruising in the Mediterranean have a look at our group. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Mediterranean_Liveaboards/ Not new but now being actively promoted . David| 3040|3035|2004-02-14 18:16:19|Alex Christie|Re: NeedHelp!!|There is a crane and truck combination in Cedar, just south of Nanaimo that might be what you are looking for. The crane is mounted on the same truck that pulls the lowbed, and it is able to handle the weight of an empty hull without lead in the keels. That way you don't have to coordinate the truck and crane separately. I do not know the name, however, as it was a friend that was researching the possibility. I will e-mail him for the details if you are interested. Alex __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance: Get your refund fast by filing online. http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html| 3041|3035|2004-02-14 20:08:59|ve7vmt2001|Re: NeedHelp!!|You wrote; > > Is there anyone out there with a lowbed flatdeck truck, preferably > with a boom attached who wants to make some money? I'm moving the > boat from Ladysmith to Richmond BC. I'm trying to avid having to hire a crane to get the boat on the flatbed trailer. Try Westhaul Services Ltd. Nanaimo. 722-7270 Gaelan has the perfect rig for this, easy to talk to. John. Campbell River| 3042|2980|2004-02-15 12:26:28|Cameron|Re: building my own boat!! need help!|Hey all, thanks for the advice. Just wondering what types of boats i should consider buying/designing around. You said you have seen fiberglass ones for around $1500, sounds good. where do i find one? Does anyone know if you can trade for a boat? I have a 1980 trans am that i am rebuilding. it should be done for the summer. Also, can these 27ft-ers be towed? That would be a great help. Anywho, thanks - Cameron| 3043|3043|2004-02-15 13:13:00|Cameron|Boat like Contessa 26|Hey all, just want opinions on making a steel hulled boat in the design of the Contessa. I hear it is an amazing boat for solo oceanic cruises. thanks. -Cameron (still reading away)| 3044|3043|2004-02-15 18:11:33|fmichael graham|Re: Boat like Contessa 26|Cameron: I don't think it works that way. The Contessa has a lot of curves that you wouldn't realistically try to imitate in steel. The Contessa 32 is the legendary performance/cruiser and would run you major coin to buy. Great boats though, the Canadian Coast Guard College has two of them. When I decided that my next boat would be steel, and built by moi, I started cruising the internet, viewing "metal boat society", this group, and checking out the various designer's web-sites; from Canada to Norway to New Zealand. There are some interesting designs out there, from Denis Ganley's, Bruce Robert's, etc., to the locals like Trevor Bolt & Michael Kasling(probably spelt wrong). But I had seen a couple of Swain designs when shopping for my previous boat and, as far as I can see, this is the cheapest method of having a true off-shore capable, steel-hulled sailboat. Personally, I would be looking to build a 30'+ in steel, as anything smaller would transit the ocean about as gracefully as a pregnant pig(just my view - apologies to Dove III, et al). Regards, Mike Cameron wrote: Hey all, just want opinions on making a steel hulled boat in the design of the Contessa. I hear it is an amazing boat for solo oceanic cruises. thanks. -Cameron (still reading away) To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links --------------------------------- Post your free ad now! Yahoo! Canada Personals [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3045|2980|2004-02-16 01:04:37|jim dorey|Re: building my own boat!! need help!|for an ultra cheap, but somewhat usable fibreglass one off boat you can build a stick frame with stringers then cover the frames with fibreglass cloth, pull it tight and wet it down with some kind of epoxy with a slight amount of shrinkage, layer in some mat tape inside to build fillets between the stringers and skin, then cloth tape over that, add some layers to the skin as soon as the previous layer gets to the right amount of tack, you can build it upside down so you can get in to do the filleting. return of the deadly run-on sentence, heehee. Cameron wrote: > Hey all, thanks for the advice. Just wondering what types of boats i > should consider buying/designing around. You said you have seen > fiberglass ones for around $1500, sounds good. where do i find one? > Does anyone know if you can trade for a boat? I have a 1980 trans am > that i am rebuilding. it should be done for the summer. Also, can > these 27ft-ers be towed? That would be a great help. Anywho, thanks - > Cameron -- http://www.skaar.101main.net http://www.PetitionOnline.com/spcdvd/ http://www.petitiononline.com/impjapan/petition-sign.html? moderator of wildsteam@yahoogroups.com DOM and proud!!!| 3046|2980|2004-02-16 01:46:15|nelstomlinson|Re: building my own boat!! need help!|John Letcher did something like that, and it made a really stout little boat. Read here: http://www.valesh.com/~j on/boats/aleutka.html He started out with a good design, then did roughly what you describe. It was almost a wooden boat (stick frame with stringers), then covered with fiberglass. It surely sounds as if it could take a lot more time than pulling something together out of steel. Notice how I deftly pulled this back to the group's stated topic? Nels --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, jim dorey wrote: > for an ultra cheap, but somewhat usable fibreglass one off boat you can > build a stick frame with stringers then cover the frames with fibreglass > cloth, pull it tight and wet it down with some kind of epoxy with a > slight amount of shrinkage, layer in some mat tape inside to build > fillets between the stringers and skin, then cloth tape over that, add > some layers to the skin as soon as the previous layer gets to the right > amount of tack, you can build it upside down so you can get in to do the > filleting. return of the deadly run-on sentence, heehee. > > Cameron wrote: > > > Hey all, thanks for the advice. Just wondering what types of boats i > > should consider buying/designing around. You said you have seen > > fiberglass ones for around $1500, sounds good. where do i find one? > > Does anyone know if you can trade for a boat? I have a 1980 trans am > > that i am rebuilding. it should be done for the summer. Also, can > > these 27ft-ers be towed? That would be a great help. Anywho, thanks - > > Cameron > > > -- > http://www.skaar.101main.net > http://www.PetitionOnline.com/spcdvd/ > http://www.petitiononline.com/impjapan/petition-sign.html? > moderator of wildsteam@yahoogroups.com > DOM and proud!!! | 3047|2980|2004-02-16 02:55:09|info@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: building my own boat!! need help!|High performance, one off glass boats can be built by "strip plank cedar" construction. 1" square stingers are glued edge to edge over a set of frames to build a fully round bilged male plug, then sanded fair. Glass/epoxy is placed over and vacuum bagged. When cured, the structure is glassed on the inside, and faired and painted on the outside. An extremely light weight, rigid, insulated hull results. A large number of mono and multi-hulls have been built using this technique. An alternative technique is to build a large Formica surface, and cover with release wax. Lay down a layer of gelcoat, glass epoxy, followed by a layer of semi-rigid foam core, and vacuum bag. The resulting panels can then be bent over a form, with the epoxy/glass surface facing out. You then glass the inside to form a rigid hull. The advantage of this technique is that the outside of the hull is already finished mirror smooth, having been formed on a Formica table, and is fully insulated. This second technique can be used to build extremely light weight, high performance origami hulls. The large composite panels can be built to any size, darts cut, and then pulled to shape. Glassed on the inside, the completed hull requires no further finishing as it is already finished on the outside, and insulated on the inside. The decks and cabins can be formed using origami from the same panels. There are significant advantages to this composite method of origami construction, because the resulting hull requires no further finishing and are lighter - simplifying handling. Low cost polyester and core combinations could be used, and the resulting hull is significantly lighter than steel, allowing for smaller ballast, rig, sails, winches, etc., all with the potential to further reduce costs. Variations of this technique have been used to make large multi-hulls, and could provide low cost, high performance origami mono-hulls as well -- origami taking the place of the forms normally used to shape the panels. We would be interested in developing this technique further with interested builders/owners. greg elliott http://www.origamimagic.com for an ultra cheap, but somewhat usable fibreglass one off boat you can build a stick frame with stringers then cover the frames with fibreglass cloth, pull it tight and wet it down with some kind of epoxy with a slight amount of shrinkage, layer in some mat tape inside to build fillets between the stringers and skin, then cloth tape over that, add some layers to the skin as soon as the previous layer gets to the right amount of tack, you can build it upside down so you can get in to do the filleting. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3048|2996|2004-02-16 08:17:25|bubblede|Re: Pictures Project YAGO 31 on my website|Hi ben glad you like it ;-) and thanks for the link to the dutch designs. I know this type of boats quite wee, had a boat in hoilland once (in middlegurg, near vlissingen) and to meet these boats on the water always is very touching. The big ones, the old "plattboden" barges, are very impressive under sail. They use to steer them standing up, wearing wooden clogs that they stem against a post in the deck while thea lean against these monster tillers.... crazy stuff really. These barges also have 2 lateral pivoting boards. Although these boats were built for shallow waters, lakes, rivers and the wattenmeer (behind the frisien island) they ventured quite far, and among others actually established a sort of regular trade with oranges from marocco somebody told me. As for the ballast, when you think about it, it's all a question of how much you have related to where it is... meaning the higher you got it, the heavier the boat would be in the end. but stability is just as much a question of hull shape. actually of deck-shape as well, once you imagine the whole thing rolled at 180 - Flat decks and no superstructure make for a very stable "hull"... i remember in the early eighties of so, there was a nice cruising boat with keel staying up-side-down for a long time (several days even?) in spite of having all the right things, ballast, keel and so on. In the end it turned back triggered by a wave... What is easily forgotton also is that once you got your mast and rig and especiall sails immerged, there is such a lot of drag and weight of water inn the sail.pocket and so on that all this becomes quite abstract. So once your down, you are probably ready to sacrifice a lot of perforrmance for another ton or 2 of ballast it if would only bring you back ;-) I once got surprised and kicked over in groundswell when coming into a river-mouth under engine, and had the spreaders kissed the water - with no wind, no sails up etc, and that was quite enough, thank you very uncomfortable position, and the insides were a nasty mess to clean up later ;-) (On the other hand, a boat overballasted is VERY uncomfortable to live on in a seaway, because once brought out of the normal position it will bring the hull back quite violently...) ciao Gerd www.justmueller.com/boats/ --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Ben Tucker" wrote: > Hi gerd > > Had a look at the website, a very nice design and very similar to the > kind of boats I have been drawing and dreaming about. Have a look at > the gunning designs for interesting comparision. http://www.alcyone- > archive.org/. The only problems I keep running into is the Angle of > vanishing stability on an inside ballasted small steel boat? also > flat bottom maintenance? I Guess you could engineer the daggerboards > to be strong enough to hold the boat over on its side for painting. I > keep coming back to lift keels but the engineering scares me. The > raised deck and gaff rig looks great and this combination is working > very well on a 29 foot boat I helped build. the rig was cheap and all > the fittings were easily home made(just make the gaff saddle strong > as i've broken two sets of jaws on other boats)Gaff rig is easy to > handle as long as the boat has twin topping lifts and a gaff that is > long enough to be contained by the lifts and lazyjacks at all times. > with this setup the sail can be raised, lowered and reefed on all > points of sail easily and without the usual headboard/batten under > spreader or shroud games or batten caught in lazy jack fun. It might > even make battens more worth than their trouble! It would be great to > get more info on your design like the hydrostatics, rig and > accommodation layouts. > > Ben > > PS also enjoyed your boatbuilding notes, and still want to build a > boat | 3049|3009|2004-02-16 08:40:58|bubblede|Re: got the book yesterday ;-)|Hi Greg Thanks for the input - I spent all weekend playing around with my scissors and learned a lot. Not having the very finul hull shape yet, I made only smaller models from cardboard for the moment, to get the feel. So what I find is: - u-shaped flat bottom. (remember I have 2 chines and flat bottom) that seems to work. I made 2 darts, one at each chine, otherwise shaped like on Brents schema. this will give me a hull that is very close to the hull I made by glueing together full chines produces from the same hull. it looks as if in the center I should get a nice roundish section with slight chines. - knuckels & length of dart-cuts This was interesting. there is a relationship between this knuckel at the forward and aft end of the cut and the length to which I open the "seam" along the original chine. the longer the cut, in other words the more the end of the dart-cut comes into areas where the upper and lower plates will be at a flatter angle, the less of a knuckel I find. So just for the fun of it, I did an "origami" from fully cut plates, meaning I cut for each chine a full length plate as lofted, then cut the 2 lower plates at aboutmidships vertically in 2 parts. so rather than having one shape per hull side I now had 5: 1 full length top plate 1 medium chine plate, cut in half 1 bottom chine plate cut in half These five pieces I then joined as if they were a BS origami, beginning by joining the for and aft ends of all chines. This then looked very much like Brents schema, but from the very beginning began to take a rounder shape. The hull-shape was practically identical, conical for and aft, slight chine in the central part, but without the nuckles at the end of the darts! I guess there must be a part where theround shape gives way to a "chined" form, but at least on my cardboard it was no longer as clearly maked as with the original origami-cut. Gerd www.justmueller.com/boats/ --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > We found that starting with a chined hull, and trimming the bow and stern resulted in a knuckle at the chine ends, because there is a rapid change in the rate and axis of curvature as you transition between the chine sections and the end sections. > > Rather than cut the bows and sterns of a chined boat to form an origami hull, we first design the bows and sterns in origami to match a round bilged boat, then use the chine section as though it was a large batten, bent around to join the bow and sterns This results in a fair hull with no tendency to form knuckles of other hard points. > > This alternative method of generating an origami hull has resulting in a significant improvement in the hull shapes as compared to the traditional method. Anyone interested in building origami boats should take the time to take a look at one of the boats built using this new method. We have received nothing but positive comments from experienced origami builders that have come to see the boats. > > The only change required to build an origami boat using this alternative design method is to change the patterns. All other techniques remain the same, and all the benefits of origami remain unchanged. > > greg elliott > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > I managed to loft all the hull nice and smoth as developable > surface, and trimmed bow and stern. after that I can't merge them > anymore.. so what is the order? > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3050|2980|2004-02-16 11:40:08|jim dorey|Re: building my own boat!! need help!|i was more inspired by stick and canvas canoes, but i know it's an old method. nelstomlinson wrote: > John Letcher did something like that, and it made a really stout > little boat. Read here: http://www.valesh.com/~j > > on/boats/aleutka.html -- http://www.skaar.101main.net http://www.PetitionOnline.com/spcdvd/ http://www.petitiononline.com/impjapan/petition-sign.html? moderator of wildsteam@yahoogroups.com DOM and proud!!!| 3051|2996|2004-02-16 11:48:55|jim dorey|Re: Pictures Project YAGO 31 on my website|so, um, everybody should use a spring return throttle, or risk losing the boat when you fall out. bubblede wrote: > > I once got surprised and kicked over in groundswell when coming into > a river-mouth under engine, and had the spreaders kissed the water - > with no wind, no sails up etc, and that was quite enough, thank you > very uncomfortable position, and the insides were a nasty mess to > clean up later ;-) -- http://www.skaar.101main.net http://www.PetitionOnline.com/spcdvd/ http://www.petitiononline.com/impjapan/petition-sign.html? moderator of wildsteam@yahoogroups.com DOM and proud!!!| 3052|3036|2004-02-16 15:19:19|tsuhaung@aol.com|Re: auto helmets and mast weights|Schedule 40 - 5" pipe is 14.62 lb./ft.... Your numbers right there is a great reference book that is put out by Russel Metals In./Drummond McCall that they usually give to people buying lots of steel. Building a boat I think would qualify. It covers all the different forms of steel plus aluminum, stainless and nickel , etc. (Ref. book 84-17) I got mine a couple years ago but am sure that your local supplier will has this or similar material. All the Ken [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3053|3032|2004-02-16 15:19:20|tsuhaung@aol.com|Re: auto-darkening welding shields|I use an auto darkening shield and it works great, BUT you have to be very careful because the sensor which is located at the top or bottom of the tinted glass can be obstructed by your arm or pipe, plate what ever. In any case you will get flashed which is not good and if you are in the same position it could happen several times. Check where the sensor is on your perspective buy and keep this in mind when setting up to run a bead. The other thing to watch is ambient light from the room that could turn it on or off, as they work on a light differential. They nice to use though as long as you keep these cautions in mind. All the best Ken [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3054|3043|2004-02-16 18:53:25|Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr|Re: Boat like Contessa 26|The Contessa 26 is a Folkboat hull with a masthead rig. In its original form (wood) the Folkboat weighed 4200 lbs and carries 1900 lbs of ballast. There was a plywood design that was very close to folkboat that was available in the 1950's. It would be very hard to duplicate the light weight of a Folkboat in steel construction and get any where near the strength of the original boats and it was their light weight that gave them their seaworthiness. Jeff| 3055|3043|2004-02-16 18:58:27|Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr|Re: Boat like Contessa 26|The Contessa 32 was a completely different design than the Contessa 26. The 32 was a late Rorc design which anticipated IOR I which was very different than the Folkboats which were designed during WW II as offshore racers. Jeff ----- Original Message ----- From: "fmichael graham" To: Sent: Sunday, February 15, 2004 6:11 PM Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Boat like Contessa 26 > Cameron: > I don't think it works that way. The Contessa has a lot of curves that you wouldn't realistically try to imitate in steel. The Contessa 32 is the legendary performance/cruiser and would run you major coin to buy. Great boats though, the Canadian Coast Guard College has two of them. When I decided that my next boat would be steel, and built by moi, I started cruising the internet, viewing "metal boat society", this group, and checking out the various designer's web-sites; from Canada to Norway to New Zealand. There are some interesting designs out there, from Denis Ganley's, Bruce Robert's, etc., to the locals like Trevor Bolt & Michael Kasling(probably spelt wrong). But I had seen a couple of Swain designs when shopping for my previous boat and, as far as I can see, this is the cheapest method of having a true off-shore capable, steel-hulled sailboat. Personally, I would be looking to build a 30'+ in steel, as anything smaller would transit the ocean about as gracefully as > a > pregnant pig(just my view - apologies to Dove III, et al). > Regards, > Mike > > > Cameron wrote: > Hey all, just want opinions on making a steel hulled boat in the > design of the Contessa. I hear it is an amazing boat for solo oceanic > cruises. thanks. -Cameron (still reading away) > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > --------------------------------- > Post your free ad now! Yahoo! Canada Personals > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > | 3056|2980|2004-02-16 19:03:02|Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr|Re: building my own boat!! need help!|For that matter you can build a dory out blue foam that you can buy at the hardware store and glass the living daylight out of it very quick and cheaply except that you need to use epoxy resin because styrene in Polyester resin eats up Polystyene Floams . Jeff| 3057|2980|2004-02-16 20:47:13|jim dorey|Re: building my own boat!! need help!|i was gonna use that method on a v hull 12' day sailor, due to circumstance i can't do it now, had all the foam ready for choppin. so that begs the question, how stinky is epoxy resin, i know the epoxy in the twin tube syringes is kinda whiffy, maybe there's a kind that hardly has an odour, i know it's less stinky than poly, but that helps little if it'll be detected easily. Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr wrote: > For that matter you can build a dory out blue foam that you can buy at the > hardware store and glass the living daylight out of it very quick and > cheaply except that you need to use epoxy resin because styrene in > Polyester > resin eats up Polystyene Floams . > > Jeff -- http://www.skaar.101main.net http://www.PetitionOnline.com/spcdvd/ http://www.petitiononline.com/impjapan/petition-sign.html? moderator of wildsteam@yahoogroups.com DOM and proud!!!| 3058|2980|2004-02-16 20:49:49|jim dorey|Re: building my own boat!! need help!|oops, forgot to relate it to origami boat methods, well, i did start with frame and stretched fibreglass skin, but i think it'd be lighter and more spacious in frameless origami, only problem is the tendency for foam to break. jim dorey wrote: > i was gonna use that method on a v hull 12' day sailor, due to > circumstance i can't do it now, had all the foam ready for choppin. so > that begs the question, how stinky is epoxy resin, i know the epoxy in > the twin tube syringes is kinda whiffy, maybe there's a kind that hardly > has an odour, i know it's less stinky than poly, but that helps little > if it'll be detected easily. -- http://www.skaar.101main.net http://www.PetitionOnline.com/spcdvd/ http://www.petitiononline.com/impjapan/petition-sign.html? moderator of wildsteam@yahoogroups.com DOM and proud!!!| 3059|3036|2004-02-16 21:54:38|candle032000|Re: auto helmets and mast weights|Ahoy, regarding using the sched 40 steel pipe for a mast section. I took the 600 pound spruce mast off my present 48 foot ketch and replaced it with a 350 lb alloy one. The improvement was incredible as in not sailing on our ear anymore and an increase in speed as we are able to carry more sail with out flopping over with every heavy gust. I always thought the intention was to try to reduce weight aloft on sailing vessels , not to add it. I just can't imagine putting six to seven hundred pounds into a mast for a ten ton boat. Ciao, Greg AhA--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "prairiemaidca" wrote: > HI All: Check the postings for auto helmets, there was some > discussion not that far back on that subject. Has anyone else done > the numbers for the weights of tubing and pipe for the mast. I've > come up with the numbers as follows and would like to know if I'm in > the ball park. 5 1/2 5 1/8 @ 10.6 lbs/ft. for 491lbs. 5in. shd 40 > pipe @14.6 lbs/ft for 672lbs. and 6in. shd 40 pipe at 18.97lbs/ft > for 872lbs. based on a 64ft. length. Martin Forster (Prairie Maid)| 3060|2980|2004-02-16 22:22:09|Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr|Re: building my own boat!! need help!|The Blue and Pink foam planking are extruded polystyrene, which is a very low density, rigid Styrofoam with a closed cell structure. (White foam is expanded polystyrene which has an open cell structure and so is totally unsuitable for marine applications because it absorbs water and then breaks down in strength.) Extruded polystyrene has comparatively little strength as compared to the cross-linked, closed cell, medium and high density PVC and Polyurethane foams generally used in boat construction, but it is suitable for use with comparatively small, light weight boats such as you are describing. On its own, extruded polystyrene foam lacks sufficient strength but when coupled with proper internal structure (plywood bulkheads and flats, and glassed in lumber transverse frames, and a reinforced keel area) and when combined with composite skins, it can produce a light and strong boat fairly quickly especially when used with some form of stitch and glue construction which is basically the concept of origami boat building applied to other sheet materials . While epoxy suitable for laminating an hull, is quite expensive compared to other resins, in the kind of application that is being proposed, it is still a pretty cheap,quick, and easy way to build a small boat. The epoxy used for laminating purposes is formulated a little differently than the two part glues that you are familiar with. You can find additional information on epoxies on the WEST System Epoxy and the MAS websites. Epoxy is an allergen and so should be handled properly. With reasonable precautions it is safe to use and produces very high quality results. Of the possibilities that might be adaptable for the kind of cruising that you are proposing, probably the most ideal would be some form of a modified dory or sharpie hull fitted with a ballasted fin keel to guarantee self righting and skeg hung outboard rudder for ease of construction and protection of the rudder from damage. I would suggest that you look at designs by Phillip Bolger and by Jay Benford. I also strongly suggest again that you try to find a copy of "Voyaging on a Small Income" by Anne Hill which is full of useful wisdom. Jeff| 3061|3061|2004-02-16 22:58:52|Glen|design numbers|Does anyone have a link or infomation regarding designing numbers rules of thumb were in comes to building catamarans. I have looked at Ted Brewers site but am needing more info directed towards cats. Any help would be appreciated. Thank you| 3062|3061|2004-02-17 09:18:08|edward_stoneuk|Re: design numbers|Glen, www.wharram.com might help. Regards, Ted| 3063|3036|2004-02-17 16:25:31|info@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: auto helmets and mast weights|In a 10 ton boat with a 650 lb mast, allowing 250 lbs for sails, rigging, spreaders and fittings you will have about 6000 lbs of ballast in a 5 foot keel trying to right 900 lbs on a 50 foot mast. approx righting moment = (6000 lbs * 3.75 ft) - (900 lbs * 25 ft) = 0 ft-lbs A detailed calculation of the righting moments would be required, but at a glance the boat will have little reserve stability beyond its form stability, and might even have negative stability. In a seaway such a vessel could be prone to knockdown and at risk for capsize, and could be inherently unsafe. One warning sign of stability problems is knockdowns. In a well designed offshore cruising boat, knockdowns are rare. As a comparison, the Lazy Bones at 13 tons has a 209 lb alloy mast. In all our years of cruising offshore, in all kinds of weather, including "survival" conditions we have never had the mast in the water. Repeating the previous calculation with a 200 lb alloy mast on a 10 ton boat: approx righting moment = (6000 lbs * 3.75 ft) - (450 lbs * 25 ft) = 11250 ft-lbs On a boat with a 11.5 ft beam, this would be the equivalent of adding 10 x 200 lb men to the windward rail, with the ability to instantly shift them from one side of the boat to the other as the boat rolls. This could be expected to substantially improve performance and stability as compared to the 650 lb mast. Anecdotal stories are no substitute for a detailed analysis of the righting moments. Weight aloft can give a false sense of security, because it slows the motion of the vessel, making it appear more stable, while in fact making it less stable. A rule of thumb is that every pound added aloft requires 10 lbs to be added to the keel. Adding 450 lbs to a mast would require adding 4500 lbs to the keel, which could severely limit the amount of fuel, water, stores and spares that could be carried within the 10 ton displacement. Thus, because of the lever arm, mast weight is one of the more important factors in determining the suitability of a boat for offshore cruising. greg elliott http://www.origamimagic.com ----- Original Message ----- I just can't imagine putting six to seven hundred pounds into a mast for a ten ton boat. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3064|3064|2004-02-17 17:53:52|Len den Besten|Muir chainmeter manual, anyone ?|Hi All, When I bought our present SY I was lucky to get _almost_ all documentation regarding the various systems on board. There's one doc that was missing however: a manual for the Muir windlass remote control/chainmeter. Article nr: EST203. This chainmeter has all sorts of programmable functions I would like to explore and I sure hope there is a another one out there.... When somebody has a Muir chainmeter would you be so kind to see if it's a EST203 en drop me a line .... Many thanks in advance ! Greetingz, Len.| 3065|3064|2004-02-17 18:07:27|Graeme|Re: Muir chainmeter manual, anyone ?|Len Email the makers i am sure they will send you one or have a pfd file you can down load. ----- Original Message ----- From: Len den Besten To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2004 6:53 AM Subject: [origamiboats] Muir chainmeter manual, anyone ? Hi All, When I bought our present SY I was lucky to get _almost_ all documentation regarding the various systems on board. There's one doc that was missing however: a manual for the Muir windlass remote control/chainmeter. Article nr: EST203. This chainmeter has all sorts of programmable functions I would like to explore and I sure hope there is a another one out there.... When somebody has a Muir chainmeter would you be so kind to see if it's a EST203 en drop me a line .... Many thanks in advance ! Greetingz, Len. To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3066|3036|2004-02-17 18:15:31|brentswain38|Re: auto helmets and mast weights|Sch 40 pipe is way to heavy ,having a 1/4 inch wall thickness. 11 guage wall thickness 6 inch diameter steel pipe has worked well for my 36 footers and is lighter than a solid wood mast ,or a 5 1/2 by 8 inch box section hollow spruce mast with a 1 1/4 inch wall thickness and is much stronger than wood , but heavier than aluminium. A 36 footer next to me has just switched from a steel to an aluminium mast, so we'll keep you posted on what the difference works out to be in real life as opposed to theory. Slightly heavier masts increase the boats inertia and thus reduce the likelihood of capsize. In the water the mast has positive buoyancy improving the self righting ability of a boat ,as long as it remains intact and is totally sealed.Unsealed masts with internal halyards , or sch 40 steel masts have no such advantage. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "candle032000" wrote: > > Ahoy, regarding using the sched 40 steel pipe for a mast section. I > took the 600 pound spruce mast off my present 48 foot ketch and > replaced it with a 350 lb alloy one. The improvement was incredible > as in not sailing on our ear anymore and an increase in speed as we > are able to carry more sail with out flopping over with every heavy > gust. I always thought the intention was to try to reduce weight > aloft on sailing vessels , not to add it. I just can't imagine > putting six to seven hundred pounds into a mast for a ten ton boat. > Ciao, Greg > > > > > > > AhA--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "prairiemaidca" > wrote: > > HI All: Check the postings for auto helmets, there was some > > discussion not that far back on that subject. Has anyone else done > > the numbers for the weights of tubing and pipe for the mast. I've > > come up with the numbers as follows and would like to know if I'm > in > > the ball park. 5 1/2 5 1/8 @ 10.6 lbs/ft. for 491lbs. 5in. shd > 40 > > pipe @14.6 lbs/ft for 672lbs. and 6in. shd 40 pipe at 18.97lbs/ft > > for 872lbs. based on a 64ft. length. Martin Forster (Prairie > Maid) | 3067|3043|2004-02-17 18:27:22|brentswain38|Re: Boat like Contessa 26|Instead of the 26 ft Contessa just build one of my 26 footers designed for steel origami construction.The first one I did took around 21 days for hull, decks, keels, rudder , skeg, lifelines, handrails ,sterntube, hatches and most of the steel work plus most of the welding, almost ready for painting. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Cameron" wrote: > Hey all, just want opinions on making a steel hulled boat in the > design of the Contessa. I hear it is an amazing boat for solo oceanic > cruises. thanks. -Cameron (still reading away) | 3068|3036|2004-02-17 18:35:57|brentswain38|Re: auto helmets and mast weights|Increasing you beam increases stability in both the rightside up and in the inverted position. Thus if you do capsize, a beamier boat will take a lot longer to right itself, maybe forever if the beam is extreme .This has happened in the case of some ocean racers.A wheelhouse and the buoyancy in it can improve the self righting ability of a boat as much as adding a ton or two of ballast can. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > In a 10 ton boat with a 650 lb mast, allowing 250 lbs for sails, rigging, spreaders and fittings you will have about 6000 lbs of ballast in a 5 foot keel trying to right 900 lbs on a 50 foot mast. > > approx righting moment = (6000 lbs * 3.75 ft) - (900 lbs * 25 ft) = 0 ft-lbs > > A detailed calculation of the righting moments would be required, but at a glance the boat will have little reserve stability beyond its form stability, and might even have negative stability. In a seaway such a vessel could be prone to knockdown and at risk for capsize, and could be inherently unsafe. > > One warning sign of stability problems is knockdowns. In a well designed offshore cruising boat, knockdowns are rare. As a comparison, the Lazy Bones at 13 tons has a 209 lb alloy mast. In all our years of cruising offshore, in all kinds of weather, including "survival" conditions we have never had the mast in the water. > > Repeating the previous calculation with a 200 lb alloy mast on a 10 ton boat: > > approx righting moment = (6000 lbs * 3.75 ft) - (450 lbs * 25 ft) = 11250 ft-lbs > > On a boat with a 11.5 ft beam, this would be the equivalent of adding 10 x 200 lb men to the windward rail, with the ability to instantly shift them from one side of the boat to the other as the boat rolls. This could be expected to substantially improve performance and stability as compared to the 650 lb mast. > > Anecdotal stories are no substitute for a detailed analysis of the righting moments. Weight aloft can give a false sense of security, because it slows the motion of the vessel, making it appear more stable, while in fact making it less stable. > > A rule of thumb is that every pound added aloft requires 10 lbs to be added to the keel. Adding 450 lbs to a mast would require adding 4500 lbs to the keel, which could severely limit the amount of fuel, water, stores and spares that could be carried within the 10 ton displacement. Thus, because of the lever arm, mast weight is one of the more important factors in determining the suitability of a boat for offshore cruising. > > greg elliott > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > I just can't imagine > putting six to seven hundred pounds into a mast for a ten ton boat. > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3069|3064|2004-02-18 01:52:23|Len den Besten|Re: Muir chainmeter manual, anyone ?|Graeme, I did, I've been asking the manufacturer in Australia, import-firm in various countries and resellers. Seems there is no one who keeps behind the docs regarding the items sold a few years ago but have been left out in the assortiment now, not even a pfd-file. Thanks for your answer, Len. --- Graeme wrote: > Len > Email the makers i am sure they will send you one or > have a pfd file you can down load. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Len den Besten > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2004 6:53 AM > Subject: [origamiboats] Muir chainmeter manual, > anyone ? > > > Hi All, > > When I bought our present SY I was lucky to get > _almost_ all > documentation regarding the various systems on > board. > There's one doc that was missing however: a manual > for the Muir > windlass remote control/chainmeter. Article nr: > EST203. > > This chainmeter has all sorts of programmable > functions I would like > to explore and I sure hope there is a another one > out there.... > > When somebody has a Muir chainmeter would you be > so kind to see if > it's a EST203 en drop me a line .... > > Many thanks in advance ! > > > Greetingz, Len. > > > > To Post a message, send it to: > origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ADVERTISEMENT > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Yahoo! Groups Links > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an > email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the > Yahoo! Terms of Service. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been > removed] > > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want. http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools| 3070|2996|2004-02-18 05:55:01|Ben Tucker|Re: Pictures Project YAGO 31 on my website|Hi gerd The dutch boats @ http://www.alcyone-archive.org/pdf/Modern.pdf are steel 5 panel designs abit like yours with a raised deck and single centreboard instead of the leeboards, also prisimatic coeficent has been reduced to improve performance at sea. these boats have circumnavigated. and look good. A few interesting titbits of theory on inverted stability consider the free surface effect of flooding, reduced inverted freeboard of low freeboard designs or heavy disp boats, and theorys on narrow high decks/cabins and mast bouyancy. alot of old traditional designs with internal ballast have been rolled and by modern theory should have stayed upside down forever. The only reason for their recovery is water inside with attendant Free surface effect and loss of inverted freeboard. This also works on modern boats, unless they are too watertight ie open sixty with water tight bulkheads. I think flatish decks as in our designs might be better than a wheelhouse or trunk cabin with water in it. When you right freeboard can be very low, best not to have a deep companionway and hopefully very good pumps! The only time I got badly flooded the water went to the stern and she ended up with only a few inches of freeboard aft (or so it seemed). A frightend man with a bucket works great! A Yacht designer did some Tank tests at our college on the Syd-hobart boats after 1998 and came up with the theory that the drag of the rig could help rerighting in big seas by providing a tripping drag to initiate rerighting!. Without the rig the lightweight boats would surf ahead of a wave upside down (lends support to the shallow draught boat slipping away from a wave theory!). I think this probably only applies to light boats in very big seas. plenty of tales tell the opposite story, but a floating mast can make a huge differnce I hear. Interesting about your knockdown, Got knocked down the same way once, no wind big swell on my folks 20 ton 45 footer. The tapedeck flew of the shelf and hit the deckhead, and this was leaving the bay! I was too young to be scared. I like your computer simulations. I am having trouble adding detail like windows to my 3d dxf files. To Get realisticish sails try sailcut from carson designs (free) and import the dxf files to your hull. I like the sound of your folding of hull experiments. How do you intergrate the flat bottom into the patern? have been thrown out of my bunk a few times on ships that were to stiff. cheers ben > | 3071|2996|2004-02-18 08:56:55|bubblede|Re: Pictures Project YAGO 31 on my website|Hi Ben >> leeboards: I am playing around with the idea placing a ballast-bulb at the bottom of the boards, which would make them to some sort of lifting bilge-keels ... haven't seen that anywhere yet, so maybe I should take out a patent? ;-) Originally the boardswere wood plus epoxy glass coating, but now i think about building them in steel and strong enough to sit the boat on it. the "bulb" would then also be a steel box, with lead poured directly into them and welded to the board-profile - no bolts etc. Meaning with the things up I would have 10-15 cm of air under the hull (with a flat bottom that would help for cleaning and inspection) and still have a keels-up draft of only 65 or so for beaching. Ballast probably part in the bulbs and part inside hull...looking for a way to lift them easily now (winches on deck...?) This results in the boards moving aft a bit as compared to the original, because there we counted on lifting the boards on the wind and progressively lifting as the wind moves aft, if both are down all the time there will be little adjusting of the things, en route this would really be more of a "normal" bilge keel configuration. that's the only regret, I have sailed a 10 m centerboarder downwind with a lifting keel almost up, and it's really great, like a train on rails ;-) Otherwise that seems to be full of advantages: - shallow draft like a centerboarder - easy, safe beaching on 3point keels and skeg, hull lifted away from sharp edges - access to hull when beached - lighter boat / ballast further down when sailing - keels-down draft can be deeper that you would accept for a a fixed keel, giving better performance on deeper and mor laminar water. - the centerboard cases hidden near the hullsides and not in the center of the best living area Still looking for the real disadvantages, except that I have to build 2 instead of one ;-) >> flat bottom: seems to come nicely in origami, I just make 2 dart-cuts one above the other instead of one like on brents designs, one for each chine, which gives me a nice rather flat section midships, round conical aft and a rounded v forward right under the waterline. If you look at the lines-draawings you will see that the upper chine runs just under the waterline all the way to the bows, even built with "traditional" hard chines you never really notice them except when under way. As I do not really know how to use these CAD-things, I have trouble designing the hull as it _will_ be, and do only the hard-chine hull I am starting out from. >>masts: personally I would hesitate a lot to add weight topsides. The fact that a steel mast may be watertight does not mean much here, because you can have the same with any other material. OK, back to office work, hope I will advance a bit more this weekend... ;-( Gerd| 3072|3072|2004-02-18 11:05:22|prairiemaidca|Mast weights|Hi All: I certainly wasn't planning on using the shd.40 pipe due to it's weight. I was looking at the 5 1/2 in. tubing at 10.6lbs a ft. for a total of 491lbs for a 46ft lenght. How much would the stainless mast weigh on the 36 that we took pictures of in Campbell River? It looked nice but I was concerned about the weight. Are there sources in the western can. region where one might obtain a mast from a damaged boat? Insurance claims etc... Martin Forster (Prairie Maid)| 3073|3072|2004-02-18 14:17:25|info@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: Mast weights|This could still be 750+ lbs aloft when rigged on 6000 lbs of ballast, and looks heavy. As a rule of thumb, the height of the mast is 10 times the depth of the keel, so weight aloft should be less than 1/10th the weight of the keel. Otherwise you could be close to zero righting moment (or worse negative), leaving the boat at risk in a seaway. Think of a teeter-totter. 10 people sitting one foot from the pivot exactly balance 1 person sitting 10 feet on the other side of the pivot . In a boat you want to do better than simply being balanced. You want more than 10 people (keel), to ensure that the 1 person (mast) never ends up in the water (knockdown/capsize). In your case it looks like you may have less than 10 people. What is the righting moment with a 491lb mast fully rigged with wet sails? This should be calculated before selecting a mast. Shoal draft and the weight of steel decks, cabin and pilothouse all affect the numbers and should be taken into account. Offshore in a storm is not a good place to discover you have a stability problem. Greg Elliott Origami Magic http://www.origamimagic.com 1.604.987.0050 I was looking at the 5 1/2 in. tubing at 10.6lbs a ft. for a total of 491lbs for a 46ft lenght. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3074|2996|2004-02-18 14:45:43|brentswain38|Re: Pictures Project YAGO 31 on my website|While flat decks do give free water surface more ability to slosh a boat upright,while doing a lot of dammage in the process, if one uses the totally watertight hatches described in my book, there will be no water inside during a capsize and the buoyancy of a wheelhouse will provide a much dryer means of improving self righting, which semms the more comfortable and intelligent way to go.They wouldn't allow a boat to go surfing upside down on a wave.Several tons of free water surface sloshing around inside a boat can cause a lot of dammage. Traditional ,leaky tiki hatches are impossible to make totally watertight and are a real primitive throwback. They should be avoided at all costs, and got rid of on existing boats. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Ben Tucker" wrote: > Hi gerd > > The dutch boats @ http://www.alcyone-archive.org/pdf/Modern.pdf are > steel 5 panel designs abit like yours with a raised deck and single > centreboard instead of the leeboards, also prisimatic coeficent has > been reduced to improve performance at sea. these boats have > circumnavigated. and look good. > > A few interesting titbits of theory on inverted stability consider > the free surface effect of flooding, reduced inverted freeboard of > low freeboard designs or heavy disp boats, and theorys on narrow high > decks/cabins and mast bouyancy. > > alot of old traditional designs with internal ballast have been > rolled and by modern theory should have stayed upside down forever. > The only reason for their recovery is water inside with attendant > Free surface effect and loss of inverted freeboard. This also works > on modern boats, unless they are too watertight ie open sixty with > water tight bulkheads. I think flatish decks as in our designs might > be better than a wheelhouse or trunk cabin with water in it. When you > right freeboard can be very low, best not to have a deep companionway > and hopefully very good pumps! The only time I got badly flooded the > water went to the stern and she ended up with only a few inches of > freeboard aft (or so it seemed). A frightend man with a bucket works > great! > > A Yacht designer did some Tank tests at our college on the Syd- hobart > boats after 1998 and came up with the theory that the drag of the rig > could help rerighting in big seas by providing a tripping drag to > initiate rerighting!. Without the rig the lightweight boats would > surf ahead of a wave upside down (lends support to the shallow > draught boat slipping away from a wave theory!). I think this > probably only applies to light boats in very big seas. plenty of > tales tell the opposite story, but a floating mast can make a huge > differnce I hear. > > Interesting about your knockdown, Got knocked down the same way once, > no wind big swell on my folks 20 ton 45 footer. The tapedeck flew of > the shelf and hit the deckhead, and this was leaving the bay! I was > too young to be scared. > > I like your computer simulations. I am having trouble adding detail > like windows to my 3d dxf files. To Get realisticish sails try > sailcut from carson designs (free) and import the dxf files to your > hull. > > I like the sound of your folding of hull experiments. How do you > intergrate the flat bottom into the patern? > > have been thrown out of my bunk a few times on ships that were to > stiff. > > cheers ben > > > > > | 3075|2996|2004-02-18 14:51:38|brentswain38|Re: Pictures Project YAGO 31 on my website|A steel mast fully detailed ready to step costs around $1,000, less than 1/10th the price of an aluminium mast.It will get you cruising and if you find a deal on an aluminium mast later, the steel mast can be sold for cost and it won't owe you anything. There are many would be cruisers stuck on dry land ,not for want of neccesities, but insisting on luxuries. Brent swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "bubblede" wrote: > Hi Ben > > >> leeboards: > I am playing around with the idea placing a ballast-bulb at the > bottom of the boards, which would make them to some sort of lifting > bilge-keels ... haven't seen that anywhere yet, so maybe I should > take out a patent? ;-) > Originally the boardswere wood plus epoxy glass coating, but now i > think about building them in steel and strong enough to sit the boat > on it. the "bulb" would then also be a steel box, with lead poured > directly into them and welded to the board-profile - no bolts etc. > Meaning with the things up I would have 10-15 cm of air under the > hull (with a flat bottom that would help for cleaning and > inspection) and still have a keels-up draft of only 65 or so for > beaching. Ballast probably part in the bulbs and part inside > hull...looking for a way to lift them easily now (winches on > deck...?) > This results in the boards moving aft a bit as compared to the > original, because there we counted on lifting the boards on the wind > and progressively lifting as the wind moves aft, if both are down > all the time there will be little adjusting of the things, en route > this would really be more of a "normal" bilge keel configuration. > that's the only regret, I have sailed a 10 m centerboarder downwind > with a lifting keel almost up, and it's really great, like a train > on rails ;-) > Otherwise that seems to be full of advantages: > - shallow draft like a centerboarder > - easy, safe beaching on 3point keels and skeg, hull lifted away > from sharp edges > - access to hull when beached > - lighter boat / ballast further down when sailing > - keels-down draft can be deeper that you would accept for a a fixed > keel, giving better performance on deeper and mor laminar water. > - the centerboard cases hidden near the hullsides and not in the > center of the best living area > > Still looking for the real disadvantages, except that I have to > build 2 instead of one ;-) > > >> flat bottom: > seems to come nicely in origami, I just make 2 dart-cuts one above > the other instead of one like on brents designs, one for each chine, > which gives me a nice rather flat section midships, round conical > aft and a rounded v forward right under the waterline. If you look > at the lines-draawings you will see that the upper chine runs just > under the waterline all the way to the bows, even built > with "traditional" hard chines you never really notice them except > when under way. As I do not really know how to use these CAD- things, > I have trouble designing the hull as it _will_ be, and do only the > hard-chine hull I am starting out from. > > >>masts: > personally I would hesitate a lot to add weight topsides. The fact > that a steel mast may be watertight does not mean much here, because > you can have the same with any other material. > > OK, back to office work, hope I will advance a bit more this > weekend... ;-( > Gerd | 3076|3072|2004-02-18 14:58:08|brentswain38|Re: Mast weights|Most of my 36 footers have steel masts and their owners despite many ocean crossings, wouldn't consider it worth changing. People with 5 1/2 inch tubing for masts have sailed along side sister ships with 6 5/8th mast at the same angle of heel in the same 15 knot winds .Some masts do come up for sale here on the west coast.Aluminium is definitly better, but not worth waiting for if you can get sailing right now with a steel mast, while accumulating the money for aluminium means missing a season or two. Brent Swain Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > This could still be 750+ lbs aloft when rigged on 6000 lbs of ballast, and looks heavy. As a rule of thumb, the height of the mast is 10 times the depth of the keel, so weight aloft should be less than 1/10th the weight of the keel. Otherwise you could be close to zero righting moment (or worse negative), leaving the boat at risk in a seaway. > > Think of a teeter-totter. 10 people sitting one foot from the pivot exactly balance 1 person sitting 10 feet on the other side of the pivot . In a boat you want to do better than simply being balanced. You want more than 10 people (keel), to ensure that the 1 person (mast) never ends up in the water (knockdown/capsize). In your case it looks like you may have less than 10 people. > > What is the righting moment with a 491lb mast fully rigged with wet sails? This should be calculated before selecting a mast. Shoal draft and the weight of steel decks, cabin and pilothouse all affect the numbers and should be taken into account. Offshore in a storm is not a good place to discover you have a stability problem. > > Greg Elliott > Origami Magic > http://www.origamimagic.com > 1.604.987.0050 > > > I was looking at the 5 1/2 in. tubing at 10.6lbs a ft. > for a total of 491lbs for a 46ft lenght. > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3077|3077|2004-02-18 18:20:21|Cameron|Apologee|hey everyone. I'm sorry for posting all the non-steel boat related crap on this site. I was referred to this place by some other guys on the internet. Said there were knowledgable and innovative people here. So thats why i showed up. I'll try to head somewhere else with my non-steel related ideas. Sorry. -Cameron| 3078|3077|2004-02-18 18:42:27|Michael Casling|Re: Apologee|Maybe consider Boat Design and Low Cost Voyaging. Both are @yahoogroups.com Non steel is not crap to me. Michael Casling ----- Original Message ----- From: Cameron To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 18, 2004 3:20 PM Subject: [origamiboats] Apologee hey everyone. I'm sorry for posting all the non-steel boat related crap on this site. I was referred to this place by some other guys on the internet. Said there were knowledgable and innovative people here. So thats why i showed up. I'll try to head somewhere else with my non-steel related ideas. Sorry. -Cameron To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3079|3072|2004-02-18 20:26:12|richytill|Re: Mast weights/cost effective solutions|My engineer friend from the local pulp mill says "no way" to 316ss masts no matter how they are welded. Way too many problems with potential fractures given the constant change in load, vibration, uneven loading and so-on. This was a let down because I had found some used material of the right dimesions for next to no cost; it needed a fair bit of cleaning. I considered an aluminum mast but the least expesive was $8,000 cdn shipped in from California. Figured if I bought everything off the shelf at new cost I would still be building well past retirement; the clock is ticking. Did some inconclusive calculating on appropriate wheights using boat data book plus Skenes and finaly decided that no matter how many numbers I crunch the final question will always be--does it work? Apparently there are sufficient in- vivo tests to assure us that Swain 36 boats do fine with thin wall steel masts. Just as I was about to order steel tube, I picked up a tapered 53' aluminum pole made by Isomat--cost about $700. The pole is marine grade and fair beefy--my son and I can carry it without difficulty. I have welded up stations for double spreaders since the pole tapers down to 4.5" at the top. Have made mast head sheave box and base to suit--will weigh the whole assembly sometime. The thing that I like about it is the fact it is lighter at the top than the bottom. Even so, the steel mast will probably have less windage and wind seems to have more push than mast wheight by the time we are talking about knock downs????? rt --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" wrote: > Most of my 36 footers have steel masts and their owners despite many > ocean crossings, wouldn't consider it worth changing. People with 5 > 1/2 inch tubing for masts have sailed along side sister ships with 6 > 5/8th mast at the same angle of heel in the same 15 knot winds .Some > masts do come up for sale here on the west coast.Aluminium is > definitly better, but not worth waiting for if you can get sailing > right now with a steel mast, while accumulating the money for > aluminium means missing a season or two. > Brent Swain > Brent Swain > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > > This could still be 750+ lbs aloft when rigged on 6000 lbs of > ballast, and looks heavy. As a rule of thumb, the height of the mast > is 10 times the depth of the keel, so weight aloft should be less > than 1/10th the weight of the keel. Otherwise you could be close to > zero righting moment (or worse negative), leaving the boat at risk in > a seaway. > > > > Think of a teeter-totter. 10 people sitting one foot from the > pivot exactly balance 1 person sitting 10 feet on the other side of > the pivot . In a boat you want to do better than simply being > balanced. You want more than 10 people (keel), to ensure that the 1 > person (mast) never ends up in the water (knockdown/capsize). In > your case it looks like you may have less than 10 people. > > > > What is the righting moment with a 491lb mast fully rigged with wet > sails? This should be calculated before selecting a mast. Shoal > draft and the weight of steel decks, cabin and pilothouse all affect > the numbers and should be taken into account. Offshore in a storm is > not a good place to discover you have a stability problem. > > > > Greg Elliott > > Origami Magic > > http://www.origamimagic.com > > 1.604.987.0050 > > > > > > I was looking at the 5 1/2 in. tubing at 10.6lbs a ft. > > for a total of 491lbs for a 46ft lenght. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3080|2996|2004-02-18 21:21:24|Ben Tucker|Re: Pictures Project YAGO 31 on my website|--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" wrote: >Hi brent Couldn't agree more on the idea of keeping water out of the boat. In a sensible designs like yours they shouldn't need much help coming back upright. my comments really refer to the light beamy modern designs or my own area of interest of very shallow steel boats. The time I got a boat full of water was in a pooping +knockdown in moderate conditions with the two top dropboards out. the force of water actually ripped a shelf off the cabinside. the reason we had the boards out was because it was amost imposible to get in and out easily with all three board in. A System like yours is ideal. My favorite conversion for dropboards is to hinge the top one horzontally off the bottom one to enable easy accces and stop you losing it overboard. If you have an easy to use system it will be shut when it should be! 1 in 300,000 wave is four times the hight of the rest - and its out to get you! the boat was a 28 foot steel boat. it was narrow,shallow and very tender. it had an alloy stick, we got knocked down twice in only moderate conditions and later on the boat got knocked down several more times. As Greg says stability is very important! The boat would have been a death trap with heaver mast (it nearly was with an alloy one). The steel mast question is interesting.see http://www.dixdesign.com/FAQsteel.htm Apparently a high tensile steel mast can be as light for its compession strengh as alloy (something to do with modulas of elasticity and eullers formular rather than tensile strength) building them light is the problem. Steel masts make more sense on a gaff rig because the mast can be much shorter with a light fimsy topmast(careful hanging a big headsail of this,have broken two so far) or a yard topsail for light airs. the tripod tube masts are also quite light weight and cheap, but boy are they ugly. windage will also be high. The weight of fittings can be reduced on a steel mast, and the track if welded included in modulas calculations. tapering is also easyer. Look at the weight of the whole rig including roller reefing, oversize spreaders, mast steps inmast furling etc. A steel mast without these extras may be nearly comparable to alloy with all the toys. cheers ben > > > | 3081|3072|2004-02-19 03:31:50|bubblede|Re: Mast weights|Hi Brent >....Aluminium is > definitly better, but not worth waiting for if you can get sailing > right now with a steel mast, while accumulating the money for > aluminium means missing a season or two. Yes, I think apart from the fact that best is always best, price has to enter here. I remember when I built my last boat I had this terrible feeling that the closer I came to launching, there more money I spent. Whereas a thousand would buy me stuff to keep me busy for weeks and build big things in the beginning, ppace accelerated when it came to the end of the rough woodworks inside and when fitting out deck and rigg I was a the shipchandlers twice a day for a thousand each time... terrible! And this was in an area where you could really find everything second-hand, de-classified or slightly spoiled (like when we bought a load of big winches after the GibSea Yard burned out). As I am now living here in the center of hungary, landlocked and every little bit imported with high taxes, this is one of the reasons I am going for gaff this time, hoping to buy next to nothing made-for-yachts. I sure would not want to fit out an aluminium mast here! So wooden mast, and build all the bits and pieces myself, no winches, no fancy cam-cleats etc, maybe even making my own sails - I did some calcs and gaff should drop my budget by about 20 % compared to the same boat with a modern alloy rig. See also: Bernard Moitessier who sailed his Joshua one and a half time nonstop around the world and then some, with massive wooden telegraph-poles and in that case steel would probably have been lighter. Nobody questions this boat (actually it's a pig, i delivered one like that france-madeira) or the skipper as for seaworthiness, he is a legend in france and has sparked the entire french amateur movement all on his own. I read his books myself, and started building ... ;-) The boat is now in the maritime museum in la rochelle, still sailing on trips and excursions there, pictures at http://www.museemaritimelarochelle.fr/visite.php and from the pics it looks as if its still the same sticks. BTW, a friend of mine was thinking about using alloy lamp-posts, anybody ever tried something like that? Gerd| 3082|3082|2004-02-19 09:59:30|greenguy2ca|Aluminim Mast|Got lucky and found a used aluminum mast. After I strip the old paint off I was thinking of putting some foam or other deadening material inside. Would appreciate any info on how to go about this and what material would be best. Thanks... Gary| 3083|3072|2004-02-19 10:15:51|info@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: Mast weights/cost effective solutions|Alloy tubing can be used to build a mast, typically for a fraction of the cost of a custom extrusion. The Pangaea 50 has such a mast http://www.origamimagic.com/Design/Harvey50/Harvey50.htm Many of the boats from NZ that we met had masts made from alloy tubing. For performance they run the tube through rollers to flatten it to form an oval, and cut a long "V" in the top and pull it together if they want a taper. Greg Elliott Origami Magic http://www.origamimagic.com 1.604.987.0050 I considered an aluminum mast but the least expesive was $8,000 cdn shipped in from California. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3084|3072|2004-02-19 10:16:06|info@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: Mast weights|The Nonsuch by Hinterholler (unstayed wishbone cat rig). Greg Elliott Origami Magic http://www.origamimagic.com 1.604.987.0050 BTW, a friend of mine was thinking about using alloy lamp-posts, anybody ever tried something like that? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3085|3072|2004-02-19 11:35:24|put_to_sea|Re: Mast weights|I have also been considering a gaff rig. It would use a shorter mast so a steel mast would be more suitable. I am particularly interested in the Wharram soft wing sail ( http://www.wharram.com/tiki_wingsail_article.shtml ) which might be considered an "improved" gaff rig although I don't know enough about it at this time. Amos > this is one of the > reasons I am going for gaff this time, hoping to buy next to nothing > made-for-yachts. I sure would not want to fit out an aluminium mast > here! > So wooden mast, and build all the bits and pieces myself, no > winches, no fancy cam-cleats etc, maybe even making my own sails - I > did some calcs and gaff should drop my budget by about 20 % compared > to the same boat with a modern alloy rig. | 3086|2996|2004-02-19 12:27:13|michael miller|(no subject)|Hi All Newbe Mick here. Fascinating stuff here - I've been bitten by the bug. Has anyone put a gaff rig on a BS design? Has anyone else thought about a much loer aspect rig - perhaps gaff/ketch with bowsprit and double headsail. Seems like it would look good. How do you all think it would go. Mick __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want. http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools| 3087|1354|2004-02-19 12:28:10|prairiemaidca|Masts|Hi All; Greg, when you referer to alloy tube are we talking aluminum or I am I just confused over more than one type of material here? And with these materials are you familiar with the price range? Martin Forster (Prairie Maid)| 3088|3072|2004-02-19 13:34:00|Gary H. Lucas|Re: Mast weights|I've thought about using light poles myself. Mainly because I worked as an electrical contractor and installed lots of them, and repaired a lot of them after they were hit by cars. My brother is still in the business and probably can get lots of them. Tapered steel poles have a uniform wall thickness top to bottom. Tapered aluminum poles appear to be the same weight per foot. The bottom wall thickness is about 1/8" while the wall thickness at the top can be double that or more. That is a really far less than ideal situation. Gary H. Lucas ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2004 10:16 AM Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: Mast weights > The Nonsuch by Hinterholler (unstayed wishbone cat rig). > > Greg Elliott > Origami Magic > http://www.origamimagic.com > 1.604.987.0050 > > BTW, a friend of mine was thinking about using alloy lamp-posts, > anybody ever tried something like that? > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > | 3089|3072|2004-02-19 13:50:02|edward_stoneuk|Re: Mast weights aluminum light poles|I have heard of folks in the UK who have used tapered aluminium poles for unstayed junk rigged boats. They could be got from Atlantic Spars in Brixham, Devon. Tel: + 44 (0) 1803 843 322. This information may not be of much use to those elsewhere but I believe that they imported them so a phone call from abroad may be able to find out where they got them from. I am not sure if they were light poles or flag poles. I know of folks who have made tapered aluminium masts by pushing smaller epoxy smeared pipe into larger pipe and smoothing the step into a taper with more epoxy. The result looked very good. When I googled tapered poles I found sites offering tapered glassfibre flag poles which might be worth more investigation. Regards, Ted| 3090|1354|2004-02-19 14:12:52|info@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: Masts|Hi Martin, Alloy is short for aluminum alloy. Sort of like saying "steel" instead of "iron alloy". The suppliers will know what you mean. You will normally be looking for 6000 series alloy for a mast. I was told the alloy for the mast on Pangaea cost $2000. regards, g Greg Elliott Origami Magic http://www.origamimagic.com 1.604.987.0050 ----- Original Message ----- From: prairiemaidca To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2004 9:27 AM Subject: [origamiboats] Masts Hi All; Greg, when you referer to alloy tube are we talking aluminum or I am I just confused over more than one type of material here? And with these materials are you familiar with the price range? Martin Forster (Prairie Maid) To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3091|3072|2004-02-19 14:38:52|brentswain38|Re: Mast weights|One of my 36 footers in Frisco used a lampost. It worked well.Another friend used an unstayed one on a junk rig and it broke just where the sleeve inside ended where a pad had been welded on.It wouldn't have broken if the sleeve had gone beyond the pad . Most of them are 6061 which doesn't weld reliably. One of my boats was rigged with a gaff rig and a bowsprit. It seems like a lot of unneccessary junk and potential weakpoints for no good reason. If it aint broke , don't fix it. With a marconi rig you can buy all kinds of used sails,very cheaply, hang them on and go sailing immediatly. With a gaff rig , everything has to be specially made. with a shorter rig,and it's reduced inertia , the risk of capsize increases.The amount of chaffing when cruising deep sea would increase drastically. It's a shame to take a simple ,well proven sea boat and turn it into a cantankerous museum of decorative priorities. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > The Nonsuch by Hinterholler (unstayed wishbone cat rig). > > Greg Elliott > Origami Magic > http://www.origamimagic.com > 1.604.987.0050 > > BTW, a friend of mine was thinking about using alloy lamp-posts, > anybody ever tried something like that? > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3092|3072|2004-02-19 14:46:57|brentswain38|Re: Mast weights/cost effective solutions|A friend had the pipe for the bulwark caps squashed to an oval for $60 ,for enough to do all the bulwarks on a 40 footer. As a former brake operator,I know the cost is the same regardless of the size of the tubing.I belive there are brake presses in Vancouver with 20 ft beds as I once ran a 600 ton one there.Aluminium tubing makes great masts, but aluminium welding equipment is less available than steel. One client made his mast fittings out of steel, had them galvanized and bolted them on an aluminium mast. That was in the early 80's and they are still good. The boat has gone from BC to England. Once you get ten feet or more above the deck, salt and resulting corrosion drops dramatically.Steel fittings are far more structurally reliable than aluminium or stainless. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > Alloy tubing can be used to build a mast, typically for a fraction of the cost of a custom extrusion. The Pangaea 50 has such a mast > > http://www.origamimagic.com/Design/Harvey50/Harvey50.htm > > Many of the boats from NZ that we met had masts made from alloy tubing. For performance they run the tube through rollers to flatten it to form an oval, and cut a long "V" in the top and pull it together if they want a taper. > > Greg Elliott > Origami Magic > http://www.origamimagic.com > 1.604.987.0050 > > > I considered an aluminum mast but the least expesive was $8,000 cdn > shipped in from California. > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3093|3082|2004-02-19 14:55:02|brentswain38|Re: Aluminim Mast|One client cut up styrofoam from an old float and forced it inside with a long pike pole before putting the bottom. It changes the sound from the bell like ringing of an aluminium mast to the sound of a wooden mast.Squirting spray foam in holes in the mast works, but it would take a lot of foam to fill a mast. Getting it at several points does the trick tho.. On New masts they prop them upright and mix 2 part foam in plastic dixie cups , then drop them in from the top. The dixie cups stop the foam from sticking and foaming to the mast part way down, if you mix and drop them quick enough. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "greenguy2ca" wrote: > Got lucky and found a used aluminum mast. After I strip the old > paint off I was thinking of putting some foam or other deadening > material inside. Would appreciate any info on how to go about this > and what material would be best. > > Thanks... Gary | 3094|3072|2004-02-19 15:19:00|bubblede|Re: Mast weights|hi Brent - I seem to understand you do not like gaff rigs ;-) > buy all kinds of used sails,very cheaply, hang them on and go sailing immediatly. well no, not here :-( > with a shorter rig,and it's reduced inertia , the risk of capsize > increases. that is not quite clear to me... I understand that inertia may delay sudden movements (and also prolong rolling movements once the thing gets going), but from there to wanting higher rigs ? the only advantage that I see in high aspect rigs is to have more efficient longer attack on the sail. ...> boat and turn it into a cantankerous museum of decorative priorities. well, I have built and sailed both modern and more traditional boats, and this time have this stubborn idea of doing something mostly for the looks and feel, and with a certain disregard of what may be the "better" way to do things. I want experiment, fun and good feeling most of all I think, and the idea of marrying a modern hull a traditional gaff rig just intrigues me enough to plan another build with lots of excitement. The result will be a compromise, sure, but of another, unknown kind and that is what makes me tick. I would also love to build a boat just for speed from the cheapest stuff available, say a very long empty steel hull with an enourmous rigg and a very deep narrow fin, could be built for peanuts in a month, and sock it to all these modern plastic hulls but as I really want to go cruising again I gess that sort of thing will have to wait for after my next reincarnation as for tapered steel masts: the more I think about it... have to do some more calcs there, but choosing between wood and steel may make me change some fixed ideas it seems. learning every day... ;-) Gerd| 3095|3072|2004-02-19 16:04:34|Michael Casling|Re: Mast weights|The advantage of a steel hull for racing is that you get plenty of room at the starts and mark roundings. How the extra weight of a steel hull is going to sock it to the other boats escapes me. If steel is your choice then the BS 36 is the way to go in my opinion. Why try and change it ? Michael Casling ----- Original Message ----- From: bubblede To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2004 12:18 PM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Mast weights I would also love to build a boat just for speed from the cheapest stuff available, say a very long empty steel hull with an enourmous rigg and a very deep narrow fin, could be built for peanuts in a month, and sock it to all these modern plastic hulls but as I really want to go cruising again I gess that sort of thing will have to wait for after my next reincarnation Gerd To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3096|3077|2004-02-19 17:28:05|...|Apologee|Hi Cameron, I hope none of the group mind you asking questions,most people who have boats in the blood have started out with wood or grp boats and have learnt the hard way. Reading the posts, it looked like you got some very good advice, I don't remember anyone saying you were not welcome. You must get some experience before going to sea on your own, until then continue reading everything, that's the way to learn Geoff England -------------------------------------------------------------------------- hey everyone. I'm sorry for posting all the non-steel boat related crap on this site. I was referred to this place by some other guys on the internet. Said there were knowledgable and innovative people here. So thats why i showed up. I'll try to head somewhere else with my non-steel related ideas. Sorry. -Cameron| 3097|3082|2004-02-20 00:47:42|candle032000|Re: Aluminim Mast|-On our recent new alloy mast installation we rolled up strips of closed cell foam of ablout 12mm. thickness and four feet long. We cut the strips to be wide enough to completely encircle the inside of the tube. When rolled to a smaller diameter we were able to keep shoving the pieces up inside the mast. As we were using internal halyards we didn't want to completely fill the mast with foam. I also was told by the mast shop that completely filling the extrusion with foam could both increase corrosion and add alot of excess weight aloft when wet. Since I have never even come close in 27 years of dipping my spreaders in the ocean I wasn't concerned with trying to find some extra floatation. Made sense to me.and it is quiet. With the internal halyards we have never had a problem,have reduced windage and lessened the slapping against the mast. Cheers,Greg -- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "greenguy2ca" wrote: > Got lucky and found a used aluminum mast. After I strip the old > paint off I was thinking of putting some foam or other deadening > material inside. Would appreciate any info on how to go about this > and what material would be best. > > Thanks... Gary | 3098|3072|2004-02-20 02:59:34|bubblede|Re: Mast weights|Hi michael - there is if course no advantage for steel in racing as a material. What I meant is that you could very well build a steel hull 40 to 50', low, with a deep keel that would be relatively light and very fast. A sort of steel-ULDB, if that's not a impossiblity in itself... if then you apply a very "zen" approach to the interiors, almost no equipment, no engine, fuel, shower-water, library and other comfort-stuff and keep it clean and empty, sleeping on a futon... ;-) what you would have is a very fast passagemaker and tons of fun, built in no time at all for the smallest possible budget. I think if I were again 20 years younger and wanted to sail single-handed, that's what I would do. -- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Michael Casling wrote: > The advantage of a steel hull for racing is that you get plenty of room at the starts and mark roundings. How the extra weight of a steel hull is going to sock it to the other boats escapes me. If steel is your choice then the BS 36 is the way to go in my opinion. Why try and change it ? Michael Casling > ----- Original Message ----- > From: bubblede > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2004 12:18 PM > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Mast weights > > > > I would also love to build a boat just for speed from the cheapest > stuff available, say a very long empty steel hull with an enourmous > rigg and a very deep narrow fin, could be built for peanuts in a > month, and sock it to all these modern plastic hulls but as I really > want to go cruising again I gess that sort of thing will have to > wait for after my next reincarnation > > Gerd > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------- > Yahoo! Groups Links > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3099|2996|2004-02-20 06:32:45|Ben Tucker|(no subject)|Hello mick Having grown up sailing a gaff ketch and spent years working on Square riggers as well as having owned two bermudan cutters and raced all sorts of modern stuff I have some idea of the compromises involved. My next boat will almost certainly be a Gaff Yawl for three reasons. Looks ,ease of handling, and Fun. Looks is entirely individual thing but to me a gaffer looks lovely, if all the other details are right and match the rig. Ease of handling sounds like a mistake but if set up properly (see my post on the yago31)It can be easyer to set, drop and reef than a bermudan rig. It is however much more complex. In it simplest it has at least one more halyard and topping lift add a topsail and we have another two ropes. Running backstays are also much more important than on a masthead cutter. I find all these ropes to be immense amounts of fun and my present simple bermudan cutter to be rather booring to sail. I love to set watersails, topsails, ringtails, jimminy greens, stunnsails etc. This sort if thing only works well on a gaffer (or though a backstaysail can be fun on a bermudan rig). This leads to annother advantage of the gaffer in that enormous amounts of sail can be set off short spars (my folks boat has a SA/Disp ratio around 20) This suits Heavy displacement boats well and many an old cruising boat has been ruined by the conversion to bermudan rig. Because the rig (without topsails) is low aspect it developes incredible power on a reach or run. the boats don't develope as much weather helm and track as if on rails, awesome sailing, In my mind matches surfing at 21 knots deep in the tasman sea on a ULDB. Of course there are plenty of downsides. the complexity and use of tackles instead of winches creates lots of windage and on Soren larsen (a 100' brigantine) our skipper's favorite qoute was "chafe is the enemy " (Hiscocks also said this). On Average speed to windward is not quite as good as a bermudan rig, especally when the flying jib has to come in to save the topmast (not quick enough twice while racing!!)My folks gaffer sails rings around most conventional bermudan boats (even other bermudan mobjacks)unless the course is hard to windward in 15-25 knots (the topmast factor). she will do 200 miles a day fairly regularly and has surfed at over 16 knots. She broke the record for the fastest trip from NZ to Murora atoll (3000'in the southern ocean in winter) so a good gaffer can certainly sail well. sails must be custom made but will last much longer than bermudan sail and hold their shape better if properly made, alternatly a heavy oversize bermudan main can be cut down to make a good gaff main with the top becoming a jib or staysail. The rig is complex and takes time to perfect and learn. There are of course many more advantages and disadvantages, also lots of differnt types of gaffer. At the end of the day the perfect rig hasn't been invented (thankfully). In conclusion if you just want to go sailing as simply and as practically as posible use a masthead bermudan rig(or junk). in light air use a motor instead of all the gaffs fancy light sails or a spinniker. If you don't love playing boats and ropes stick to bermudan, I'll go for a gaff. The sylings of the BS boats suit a gaff nicely as long as you dont have a pilothouse. Light boats don't need the extra sail area gaff can provide so they suit heavier boats better like the BS's. read tom cunliffs "hand reef and steer" and John leathers "Gaff rig" try sailing an old gaffer or square rigger before you commit. all the best Ben > Newbe Mick here. Fascinating stuff here - I've been > bitten by the bug.> > Has anyone put a gaff rig on a BS design? > > Has anyone else thought about a much loer aspect rig - > perhaps gaff/ketch with bowsprit and double headsail. > Seems like it would look good. How do you all think it > would go. > > Mick > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want. > http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools | 3100|3072|2004-02-20 06:39:22|Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr|Re: Mast weights|You might want to take a look at 'Steelstar' on Yves Tanton's website. It is exactly what you are describing. Jeff ----- Original Message ----- From: "bubblede" To: Sent: Friday, February 20, 2004 2:59 AM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Mast weights > Hi michael - there is if course no advantage for steel in racing as > a material. What I meant is that you could very well build a steel > hull 40 to 50', low, with a deep keel that would be relatively light > and very fast. A sort of steel-ULDB, if that's not a impossiblity > in itself... if then you apply a very "zen" approach to the > interiors, almost no equipment, no engine, fuel, shower-water, > library and other comfort-stuff and keep it clean and empty, > sleeping on a futon... ;-) what you would have is a very fast > passagemaker and tons of fun, built in no time at all for the > smallest possible budget. I think if I were again 20 years younger > and wanted to sail single-handed, that's what I would do. > > > -- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Michael Casling > wrote: > > The advantage of a steel hull for racing is that you get plenty of > room at the starts and mark roundings. How the extra weight of a > steel hull is going to sock it to the other boats escapes me. If > steel is your choice then the BS 36 is the way to go in my opinion. > Why try and change it ? Michael Casling > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: bubblede > > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2004 12:18 PM > > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Mast weights > > > > > > > > I would also love to build a boat just for speed from the > cheapest > > stuff available, say a very long empty steel hull with an > enourmous > > rigg and a very deep narrow fin, could be built for peanuts in a > > month, and sock it to all these modern plastic hulls but as I > really > > want to go cruising again I gess that sort of thing will have to > > wait for after my next reincarnation > > > > Gerd > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- > unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > ----------- > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms > of Service. > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > | 3101|2996|2004-02-20 10:03:06|michael miller|Any BS designs built in UK ir Ireland?|__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want. http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools| 3102|2996|2004-02-20 10:09:48|michael miller|Any BS designs built in UK ir Ireland?|Thanks to Ben and Brent for their replies re. gaff rigs. Does anyone know have any BS designs been built in Ireland or UK? Or are there any currently in these waters? I'd love to get a look at one (I've relished all your photos)and meet a builder. I've done a little sailing. Now 45 and have been gripped by the notion of sailing offshore for the last couple of years. The bug is not going away. So I'll eventually get off my arse and get going. The whole Brent Swain approach is most appealing to me. Early days yet. The Group is so interesting Thanks for fueling dreams. Mick __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want. http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools| 3103|3072|2004-02-20 16:56:24|brentswain38|Re: Mast weights|When I was building the first 36 footer back in 81, an englishman told me about a race he was in in England on a steel boat. When a plastic boat crew yelled "Starboard," they yelled back " Steel " and kept going. They were disqualified of course, but he said it was worth it. One of my 36 footers won the cruising division of race week in Antigua in the 80's, another won the Heriot Bay Mayday races a few years back, beating a lot of supposedly fast boats including a Cal 48. They had a lot of wind that time, and the steel boat with the steel mast could be driven much harder that any of the others dared. Brent swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Michael Casling wrote: > The advantage of a steel hull for racing is that you get plenty of room at the starts and mark roundings. How the extra weight of a steel hull is going to sock it to the other boats escapes me. If steel is your choice then the BS 36 is the way to go in my opinion. Why try and change it ? Michael Casling > ----- Original Message ----- > From: bubblede > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2004 12:18 PM > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Mast weights > > > > I would also love to build a boat just for speed from the cheapest > stuff available, say a very long empty steel hull with an enourmous > rigg and a very deep narrow fin, could be built for peanuts in a > month, and sock it to all these modern plastic hulls but as I really > want to go cruising again I gess that sort of thing will have to > wait for after my next reincarnation > > Gerd > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- > Yahoo! Groups Links > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3104|3072|2004-02-20 17:05:24|brentswain38|Re: Mast weights|It's been found that when a boat capsizes it's a case of the boat being thrown sideways and the keel biting in trips her and causes the capsize. With a taller rig, the wave has passed before the rig gets going fast enough to let her capsize. In tank tests they found that a wave which will roll a model thru 360 degrees will only roll her 40 degrees with a mast in.This explains why boats often get rolled over rather quickly the second time ,if they lose their rig in the first rollover. The book" Seaworthines, the Forgotten Factor" by Marchage explains this in greater depth. With tapering a steel mast, I'd be inclined to experiment with models first to see which way the welding distortion makes her go. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "bubblede" wrote: > hi Brent - I seem to understand you do not like gaff rigs ;-) > > > buy all kinds of used sails,very cheaply, hang them on and go > sailing immediatly. > well no, not here :-( > > > with a shorter rig,and it's reduced inertia , the risk of capsize > > increases. > that is not quite clear to me... I understand that inertia may > delay sudden movements (and also prolong rolling movements once the > thing gets going), but from there to wanting higher rigs ? > the only advantage that I see in high aspect rigs is to have more > efficient longer attack on the sail. > > ...> boat and turn it into a cantankerous museum of decorative > priorities. > well, I have built and sailed both modern and more traditional > boats, and this time have this stubborn idea of doing something > mostly for the looks and feel, and with a certain disregard of what > may be the "better" way to do things. I want experiment, fun and > good feeling most of all I think, and the idea of marrying a modern > hull a traditional gaff rig just intrigues me enough to plan another > build with lots of excitement. The result will be a compromise, > sure, but of another, unknown kind and that is what makes me tick. > > I would also love to build a boat just for speed from the cheapest > stuff available, say a very long empty steel hull with an enourmous > rigg and a very deep narrow fin, could be built for peanuts in a > month, and sock it to all these modern plastic hulls but as I really > want to go cruising again I gess that sort of thing will have to > wait for after my next reincarnation > > as for tapered steel masts: the more I think about it... have to do > some more calcs there, but choosing between wood and steel may make > me change some fixed ideas it seems. learning every day... ;-) > > Gerd | 3105|2996|2004-02-20 17:15:36|brentswain38|Re: Any BS designs built in UK ir Ireland?|John has a bright red 31 foot twin keeler I built, currently in Falmouth ,called "Ecclectus." He built a 36 footer there.There was one of my 36 footers for sale in Scotland a while back and Ted Stone, who follows this website ,is building one in England.I've sold a few more plans in England and possibly Ireland, but I don't know who else building yet. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, michael miller wrote: > Thanks to Ben and Brent for their replies re. gaff > rigs. > > Does anyone know have any BS designs been built in > Ireland or UK? Or are there any currently in these > waters? I'd love to get a look at one (I've relished > all your photos)and meet a builder. > > I've done a little sailing. Now 45 and have been > gripped by the notion of sailing offshore for the last > couple of years. The bug is not going away. So I'll > eventually get off my arse and get going. > > The whole Brent Swain approach is most appealing to > me. Early days yet. > > The Group is so interesting > Thanks for fueling dreams. > > Mick > > > > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want. > http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools | 3106|3072|2004-02-20 18:44:40|richytill|Re: Mast weights aluminum light poles|The tapered aluminium pole I am using has 2 X heavier wall thickness at the top than the bottom. When you pick it up, the top is way easier to pick up and obviously way lighter. Will whiegh the thing soon. rt --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "edward_stoneuk" wrote: > I have heard of folks in the UK who have used tapered aluminium poles > for unstayed junk rigged boats. They could be got from Atlantic > Spars in Brixham, Devon. Tel: + 44 (0) 1803 843 322. This > information may not be of much use to those elsewhere but I believe > that they imported them so a phone call from abroad may be able to > find out where they got them from. I am not sure if they were light > poles or flag poles. I know of folks who have made tapered aluminium > masts by pushing smaller epoxy smeared pipe into larger pipe and > smoothing the step into a taper with more epoxy. The result looked > very good. When I googled tapered poles I found sites offering > tapered glassfibre flag poles which might be worth more investigation. > Regards, > Ted | 3107|3072|2004-02-20 22:22:00|bilgekeeldave|Re: Mast weights|--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" wrote: > When I was building the first 36 footer back in 81, an englishman > told me about a race he was in in England on a steel boat. When a > plastic boat crew yelled "Starboard," they yelled back " Steel " and > kept going. They were disqualified of course, but he said it was > worth it. A few years ago, I was waiting for another boat to leave a spot, on the face, at Friday Harbor WA, just as the other boat cleared the dock and just as I was starting to move, a little 18' ski boat slipped around me and took the space. I kept bearing down on them. I yelled, "It's made of steel, and I'm insured!" They got out of my way. Gotta love these steel boats! Dave| 3108|3072|2004-02-21 10:57:12|narwhale36|Re: Mast weights|-Its disconcerting to read the banter concerning using the supposed strenghths of steel to exert the rules of the road. If the International collision regs. were to operate on the premise that might is right then just imagine the chaos, loss of life and environmental damage. The same mariners that would use their slight advantage in size or strength of hull in a race or jockeying at a marina would probably be the ones to cry foul when a large tanker ignored their presence on the seas. Ego and road rage has no place on the ocean. Bob -- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "bilgekeeldave" wrote: > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" > wrote: > > When I was building the first 36 footer back in 81, an englishman > > told me about a race he was in in England on a steel boat. When a > > plastic boat crew yelled "Starboard," they yelled back " Steel " > and > > kept going. They were disqualified of course, but he said it was > > worth it. > > > A few years ago, I was waiting for another boat to leave a spot, on > the face, at Friday Harbor WA, just as the other boat cleared the > dock and just as I was starting to move, a little 18' ski boat > slipped around me and took the space. I kept bearing down on them. I > yelled, "It's made of steel, and I'm insured!" They got out of my > way. > > Gotta love these steel boats! > > Dave | 3109|3072|2004-02-21 13:11:25|bilgekeeldave|Re: Road rules. (was Mast weights)|--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "narwhale36" wrote: > -Its disconcerting to read the banter concerning using the supposed > strenghths of steel to exert the rules of the road. If the > International collision regs. were to operate on the premise that > might is right then just imagine the chaos, loss of life and > environmental damage. The same mariners that would use their slight > advantage in size or strength of hull in a race or jockeying at a > marina would probably be the ones to cry foul when a large tanker > ignored their presence on the seas. Ego and road rage has no place on > the ocean. Bob I am a professional mariner, I sail on these tanker's and drycargo ships. We often don't see small boats at sea, though we do keep a good watch. A boat with a white fiberglass hull, without a radar reflector, could be invisible to us in a rough sea. Our 600' to 1000' length is VERY visible to the small yacht, If you keep a good watch. International rules of the road are nice, but if you're smart, you will give the larger, less manuverable vessel the right of way, even if you think that right of way is yours. Better to make a course change and loose your right of way than to stubbornly insist on the rules and loose your boat. In the real world, the bigger boat HAS the right of way. Dave| 3110|3072|2004-02-21 16:53:25|brentswain38|Re: Mast weights|I think the guy who uses his speed advantage to cut you off from a space you've been waiting patiently for, deserves only as much consideration as he was showing others, and has already chosen the rules as they apply to him( But not only him) Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "narwhale36" wrote: > -Its disconcerting to read the banter concerning using the supposed > strenghths of steel to exert the rules of the road. If the > International collision regs. were to operate on the premise that > might is right then just imagine the chaos, loss of life and > environmental damage. The same mariners that would use their slight > advantage in size or strength of hull in a race or jockeying at a > marina would probably be the ones to cry foul when a large tanker > ignored their presence on the seas. Ego and road rage has no place on > the ocean. Bob > > > > -- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "bilgekeeldave" > wrote: > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" > > wrote: > > > When I was building the first 36 footer back in 81, an englishman > > > told me about a race he was in in England on a steel boat. When a > > > plastic boat crew yelled "Starboard," they yelled back " Steel " > > and > > > kept going. They were disqualified of course, but he said it was > > > worth it. > > > > > > A few years ago, I was waiting for another boat to leave a spot, on > > the face, at Friday Harbor WA, just as the other boat cleared the > > dock and just as I was starting to move, a little 18' ski boat > > slipped around me and took the space. I kept bearing down on them. > I > > yelled, "It's made of steel, and I'm insured!" They got out of my > > way. > > > > Gotta love these steel boats! > > > > Dave | 3111|3072|2004-02-21 17:05:15|info@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: Mast weights|The subject of capsize is at best controversial. As a result, I'm always cautious about assuming that a strategy that works for one boat will work for all boats. Modern designs often have their weight concentrated well below the waterline, with little inertia in their ultra light hulls and rigs. For those boats the problem can be too much weight down low, and there is some thought that adding weight aloft may reduce capsize risk. Steel cruising boats can have the opposite problem. A steel hull has fantastic inertia, much of it concentrated above the waterline in the heavy decks and cabin. For these boats the problem can be too much weight up high, and they may need to be balanced by adding ballast A quick test to see if a boat has adequate ballast can be done using this simple formula: (keel depth X ballast weight) - (mast height X the weight of the masts, sails, and rigging) The result should be positive. For steel boats a better test might be: (keel depth X ballast weight) - (mast height X the weight of the masts, sails, and rigging) - (deck/cabin height X weight of cabin/deck) Again, the result should be positive. Greg Elliott Origami Magic http://www.origamimagic.com 1.604.987.0050 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3112|3072|2004-02-21 18:38:16|Ben Tucker|Re: Road rules. (was Mast weights)|Interesting Things kind of ballance out. The big less manuverable ship/yacht has fear on its side and the small manouverable boat has the control to take evasive action. I prefer to be in the small boat, at least then you have control of the situation. Things go wrong when other people do not realise the limitations of larger vessels. To do a crash stop on the container ships I worked on we would still travel at least 1.5nm and probably disable the ship for 7-10 hours. Putting the helm hard over we still traveled ahead about 1 nm. With 3 radar reflectors up on my last boat i was still not seen on radar by a passing ship 2 nm away. On ships I find yachts very hard to see (steel ones too) in any moderate sea conditions. Do not rely on being seen! throw away those hopeless tricolors and use a good bright allround white if you want to be seen. An aircraft strobe at the top of the mast flashed 5 times scares anything away real well. Ben| 3113|3072|2004-02-21 18:50:57|Ben Tucker|Re: Mast weights|Greg I take it all moments are taken about the waterline for this. I would suggest for the last formular that weights of all low/keel steelwork are added to the ballast. Ben > > (keel depth X ballast weight) - (mast height X the weight of the masts, sails, and rigging) > > The result should be positive. For steel boats a better test might be: > > (keel depth X ballast weight) - (mast height X the weight of the masts, sails, and rigging) - (deck/cabin height X weight of cabin/deck) > | 3114|3072|2004-02-21 19:30:06|Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr|Re: Mast weights|With all due respect, with regards to capsize avoidance there is no such thing as having "be too much weight down low". Modern IMS influenced designs have compartively high roll moments of inertia which comes from comparatively large keel ballast bulbs carried very far below their roll axis and it is the combination of low VCG's coupled with comparatively high roll inertias that give them their compartively comfortable motions (relatively small roll angles coupled with compartively slow accellerations). Your quick check formulas are even close to accurate in terms of predicting capsize as the key formulas are moments of inertia in which the distances from the roll and pitch centers to the center of gravity are to the third power. To be even close enough to be accurate for any kind of real prediction the formula would need to be: [( distance from the center of gravity of the keel to the roll axis)^3 X ballast weight] - [( distance from the center of gravity of the mast, sails, rigging to the roll axis)^3 X the weight of the masts, sails, and rigging) Which should be a positive number Jeff ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Saturday, February 21, 2004 5:05 PM Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: Mast weights > The subject of capsize is at best controversial. As a result, I'm always cautious about assuming that a strategy that works for one boat will work for all boats. > > Modern designs often have their weight concentrated well below the waterline, with little inertia in their ultra light hulls and rigs. For those boats the problem can be too much weight down low, and there is some thought that adding weight aloft may reduce capsize risk. > > Steel cruising boats can have the opposite problem. A steel hull has fantastic inertia, much of it concentrated above the waterline in the heavy decks and cabin. For these boats the problem can be too much weight up high, and they may need to be balanced by adding ballast > > A quick test to see if a boat has adequate ballast can be done using this simple formula: > > (keel depth X ballast weight) - (mast height X the weight of the masts, sails, and rigging) > > The result should be positive. For steel boats a better test might be: > > (keel depth X ballast weight) - (mast height X the weight of the masts, sails, and rigging) - (deck/cabin height X weight of cabin/deck) > > Again, the result should be positive. > > Greg Elliott > Origami Magic > http://www.origamimagic.com > 1.604.987.0050 > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > | 3115|3072|2004-02-21 22:40:12|Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr|Re: Mast weights|The moments are taken about the axis of rotation which will vary with heel angle but the center or buoyancy at rest is usually used for static approximations of roll momnents. Jeff ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ben Tucker" To: Sent: Saturday, February 21, 2004 6:50 PM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Mast weights > Greg > > I take it all moments are taken about the waterline for this. I would > suggest for the last formular that weights of all low/keel steelwork > are added to the ballast. > > Ben > > > > (keel depth X ballast weight) - (mast height X the weight of the > masts, sails, and rigging) > > > > The result should be positive. For steel boats a better test might > be: > > > > (keel depth X ballast weight) - (mast height X the weight of the > masts, sails, and rigging) - (deck/cabin height X weight of > cabin/deck) > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > | 3116|3072|2004-02-22 07:00:27|Ben Tucker|Re: Mast weights|jeff Moments of inertia should be added, unlike moments for calculating C of G Which are totally different. In terms of roll moment of inertia both the tall heavy mast and the deep keels are positive factors. For C of G both work diffently depending on where your base line is taken from. WL, CB, top of mast, Keel, baseline etc all can be used for moments for working out Vertical C of G. In the end where ever the base line is taken from the C of G will work out to be the same. In most discussions on stability people Get too hung up on GZ values which are really only half the story. To Get the true Picture we need to multiply GZ x Displacement to Get Righting Moment(RM) This can then be used to calculate dynamic stability together with Inertia. GZ curves being equal A heavy boat will have twice the static stabiliy. Its Rig and ballast will also be heavier and possibly taller giving greatly increased Roll moment of inertia. The boat will be slower to windward due to reduced RM/Drag and highter pitching moments for the same damping. but as a bonus the keel(and crew) just might stay attached! I do like alot of the modern designs like Gregs, I just get tired of people knocking older heaver designs for not very good reasons. in the end seawothyness comes down to a heap of factors, not in the least being crew. Gregs formular is interesting because it gives a quick simple insight to the non technical yachty as to the importance of ballast and light rigs and a good reminder to the rest of us. On it's own it does not give us hard data as to the capsizability. I think steel is mostly incompatable with very light weight wider designs except in the larger sizes were the 3 mm (1/8th)plating becomes acceptable (even then the slamming loads on a light boat make steel unsuitible, just look at any warship). If I wanted a light boat ( and I might be tempemted once i learn to weld alloy ) id build her from alloy or wood and make her with positive bouyancy. If I Didn't want to play with ice i'd probably look at a Multi! "To each his own" As my mate used to say when i got wound up over stuff, and he's right. Ben| 3117|3072|2004-02-22 11:24:26|Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr|Re: Mast weights|Hi Ben I agree with you that moments of inertia are additive. To some extent that is reflected in the change in language in the formula that I posted last night when I indicated that the measurement was from the 'center of gravity' of the individual items rather than from their overall length, as suggested in the post that I was responding to. Center of gravity calculations are generally done in an additive way as well. The weight of each of the components and parts of the item for which the CG is being calculated are multiplied by their distance from a single point. The individual moments (weight times distance) are added up and then divided by the weight which gives the offset from the fixed measurement point to the CG. The more sophisticated modern computer assisted yacht design softwares pretty quickly calculate the CG in three dimensions. As you note it does not matter where you set your point of measurement (WL, CB, top of mast, Keel, baseline) for calculating the CG but it is very important when calculating roll, pitch and yaw moments of intertia. I want to touch on the misconception that weight aloft is a good thing in terms of motion comfort or in terms of capsize avoidance. The idea that high roll moments of inertia, however they were achieved, came out of very early studies performed in the early 1980's in which high roll moments of inertia were identified as slowing roll rates and therefore were seen as reducing the chance of a wave induced roll over, and the slower roll rates were seen as providing a more comfortable motion. That notion was quickly revised as it became clear very early on, and certainly conformed in the studies that have taken place in the 25 years since the Fastnet Disaster, that weight aloft does nothing but increase the chance of a wave or wind induced knockdown or wave induced roll over which is the most common form of roll over and perhaps the only form that can occur in a properly designed vessel. I will try explain the reason that a moment generated from weight carried high above is a major contributor to knock downs and rollovers. As we all probably know from physics classes, moment of inertia is the ability of an object to store kinetic energy and kinetic energy is the tendency of an object to stay at rest or to continue on the direction that it is already traveling. What this means is in a wave induced knock down, or roll over a high roll moment of inertia would tend to keep the boat rotating in the direction of the wave induced roll. It was originally thought that a high roll moment of inertia would reduce the amount of energy imparted into the vessel from the force of the wave. In other words a boat with a higher roll moment of inertia was thought to roll through a smaller angle at a slower speed and so stored approximately an equal amount of energy to a boat with a smaller roll moment of inertia. That notion was quickly dismissed as studies of actual rollovers and model simulations showed that the roll inducing force of a wave are so large relative to the moment of inertia of the boat that a high roll moment of inertia did not really alter the angle of rotation and speed of roll experienced by a vessel in a wave moving fast enough and that was large enough in size to cause a roll over or a major knockdown. If the induced angle of rotation and speed of rotation are equal, the boat with the higher roll moment of inertia would continue to roll with more energy than a boat with a smaller roll moment of inertia. Counteracting that roll moment of inertia is the righting moment and dampening. When you have a boat that has more of its weight carried aloft, the righting moment can be greatly reduced as the center of gravity is raised in the boat reducing the lever arm between the center of bouyancy and the center of gravity of the boat. In other words in a boat that carries a lot of weight aloft there is less force of righting to resist the greater kinetic energy of the higher roll moment of inertia. Comfort of motion in rotation (roll, pitch, and yaw) results from having a slow rate of motion at a small rotational angle. With regards to roll, a slow roll rate is desirable as long as it does not increase roll angle to do so. To explain roll rate, if you rock any particular boat in flat water, the boat will roll at a natural rhythm. It is pretty easy to calculate that roll rate by rocking the boat and looking at the number of roll cycles occur per minute. For a given boat in a given state of loading the roll rate will be constant. Roll rates are a pretty much a product of weight distribution and bouyancy distribution. Total weight is not really much of factor. Slower roll rates are generally more comfortable than faster roll rates. For the reason described above, when a slow roll rate results from weight aloft, the roll angle of wave induced roll will increase while the rate will decrease. In terms of comfort, a slow rate achieved at a higher roll angle is not universally more comfort. A US Navy study of seasickness showed that people respond differently to different kinds of motion stimulus. They found that roughly equal numbers of people were adversely affected by a boat with a quicker motion but were not affected by a larger amounts of motion than there are people who were not affected by a boat with a quicker motion but were affected by a larger amounts of motion. There was still another group that was equally affected by both stimuli. In other words, depending on your own makeup, you may be more comfortable on a traditional boat with larger roll angles at slower speeds or you may be more comfortable on a more modern boat with smaller roll angles and a bit higher roll rate (although the newest IMS designs tend to have very slow roll rates and very small roll angles as well) The other issue with boats that carry a relatively high amount of weight aloft is what is called excitation rolling. In a closely spaced wave train a vessel can get into a situation where the roll rate matches that of the wave train. When the roll moment of inertia results from weight carried aloft there is more energy to continue the roll. In that situation, like pushing a person on a swing, with each roll greater energy is stored and a so greater and greater roll angles are induced. Excitation knockdowns can occur in comparatively light winds and small waves. So while a heavier boat may have a higher static stability, depending on how that weight is distributed, it might actually be more prone to a knock down or roll over. Respectfully, Jeff| 3118|3072|2004-02-23 02:26:30|Ben Tucker|Re: Mast weights|Hi jeff I don't think anybody would disagree that the best place for weight is down low, but it also seems that the mast has an exceedingly important role in preventing and reducing capsize incidents. It has been shown time and time again that a boat without a mast is much more vunerable to a capsize even though the wind induced heeling moments and the C of G are both reduced. Given similar beams,draughts, ballast ratios,comparitive mast weights in relation to displacement etc (comparing apples to apples) the heavier boat will be much less likely to capsize in normal waves. I guess what your saying here is that if a boat has a very high Moment of inertia in relation to the area under the RM curve it may actually roll itself into a knockdown. Yes in some ways Inertia could be veiwed as a double edged sword. The real problem here is not the high Inertia but the lower RM's. 98 Sydney to Hobart Research showed that D/L ratio was not in itself a major factor, This was because most boats were rolled by freak waves that would overwhelm most yachts. At the end of the day given a large enough wave any boat will capsize. The next question is making the boat survive the roll over, something the lightly built IMS boats don't have a wonderfull record of doing. Give me a good solid BS boat for this anyday. X amount of money will buy a much bigger BS boat than a new generation IMS design which will make the boat much more resistant to capsize, and also more comfortable at sea and in port. These IMS inspired boats with very low D/L cannot be built safely out of steel or built with fixed shallow draught, as they rely on their low VCG for safety. You seem quite happy with your choice of yacht, and so do plenty of BS owners. To each his own. Cheers Ben| 3119|3072|2004-02-23 08:35:40|Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr|Re: Mast weights|Hi Ben, I am not trying to talk anyone out of building, sailing, or owning any particular design built in anu particular material. We all come to sailing with our own tastes, goals, experiences, budgets, and prejudices and try to sail the boats that match our the profile that we establish for ourselves. I just want to try to keep the facts straight. One point that I think that we agree on is that a boat without a mast is a little more vunerable to a capsize than one without. Without a mast the vessel is also much more prone to a very quick motion making life aboard far less comfortable. (When I lost the mast on my Folkboat I could hardly stay aboard even by crawling down the deck holding on to the hand rails and toe rail.) I suggest that you look at the Marchaj, 'Seaworthiness the Forgotten Factor' and the Delft towing tank report on capsizes on this point though, in which the absense of a mast was shown to increase the likelihood of a capsize up to a point after which, as mast weights increased, the tendancy to be knocked down or rolled by wave action also increased. As Machaj notes this seems like an apparent contradiction but uses the explaination that I had previously posted for this apparent contradiction. I also want to touch on your point: "Given similar beams,draughts, ballast ratios,comparitive mast weights in relation to displacement etc (comparing apples to apples) the heavier boat will be much less likely to capsize in normal waves." If the heavier boat were proportioned similarly in terms of weight and buoyancy distribution that statement would be correct but generally in order to support that greater weight, the canoe body of the heavier boat is deeper which lowers the center of bouyancy so that for a similar air and water draft, the lighter boat would have similar or higher stability and be less likely to capsize in waves. This is especially try when comparing the amount of drag to righting moment which is an important factor when looking at combined wind and seastate knockdowns and capsizes. The comparatively low stability to drag ratios of heavier boats tends to result in carrying smaller SA/D's in the working sail plan and that contributes to many heavier boat's poorer light air performance. Actually the IMS boats did extremely well in the detailed Sydney Hobart analysis with regards to surviving knock downs and roll overs. They also suffered proportionately fewer than was experienced by the older IOR and heavier Cruising class boats. (That said, the IMS boats that were intended as inshore racers did not fair that well in terms of retaining their rigs. Those that were inshore IMS type race boats had rigs that did not fare as well as one would want for an offshore boat but that was not the purpose for which they were constructed). Lightly built IOR era boats did not fare well structurally, losing rigs and pieces of the deck in knock downs and dismastings and suffered proportionately the highest number of knockdowns and roll overs. The largest loss of life occured on Winston Churchill, a heavy weight wooden cruiser that was thrown horizontally and landed on its cabin top. Two non-racers that were cruising in the area were also lost, one a heavy displacement fiberglass boat and the other a moderate displacement steel hulled boat. Since these were not racing or covered in the Coroners Report on the Sydney-Hobart Disaster and only briefly referenced in the CE's study of the race, it is unclear to me what were the circumstances of their loss. Lastly I want to touch on your point that given: "X amount of money will buy a much bigger BS boat than a new generation IMS design which will make the boat much more resistant to capsize, and also more comfortable at sea and in port. These IMS inspired boats with very low D/L cannot be built safely out of steel or built with fixed shallow draught, as they rely on their low VCG for safety." I agree with you that it is true that if you were to build a BS boat it would be substantially cheaper than buying an off the shelf IMS based design. If you search the archives you will find an analysis that showed that the cost of materials to build a one off IMS based design using vinylester resing and kevlar outer skins would be very similar to the cost of materials to build a similar size BS design. I also disagree with your point that an IMS based design cannot be have as shallow a draft because of their reliance on a low VCG. Given the higher VCenter of Buoyancy of a lighter boat and the ability to place a larger portion of the displacement in the ballast bulb on a composite boat of equal size and strength to a steel hulled boat, the IMS typeform would generally have a higher stability, wider LPS, and larger RM. Again I am not trying to talk anyone into or out of buying or building any particular type of boat. Most who come to this forum seem happy with their BS boats. I am just trying to discuss how vessel dynamics. Respectfully, Jeff [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3120|3072|2004-02-23 17:30:11|brentswain38|Re: Road rules. (was Mast weights)|A fluorescent masthead light is clearly visible for eight miles or more on an amp of power draw.It's the area of the lighted surface which determines range rather than the wattage. When cruising around big ships in coastal waters I prefer sailing in waters too shallow or too close to shore for big ships when the option exists. Knowing they won't fit where I am gives me great peace of mind. As for capsize lilihood, when mathmatical formulas conflict with reality, scrap the formulas. According to mathmatical formulas, a bee can't fly . We are also told by the experts that a bee does a maximum speed of 4 mph. Think of that the next time you see one flying into a 25 knot wind. The model capsize tests are a far better comparison than numbers on a page. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Ben Tucker" wrote: > Interesting > > Things kind of ballance out. The big less manuverable ship/yacht has > fear on its side and the small manouverable boat has the control to > take evasive action. I prefer to be in the small boat, at least then > you have control of the situation. Things go wrong when other people > do not realise the limitations of larger vessels. To do a crash stop > on the container ships I worked on we would still travel at least > 1.5nm and probably disable the ship for 7-10 hours. Putting the helm > hard over we still traveled ahead about 1 nm. With 3 radar reflectors > up on my last boat i was still not seen on radar by a passing ship 2 > nm away. On ships I find yachts very hard to see (steel ones too) in > any moderate sea conditions. Do not rely on being seen! throw away > those hopeless tricolors and use a good bright allround white if you > want to be seen. An aircraft strobe at the top of the mast flashed 5 > times scares anything away real well. > > Ben | 3121|3072|2004-02-23 17:41:52|brentswain38|Re: Mast weights|While weight far below the roll axis does increase inertia and resistance to capsize, such a solution , and the resulting extreme draft is totally impractical for a cruising yacht ,where ability to get into far more anchorages is a very high priority . On the east coast of Australia a boat with less than 5 ft draft , which can dry out, can anchor up many a river whereas those with deeper draft have to anchor outside in the swell, exposed to the sea.If there were a hurricane comming, being able to use such hurricane holes is a far greater safety factor to a cruising yacht than one would gain at sea with excessive draft, especially when the inertia and capsize resistance can be gained in other more practical ways. At such times I'd rather be up a creek, high and dry with less draft than in the open sea with deep draft. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr" wrote: > With all due respect, with regards to capsize avoidance there is no such > thing as having "be too much weight down low". Modern IMS influenced designs > have compartively high roll moments of inertia which comes from > comparatively large keel ballast bulbs carried very far below their roll > axis and it is the combination of low VCG's coupled with comparatively high > roll inertias that give them their compartively comfortable motions > (relatively small roll angles coupled with compartively slow > accellerations). > > Your quick check formulas are even close to accurate in terms of predicting > capsize as the key formulas are moments of inertia in which the distances > from the roll and pitch centers to the center of gravity are to the third > power. To be even close enough to be accurate for any kind of real > prediction the formula would need to be: > [( distance from the center of gravity of the keel to the roll axis) ^3 X > ballast weight] - [( distance from the center of gravity of the mast, sails, > rigging to the roll axis)^3 X the weight of the masts, sails, and rigging) > > Which should be a positive number > > Jeff > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: > Sent: Saturday, February 21, 2004 5:05 PM > Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: Mast weights > > > > The subject of capsize is at best controversial. As a result, I'm always > cautious about assuming that a strategy that works for one boat will work > for all boats. > > > > Modern designs often have their weight concentrated well below the > waterline, with little inertia in their ultra light hulls and rigs. For > those boats the problem can be too much weight down low, and there is some > thought that adding weight aloft may reduce capsize risk. > > > > Steel cruising boats can have the opposite problem. A steel hull has > fantastic inertia, much of it concentrated above the waterline in the heavy > decks and cabin. For these boats the problem can be too much weight up > high, and they may need to be balanced by adding ballast > > > > A quick test to see if a boat has adequate ballast can be done using this > simple formula: > > > > (keel depth X ballast weight) - (mast height X the weight of the masts, > sails, and rigging) > > > > The result should be positive. For steel boats a better test might be: > > > > (keel depth X ballast weight) - (mast height X the weight of the masts, > sails, and rigging) - (deck/cabin height X weight of cabin/deck) > > > > Again, the result should be positive. > > > > Greg Elliott > > Origami Magic > > http://www.origamimagic.com > > 1.604.987.0050 > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > | 3122|3072|2004-02-23 17:54:56|brentswain38|Re: Mast weights|The steel for a 36 ft BS shell costs roughly$7,000 CDN . Could you build an ims kevlar and Vinylester shell for that. It would take less than 200 hours labour. Could you build a kevlar and Vinylester shell in that much time? A friend built a mold for a 26 ft bristol channel cutter in the early 80's for $3,000 dollars, then was quoted $12,000 for the fibreglass materials alone.He abandoned the project and did a BS 31 shell for roughly $3500 in steel, in a fraction the time it took to build the mold.The price of the steel includes your anchors, stove, many fittings, etc. Do you get that in your vinylester order? Can you weld your fittings down in a couple of minutes each with a few pennies worth of rod ,in a way that will never let go or leak? Would it survive a full speed collision with a container at night with no more than paint dammage? Could it survive 16 days pounding on a Mexican beach in 8 ft surf, or pounding across several hundred yards of Fijian coral reef, or a collision with a freighter?If not , it doesn't sound like a good choice for long distance cruising. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr" wrote: > Hi Ben, > > I am not trying to talk anyone out of building, sailing, or owning any particular design built in anu particular material. We all come to sailing with our own tastes, goals, experiences, budgets, and prejudices and try to sail the boats that match our the profile that we establish for ourselves. I just want to try to keep the facts straight. One point that I think that we agree on is that a boat without a mast is a little more vunerable to a capsize than one without. Without a mast the vessel is also much more prone to a very quick motion making life aboard far less comfortable. (When I lost the mast on my Folkboat I could hardly stay aboard even by crawling down the deck holding on to the hand rails and toe rail.) I suggest that you look at the Marchaj, 'Seaworthiness the Forgotten Factor' and the Delft towing tank report on capsizes on this point though, in which the absense of a mast was shown to increase the likelihood of a capsize up to a point after which, as mast weights increased, the tendancy to be knocked down or rolled by wave action also increased. As Machaj notes this seems like an apparent contradiction but uses the explaination that I had previously posted for this apparent contradiction. > > I also want to touch on your point: > "Given similar beams,draughts, ballast ratios,comparitive mast weights > in relation to displacement etc (comparing apples to apples) the > heavier boat will be much less likely to capsize in normal waves." > > If the heavier boat were proportioned similarly in terms of weight and buoyancy distribution that statement would be correct but generally in order to support that greater weight, the canoe body of the heavier boat is deeper which lowers the center of bouyancy so that for a similar air and water draft, the lighter boat would have similar or higher stability and be less likely to capsize in waves. This is especially try when comparing the amount of drag to righting moment which is an important factor when looking at combined wind and seastate knockdowns and capsizes. The comparatively low stability to drag ratios of heavier boats tends to result in carrying smaller SA/D's in the working sail plan and that contributes to many heavier boat's poorer light air performance. > > Actually the IMS boats did extremely well in the detailed Sydney Hobart analysis with regards to surviving knock downs and roll overs. They also suffered proportionately fewer than was experienced by the older IOR and heavier Cruising class boats. (That said, the IMS boats that were intended as inshore racers did not fair that well in terms of retaining their rigs. Those that were inshore IMS type race boats had rigs that did not fare as well as one would want for an offshore boat but that was not the purpose for which they were constructed). Lightly built IOR era boats did not fare well structurally, losing rigs and pieces of the deck in knock downs and dismastings and suffered proportionately the highest number of knockdowns and roll overs. The largest loss of life occured on Winston Churchill, a heavy weight wooden cruiser that was thrown horizontally and landed on its cabin top. Two non-racers that were cruising in the area were also lost, one a heavy displacement fiberglass boat and the other a moderate displacement steel hulled boat. Since these were not racing or covered in the Coroners Report on the Sydney-Hobart Disaster and only briefly referenced in the CE's study of the race, it is unclear to me what were the circumstances of their loss. > > Lastly I want to touch on your point that given: > "X amount of money will buy a much bigger BS boat than a new > generation IMS design which will make the boat much more resistant to > capsize, and also more comfortable at sea and in port. These IMS > inspired boats with very low D/L cannot be built safely out of steel > or built with fixed shallow draught, as they rely on their low VCG > for safety." > > I agree with you that it is true that if you were to build a BS boat it would be substantially cheaper than buying an off the shelf IMS based design. If you search the archives you will find an analysis that showed that the cost of materials to build a one off IMS based design using vinylester resing and kevlar outer skins would be very similar to the cost of materials to build a similar size BS design. I also disagree with your point that an IMS based design cannot be have as shallow a draft because of their reliance on a low VCG. Given the higher VCenter of Buoyancy of a lighter boat and the ability to place a larger portion of the displacement in the ballast bulb on a composite boat of equal size and strength to a steel hulled boat, the IMS typeform would generally have a higher stability, wider LPS, and larger RM. > > Again I am not trying to talk anyone into or out of buying or building any particular type of boat. Most who come to this forum seem happy with their BS boats. I am just trying to discuss how vessel dynamics. > > Respectfully, > Jeff > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3123|3072|2004-02-23 23:17:52|narwhale36|Re: Mast weights|--In reply to the cost of building the BS 31 and the 36, I would like to have some imput from other owners on their experience re:costs . the local BS owners have all suggested I would be looking at a minimum of 35-40,000 Canadian using used engine,sails and doing alot of the work myself. I spoke with one 36 owner who has over 80 grand in his boat. This is not a cheap boat and for the years of putting it together (that hidden cost factor) I would suggest that it would be nice to have alittle more upfront reality as to the final price. I keep hearing from Brent on this site that one can be cranked out in a "couple of weeks" using dumpster parts for cheap, but that is not the general trend it appears. Like any boat project of any material, quality craftmanship takes time. As for the weight aloft issue, I think I would have to agree with the theory that weight belongs as low as possible,not scraping the sky with a 600 to 800 pound mast, rigging,sails etc. when a much lighter alternative is available. The scuttlebutt around our area is that the BS boats with steel masts are notably tender and tend to hobbyhorse going to weather because of the heavy stick. Cheers Bob S. - In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" wrote: > The steel for a 36 ft BS shell costs roughly$7,000 CDN . Could you > build an ims kevlar and Vinylester shell for that. It would take less > than 200 hours labour. Could you build a kevlar and Vinylester shell > in that much time? A friend built a mold for a 26 ft bristol channel > cutter in the early 80's for $3,000 dollars, then was quoted $12,000 > for the fibreglass materials alone.He abandoned the project and did a > BS 31 shell for roughly $3500 in steel, in a fraction the time it > took to build the mold.The price of the steel includes your anchors, > stove, many fittings, etc. Do you get that in your vinylester order? > Can you weld your fittings down in a couple of minutes each with a > few pennies worth of rod ,in a way that will never let go or leak? > Would it survive a full speed collision with a container at night > with no more than paint dammage? Could it survive 16 days pounding > on a Mexican beach in 8 ft surf, or pounding across several hundred > yards of Fijian coral reef, or a collision with a freighter?If not , > it doesn't sound like a good choice for long distance cruising. > Brent Swain > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr" > wrote: > > Hi Ben, > > > > I am not trying to talk anyone out of building, sailing, or owning > any particular design built in anu particular material. We all come > to sailing with our own tastes, goals, experiences, budgets, and > prejudices and try to sail the boats that match our the profile that > we establish for ourselves. I just want to try to keep the facts > straight. One point that I think that we agree on is that a boat > without a mast is a little more vunerable to a capsize than one > without. Without a mast the vessel is also much more prone to a very > quick motion making life aboard far less comfortable. (When I lost > the mast on my Folkboat I could hardly stay aboard even by crawling > down the deck holding on to the hand rails and toe rail.) I suggest > that you look at the Marchaj, 'Seaworthiness the Forgotten Factor' > and the Delft towing tank report on capsizes on this point though, in > which the absense of a mast was shown to increase the likelihood of a > capsize up to a point after which, as mast weights increased, the > tendancy to be knocked down or rolled by wave action also increased. > As Machaj notes this seems like an apparent contradiction but uses > the explaination that I had previously posted for this apparent > contradiction. > > > > I also want to touch on your point: > > "Given similar beams,draughts, ballast ratios,comparitive mast > weights > > in relation to displacement etc (comparing apples to apples) the > > heavier boat will be much less likely to capsize in normal waves." > > > > If the heavier boat were proportioned similarly in terms of weight > and buoyancy distribution that statement would be correct but > generally in order to support that greater weight, the canoe body of > the heavier boat is deeper which lowers the center of bouyancy so > that for a similar air and water draft, the lighter boat would have > similar or higher stability and be less likely to capsize in waves. > This is especially try when comparing the amount of drag to righting > moment which is an important factor when looking at combined wind and > seastate knockdowns and capsizes. The comparatively low stability to > drag ratios of heavier boats tends to result in carrying smaller > SA/D's in the working sail plan and that contributes to many heavier > boat's poorer light air performance. > > > > Actually the IMS boats did extremely well in the detailed Sydney > Hobart analysis with regards to surviving knock downs and roll overs. > They also suffered proportionately fewer than was experienced by the > older IOR and heavier Cruising class boats. (That said, the IMS boats > that were intended as inshore racers did not fair that well in terms > of retaining their rigs. Those that were inshore IMS type race boats > had rigs that did not fare as well as one would want for an offshore > boat but that was not the purpose for which they were constructed). > Lightly built IOR era boats did not fare well structurally, losing > rigs and pieces of the deck in knock downs and dismastings and > suffered proportionately the highest number of knockdowns and roll > overs. The largest loss of life occured on Winston Churchill, a heavy > weight wooden cruiser that was thrown horizontally and landed on its > cabin top. Two non-racers that were cruising in the area were also > lost, one a heavy displacement fiberglass boat and the other a > moderate displacement steel hulled boat. Since these were not racing > or covered in the Coroners Report on the Sydney-Hobart Disaster and > only briefly referenced in the CE's study of the race, it is unclear > to me what were the circumstances of their loss. > > > > Lastly I want to touch on your point that given: > > "X amount of money will buy a much bigger BS boat than a new > > generation IMS design which will make the boat much more resistant > to > > capsize, and also more comfortable at sea and in port. These IMS > > inspired boats with very low D/L cannot be built safely out of > steel > > or built with fixed shallow draught, as they rely on their low VCG > > for safety." > > > > I agree with you that it is true that if you were to build a BS > boat it would be substantially cheaper than buying an off the shelf > IMS based design. If you search the archives you will find an > analysis that showed that the cost of materials to build a one off > IMS based design using vinylester resing and kevlar outer skins would > be very similar to the cost of materials to build a similar size BS > design. I also disagree with your point that an IMS based design > cannot be have as shallow a draft because of their reliance on a low > VCG. Given the higher VCenter of Buoyancy of a lighter boat and the > ability to place a larger portion of the displacement in the ballast > bulb on a composite boat of equal size and strength to a steel hulled > boat, the IMS typeform would generally have a higher stability, wider > LPS, and larger RM. > > > > Again I am not trying to talk anyone into or out of buying or > building any particular type of boat. Most who come to this forum > seem happy with their BS boats. I am just trying to discuss how > vessel dynamics. > > > > Respectfully, > > Jeff > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3124|3072|2004-02-23 23:29:53|Ben Tucker|Re: Mast weights|Hi jeff The coroners report is quite interesting, veiw at http://www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/lc.nsf/files/sydneytohobart.rtf/ $FILE/sydneytohobart.rtf> I have lost my copy of machajs work but the library has one and as you say it is a facinating read. Are there any new books out updating his work in relation to new findings? I had a modifed folkboat type as well, great little boats. I would like to point out that winston churchhill did not actually capsize or land on the cabin top but landed on her side. the resultant loads were to much for her 50 odd year old wooden structure. The loss of life was caused by a number of factors but the cause of sinking was structural failure, not capsize. The boat had had a much larger alloy mast replacing the old oregon one, and was originally built as a racing boat. A freinds boat (near sister ship) built at the same yard has had problems with garboard leaks, and cracked ribs. from the report "Winston Churchill" was not rolled by this wave but was knocked down so severely that serious damage was sustained by her. John Stanley described it as like "hitting a brick wall." (John Stanley, 29th December, 1998, p.11) "Winston Churchill's" three coach house windows on the port side were smashed. The port side bulwark had been damaged to the extent that approximately two metres (6 feet) had been carried away in the vicinity of the chainplates (Richard Winning, 29th December, 1998, p.3) (John Stanley, 25th December, 1998, p.12). But of greater concern was that "Winston Churchill" had been damaged below the waterline on the port side. There is no firm evidence on precisely where or what this damage was. However the survivors believe it was below the port side chainplates, the mast being stepped about one third of the vessel's length from the bow. A well built steel or alloy boat would not have these problems. as opposed to "sword of orion"(an IMS type) after her capsize Carl Watson described how the hull of the yacht was beginning to break up:- "You have an outer skin of the boat and an inside skin and they're both laminated to that foam with high density glue and ... they put a layer of kevlar down ... What happened around the side of the cockpit was that the kevlar and the foam had started to shear and what happens is that the two sides go like this and it becomes like rubbing your hands together and that foam turns to powder and gradually surely that will just work its way around and make the boat very very unsafe ..." (transcript 24th March, 2000, p.18) To be fair after david lewis capsized in "ice bird" (a small steel boat) 6 inches or so of cabinside split at the deck-cabin join. this was repaired by stuffing in a bit of cotton. The fiberglass cruiser you mentioned did not capsize but started to take on water from an unknown source and foundered. you wrote If the heavier boat were proportioned similarly in terms of weight and buoyancy distribution that statement would be correct but generally in order to support that greater weight, the canoe body of the heavier boat is deeper which lowers the center of bouyancy so that for a similar air and water draft, the lighter boat would have similar or higher stability and be less likely to capsize in waves. This is especially try when comparing the amount of drag to righting moment which is an important factor when looking at combined wind and seastate knockdowns and capsizes. We are now getting into serious hydrostatics, to accurately model the stability over the intire range we need to know much more varibles. If you take any boat and add some weight directly at the CoG The righting moment will generaly increase but as you say due to the increased depth of the hull the metacentre will also drop slightly so the increase in stability will not be proportional to the increase in weight, but it will still be more. This effect depends on the height of the VCG. For most normal yachts we will get a increase in stability. For some ships we might see a slight decrease in some high vcg conditions. Put the figues into any stability programs for proof. An example of this is the Cargo 50 from dudley dix at http://www.dixdesign.com/cargo50.htm "Stability calculations showed that it would only be possible to provide proper sailing stability for a limited cargo weight range if all ballast was fixed in the keel. If stability was correct for full cargo she would be too tender when empty. Conversely, if stability was correct when empty she would possibly break her rig when fully loaded due to excess stability." Dudley Dix Even Though the cargo is much higher than the Water ballast the stability remains similar. Note also The LPS values of around 160 and steel masts. I would like elaboration of how the drag of a yacht effects stability. I assume you are referring to the ability of a boat to slip sideways and "give" to the waves? This would rely on the boat being nearly stationary as the high lift keels would tend to Grab if the boat was moving. This go's against the light boat ethos of keeping up speed and control in heavy weather. Heavy displacement boats can be sail area challenged. Big masts, bowsprits and long booms all help, as well as Gaff rigs. Wetted surface in theory can be lower for the displacement which helps in the lower speed-length ranges. "underigging" of Heavy boats to meet modern fashions has given them a bad name for light airs sailing. Feel free to email me direct any technical thoughts as long as they are accompanied by the apropriate research, proof or mathematics. I am always looking for new theorys and data relating to this subject, and It's always good to debate various ideas with other people. Cheers Ben| 3125|3072|2004-02-23 23:34:59|vinnie_barberino2000|Re: Mast weights|A bloke I know in Auckland was given a 35ft Jim young design glass mould for free .Thinking it would be his next project he priced up materials to the sum of just over $30000 nz just for glass fibre and resins,he has not gone any further with it. A Ganley "TARA" 39ft named Bakaal got its keel wedged in coral in the Hui Atol in the Torres group years ago and could not be moved.Gas cutting gear was used to remove the keel and rudder and towed off the reef to deep water a jury rudder was hung from the transom and under sail only(against D.Ganleys advice!!) left for Honiara 600miles away without a keel.A keel was fabricated but no lead was obtainable so they used sand and old sewing machines whereupon they sailed back to NZ. Steve --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" wrote: > The steel for a 36 ft BS shell costs roughly$7,000 CDN . Could you > build an ims kevlar and Vinylester shell for that. It would take less > than 200 hours labour. Could you build a kevlar and Vinylester shell > in that much time? A friend built a mold for a 26 ft bristol channel > cutter in the early 80's for $3,000 dollars, then was quoted $12,000 > for the fibreglass materials alone.He abandoned the project and did a > BS 31 shell for roughly $3500 in steel, in a fraction the time it > took to build the mold.The price of the steel includes your anchors, > stove, many fittings, etc. Do you get that in your vinylester order? > Can you weld your fittings down in a couple of minutes each with a > few pennies worth of rod ,in a way that will never let go or leak? > Would it survive a full speed collision with a container at night > with no more than paint dammage? Could it survive 16 days pounding > on a Mexican beach in 8 ft surf, or pounding across several hundred > yards of Fijian coral reef, or a collision with a freighter?If not , > it doesn't sound like a good choice for long distance cruising. > Brent Swain > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr" > wrote: > > Hi Ben, > > > > I am not trying to talk anyone out of building, sailing, or owning > any particular design built in anu particular material. We all come > to sailing with our own tastes, goals, experiences, budgets, and > prejudices and try to sail the boats that match our the profile that > we establish for ourselves. I just want to try to keep the facts > straight. One point that I think that we agree on is that a boat > without a mast is a little more vunerable to a capsize than one > without. Without a mast the vessel is also much more prone to a very > quick motion making life aboard far less comfortable. (When I lost > the mast on my Folkboat I could hardly stay aboard even by crawling > down the deck holding on to the hand rails and toe rail.) I suggest > that you look at the Marchaj, 'Seaworthiness the Forgotten Factor' > and the Delft towing tank report on capsizes on this point though, in > which the absense of a mast was shown to increase the likelihood of a > capsize up to a point after which, as mast weights increased, the > tendancy to be knocked down or rolled by wave action also increased. > As Machaj notes this seems like an apparent contradiction but uses > the explaination that I had previously posted for this apparent > contradiction. > > > > I also want to touch on your point: > > "Given similar beams,draughts, ballast ratios,comparitive mast > weights > > in relation to displacement etc (comparing apples to apples) the > > heavier boat will be much less likely to capsize in normal waves." > > > > If the heavier boat were proportioned similarly in terms of weight > and buoyancy distribution that statement would be correct but > generally in order to support that greater weight, the canoe body of > the heavier boat is deeper which lowers the center of bouyancy so > that for a similar air and water draft, the lighter boat would have > similar or higher stability and be less likely to capsize in waves. > This is especially try when comparing the amount of drag to righting > moment which is an important factor when looking at combined wind and > seastate knockdowns and capsizes. The comparatively low stability to > drag ratios of heavier boats tends to result in carrying smaller > SA/D's in the working sail plan and that contributes to many heavier > boat's poorer light air performance. > > > > Actually the IMS boats did extremely well in the detailed Sydney > Hobart analysis with regards to surviving knock downs and roll overs. > They also suffered proportionately fewer than was experienced by the > older IOR and heavier Cruising class boats. (That said, the IMS boats > that were intended as inshore racers did not fair that well in terms > of retaining their rigs. Those that were inshore IMS type race boats > had rigs that did not fare as well as one would want for an offshore > boat but that was not the purpose for which they were constructed). > Lightly built IOR era boats did not fare well structurally, losing > rigs and pieces of the deck in knock downs and dismastings and > suffered proportionately the highest number of knockdowns and roll > overs. The largest loss of life occured on Winston Churchill, a heavy > weight wooden cruiser that was thrown horizontally and landed on its > cabin top. Two non-racers that were cruising in the area were also > lost, one a heavy displacement fiberglass boat and the other a > moderate displacement steel hulled boat. Since these were not racing > or covered in the Coroners Report on the Sydney-Hobart Disaster and > only briefly referenced in the CE's study of the race, it is unclear > to me what were the circumstances of their loss. > > > > Lastly I want to touch on your point that given: > > "X amount of money will buy a much bigger BS boat than a new > > generation IMS design which will make the boat much more resistant > to > > capsize, and also more comfortable at sea and in port. These IMS > > inspired boats with very low D/L cannot be built safely out of > steel > > or built with fixed shallow draught, as they rely on their low VCG > > for safety." > > > > I agree with you that it is true that if you were to build a BS > boat it would be substantially cheaper than buying an off the shelf > IMS based design. If you search the archives you will find an > analysis that showed that the cost of materials to build a one off > IMS based design using vinylester resing and kevlar outer skins would > be very similar to the cost of materials to build a similar size BS > design. I also disagree with your point that an IMS based design > cannot be have as shallow a draft because of their reliance on a low > VCG. Given the higher VCenter of Buoyancy of a lighter boat and the > ability to place a larger portion of the displacement in the ballast > bulb on a composite boat of equal size and strength to a steel hulled > boat, the IMS typeform would generally have a higher stability, wider > LPS, and larger RM. > > > > Again I am not trying to talk anyone into or out of buying or > building any particular type of boat. Most who come to this forum > seem happy with their BS boats. I am just trying to discuss how > vessel dynamics. > > > > Respectfully, > > Jeff > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3126|3126|2004-02-24 08:40:55|bert andjan|Re: Shallow Draft and Rolling|Hi all, always enjoy the good discourse and debate here! Just what is the average draft of a BS31 and BS36 loaded for cruising? (twin keeled versions) Thanks, Bert Eggers...Saginaw, Michigan __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard - Read only the mail you want. http://antispam.yahoo.com/tools| 3127|3127|2004-02-24 13:02:19|Michael Casling|Conclusions|I can not always agree on the conclusions drawn from singular events. If a steel boat was in the water during the Storm off Hobart and survived okay then the steel fans might say that is proof of the quality of material and design, and if a wood or composite boat fails, then that is proof that they are no good. I suppose it is natural to defend what we like and rail against what we do not like. A 35 foot composite boat won the race and frankly I think I would feel safe in that boat. We have been presented with some good imformation on mast weight and ballast from an author who appears knowlegable, I do not recall him endorsing one material over another he just presented the basic facts. I will not argue with the folks that may want to have their boat on a coral reef for two days or be run over by a larger vessell, or hit a container if that is your priority. If buoyancy is higher up the list of your priorities or any other design criteria that's okay with me. I would suggest that shallow draft was not on the minds of the guys in the storm. Michael Casling| 3128|22|2004-02-24 13:26:14|origamiboats@yahoogroups.com|New file uploaded to origamiboats |Hello, This email message is a notification to let you know that a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the origamiboats group. File : /Perkins 4-107.txt Uploaded by : rbyzitter2001 Description : Low hours Perkins 4-107 You can access this file at the URL http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/files/Perkins%204-107.txt To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/files Regards, rbyzitter2001 | 3129|3072|2004-02-24 13:28:17|tsuhaung@aol.com|Re: Mast weights|Hi all I have been following this discussion on mast weights with great enjoyment. I am sure others are following along. Both camps seem to have the same under lying unspoken message, know yourself and the true strengths and weakness of your boat and it design. Mother nature takes no prisoners and in a pissing contest you loose. On a slightly off topic, I am located in the middle of the prairies surrounded by dreamers. One has come to realise that sailing is not to be, not for a much longer time anyway. He built the hull, deck of a BS 36' bilge keel and it was stored until this winter inside. It of course needs a complete sand blast and finishing but the feeling from a welding friend is that $5,000 could put it in my backyard. There are no drawings that I know of and am curious about draft, ballast; it is already in, and comfort. I am 6'-2" and for me comfortable head room is important. My friend a journeyman welder and fellow dreamer said he will donate all his time, in exchange for salt spray in his face. The welding and fairness of the hull are good but I will accurately check it all out with some specs of what it should be. All comments are welcome Ken [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3130|3130|2004-02-24 13:37:34|rbyzitter2001|Low hour diesel for sale.|Hello. A friend of mine would like to sell his Perkins 4-107. He was using it to push a 36000lb, 42' Westsail. He repowered with a V3300 Kubota. This engine is turn key, gear box, engine, panel, heat exchanger, ready to go. I the info with his contact number is in the files section. Coming from a diesel engine background, I would have to say it is an excellent deal. Oh ya, the $ are negotiable. Best regards.| 3131|3072|2004-02-25 03:14:47|info@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: Mast weights|Hi Ben, All measurements are from the waterline. The formula is of course not intended as an empirical calculation of capsize resistance. It is simply a rule of thumb to calculate (minimum) ballast. I recall reading it in an old book quite a few years ago. I thought it might be of use to the amateur builders on this site because it can be used without detailed calculations. While the formula is simplistic, it may date from the days of sail, and survived because it was found to work, before the theory existed to explain why. Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com ----- Original Message ----- From: Ben Tucker To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, February 21, 2004 3:50 PM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Mast weights Greg I take it all moments are taken about the waterline for this. I would suggest for the last formular that weights of all low/keel steelwork are added to the ballast. Ben > > (keel depth X ballast weight) - (mast height X the weight of the masts, sails, and rigging) > > The result should be positive. For steel boats a better test might be: > > (keel depth X ballast weight) - (mast height X the weight of the masts, sails, and rigging) - (deck/cabin height X weight of cabin/deck) > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3132|3072|2004-02-25 10:45:34|Henri Naths|Re: Mast weights|ken; I am one of those dreamers landlocked by dust and ice, west of Red Deer I would love to take a look if at all possible? H. ----- Original Message ----- From: tsuhaung@... To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: 24 February, 2004 11:26 AM Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: Mast weights Hi all I have been following this discussion on mast weights with great enjoyment. I am sure others are following along. Both camps seem to have the same under lying unspoken message, know yourself and the true strengths and weakness of your boat and it design. Mother nature takes no prisoners and in a pissing contest you loose. On a slightly off topic, I am located in the middle of the prairies surrounded by dreamers. One has come to realise that sailing is not to be, not for a much longer time anyway. He built the hull, deck of a BS 36' bilge keel and it was stored until this winter inside. It of course needs a complete sand blast and finishing but the feeling from a welding friend is that $5,000 could put it in my backyard. There are no drawings that I know of and am curious about draft, ballast; it is already in, and comfort. I am 6'-2" and for me comfortable head room is important. My friend a journeyman welder and fellow dreamer said he will donate all his time, in exchange for salt spray in his face. The welding and fairness of the hull are good but I will accurately check it all out with some specs of what it should be. All comments are welcome Ken [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3133|3072|2004-02-25 12:08:15|dreemer1962|Re: Mast weights (fast, narrow hulls)|"...I would also love to build a boat just for speed from the cheapest stuff available, say a very long empty steel hull with an enourmous rigg and a very deep narrow fin, could be built for peanuts in a month, and sock it to all these modern plastic hulls but as I really want to go cruising again..." I am thinking about narrow hull (length/beam ratio of around 1:4) with very small overhangs and moderate draft, and a lot of sails with low centre of effort for downwind sailing. Sort of poor man's downwind flyer. It seems to me a practical proposition for the cruising. It could be for example BS 31 stretched to 40-ft, same beam and draft, no overhangs, same engine and mast a fraction higher. Costs should be just a little higher, for a little more hull material, as the expensive stuff as engine, rig, sails, and different equipment stays about the same. For very moderate costs increase, it should produce a cruising boat with a higher average speed, more interior space, a lot of course stability and possibly more comfortable motion in the waves (higher moment of inertia and higher longitudinal stability). The only downside is possible lower speed in very light winds due to the increased wet surface.| 3134|3134|2004-02-25 12:10:32|prairiemaidca|Ports (to recess or not?)|HI All: I can't believe all the great discussion on masts just by inquiring about the weight of pipe and tube. I'm fast comming to the stage where Prairie Maid will need her cabin cut outs for the ports. Some of the boats have recessed ports and others the original style of flat attachment to the cabin side. How about some commments on the pros and or cons of these two construction methods. Martin Forster (Prairie Maid)| 3135|3072|2004-02-25 18:29:59|Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr|Re: Mast weights (fast, narrow hulls)|You might take a look at Yves Tanton's website. He has a design called the Steel Star that sounds just like what you are proposing. It would not really sock it to the current crop of race boats but would be quite fast and easy to handle. Jeff ----- Original Message ----- From: "dreemer1962" To: Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2004 12:06 PM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Mast weights (fast, narrow hulls) > "...I would also love to build a boat just for speed from the cheapest > stuff available, say a very long empty steel hull with an enourmous > rigg and a very deep narrow fin, could be built for peanuts in a > month, and sock it to all these modern plastic hulls but as I really > want to go cruising again..." > > I am thinking about narrow hull (length/beam ratio of around 1:4) > with very small overhangs and moderate draft, and a lot of sails with > low centre of effort for downwind sailing. Sort of poor man's > downwind flyer. It seems to me a practical proposition for the > cruising. It could be for example BS 31 stretched to 40-ft, same beam > and draft, no overhangs, same engine and mast a fraction higher. > Costs should be just a little higher, for a little more hull > material, as the expensive stuff as engine, rig, sails, and different > equipment stays about the same. For very moderate costs increase, it > should produce a cruising boat with a higher average speed, more > interior space, a lot of course stability and possibly more > comfortable motion in the waves (higher moment of inertia and higher > longitudinal stability). The only downside is possible lower speed in > very light winds due to the increased wet surface. > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > | 3136|3136|2004-02-25 18:46:20|John Olson|Costs to build - was: Mast weights|Bob I built Eclectus, a BS31 in 1983, and launched in 1985. First offshore trip was 1986. To put the boat in the water in basic sailing trim was about $16-$17000 Can. This was about the same price as I was looking at for a glassfibre hull and deck. There were a few more thousand to go before the boat was ready for offshore sailing. To keep this in context, - I didn't follow the plans exactly. I changes the rig to a cutter with a bowsprit, which didn't cost a lot extra, but took a fair amount of time. The boat could have been finished sooner. - I built a number of things several times over, until I was happy with them. I cut the pilot house off and build an extended raised cabin top. Looking back with the benefit of experience, most of the rebuilding wasn't necessary. Could have been finished cheaper and sooner. - I didn't know how to weld when I started. That took a bit of time. - When I started the build, I had an open mind about how things could be done, but virtually all the available information came from 'yachty' sources. If you don't have the experience to say what will work and what doesn't, you will end up straying again and again to the yachty (pronounced "expensive") solution. Only experience, and exposure to other people building cheaply will sort this. The boat could have been simpler and cheaper. - So, if I was doing it again, it would definitely be quicker, cheaper, simpler, and I would have more money to spend while sailing and more time to spend it. In my experience, there are 3 types of people that want to build a boat and go sailing. The first is the Builder. These people are more interested in building and rebuilding the boat until it is perfect. They tend to spends years (and even decades) working on their boats and few actually make it as far as the water. The second type is the Yachty. They put a lot of time and money making their boat match the pretty plastic things in the latest glossy mag. They don't take as long as the Builder, because they are substituting purchased goodies for simple home-made equipment. You see these people in ports all over the world, usually waiting for replacements for broken gear, or in boatyards trying to keep acres of paint or gelcoat looking shiny. The last type is the Sailor, who's equipment is simple and strong, cheap to make, and easy to repair if it should break. The material the boat is made of doesn't matter; I've met as many Sailors in wooden boats as in steel ones. What is different is the attitude. The goal is not to build, or end up on the cover of magazine, but to go sailing as far as you can for as long as possible. I wouldn't say any of these approaches is wrong (because they all seem to be happy doing what they are doing), but if you only want to build, or just want a fancy plastic boat, you are probably looking at the wrong design. It is possible to spend $80000 on one of these boats. It's possible to spend years of your life building one. But if you do, are you really interested in going away? The boat is as cheap or expensive as you care to make it. I don't know what Brent is saying it could cost at the moment (I'm in the UK and couldn't tell you what things cost back in Canada) but I'd wager it's about right for a basic offshore boat. They CAN be very cheap and very quick to build, if what you are interested in is sailing. Can't comment on the mast weight issue really. My mast was a boom extrusion for a 50' boat and cost me $500. It just worked out to be the right size and shape for what I needed. All the fittings were mild steel, with welded stainless bushes. I then sent the whole lot to the galvanisers. That was 20 years ago (yikes, how did that happen!) and they look as good today as when I installed them. Cheers John john.olson@... > Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2004 04:17:49 -0000 > From: "narwhale36" > Subject: Re: Mast weights > > --In reply to the cost of building the BS 31 and the 36, I would like > to have some imput from other owners on their experience re:costs . > the local BS owners have all suggested I would be looking at a > minimum of 35-40,000 Canadian using used engine,sails and doing alot > of the work myself. I spoke with one 36 owner who has over 80 grand > in his boat. This is not a cheap boat and for the years of putting it > together (that hidden cost factor) I would suggest that it would be > nice to have alittle more upfront reality as to the final price. > I keep hearing from Brent on this site that one can be cranked out in > a "couple of weeks" using dumpster parts for cheap, but that is not > the general trend it appears. Like any boat project of any material, > quality craftmanship takes time. > As for the weight aloft issue, I think I would have to agree with the > theory that weight belongs as low as possible,not scraping the sky > with a 600 to 800 pound mast, rigging,sails etc. when a much lighter > alternative is available. The scuttlebutt around our area is that the > BS boats with steel masts are notably tender and tend to hobbyhorse > going to weather because of the heavy stick. > Cheers Bob S. --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.593 / Virus Database: 376 - Release Date: 2004-02-20| 3137|3136|2004-02-25 22:05:27|richytill|Re: Costs to build - was: Mast weights|For the contemplators: further notes on the cost of building. Here is a, perhaps, extreme example to illustrate views on cost effectiveness: As a boy I lived on Fair Isle located between Shetland and Orkney. Some would consider the island to be little more than a treeless, storm battered speck of rock on the map; to us it was life and home. I lived one field away from the island carpenter and so, was able to watch him about his work. This is what I learned. As each storm or tide passed the carpenter would allow me to beachcomb with him. Choice pieces of wood were carried up the cliffs and accross the island to his shop--other items were stashed in crevices and nooks for future use. Furniture, coffins, boats and the like were crafted from this assortment of flotsam--but only as they were needed. Special pieces of wood were ordered from the mainland well in advance--or you waited to see what the next storm might bring in. In terms of boat-building, none of this seems cost effective. Add to this the fact that all the carpentry was done by hand with rudimentary tools and no power whatsoever. The amount of time required to find and shape a specific piece of salvaged wood for a specific task would make the timber seem costly if hourly wage is factored in: the notion of productivity, altogether untenable. Was the carpenter frustrated by this? Did he stress-out about what he didn't have? As I recall--not in the least. Those walks down to the beach to see what the sea had given up will remain one of lifes' valued experiences for me. There was also a well known copper deposit on the island. The carpenter could have smelted the copper to make nails, roves and the like for fastenings. As independent and resourceful as he was; he didn't. Nor will I dig an iron, coal, limestone mine to forge the steel to build my boat. That would take several life-times and I only have one. In every situation there is a dividing line between what is a do-able project and what is not. The cleats, bollards, mast step, pintles and many other parts of "My Island" (36 BS) are made from the highest quality stainless steel, most of it recovered from industrial surplus at little or no cost. I had fun finding the stuff--my son too. Sometimes the dumpsters yield more--sometimes less. Like the island carpenter, I stash a little, use a little. He waited for storms from Scandinavia or the Americas to bring in the goods: I wait for a refit at the mill or the mine. If I count all the time put into this boat as wages, it may look expensive. If count the time as being alive creating something functional and desirable; then I am a wealthy man. Wealthy, because I am doing what I want to do and doing it the way I want to do it. I am working for my own and not for the bank. A fine day of beachcoming/salvaging, sailing, a fine day of boatbuilding, a fine day either way. I would not advocate building your own welding machine or making the steel to build your boat--but there are times when you can reap rewards by becoming aware of what can be salvaged and made into top quality fittings and finishing material. Had I gone to the bank to borrow money to buy all these fittings from the yachting store I would have felt myself to be a slave. The bank would be stealing my time and my pleasure. Shopping at the dumpster I get the very best of materials and make things the way I want them. I see the origami approach as a method for the avarage, practical, working person to enjoy a comparitively straight-forward building and sailing venture. If you decide to go this route, pause from time to time to determine what is do-able, or not do-able, for you in your situation. Be realistic. If you have spare money, no time, and are in a big hurry to get sailing, you will likely just buy a boat and cast-off with no worries about any of this. For the rest of us, it may tend to be a case of choosing your battles wisely and watching for what the tide may bring. rt --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "John Olson" wrote: > Bob > > I built Eclectus, a BS31 in 1983, and launched in 1985. First offshore trip > was 1986. To put the boat in the water in basic sailing trim was about > $16-$17000 Can. This was about the same price as I was looking at for a > glassfibre hull and deck. There were a few more thousand to go before the > boat was ready for offshore sailing. > > To keep this in context, > - I didn't follow the plans exactly. I changes the rig to a cutter with a > bowsprit, which didn't cost a lot extra, but took a fair amount of time. The > boat could have been finished sooner. > - I built a number of things several times over, until I was happy with > them. I cut the pilot house off and build an extended raised cabin top. > Looking back with the benefit of experience, most of the rebuilding wasn't > necessary. Could have been finished cheaper and sooner. > - I didn't know how to weld when I started. That took a bit of time. > - When I started the build, I had an open mind about how things could be > done, but virtually all the available information came from 'yachty' > sources. If you don't have the experience to say what will work and what > doesn't, you will end up straying again and again to the yachty (pronounced > "expensive") solution. Only experience, and exposure to other people > building cheaply will sort this. The boat could have been simpler and > cheaper. > - So, if I was doing it again, it would definitely be quicker, cheaper, > simpler, and I would have more money to spend while sailing and more time to > spend it. > > In my experience, there are 3 types of people that want to build a boat and > go sailing. The first is the Builder. These people are more interested in > building and rebuilding the boat until it is perfect. They tend to spends > years (and even decades) working on their boats and few actually make it as > far as the water. The second type is the Yachty. They put a lot of time > and money making their boat match the pretty plastic things in the latest > glossy mag. They don't take as long as the Builder, because they are > substituting purchased goodies for simple home-made equipment. You see > these people in ports all over the world, usually waiting for replacements > for broken gear, or in boatyards trying to keep acres of paint or gelcoat > looking shiny. The last type is the Sailor, who's equipment is simple and > strong, cheap to make, and easy to repair if it should break. The material > the boat is made of doesn't matter; I've met as many Sailors in wooden boats > as in steel ones. What is different is the attitude. The goal is not to > build, or end up on the cover of magazine, but to go sailing as far as you > can for as long as possible. I wouldn't say any of these approaches is > wrong (because they all seem to be happy doing what they are doing), but if > you only want to build, or just want a fancy plastic boat, you are probably > looking at the wrong design. > > It is possible to spend $80000 on one of these boats. It's possible to > spend years of your life building one. But if you do, are you really > interested in going away? The boat is as cheap or expensive as you care to > make it. I don't know what Brent is saying it could cost at the moment (I'm > in the UK and couldn't tell you what things cost back in Canada) but I'd > wager it's about right for a basic offshore boat. They CAN be very cheap > and very quick to build, if what you are interested in is sailing. > > Can't comment on the mast weight issue really. My mast was a boom extrusion > for a 50' boat and cost me $500. It just worked out to be the right size > and shape for what I needed. > All the fittings were mild steel, with welded stainless bushes. I then sent > the whole lot to the galvanisers. That was 20 years ago (yikes, how did > that happen!) and they look as good today as when I installed them. > > Cheers > > John > john.olson@b... > > > Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2004 04:17:49 -0000 > > From: "narwhale36" > > Subject: Re: Mast weights > > > > --In reply to the cost of building the BS 31 and the 36, I would like > > to have some imput from other owners on their experience re:costs . > > the local BS owners have all suggested I would be looking at a > > minimum of 35-40,000 Canadian using used engine,sails and doing alot > > of the work myself. I spoke with one 36 owner who has over 80 grand > > in his boat. This is not a cheap boat and for the years of putting it > > together (that hidden cost factor) I would suggest that it would be > > nice to have alittle more upfront reality as to the final price. > > I keep hearing from Brent on this site that one can be cranked out in > > a "couple of weeks" using dumpster parts for cheap, but that is not > > the general trend it appears. Like any boat project of any material, > > quality craftmanship takes time. > > As for the weight aloft issue, I think I would have to agree with the > > theory that weight belongs as low as possible,not scraping the sky > > with a 600 to 800 pound mast, rigging,sails etc. when a much lighter > > alternative is available. The scuttlebutt around our area is that the > > BS boats with steel masts are notably tender and tend to hobbyhorse > > going to weather because of the heavy stick. > > Cheers Bob S. > > > > --- > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.593 / Virus Database: 376 - Release Date: 2004-02-20 | 3138|3072|2004-02-25 22:32:22|jumpaltair|Re: Mast weights (fast, narrow hulls)|If you think that the Tanton steelstar is narrow and appropriate for him to consider, why not the BS 40? I know you're not a fan of BS designs. If you look at the BS 40 and the Tanton steel star you'd see that the displacement is almost the same, the LWL almost the same, draft almost the same, yet the BS has less beam by about 8" if I recall correctly at 11'10". I'd suggest that he therefore consider the BS 40. Peter --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr" wrote: > You might take a look at Yves Tanton's website. He has a design called the > Steel Star that sounds just like what you are proposing. It would not really > sock it to the current crop of race boats but would be quite fast and easy > to handle. > > Jeff > > | 3139|3136|2004-02-26 00:36:34|Graeme|Re: Costs to build - was: Mast weights|rt thx for that sounds like a great adventure you had as a child Graeme ----- Original Message ----- From: "richytill" To: Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2004 11:05 AM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Costs to build - was: Mast weights > For the contemplators: further notes on the cost of building. > > Here is a, perhaps, extreme example to illustrate views on cost > effectiveness: > > As a boy I lived on Fair Isle located between Shetland and Orkney. > Some would consider the island to be little more than a treeless, > storm battered speck of rock on the map; to us it was life and home. > I lived one field away from the island carpenter and so, was able to > watch him about his work. This is what I learned. > > As each storm or tide passed the carpenter would allow me to > beachcomb with him. Choice pieces of wood were carried up the cliffs > and accross the island to his shop--other items were stashed in > crevices and nooks for future use. Furniture, coffins, boats and the > like were crafted from this assortment of flotsam--but only as they > were needed. Special pieces of wood were ordered from the mainland > well in advance--or you waited to see what the next storm might bring > in. > > In terms of boat-building, none of this seems cost effective. Add to > this the fact that all the carpentry was done by hand with > rudimentary tools and no power whatsoever. The amount of time > required to find and shape a specific piece of salvaged wood for a > specific task would make the timber seem costly if hourly wage is > factored in: the notion of productivity, altogether untenable. > > Was the carpenter frustrated by this? Did he stress-out about what > he didn't have? As I recall--not in the least. Those walks down to > the beach to see what the sea had given up will remain one of lifes' > valued experiences for me. > > There was also a well known copper deposit on the island. The > carpenter could have smelted the copper to make nails, roves and the > like for fastenings. As independent and resourceful as he was; he > didn't. Nor will I dig an iron, coal, limestone mine to forge the > steel to build my boat. That would take several life-times and I > only have one. > > In every situation there is a dividing line between what is a do-able > project and what is not. The cleats, bollards, mast step, pintles > and many other parts of "My Island" (36 BS) are made from the highest > quality stainless steel, most of it recovered from industrial surplus > at little or no cost. I had fun finding the stuff--my son too. > Sometimes the dumpsters yield more--sometimes less. Like the island > carpenter, I stash a little, use a little. He waited for storms from > Scandinavia or the Americas to bring in the goods: I wait for a > refit at the mill or the mine. > > If I count all the time put into this boat as wages, it may look > expensive. If count the time as being alive creating something > functional and desirable; then I am a wealthy man. Wealthy, because > I am doing what I want to do and doing it the way I want to do it. I > am working for my own and not for the bank. A fine day of > beachcoming/salvaging, sailing, a fine day of boatbuilding, a fine > day either way. > > I would not advocate building your own welding machine or making the > steel to build your boat--but there are times when you can reap > rewards by becoming aware of what can be salvaged and made into top > quality fittings and finishing material. Had I gone to the bank to > borrow money to buy all these fittings from the yachting store I > would have felt myself to be a slave. The bank would be stealing my > time and my pleasure. Shopping at the dumpster I get the very best > of materials and make things the way I want them. > > I see the origami approach as a method for the avarage, practical, > working person to enjoy a comparitively straight-forward building and > sailing venture. If you decide to go this route, pause from time to > time to determine what is do-able, or not do-able, for you in your > situation. Be realistic. > > If you have spare money, no time, and are in a big hurry to get > sailing, you will likely just buy a boat and cast-off with no worries > about any of this. For the rest of us, it may tend to be a case of > choosing your battles wisely and watching for what the tide may > bring. rt > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "John Olson" > wrote: > > Bob > > > > I built Eclectus, a BS31 in 1983, and launched in 1985. First > offshore trip > > was 1986. To put the boat in the water in basic sailing trim was > about > > $16-$17000 Can. This was about the same price as I was looking at > for a > > glassfibre hull and deck. There were a few more thousand to go > before the > > boat was ready for offshore sailing. > > > > To keep this in context, > > - I didn't follow the plans exactly. I changes the rig to a cutter > with a > > bowsprit, which didn't cost a lot extra, but took a fair amount of > time. The > > boat could have been finished sooner. > > - I built a number of things several times over, until I was happy > with > > them. I cut the pilot house off and build an extended raised cabin > top. > > Looking back with the benefit of experience, most of the rebuilding > wasn't > > necessary. Could have been finished cheaper and sooner. > > - I didn't know how to weld when I started. That took a bit of > time. > > - When I started the build, I had an open mind about how things > could be > > done, but virtually all the available information came from 'yachty' > > sources. If you don't have the experience to say what will work > and what > > doesn't, you will end up straying again and again to the yachty > (pronounced > > "expensive") solution. Only experience, and exposure to other > people > > building cheaply will sort this. The boat could have been simpler > and > > cheaper. > > - So, if I was doing it again, it would definitely be quicker, > cheaper, > > simpler, and I would have more money to spend while sailing and > more time to > > spend it. > > > > In my experience, there are 3 types of people that want to build a > boat and > > go sailing. The first is the Builder. These people are more > interested in > > building and rebuilding the boat until it is perfect. They tend to > spends > > years (and even decades) working on their boats and few actually > make it as > > far as the water. The second type is the Yachty. They put a lot > of time > > and money making their boat match the pretty plastic things in the > latest > > glossy mag. They don't take as long as the Builder, because they > are > > substituting purchased goodies for simple home-made equipment. You > see > > these people in ports all over the world, usually waiting for > replacements > > for broken gear, or in boatyards trying to keep acres of paint or > gelcoat > > looking shiny. The last type is the Sailor, who's equipment is > simple and > > strong, cheap to make, and easy to repair if it should break. The > material > > the boat is made of doesn't matter; I've met as many Sailors in > wooden boats > > as in steel ones. What is different is the attitude. The goal is > not to > > build, or end up on the cover of magazine, but to go sailing as far > as you > > can for as long as possible. I wouldn't say any of these > approaches is > > wrong (because they all seem to be happy doing what they are > doing), but if > > you only want to build, or just want a fancy plastic boat, you are > probably > > looking at the wrong design. > > > > It is possible to spend $80000 on one of these boats. It's > possible to > > spend years of your life building one. But if you do, are you > really > > interested in going away? The boat is as cheap or expensive as you > care to > > make it. I don't know what Brent is saying it could cost at the > moment (I'm > > in the UK and couldn't tell you what things cost back in Canada) > but I'd > > wager it's about right for a basic offshore boat. They CAN be very > cheap > > and very quick to build, if what you are interested in is sailing. > > > > Can't comment on the mast weight issue really. My mast was a boom > extrusion > > for a 50' boat and cost me $500. It just worked out to be the > right size > > and shape for what I needed. > > All the fittings were mild steel, with welded stainless bushes. I > then sent > > the whole lot to the galvanisers. That was 20 years ago (yikes, > how did > > that happen!) and they look as good today as when I installed them. > > > > Cheers > > > > John > > john.olson@b... > > > > > Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2004 04:17:49 -0000 > > > From: "narwhale36" > > > Subject: Re: Mast weights > > > > > > --In reply to the cost of building the BS 31 and the 36, I would > like > > > to have some imput from other owners on their experience > re:costs . > > > the local BS owners have all suggested I would be looking at a > > > minimum of 35-40,000 Canadian using used engine,sails and doing > alot > > > of the work myself. I spoke with one 36 owner who has over 80 > grand > > > in his boat. This is not a cheap boat and for the years of > putting it > > > together (that hidden cost factor) I would suggest that it would > be > > > nice to have alittle more upfront reality as to the final price. > > > I keep hearing from Brent on this site that one can be cranked > out in > > > a "couple of weeks" using dumpster parts for cheap, but that is > not > > > the general trend it appears. Like any boat project of any > material, > > > quality craftmanship takes time. > > > As for the weight aloft issue, I think I would have to agree with > the > > > theory that weight belongs as low as possible,not scraping the sky > > > with a 600 to 800 pound mast, rigging,sails etc. when a much > lighter > > > alternative is available. The scuttlebutt around our area is that > the > > > BS boats with steel masts are notably tender and tend to > hobbyhorse > > > going to weather because of the heavy stick. > > > Cheers Bob S. > > > > > > > > --- > > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > > Version: 6.0.593 / Virus Database: 376 - Release Date: 2004-02-20 > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > | 3140|3072|2004-02-26 00:41:09|info@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: Mast weights (fast, narrow hulls)|The JM50 is a 2 dart origami, 1:4 beam that has proven very fast and capable offshore. Originally built in 3/8" alloy, we can computer scale the design to 40' in steel. Displacement about 17,500-19,000 lbs, which can be tweaked a bit during the scaling process. http://www.origamimagic.com/Design/JM50/JM50.htm Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com ----- Original Message ----- From: dreemer1962 To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2004 9:06 AM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Mast weights (fast, narrow hulls) "...I would also love to build a boat just for speed from the cheapest stuff available, say a very long empty steel hull with an enourmous rigg and a very deep narrow fin, could be built for peanuts in a month, and sock it to all these modern plastic hulls but as I really want to go cruising again..." I am thinking about narrow hull (length/beam ratio of around 1:4) with very small overhangs and moderate draft, and a lot of sails with low centre of effort for downwind sailing. Sort of poor man's downwind flyer. It seems to me a practical proposition for the cruising. It could be for example BS 31 stretched to 40-ft, same beam and draft, no overhangs, same engine and mast a fraction higher. Costs should be just a little higher, for a little more hull material, as the expensive stuff as engine, rig, sails, and different equipment stays about the same. For very moderate costs increase, it should produce a cruising boat with a higher average speed, more interior space, a lot of course stability and possibly more comfortable motion in the waves (higher moment of inertia and higher longitudinal stability). The only downside is possible lower speed in very light winds due to the increased wet surface. To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3141|3072|2004-02-26 04:48:01|bubblede|Re: Mast weights (fast, narrow hulls)|Hi all - Yes, I know the Steelstar, and actually like Tanton's designs very much. He has lots of very different boats and browsing his website his a good way to spend an hour or two reconsidering your own fixed ideas on what you really want from a boat. For my 20-years-younger-dreamboat I would go even further I think, displacemnt could be reduced still if limited to what is necessary to the boat itself as a sailing machine, with close to zero displacement for crew, stores, furniture, etc. Imagine what you would take to spend 4 weeks singlehanding on an 18 footer and take nothing else, 3 lt of water per day plus basic food NO interior arrangement, no sinks, tanks, showers, chart table and all the junk you pile up on a cruising boat over the years - just a sleeping bag and an foam-matress and a bucket-loo. Reduce freeboard to some surf-board shape with just a small roof 2 m long with sitting headroom, thats the only living area, forward and aft all is empty hull, just there to go fast... design the hull only for sailing without any regard to living aboard. Basically: build yourself a 3 m boat to live in, but add another 12 empty meters for sailing it. I sailed on the boat that first Van den Heede and later Isabelle Autissier took into the golden globe about 15 years ago or so. That was a long aluminium cigar for the open 60 class, rather narrow compared to what is being done today, and it was a bit like that, a very cramped cabin with just one bunk, small chart-table, gimballed single flame camping-cooker and looking for and aft just long empty meters of hull with the naked frames and stingers. Sailing it was the biggest fun I ever had on a boat. with the same concept and size you could actually build a very similar boat in steel. But as I said, this is just some crazy idea, right now I am trying to fit a shower into a 31' plan ;-) Gerd Budapest| 3142|3072|2004-02-26 06:47:50|Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr|Re: Mast weights (fast, narrow hulls)|It is not that I consider that there is anything inherrently wrong with the BS 40. I mentioned the Tanton designed Steelstar because Dreemer1962 was already on this site where I assumed he had seen the BS40 and was still describing his search and so through that out and an alternative. Regards Jeff ----- Original Message ----- From: "jumpaltair" To: Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2004 10:32 PM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Mast weights (fast, narrow hulls) > If you think that the Tanton steelstar is narrow and appropriate for > him to consider, why not the BS 40? I know you're not a fan of BS > designs. If you look at the BS 40 and the Tanton steel star you'd > see that the displacement is almost the same, the LWL almost the > same, draft almost the same, yet the BS has less beam by about 8" if > I recall correctly at 11'10". I'd suggest that he therefore consider > the BS 40. > > Peter > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr" > wrote: > > You might take a look at Yves Tanton's website. He has a design > called the > > Steel Star that sounds just like what you are proposing. It would > not really > > sock it to the current crop of race boats but would be quite fast > and easy > > to handle. > > > > Jeff > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > | 3143|3072|2004-02-26 07:06:10|Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr|Re: Mast weights (fast, narrow hulls)|Ooops that should read,,,,, It is not that I consider that there is anything inherrently wrong with the BS 40. I mentioned the Tanton designed Steelstar because Dreemer1962 was already on this site where I assumed he had seen the BS40 and was still describing his search and so *threw* the Steelstar out *as* an alternative. Jeff| 3144|3072|2004-02-26 11:20:38|info@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: Mast weights|Hi Jeff, I've been out in heavily breaking seas a couple of times. Always the same, wind against current and rapidly shoaling water at the edge of the continental shelf. Comparing the performance of a FG and steel boat in those conditions, I felt the inertia of the steel hull definitely worked against us, especially the weight of the decks and cabins. The problem was not so much a single breaking wave, rather that all waves were breaking, and you were at risk of a 1-2 punch like in boxing. The first wave slams you and knocks you out of position and the second wave tries to finish you off before you can recover. The formula I presented was not for capsize prediction, rather a rule of thumb for calculating ballast. I believe the rule was originally developed for wood. I thought it might be useful to the amateur builders on this site, who might not know CB, GM, etc. because it can be applied in reverse to calculate rig weights. It might be helpful to look at a couple of examples: 10 ton steel, 5 foot shoal draft, 6000 lbs ballast, 50 foot mast height. What weight of rig could it support? (5 * 6000) = 30000 / 50 = 600 lbs. 600 lbs looks reasonable to me for a maximum if the boat was wood. correcting for steel, maybe 1000 lbs extra deck/cabin weight as compared to wood. Deck height 5 feet. (5 * 6000) = 30000 - (1000 * 5) = 25000 / 50 = 500 lbs 500 lbs max for the rig looks reasonable to me for a maximum if this boat is steel. Consider the G55 we are building. 40000 lbs, 7 foot draft, 13,000 lbs ballast, 80 foot mast. What is the rig weight? (7 * 40000) = 91000 / 80 = 1150 lbs 1150 lbs looks reasonable to me for the max rig you would want to put on the boat. What happens if we use moments of inertia in our 10 ton steel boat? i = mr^2 as I recall -- we can use mr^3 if you prefer. On the 10 ton boat, CB will be about WL-1, and CG of the ballast about WL-4 at best, so i = 6000 * 3^3 = 162000 For the rig, the CG with sails will be about WL+20 at best, so 20^3 = 8000 What weight of rig could we support if we used moments of inertia as proposed? 162000/8000 = 20.25 lbs This does not look reasonable to me. Even if we use i = mr^2 we get 6000 * 9 = 54000 / 400 = 135 lbs Which still doesn't look reasonable. How about if we used a 500 lb mast, how much ballast would be required? 500 * 20^2 = 200000 / 9 = 22,222 lbs From this I would conclude that the rule of thumb for ballast cannot be used as a capsize predictor using moments of inertia, but can be used as a rule of thumb to calculate ballast and rig weights. I do find your insight into moments of inertia helpful, because it does point to a basic problem. That there is more energy in a boats motion above the roll axis than below, which may inherently put all boats at risk for capsize. Thus the controversy. Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com ----- Original Message ----- From: Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, February 21, 2004 4:31 PM Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: Mast weights With all due respect, with regards to capsize avoidance there is no such thing as having "be too much weight down low". Modern IMS influenced designs have compartively high roll moments of inertia which comes from comparatively large keel ballast bulbs carried very far below their roll axis and it is the combination of low VCG's coupled with comparatively high roll inertias that give them their compartively comfortable motions (relatively small roll angles coupled with compartively slow accellerations). Your quick check formulas are even close to accurate in terms of predicting capsize as the key formulas are moments of inertia in which the distances from the roll and pitch centers to the center of gravity are to the third power. To be even close enough to be accurate for any kind of real prediction the formula would need to be: [( distance from the center of gravity of the keel to the roll axis)^3 X ballast weight] - [( distance from the center of gravity of the mast, sails, rigging to the roll axis)^3 X the weight of the masts, sails, and rigging) Which should be a positive number Jeff [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3145|3072|2004-02-26 12:44:37|tsuhaung@aol.com|Re: Mast weights|I am looking at the logistics of putting it in my back yard, it would actually fill my backyard. I am going to take some pictures and get some measurements over the next week or two. I am not sure how to post them just yet but will be happy to get comments from everybody. I am at the point where I need to put up or shut up, my friends have heard the boat tales too many times. I was out on Vancouver Island last year; work, and went to see a steel boat there for sale "fogo art". I talked with the guy for sometime he was a prairie boy who dreamed of sailing. He build the boat at the farm and trucked it to Vancouver. He chained the trailer to the boat and set it out as far as possible at low tide. the tide came in and the boat was towed to the island where the reverse process but it on dry land beside his house. It is still there 15+ years later still on the home made trailer. I want to look at this project realistically so it does not become another ghost haunting another dreamer backyard. I have built other smaller boats, all of wood but steel seems to be the way to go. Anybody who is just at the getting into stage, it would be good to hear how you your planning things out and the time frame you have given yourself All the best Ken [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3146|3072|2004-02-26 21:38:24|richytill|Time lines|Obviously the time can vary a lot. We have examples here of mere months to get launched and sailing, or, endless projects that never quite seem to float. Available productive building hours and money seem to be 2 determinates of the time line. Another variable would be the amount of detail and finish you expect to achieve. In the interior, "real fancy" can take 10 times longer to do with no real structural or functional advantage. A local shipwright quoted me 3 months of 40 hour work weeks to do the interior at $50 cdn per hr.-- or $34,000 with materials if you like. I chose to go it alone. The interior seems to be turning out decent. Good wood has come at the right time. I am in year 3. Boat is floating; interior joinery in progress; motor and drive line in; mast mostly made; electrical started; hatches and portlights on. Expect to be sailing in year 5. I work more than full time. If you stick to the plan things go more efficiently. I experimented with flush decks, underwater exhausts, joining motors to transmissions and the like and that often slows things down. One thing I would stress is that building right on my doorstep worked well--fitting out on the water has slowed things down. I had to move so I had to launch. Good help from friends can really speed things up. Have fun, rt --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, tsuhaung@a... wrote: > I am looking at the logistics of putting it in my back yard, it would > actually fill my backyard. I am going to take some pictures and get some measurements > over the next week or two. I am not sure how to post them just yet but will > be happy to get comments from everybody. I am at the point where I need to put > up or shut up, my friends have heard the boat tales too many times. I was out > on Vancouver Island last year; work, and went to see a steel boat there for > sale "fogo art". I talked with the guy for sometime he was a prairie boy who > dreamed of sailing. He build the boat at the farm and trucked it to Vancouver. He > chained the trailer to the boat and set it out as far as possible at low > tide. the tide came in and the boat was towed to the island where the reverse > process but it on dry land beside his house. It is still there 15+ years later > still on the home made trailer. > I want to look at this project realistically so it does not become another > ghost haunting another dreamer backyard. I have built other smaller boats, all > of wood but steel seems to be the way to go. Anybody who is just at the getting > into stage, it would be good to hear how you your planning things out and the > time frame you have given yourself > All the best Ken > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3147|3072|2004-02-26 23:21:34|bilgekeeldave|Re: Time lines|I bought my Brent Swain 31 complete, with rig. It had a crude interior made of angle iron and plywood and no motor other than a six hp Seagull. I installed the Vetus 20 hp diesel, and my father and I removed the 'temporary' interior and designed and installed our own interior. We thought the interior would take about six months to complete, it took a year and a half, and that was with us averaging 4 hrs a day of work. Things don't alway go as expected. Dave --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "richytill" wrote: > Obviously the time can vary a lot. We have examples here of mere > months to get launched and sailing, or, endless projects that never > quite seem to float. Available productive building hours and money > seem to be 2 determinates of the time line. Another variable would > be the amount of detail and finish you expect to achieve. In the > interior, "real fancy" can take 10 times longer to do with no real > structural or functional advantage. A local shipwright quoted me 3 > months of 40 hour work weeks to do the interior at $50 cdn per hr.- - > or $34,000 with materials if you like. I chose to go it alone. The > interior seems to be turning out decent. Good wood has come at the > right time. > > I am in year 3. Boat is floating; interior joinery in progress; > motor and drive line in; mast mostly made; electrical started; > hatches and portlights on. Expect to be sailing in year 5. I work > more than full time. If you stick to the plan things go more > efficiently. I experimented with flush decks, underwater exhausts, > joining motors to transmissions and the like and that often slows > things down. One thing I would stress is that building right on my > doorstep worked well--fitting out on the water has slowed things > down. I had to move so I had to launch. Good help from friends can > really speed things up. Have fun, rt > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, tsuhaung@a... wrote: > > I am looking at the logistics of putting it in my back yard, it > would > > actually fill my backyard. I am going to take some pictures and get > some measurements > > over the next week or two. I am not sure how to post them just yet > but will > > be happy to get comments from everybody. I am at the point where I > need to put > > up or shut up, my friends have heard the boat tales too many times. > I was out > > on Vancouver Island last year; work, and went to see a steel boat > there for > > sale "fogo art". I talked with the guy for sometime he was a > prairie boy who > > dreamed of sailing. He build the boat at the farm and trucked it to > Vancouver. He > > chained the trailer to the boat and set it out as far as possible > at low > > tide. the tide came in and the boat was towed to the island where > the reverse > > process but it on dry land beside his house. It is still there 15+ > years later > > still on the home made trailer. > > I want to look at this project realistically so it does not become > another > > ghost haunting another dreamer backyard. I have built other smaller > boats, all > > of wood but steel seems to be the way to go. Anybody who is just at > the getting > > into stage, it would be good to hear how you your planning things > out and the > > time frame you have given yourself > > All the best Ken > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3148|3148|2004-02-27 07:09:02|bubblede|hard-chine origami ?|I am still trying to adapt my hard-chine hull to conical for and aft origami cutout a la Brent... and was just wondering: has anybody tried to simply assemble a fully hard-chine origami? This would be a hull built out of seperate fully developable panels for each chine plating, rather than the single half-hull panels with dart cuts. the resulting hull would be as designed, and of course then without the conical areas for and aft. This would not need any adaption really with predictable results as all panels are already fully developable. Assembly would be similar I guess, but maybe starting by bringing the panels together midships first, maybe already with temporary support at the approximate angle, and then pulling in the ends? With 5 panels total(2 per side plus one bottom) what might be the best order? any _practical_ experiences with that? Gerd, Budapest| 3149|3149|2004-02-27 09:10:30|bubblede|More Origami from Germany|just thought some of you might find the origami idea interesting but not necessarily want to build a big steel ship. There is a guy in Germany who sells cuts for plywood boats, dinghies and some small cruisers. quite nice boats. The shapes are clearly "origami", but cut from the ends rather than in the center. In Germany he is quite a well known figure, I remember having seen his ads more than 20 years ago in Die Yacht - have a look, intersting ;-) Gerd, Budapest| 3150|3148|2004-02-27 11:01:26|jalborey|Re: hard-chine origami ?|Gerd, you seem to describe van de Stadt's building procedure: http://www.stadtdesign.com Greetings from Spain and good luck with your project. Jesús| 3151|3148|2004-02-27 11:44:07|dreemer1962|Re: hard-chine origami ?|Gerd, French META boat builders have solutions for that. In addition, their most popular sailing yachts range, Dallu, is of the same 5 panels cross section form, which you are planing to use. Here is their site with few very informative photos: http://www.reducostall.com/HTML/pagetwo.htm This is another interesting site from one of their customers, who used to heave 12 m (40 ft) Meta boat and now has one 20 m (66 ft) long. Check the building photos of the big one: http://www.metapassion.fr.fm/ Van de Stadt has clever multichine technique. Personally, I find it a bit too many chines but seemsOK. http://www.beisterveld.com/enhoofd.htm http://www.forna37.opiliones.com/ Both techniques are undoubtedly faster then conventional, but still more work then Brent's origami. Milan --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "bubblede" wrote: > I am still trying to adapt my hard-chine hull to conical for and aft > origami cutout a la Brent... and was just wondering: has anybody > tried to simply assemble a fully hard-chine origami? > > This would be a hull built out of seperate fully developable panels > for each chine plating, rather than the single half-hull panels with > dart cuts. the resulting hull would be as designed, and of course > then without the conical areas for and aft. > > This would not need any adaption really with predictable results as > all panels are already fully developable. > > Assembly would be similar I guess, but maybe starting by bringing > the panels together midships first, maybe already with temporary > support at the approximate angle, and then pulling in the ends? With > 5 panels total(2 per side plus one bottom) what might be the best > order? any _practical_ experiences with that? > > > Gerd, Budapest | 3152|3072|2004-02-27 15:00:36|brentswain38|Re: Time lines|I began building bits and pieces and stashing them a year before I started the hull. When I started the hull on April 10th 1984 I had $4,000 in the bank, had half my ballast stashed in a park, the mast stashed in my parent's back yard, the interior precut from a sistership, some detail bits and ports cut , used sails stashed and a coil of riggin wire. I launched a month later on May 10th, with $40 in my pocket, ran her up to Cortes Island and left her while I built two more 36 footer shells for a cash infusion.In august that summer, I went back to work on her and in two weeks finished the steel work and half the ballast, spent ten days painting her and roughing the bulkheads and bigger interior plywood in, then foamed her the beginning of september and put the rest of the rough interior in. Then I took a break and went back to rig her and go for my first sail in mid october 1984.She was rough but mobile and liveable. The rest would be hobby. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "richytill" wrote: > Obviously the time can vary a lot. We have examples here of mere > months to get launched and sailing, or, endless projects that never > quite seem to float. Available productive building hours and money > seem to be 2 determinates of the time line. Another variable would > be the amount of detail and finish you expect to achieve. In the > interior, "real fancy" can take 10 times longer to do with no real > structural or functional advantage. A local shipwright quoted me 3 > months of 40 hour work weeks to do the interior at $50 cdn per hr.-- > or $34,000 with materials if you like. I chose to go it alone. The > interior seems to be turning out decent. Good wood has come at the > right time. > > I am in year 3. Boat is floating; interior joinery in progress; > motor and drive line in; mast mostly made; electrical started; > hatches and portlights on. Expect to be sailing in year 5. I work > more than full time. If you stick to the plan things go more > efficiently. I experimented with flush decks, underwater exhausts, > joining motors to transmissions and the like and that often slows > things down. One thing I would stress is that building right on my > doorstep worked well--fitting out on the water has slowed things > down. I had to move so I had to launch. Good help from friends can > really speed things up. Have fun, rt > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, tsuhaung@a... wrote: > > I am looking at the logistics of putting it in my back yard, it > would > > actually fill my backyard. I am going to take some pictures and get > some measurements > > over the next week or two. I am not sure how to post them just yet > but will > > be happy to get comments from everybody. I am at the point where I > need to put > > up or shut up, my friends have heard the boat tales too many times. > I was out > > on Vancouver Island last year; work, and went to see a steel boat > there for > > sale "fogo art". I talked with the guy for sometime he was a > prairie boy who > > dreamed of sailing. He build the boat at the farm and trucked it to > Vancouver. He > > chained the trailer to the boat and set it out as far as possible > at low > > tide. the tide came in and the boat was towed to the island where > the reverse > > process but it on dry land beside his house. It is still there 15+ > years later > > still on the home made trailer. > > I want to look at this project realistically so it does not become > another > > ghost haunting another dreamer backyard. I have built other smaller > boats, all > > of wood but steel seems to be the way to go. Anybody who is just at > the getting > > into stage, it would be good to hear how you your planning things > out and the > > time frame you have given yourself > > All the best Ken > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3153|3072|2004-02-27 15:27:50|dreemer1962|Re: Mast weights (fast, narrow hulls)|Jeff, thanks a lot for the link. Indeed, a like the Steel Star and many other Tanton designs. I always liked narrow, low drag boats, be it a classical designs as some of the Herreshof's, or the more modern ones as some of the hard chine plywood flyers from 50's and 60's or most modern ones as a Dashew Sundeers for example. At the same time, partly from the necessity, (I don't heave a money), partly based on my taste and beliefs I search simplicity. So I'm thinking about taking basic concept of a low drag sailing boat from these examples and developing economical cruising design with a modest accommodation, without luxuries and complexities. For the cruising on the open sea I do want standing height in at list a part of the accommodation, stout construction and enough space and load capacity for two-three people plus some tools and spares for the maintenance. With a conventional boats the minimum length that can satisfy these requirements is 9 meters. By adding 2-3 meters on the waterline it becomes a very low drag boat, with very low displacement/waterline length ratio, even if built from relatively heavy (cheap), building materials. I'm living in The Netherlands, land of the steel boats, so I'm naturally interested in the steel. I made some rough drawings. If I figure out how to scan them, I'll try to post them in the files one of these days. Regards Milan --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr" wrote: > You might take a look at Yves Tanton's website. He has a design called the > Steel Star that sounds just like what you are proposing. It would not really > sock it to the current crop of race boats but would be quite fast and easy > to handle. > > Jeff | 3154|3072|2004-02-27 15:38:24|dreemer1962|Re: Mast weights (fast, narrow hulls)|Peter, thanks a lot for the reaction. I think BS 40 is a very fine boat on its own right. However I think you made some mistakes comparing BS 40 and Tanton's Steel Star. They indeed heave similar displacement and beam but Steel Star is 20 feet longer on deck! They are very different boats. Regards Milan --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "jumpaltair" wrote: > If you think that the Tanton steelstar is narrow and appropriate for > him to consider, why not the BS 40? I know you're not a fan of BS > designs. If you look at the BS 40 and the Tanton steel star you'd > see that the displacement is almost the same, the LWL almost the > same, draft almost the same, yet the BS has less beam by about 8" if > I recall correctly at 11'10". I'd suggest that he therefore consider > the BS 40. > > Peter > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr" > wrote: > > You might take a look at Yves Tanton's website. He has a design > called the > > Steel Star that sounds just like what you are proposing. It would > not really > > sock it to the current crop of race boats but would be quite fast > and easy > > to handle. > > > > Jeff > > > > | 3155|3072|2004-02-27 16:08:25|dreemer1962|Re: Mast weights (fast, narrow hulls)|Hi Gerd. I like your ideas of absolute minimalism of a simple sailing machine, but just for a day sailing and short trips. For just a joy of fast sailing on a limited budget, my candidate is hard chine plywood Van de Stadt Black Soo designed in the 1956. Check the numbers LOA=9m; LWL=7.95m; beam=2m: displ=1800kg: balast=750kg Longer range cruising on the open sea is a different meter all together. I wouldn't like to do that on the boat with less accommodation and load capacity then average 30 footer. What was the name of the Van den Heede / I. Autissier boat? Could you mail some *.jpg's on the site? Regards, Milan --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "bubblede" wrote: > Hi all - Yes, I know the Steelstar, and actually like Tanton's > designs very much. He has lots of very different boats and browsing > his website his a good way to spend an hour or two reconsidering > your own fixed ideas on what you really want from a boat. > For my 20-years-younger-dreamboat I would go even further I think, > displacemnt could be reduced still if limited to what is necessary > to the boat itself as a sailing machine, with close to zero > displacement for crew, stores, furniture, etc. > Imagine what you would take to spend 4 weeks singlehanding on an 18 > footer and take nothing else, 3 lt of water per day plus basic food > NO interior arrangement, no sinks, tanks, showers, chart table and > all the junk you pile up on a cruising boat over the years - just a > sleeping bag and an foam-matress and a bucket-loo. > Reduce freeboard to some surf-board shape with just a small roof 2 m > long with sitting headroom, thats the only living area, forward and > aft all is empty hull, just there to go fast... design the hull only > for sailing without any regard to living aboard. > Basically: build yourself a 3 m boat to live in, but add another 12 > empty meters for sailing it. > I sailed on the boat that first Van den Heede and later Isabelle > Autissier took into the golden globe about 15 years ago or so. That > was a long aluminium cigar for the open 60 class, rather narrow > compared to what is being done today, and it was a bit like that, a > very cramped cabin with just one bunk, small chart-table, gimballed > single flame camping-cooker and looking for and aft just long empty > meters of hull with the naked frames and stingers. Sailing it was > the biggest fun I ever had on a boat. with the same concept and size > you could actually build a very similar boat in steel. > > But as I said, this is just some crazy idea, right now I am trying > to fit a shower into a 31' plan ;-) > > Gerd > Budapest | 3156|3072|2004-02-27 17:01:59|jumpaltair|Re: Mast weights (fast, narrow hulls)|Actually, Tanton has several "Steelstar" designs, including a 40 footer. It is the 40 footer steelstar (design 994?), that I was comparing to the BS 40. I thought you mentioned 40 feet, that's why I compared the two. The 60ft steelstar is intended to have wooden decks if I recall correcty, but that's another matter. I didn't mean to push the BS 40 on you either. It's just that the two 40 footers aren't that much different. Neverthess, I hope you find what you're looking for, as that's what it's all about, and I'd be interested to see your draft designs also. Peter --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "dreemer1962" wrote: > Peter, thanks a lot for the reaction. I think BS 40 is a very fine > boat on its own right. However I think you made some mistakes > comparing BS 40 and Tanton's Steel Star. They indeed heave similar > displacement and beam but Steel Star is 20 feet longer on deck! They > are very different boats. > > Regards > Milan > > > | 3157|3148|2004-02-27 18:13:10|bubblede|Re: hard-chine origami ?|Hi Jesus no, I know about v.d.Stadt' system, he still builds a jig in form of a negative supporting mould - what I had in mind was to pull the shapes together as is and let them take their form naturally - as Brent writes somewhere it would be geometrically impossible to have it come together differently - and that should apply similarily to any number of shapes cut to developed lines, shouldn't it? if you would take any 2 plates from a hard-chine hull, developed and cut properly, they MUST come together right... the only question is how practical would it be to do this without any supporting structure a la van de stadt well, back to the drawing board ;-) Gerd, Budapest --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "jalborey" wrote: > Gerd, you seem to describe van de Stadt's building procedure: > http://www.stadtdesign.com > Greetings from Spain and good luck with your project. > Jesús | 3158|3148|2004-02-27 18:20:44|bubblede|Re: hard-chine origami ?|Hi Milan I know meta well - they do their strongall technique, thick panels practically without structure. thez also had a big rig thez could torn their hulls in to do all the welding "a plat". they are heavy on equipment though, moulds,turning jigs and so on, wich is not really what I had in mind. My idea would be to lay out an entire bottom panel flat, probably stiffened with the stringers, then the the lower side panel next to it and just start pulling it together, with no more support than for the BS designs... the 5 panel hull is very popular in france, I have built 4 hulls like that myself ;-) it all started more than 20 years ago with Michel Joubert and Ph. Hale designs, ply, alloy stell... I have sailed a lot on htese boats and love the movements. Gerd --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "dreemer1962" wrote: > Gerd, French META boat builders have solutions for that. In addition, > their most popular sailing yachts range, Dallu, is of the same 5 > panels cross section form, which you are planing to use. > > Here is their site with few very informative photos: > http://www.reducostall.com/HTML/pagetwo.htm > > This is another interesting site from one of their customers, who > used to heave 12 m (40 ft) Meta boat and now has one 20 m (66 ft) > long. Check the building photos of the big one: > http://www.metapassion.fr.fm/ > > Van de Stadt has clever multichine technique. Personally, I find it a > bit too many chines but seemsOK. > http://www.beisterveld.com/enhoofd.htm > http://www.forna37.opiliones.com/ > > Both techniques are undoubtedly faster then conventional, but still > more work then Brent's origami. > > Milan > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "bubblede" wrote: > > I am still trying to adapt my hard-chine hull to conical for and > aft > > origami cutout a la Brent... and was just wondering: has anybody > > tried to simply assemble a fully hard-chine origami? > > > > This would be a hull built out of seperate fully developable panels > > for each chine plating, rather than the single half-hull panels > with > > dart cuts. the resulting hull would be as designed, and of course > > then without the conical areas for and aft. > > > > This would not need any adaption really with predictable results as > > all panels are already fully developable. > > > > Assembly would be similar I guess, but maybe starting by bringing > > the panels together midships first, maybe already with temporary > > support at the approximate angle, and then pulling in the ends? > With > > 5 panels total(2 per side plus one bottom) what might be the best > > order? any _practical_ experiences with that? > > > > > > Gerd, Budapest | 3159|3072|2004-02-27 18:32:53|bubblede|Re: Mast weights (fast, narrow hulls)|The boat was "Ecureuil Poitou-Charentes", ex "36-15 Met" when VDH had it. Isabelle took the boat into the 90 91 BOC chaallenge, and I went out with her for an afternoon during her preps. I can t find pics right now, but you should find some stuff on google. gerd --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "dreemer1962" wrote: > Hi Gerd. I like your ideas of absolute minimalism of a simple sailing > machine, but just for a day sailing and short trips. For just a joy > of fast sailing on a limited budget, my candidate is > hard chine plywood Van de Stadt Black Soo designed in the 1956. Check > the numbers LOA=9m; LWL=7.95m; beam=2m: displ=1800kg: balast=750kg > > Longer range cruising on the open sea is a different meter all > together. I wouldn't like to do that on the boat with less > accommodation and load capacity then average 30 footer. > > What was the name of the Van den Heede / I. Autissier boat? Could you > mail some *.jpg's on the site? > > Regards, > Milan > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "bubblede" wrote: > > Hi all - Yes, I know the Steelstar, and actually like Tanton's > > designs very much. He has lots of very different boats and browsing > > his website his a good way to spend an hour or two reconsidering > > your own fixed ideas on what you really want from a boat. > > For my 20-years-younger-dreamboat I would go even further I think, > > displacemnt could be reduced still if limited to what is necessary > > to the boat itself as a sailing machine, with close to zero > > displacement for crew, stores, furniture, etc. > > Imagine what you would take to spend 4 weeks singlehanding on an 18 > > footer and take nothing else, 3 lt of water per day plus basic food > > NO interior arrangement, no sinks, tanks, showers, chart table and > > all the junk you pile up on a cruising boat over the years - just a > > sleeping bag and an foam-matress and a bucket-loo. > > Reduce freeboard to some surf-board shape with just a small roof 2 > m > > long with sitting headroom, thats the only living area, forward and > > aft all is empty hull, just there to go fast... design the hull > only > > for sailing without any regard to living aboard. > > Basically: build yourself a 3 m boat to live in, but add another 12 > > empty meters for sailing it. > > I sailed on the boat that first Van den Heede and later Isabelle > > Autissier took into the golden globe about 15 years ago or so. That > > was a long aluminium cigar for the open 60 class, rather narrow > > compared to what is being done today, and it was a bit like that, a > > very cramped cabin with just one bunk, small chart-table, gimballed > > single flame camping-cooker and looking for and aft just long empty > > meters of hull with the naked frames and stingers. Sailing it was > > the biggest fun I ever had on a boat. with the same concept and > size > > you could actually build a very similar boat in steel. > > > > But as I said, this is just some crazy idea, right now I am trying > > to fit a shower into a 31' plan ;-) > > > > Gerd > > Budapest | 3160|3134|2004-02-28 06:03:40|edward_stoneuk|Re: Ports (to recess or not?)|Martin, In due course I will be cutting the holes for my ports as well. Screwing acrylic or polycarbonate sheet to the outside of the cabin is a simple well-tried method and is used on many production GRP boats. That said, I keep trying to think of another, perhaps better looking way to fit ports. Recessed ports look good if the workmanship is good. In a steel boat such as mine they will add unwanted weight. On the Metal Boat Forum a little while ago there was discussion on using adhesives to fix toughened glass (twice the weight of plastic) with fritted edges into recessed frames; a good but heavy and expensive solution. I think now of either screwing plastic sheet onto the outside or fixing the plastic sheet inside using coach bolts with the round head outside, running through holes in the cabin sides, the clear plastic and through a plywood or aluminium retaining disc. To avoid condensation on the through bolts the retaining disc and nuts will be covered with a wooden frame. I expect though that in the end I will go for the simple well-proven outside method as advised by Brent and convince my self of its aesthetic merit. Regards, Ted| 3161|3149|2004-02-28 07:50:21|Josef W. Hennicken|Re: More Origami from Germany|--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "bubblede" wrote: > There is a guy in Germany who sells cuts for plywood boats, dinghies > and some small cruisers. quite nice boats. > > The shapes are clearly "origami", but cut from the ends rather than > in the center. > > In Germany he is quite a well known figure, I remember having seen > his ads more than 20 years ago in Die Yacht - have a look, > intersting ;-) > > Gerd, Budapest Hello Gerd, I´m from germany und think the guy you mentioned is dr.jüs segger. Here is a link to his actual webside : http://www.segger-boote.de More than 30 years ago he studied at technical university aachen and managed a little boatyard PRIMA-BOOT, just 5 km from my home. The boat from Yacht is DIABOLO. If anyone is interested, i have these issues of YACHT and could scan them to put them in FILES. Josef W.| 3162|3162|2004-02-28 13:49:31|vinnie_barberino2000|Polish ? origami|Scroll down to bottom of the link page ,I dont speak the lingo but the pattern is close to what we like in this group| 3163|3134|2004-02-28 13:50:34|brentswain38|Re: Ports (to recess or not?)|Give your plywood rings a good soaking in epoxy,before installing them, so they won't soak up condensation and rust the steel under it. Get lots of good bedding compound between the rings and the steel. Using screws instead of bolts make it easier to change them.Any pressure is inward so there is no loss of seaworthiness in using screws. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "edward_stoneuk" wrote: > Martin, > In due course I will be cutting the holes for my ports as well. > Screwing acrylic or polycarbonate sheet to the outside of the cabin > is a simple well-tried method and is used on many production GRP > boats. That said, I keep trying to think of another, perhaps better > looking way to fit ports. Recessed ports look good if the > workmanship is good. In a steel boat such as mine they will add > unwanted weight. On the Metal Boat Forum a little while ago there > was discussion on using adhesives to fix toughened glass (twice the > weight of plastic) with fritted edges into recessed frames; a good > but heavy and expensive solution. > I think now of either screwing plastic sheet onto the outside or > fixing the plastic sheet inside using coach bolts with the round head > outside, running through holes in the cabin sides, the clear plastic > and through a plywood or aluminium retaining disc. To avoid > condensation on the through bolts the retaining disc and nuts will be > covered with a wooden frame. > I expect though that in the end I will go for the simple well- proven > outside method as advised by Brent and convince my self of its > aesthetic merit. > Regards, > Ted | 3164|3148|2004-02-28 13:56:10|brentswain38|Re: hard-chine origami ?|There is no need for external supports . They just add a lot of extra work for no real gain. Friends using Vandestadt methods seem to take a lot longer to get a hull together , and the hulls still have lots of visible chines ,especially in the ends, without the stiffness and fairness advantage of polyconic ends.They also have many times the amount of cutting and welding. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "bubblede" wrote: > Hi Jesus > no, I know about v.d.Stadt' system, he still builds a jig in form of > a negative supporting mould - what I had in mind was to pull the > shapes together as is and let them take their form naturally - as > Brent writes somewhere it would be geometrically impossible to have > it come together differently - and that should apply similarily to > any number of shapes cut to developed lines, shouldn't it? > if you would take any 2 plates from a hard-chine hull, developed and > cut properly, they MUST come together right... the only question is > how practical would it be to do this without any supporting > structure a la van de stadt > > well, back to the drawing board ;-) > Gerd, Budapest > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "jalborey" > wrote: > > Gerd, you seem to describe van de Stadt's building procedure: > > http://www.stadtdesign.com > > Greetings from Spain and good luck with your project. > > Jesús | 3165|3162|2004-02-28 14:04:03|vinnie_barberino2000|Re: Polish ? origami|might help if i put in the link eh http://www.zeglarstwo.3miasto.pl/projgrup/km1.html --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "vinnie_barberino2000" wrote: > Scroll down to bottom of the link page ,I dont speak the lingo but > the pattern is close to what we like in this group | 3166|3149|2004-02-28 14:41:44|bubblede|Re: More Origami from Germany|Thanks Josef, silly of me, I forgot to put the link in my post.. ;-) --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Josef W. Hennicken" wrote: > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "bubblede" wrote: > > There is a guy in Germany who sells cuts for plywood boats, > dinghies > > and some small cruisers. quite nice boats. > > > > The shapes are clearly "origami", but cut from the ends rather than > > in the center. > > > > In Germany he is quite a well known figure, I remember having seen > > his ads more than 20 years ago in Die Yacht - have a look, > > intersting ;-) > > > > Gerd, Budapest > > Hello Gerd, > > I´m from germany und think the guy you mentioned is dr.jüs segger. > Here is a link to his actual webside : > > http://www.segger-boote.de > > More than 30 years ago he studied at technical university aachen > and managed a little boatyard PRIMA-BOOT, just 5 km from my home. > > The boat from Yacht is DIABOLO. > > If anyone is interested, i have these issues of YACHT and could scan > them to put them in FILES. > > Josef W. | 3167|3134|2004-02-28 14:51:19|Gary H. Lucas|Re: Ports (to recess or not?)|Ted, Some years ago I studied the problem of sealing joints with silicone when there was the possibility of joint motion. What I learned is very applicable to boats I believe, and it explains why so many boats leak. Basically any time there is the possibility of joint motion, be it from mechanical motion or thermal expansion and contraction then the best sealant is silicone by far. Silicone can tolerate a joint motion of + or - the thickness of the seal. If the seal is 1/16" thick then the part can move + or - 1/16" in any direction and the seal will not break. And there is where the problem occurs. Almost everyone designs the joint with far too little room for a sealant bead thick enough to take the motion. On windows you have to deal with some pretty huge temperature changes, and with plastics in particular against metal the range of motion is quite huge. So the recommendation I would make is to use a some dots of silicone rubber sheet about 1/8" thick glued to the plastic as spacers when installing. You can then apply a bead of silicone around the dots to get a seal. These dots will keep you from initially squeezing out the silicone as you lightly tighten the bolts. You could make the dots from the same sealant you are using. Final tightening should be done several days later after the sealant has completely cured. The bolt holes should also be grossly oversize to allow the plastic to expand and contract without pulling up hard against the bolts. The bolts should be carriage bolts so they can't turn again when you snug the them up the last time. If they can turn then the seal will be broken around the bolt. The bolts don't need to be tight. The sealant will easily hold the windows in place except under extreme circumstances like a wave crashing against them. In that case tight bolts won't add any strength. I'd use nylon locking nuts too. That way the bolts will never come off even though they are left jut barely squeezing the seal. Using a router to put a large 45 degree chamfer on the edge of the plastic all the way a round will go a long way towards improving the esthetics. If installed this way I believe the windows will remain completely leak free for the entire life span of the plastic itself. Gary H. Lucas ----- Original Message ----- From: "edward_stoneuk" To: Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2004 6:03 AM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Ports (to recess or not?) > Martin, > In due course I will be cutting the holes for my ports as well. > Screwing acrylic or polycarbonate sheet to the outside of the cabin > is a simple well-tried method and is used on many production GRP > boats. That said, I keep trying to think of another, perhaps better > looking way to fit ports. Recessed ports look good if the > workmanship is good. In a steel boat such as mine they will add > unwanted weight. On the Metal Boat Forum a little while ago there > was discussion on using adhesives to fix toughened glass (twice the > weight of plastic) with fritted edges into recessed frames; a good > but heavy and expensive solution. > I think now of either screwing plastic sheet onto the outside or > fixing the plastic sheet inside using coach bolts with the round head > outside, running through holes in the cabin sides, the clear plastic > and through a plywood or aluminium retaining disc. To avoid > condensation on the through bolts the retaining disc and nuts will be > covered with a wooden frame. > I expect though that in the end I will go for the simple well-proven > outside method as advised by Brent and convince my self of its > aesthetic merit. > Regards, > Ted > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > | 3168|3134|2004-02-28 18:24:00|edward_stoneuk|Re: Ports (to recess or not?)|Brent, Gary, Thanks for the advice. What do you think about putting the plastic windows inside the cabin sides rather than outside? Regards, Ted| 3169|3072|2004-02-28 19:23:29|edward_stoneuk|Re: Mast weights|Greg, Another key player as well as static stability and mass inertia in avoiding capsize is the damping effect of the underwater hull, which is why, no doubt some blue water sailors swear by long keel boats. C.A.Marchaj discusses it at some length in his book "Seaworthiness the forgotten factor". Francis Chichester on his solo round the world voyage had more keel added to his yacht Gypsy Moth in Sydney. That said, was your experience in heavy breaking seas in your boat Lazy Bones, which has a long keel? If so did the experience change your view of long keeled yachts? Is the cuddy/steering shelter on Lazy Bones steel? On his web page www.tedbrewer.com in his "Primer on Yacht Design" Ted Brewer writes about the CAPSIZE SCREENING FORMULA (CSF) of the Cruising Club of America, which can be used to determine if a boat has blue water capability. The CSF compares beam with displacement since excess beam contributes to capsize and heavy displacement reduces capsize vulnerability.(sic) The formula is the maximum beam divided by the cube root of the displacement in cubic feet; B/Displ.333. The displacement in cubic feet can be found by dividing the displacement in pounds by 64. A boat is acceptable if the result of the calculation is 2.0 or less. I put this into a spread sheet with a few other thing when I was looking for a boat and by my calculations a Brent Swain 36' has score of 1.63, which compares to Tom Colvin's Gazelle (3'10" Draft) score of 1.62, his Saugeen Witch 1.46, Bruce Robert's 40' Spray 1.74, Jay Benford's Badger 2.02, and Ted Brewer's Kaulani 34' 1.78. Ted Brewer gives an example of a Beneteau 311 (7716 lbs, 10'7" beam) which has a CSF number of 2.14 as not perhaps being the best choice for ocean passages. Regards, Ted| 3170|3134|2004-02-28 19:50:51|Gary H. Lucas|Re: Ports (to recess or not?)|Ted, I think it is a bad plan to put the window inside. A wave striking the window will put full water pressure against the seal as it expands outward. On an outside window the same wave is deflected by the window glazing and the seal only see that pressure which strikes at an angle. Gary H. Lucas ----- Original Message ----- From: "edward_stoneuk" To: Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2004 6:23 PM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Ports (to recess or not?) > Brent, Gary, > Thanks for the advice. What do you think about putting the plastic > windows inside the cabin sides rather than outside? > Regards, > Ted > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > | 3171|3171|2004-02-28 21:34:40|arun_louis|hi all|my name is louis we are into manafacturing of US naval archetect tom colvin designed 42 adventure sail yacht in india with joint venture with japan UK india. project name is GAZELLE. company name is kondo syokai. please log on to www.kondosyokai.com you will find it really interesting quality building british shipwreight supervising the project. and we compete with a 40 % cut price to the international market. we dont compromise on quality.. well i found it interesting about the frame less steel boat can any one specify about this thanks louis| 3172|3072|2004-02-28 23:35:26|Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr|Re: Mast weights|Unfortunately, the CAPSIZE SCREENING FORMULA has pretty well been discredited. It made some sense aas a surrogate method of comparing essentially similar hulls with essentially similar weight distributions. Today there are huge variations in boat design and we have a much better understanding of the factors affecting capsize. The formula contains none of the most critical data that is required to accurately determine a boat's likelihood of capsize. For example the Capsize Screening Formula does not factor in any information about weight distribution, or buoyancy distribution, or dampening. In way of an example, if we consider two boats that in all ways are identical, except that we add a 1000 lbs of lead to the top of the mast on one of them, the boat with the lead weight at the top of its mast would have a higher displacement and so would appear less likely to capsize using the Capsize Screening Formula when in fact, the weight at the top of the mast would greatly increase the likelihood of a knock down and capsize. The Capsize Screen Formula is so misleading as to be dangerous to rely upon it in any sort of way. You are also somewhat mistaken about long keels and dampening. The current thought is that longer lever arm between the roll center and the center of roll resistance of a typcial lighter fin keel offsets the greater area but typically considerably smaller lever arm found on a typically heavier displacement full keel. Respectfully, Jeff| 3173|3072|2004-02-29 00:54:39|info@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: Mast weights|Hi Ted, The Bones has a full keel. The dodger is epoxy laminated door skins, maybe 50 lbs tops. The mast is alloy, 207 lbs. The decks and cabin are 10 gauge, probably 1500-2000 lbs when the framing is taken into account. In my mind the capsize formula is only a guide, based on an assumption that all boats have the similar weight distribution. When the assumption is wrong, the formula cannot be relied on. This is certainly the case when comparing steel to other materials, because it does not allow for the extra weight of the decks and cabins. Our experiences in heavily breaking seas certainly woke me up to the dangers of weight above the waterline. Steel hulls are great. Steel decks and cabins are not. When the boat is slammed by a breaking wave, and the heavy decks and cabin get moving, they don't want to stop until they have pulled the boat over with them. Add a heavy steel mast and capsize is all but inevitable. To me the obvious solution is a steel origami hull with an alloy cabin and cockpit. You get the best of both worlds. Steel in the hull where weight and abrasion resistance are a benefit. Alloy in the cabin and cockpit where lightness and corrosion resistance is required. I found this article interesting: http://www.thboats.com/pages/shedwate.html regards, Greg Elliott Origami Magic http://www.origamimagic.com 1.604.987.0050 ----- Original Message ----- From: edward_stoneuk To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2004 4:23 PM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Mast weights Greg, Another key player as well as static stability and mass inertia in avoiding capsize is the damping effect of the underwater hull, which is why, no doubt some blue water sailors swear by long keel boats. C.A.Marchaj discusses it at some length in his book "Seaworthiness the forgotten factor". Francis Chichester on his solo round the world voyage had more keel added to his yacht Gypsy Moth in Sydney. That said, was your experience in heavy breaking seas in your boat Lazy Bones, which has a long keel? If so did the experience change your view of long keeled yachts? Is the cuddy/steering shelter on Lazy Bones steel? On his web page www.tedbrewer.com in his "Primer on Yacht Design" Ted Brewer writes about the CAPSIZE SCREENING FORMULA (CSF) of the Cruising Club of America, which can be used to determine if a boat has blue water capability. The CSF compares beam with displacement since excess beam contributes to capsize and heavy displacement reduces capsize vulnerability.(sic) The formula is the maximum beam divided by the cube root of the displacement in cubic feet; B/Displ.333. The displacement in cubic feet can be found by dividing the displacement in pounds by 64. A boat is acceptable if the result of the calculation is 2.0 or less. I put this into a spread sheet with a few other thing when I was looking for a boat and by my calculations a Brent Swain 36' has score of 1.63, which compares to Tom Colvin's Gazelle (3'10" Draft) score of 1.62, his Saugeen Witch 1.46, Bruce Robert's 40' Spray 1.74, Jay Benford's Badger 2.02, and Ted Brewer's Kaulani 34' 1.78. Ted Brewer gives an example of a Beneteau 311 (7716 lbs, 10'7" beam) which has a CSF number of 2.14 as not perhaps being the best choice for ocean passages. Regards, Ted To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3174|3171|2004-02-29 03:26:10|jim dorey|Re: hi all|when the plain sheet steel is pulled together it stresses the panel and makes the sheet curve into a beautiful rounded hull, do two sides, when they are welded together they tend to maintain their shape, due to the stresses placed on the sheet. far as i can tell it's a really simple concept, difficult to design properly, but makes a fast build boat with high inherent quality. arun_louis wrote: > > > well i found it interesting about the frame less steel boat can any > one specify about this > > thanks > louis -- http://www.skaar.101main.net http://www.PetitionOnline.com/spcdvd/ http://www.petitiononline.com/impjapan/petition-sign.html? moderator of wildsteam@yahoogroups.com DOM and proud!!!| 3175|3072|2004-02-29 07:11:03|bubblede|CSF|Hi Edward I would be very carful judging the seagoing value of any boat by the CSF, and I am actually quite surprised to find Brewer quoting it on his otherwise very useful page. What the CSF basicaly does is to put preconcieved, half-a-century old traditionalist ideas into a "formula" as justification for excluding "modern" boats: give me a goold old fashioned narrow heavy boat anytime... and so on Why a wide boat is more prone to capsize eludes me. The advantages of heavy displacement as such in capsize conditions are also unclear to me - sure I understand the difference between kicking a football and a bowling ball, but in the chaotic conditions in which capsizes occur there are many other factors that play a much larger role, and anyway the foot that kicks us then is large enough not to hurt even if our boat was made of lead. _any_ boat in the sizes that we talk about can capsize - the question is how to avoid getting the final kick. What I am missing in all this discussion is hydroDYNAMICS. I believe that a boat in these conditions is first of all a moving, dynamic shape and volume rather than a mass. Some examples: - A wider body with an nice hull shape will give you a lot of volume laterally to lean on and with speed help you get the nose out, rather than get the decks knocked under which will then server as a very unfavorable lateral resistance to trip you. - in the most ugly capsize head over heels, volume forward might help preventing the nose to dig in. - capsize though rolling occurs mostly after broaching. A hull shape and plan that gives you lots of directional stability and control even when running under bare poles (and I do not meean a long keel), or even a lifting keel or centerboard that will move your center of lateral resitance aft and allow you to keep your your boat pointing downhill. - A Lateral plan that offers little resistance in deep solid water will allow the boat to bob away on the higher disturbed layer if lucky without tripping over it's own feet. So I think the displacement of a boat should be the result of the above considerations, combined with requirements coming from selected material and requirements as for useful cruising charge. At the risk of kicking off a big flame war here: I think that modern long-distance ocean racers are probably the "safest" boats around, as they are a) built to arrive and b) driven permanently at maximum speed and breakpoint. In similar conditions traditional boats have summersaulted while hanging on to sea-anchors, while these things (open 60's, whitbread, even 6,50m mini-transat...)just change the spinnakers for a hevy genoa and keep tobboganing down the waves at 25 knots ;-) It is true that they break a lot, take knockdowns and capsizes and do not always arive. But this is not due to the concepts as such but rather to the fact that these concepts are then pushed to the extreme limits of risk-gambling between winning and not arriving. So do Formula 1 cars - if you would take one of these cars where the drivers step out unhurt after 150 kmh frontal crashes and walk away from it, take a spin around the corner at 120 where your honda would slip at 65, there is absolutely no doubt that the F1 is by concept and design the safer car and there should be no problem driving one - very uncomfortably - to your office dayly ;-) The fact that they do breake more F1 per km than volvos station wagons does _not_ prove that volvo are better or safer. Sure, if I would take an open 60 for a day sail, I would probably manage to bring the mast down five miles out, and also would not want to live or sleep aboard for longer than a fortnight. But if today I would try to design a good safe cruising boat, I would look at these boats and see what allows them to stay in control under the most extreme conditions, rather than look backwards. Gerd --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "edward_stoneuk" wrote: > Greg, > > Another key player as well as static stability and mass inertia in > avoiding capsize is the damping effect of the underwater hull, which > is why, no doubt some blue water sailors swear by long keel boats. > C.A.Marchaj discusses it at some length in his book "Seaworthiness > the forgotten factor". Francis Chichester on his solo round the > world voyage had more keel added to his yacht Gypsy Moth in Sydney. > That said, was your experience in heavy breaking seas in your boat > Lazy Bones, which has a long keel? If so did the experience change > your view of long keeled yachts? Is the cuddy/steering shelter on > Lazy Bones steel? > > On his web page www.tedbrewer.com in his "Primer on Yacht Design" > Ted Brewer writes about the CAPSIZE SCREENING FORMULA (CSF) of the > Cruising Club of America, which can be used to determine if a boat > has blue water capability. The CSF compares beam with displacement > since excess beam contributes to capsize and heavy displacement > reduces capsize vulnerability.(sic) The formula is the maximum beam > divided by the cube root of the displacement in cubic feet; > B/Displ.333. The displacement in cubic feet can be found by dividing > the displacement in pounds by 64. A boat is acceptable if the result > of the calculation is 2.0 or less. > > I put this into a spread sheet with a few other thing when I was > looking for a boat and by my calculations a Brent Swain 36' has > score of 1.63, which compares to Tom Colvin's Gazelle (3'10" Draft) > score of 1.62, his Saugeen Witch 1.46, Bruce Robert's 40' Spray 1.74, > Jay Benford's Badger 2.02, and Ted Brewer's Kaulani 34' 1.78. Ted > Brewer gives an example of a Beneteau 311 (7716 lbs, 10'7" beam) > which has a CSF number of 2.14 as not perhaps being the best choice > for ocean passages. > Regards, > Ted | 3176|3072|2004-02-29 10:31:01|Michael Casling|Re: CSF|I can only agree with your logic, but you may get a different response from the heavy is better group. I think that any boat beam on to a breaking wave can be rolled, yet a surfboard can handle the same wave with no problem. Being able to steer at higher speeds is the surfboards main advantage plus buoyancy. I checked the CSF for my boat and got 193 I think, if I reconfigured the ballast to put a bulb lower down to get a higher righting moment while reducing the boats total weight the CSF is worse from capsize point of view. The rule seems to just favour weight, the heavier I make my boat the better it gets but I would be losing buoyancy and handling ability. Michael Casling ----- Original Message ----- From: bubblede To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 29, 2004 4:10 AM Subject: [origamiboats] CSF Hi Edward I would be very carful judging the seagoing value of any boat by the CSF, and I am actually quite surprised to find Brewer quoting it on his otherwise very useful page. What the CSF basicaly does is to put preconcieved, half-a-century old traditionalist ideas into a "formula" as justification for excluding "modern" boats: give me a goold old fashioned narrow heavy boat anytime... and so on Why a wide boat is more prone to capsize eludes me. The advantages of heavy displacement as such in capsize conditions are also unclear to me - sure I understand the difference between kicking a football and a bowling ball, but in the chaotic conditions in which capsizes occur there are many other factors that play a much larger role, and anyway the foot that kicks us then is large enough not to hurt even if our boat was made of lead. _any_ boat in the sizes that we talk about can capsize - the question is how to avoid getting the final kick. What I am missing in all this discussion is hydroDYNAMICS. I believe that a boat in these conditions is first of all a moving, dynamic shape and volume rather than a mass. Some examples: - A wider body with an nice hull shape will give you a lot of volume laterally to lean on and with speed help you get the nose out, rather than get the decks knocked under which will then server as a very unfavorable lateral resistance to trip you. - in the most ugly capsize head over heels, volume forward might help preventing the nose to dig in. - capsize though rolling occurs mostly after broaching. A hull shape and plan that gives you lots of directional stability and control even when running under bare poles (and I do not meean a long keel), or even a lifting keel or centerboard that will move your center of lateral resitance aft and allow you to keep your your boat pointing downhill. - A Lateral plan that offers little resistance in deep solid water will allow the boat to bob away on the higher disturbed layer if lucky without tripping over it's own feet. So I think the displacement of a boat should be the result of the above considerations, combined with requirements coming from selected material and requirements as for useful cruising charge. At the risk of kicking off a big flame war here: I think that modern long-distance ocean racers are probably the "safest" boats around, as they are a) built to arrive and b) driven permanently at maximum speed and breakpoint. In similar conditions traditional boats have summersaulted while hanging on to sea-anchors, while these things (open 60's, whitbread, even 6,50m mini-transat...)just change the spinnakers for a hevy genoa and keep tobboganing down the waves at 25 knots ;-) It is true that they break a lot, take knockdowns and capsizes and do not always arive. But this is not due to the concepts as such but rather to the fact that these concepts are then pushed to the extreme limits of risk-gambling between winning and not arriving. So do Formula 1 cars - if you would take one of these cars where the drivers step out unhurt after 150 kmh frontal crashes and walk away from it, take a spin around the corner at 120 where your honda would slip at 65, there is absolutely no doubt that the F1 is by concept and design the safer car and there should be no problem driving one - very uncomfortably - to your office dayly ;-) The fact that they do breake more F1 per km than volvos station wagons does _not_ prove that volvo are better or safer. Sure, if I would take an open 60 for a day sail, I would probably manage to bring the mast down five miles out, and also would not want to live or sleep aboard for longer than a fortnight. But if today I would try to design a good safe cruising boat, I would look at these boats and see what allows them to stay in control under the most extreme conditions, rather than look backwards. Gerd --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "edward_stoneuk" wrote: > Greg, > > Another key player as well as static stability and mass inertia in > avoiding capsize is the damping effect of the underwater hull, which > is why, no doubt some blue water sailors swear by long keel boats. > C.A.Marchaj discusses it at some length in his book "Seaworthiness > the forgotten factor". Francis Chichester on his solo round the > world voyage had more keel added to his yacht Gypsy Moth in Sydney. > That said, was your experience in heavy breaking seas in your boat > Lazy Bones, which has a long keel? If so did the experience change > your view of long keeled yachts? Is the cuddy/steering shelter on > Lazy Bones steel? > > On his web page www.tedbrewer.com in his "Primer on Yacht Design" > Ted Brewer writes about the CAPSIZE SCREENING FORMULA (CSF) of the > Cruising Club of America, which can be used to determine if a boat > has blue water capability. The CSF compares beam with displacement > since excess beam contributes to capsize and heavy displacement > reduces capsize vulnerability.(sic) The formula is the maximum beam > divided by the cube root of the displacement in cubic feet; > B/Displ.333. The displacement in cubic feet can be found by dividing > the displacement in pounds by 64. A boat is acceptable if the result > of the calculation is 2.0 or less. > > I put this into a spread sheet with a few other thing when I was > looking for a boat and by my calculations a Brent Swain 36' has > score of 1.63, which compares to Tom Colvin's Gazelle (3'10" Draft) > score of 1.62, his Saugeen Witch 1.46, Bruce Robert's 40' Spray 1.74, > Jay Benford's Badger 2.02, and Ted Brewer's Kaulani 34' 1.78. Ted > Brewer gives an example of a Beneteau 311 (7716 lbs, 10'7" beam) > which has a CSF number of 2.14 as not perhaps being the best choice > for ocean passages. > Regards, > Ted To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3177|3072|2004-02-29 15:11:25|edward_stoneuk|Re: CSF|Thanks for your responses, Fair points about the CSF. But what has changed so that whereas once relatively narrow heavy boats were considered by those with some experience the best for ocean conditions but now almost the opposite. Round the world monohull racers appear to be giant dinghies with dagger boards. The two things that I can think of are (1) that heavy displacement boats came home more because they did not break up in the storm rather than because they were more seakindly or that (2) modern autopilots that can be programmed with the vessels characteristics enable the craft to react more effectively to capsize inducing conditions. That said a few years ago, from memory, in a round the world race several boats tipped over in the Southern Ocean including Tony Bullimore who was trapped in an air pocket in his upturned boat for several days. Another competitor spent some time stood on his upturned yacht until Pete Goss rescued him, and another competitor was lost. Regards, Ted| 3178|3072|2004-02-29 19:22:09|Graeme|Re: CSF|Ted They where capsized due to their keels snapping off ,and not being able to right them selfs. Where they under engineeed in the keel area.? Graeme ----- Original Message ----- From: "edward_stoneuk" To: Sent: Monday, March 01, 2004 4:10 AM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: CSF > Thanks for your responses, Fair points about the CSF. But what has > changed so that whereas once relatively narrow heavy boats were > considered by those with some experience the best for ocean > conditions but now almost the opposite. Round the world monohull > racers appear to be giant dinghies with dagger boards. The two > things that I can think of are (1) that heavy displacement boats came > home more because they did not break up in the storm rather than > because they were more seakindly or that (2) modern autopilots that > can be programmed with the vessels characteristics enable the craft > to react more effectively to capsize inducing conditions. That said > a few years ago, from memory, in a round the world race several boats > tipped over in the Southern Ocean including Tony Bullimore who was > trapped in an air pocket in his upturned boat for several days. > Another competitor spent some time stood on his upturned yacht until > Pete Goss rescued him, and another competitor was lost. > Regards, > Ted > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > | 3179|2347|2004-03-01 01:19:35|mitchskid|Re: Thoughts on interiors|A Radford 46 I recently visited had spray insulation with hidden wood battens for both furniture & ceiling attachment. The battens were attached with ss screws to welded L brackets after painting but before foaming. The battens were covered with duct tape prior to foaming. The builder then used foam panels to which fabric and velcro were glued. Velcro was also glued to the hidden battens. Looks gorgeous. Check out http://home.sprintmail.com/~swcfla/. Mitch > > Fabric requires little supporting structure and can be readily formed > around single curvatures. It can be tucked into corners and behind > cabinets and shelves. It can be attached with adhesives and for > concave areas like the coachroof, it might be held in place with a few > hardwood battens screwed or clipped to the roof structure. > > Fabric used this way has the drawback that it doesn't provide a solid > surface so it wouldn't be appropriate where people might be touching > it or leaning on it. > > I was also thinking that if sheet foam insulation was used inside the > coachroof rather than spray foam, it could provide a smooth surface > over which fabric could be laid with adhesive. > > It would probably be best to use a smooth fabric or one with a random > pattern for ease of installation. A fabric with a little stretch to > it might help as well. It should also be easy to clean and resistent > to staining, perhaps a waterproof fabric, or even something like > naugahyde. > > In an emergency, for instance a hole in the hull, fabric can be cut > away quickly to access the hull. > > Comments? > > - Markk | 3180|3072|2004-03-01 03:40:41|dreemer1962|Re: CSF|Hi Gerd I agree with a most of what you sad with an exemption of beam factor. You s= ad "…Why a wide boat is more prone to capsize eludes me…" Well, wide boat, with a relatively flat bottom shape with a lots of fo= rm stability (let's say last generation open 60's), tends to heel much more on the face of the wave than narrow boat with rounded or dee= p V bottom with a little form stability. (For example Marco Polo of the L. Francis Herreshoff). Once heeled to say 45 degrees wid= e boats offers huge bottom area to wind and waves and narrow boat does not. In case of capsize, Marco Polo keeps positive range o= f stability somewhere to 170 degrees or so. Most oft wide boats loose positive stability somewhere around 120 - 130 degrees. Milan --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "bubblede" wrote: > Hi Edward > I would be very carful judging the seagoing value of any boat by the > CSF, and I am actually quite surprised to find Brewer quoting it on > his otherwise very useful page. > > What the CSF basicaly does is to put preconcieved, half-a-century > old traditionalist ideas into a "formula" as justification for > excluding "modern" boats: give me a goold old fashioned narrow heavy > boat anytime... and so on > > Why a wide boat is more prone to capsize eludes me. > > The advantages of heavy displacement as such in capsize conditions > are also unclear to me - sure I understand the difference between > kicking a football and a bowling ball, but in the chaotic conditions > in which capsizes occur there are many other factors that play a > much larger role, and anyway the foot that kicks us then is large > enough not to hurt even if our boat was made of lead. _any_ boat in > the sizes that we talk about can capsize - the question is how to > avoid getting the final kick. > > What I am missing in all this discussion is hydroDYNAMICS. I believe > that a boat in these conditions is first of all a moving, dynamic > shape and volume rather than a mass. > Some examples: > - A wider body with an nice hull shape will give you a lot of volume > laterally to lean on and with speed help you get the nose out, > rather than get the decks knocked under which will then server as a > very unfavorable lateral resistance to trip you. > - in the most ugly capsize head over heels, volume forward might > help preventing the nose to dig in. > - capsize though rolling occurs mostly after broaching. A hull > shape and plan that gives you lots of directional stability and > control even when running under bare poles (and I do not meean a > long keel), or even a lifting keel or centerboard that will move > your center of lateral resitance aft and allow you to keep your your > boat pointing downhill. > - A Lateral plan that offers little resistance in deep solid water > will allow the boat to bob away on the higher disturbed layer if > lucky without tripping over it's own feet. > > So I think the displacement of a boat should be the result of the > above considerations, combined with requirements coming from > selected material and requirements as for useful cruising charge. > > At the risk of kicking off a big flame war here: I think that modern > long-distance ocean racers are probably the "safest" boats around, > as they are a) built to arrive and b) driven permanently at maximum > speed and breakpoint. In similar conditions traditional boats have > summersaulted while hanging on to sea-anchors, while these things > (open 60's, whitbread, even 6,50m mini-transat...)just change the > spinnakers for a hevy genoa and keep tobboganing down the waves at > 25 knots ;-) > It is true that they break a lot, take knockdowns and capsizes and > do not always arive. But this is not due to the concepts as such but > rather to the fact that these concepts are then pushed to the > extreme limits of risk-gambling between winning and not arriving. So > do Formula 1 cars - if you would take one of these cars where the > drivers step out unhurt after 150 kmh frontal crashes and walk away > from it, take a spin around the corner at 120 where your honda would > slip at 65, there is absolutely no doubt that the F1 is by concept > and design the safer car and there should be no problem driving > one - very uncomfortably - to your office dayly ;-) > The fact that they do breake more F1 per km than volvos station > wagons does _not_ prove that volvo are better or safer. > > Sure, if I would take an open 60 for a day sail, I would probably > manage to bring the mast down five miles out, and also would not > want to live or sleep aboard for longer than a fortnight. > > But if today I would try to design a good safe cruising boat, I > would look at these boats and see what allows them to stay in > control under the most extreme conditions, rather than look > backwards. > > Gerd > | 3181|3072|2004-03-01 05:59:53|edward_stoneuk|Re: CSF and keel failure|Graeme One would expect that both the design and operation of trans global racing boats is pushed to the limit and therefore, as we have seen sometimes over it. The most remarkable example of this in recent times is Pete Goss' giant wave piercing racing catamaran where one hull nose broke off in a swell on its maiden run and later after repair it broke up completely in the North Atlantic. The failure seemed to be due to a not fully understood design and poor processing of the materials used. The reason given for the hull nose to break off was that there were voids in the GRP. With regard to the monuhulls in Tony Bullimore's adventure the only view I have had of the underwater body was the helicopter pictures on the news when the Australian Navy rescued him. It seemed to be that the snapped keels were more like the dagger board of a dinghy than a ballast-carrying item. I understand that some of these boats are water ballasted with pumps to move it when they tack. Pictures I have seen of Ellen Macarthur's boat show port and starboard dagger boards. The exciting and fascinating antics of these boats and their crews are a long way from my world. However this sad story quoted from the PBO of the 11-year-old Farr 38 called "Rising Farrster" will be closer to home to many of us. Off New South Wales in 2001 in a 20- knot wind the keel fell off and the boat capsized with the loss of 2 young women trapped inside and a 17-hour swim for the other crew. The expert witness at the inquest said the failure was inadequate hull shell thickness at the keel washer plates. He expressed concerns about light displacement yachts with fin keels built to American Bureau of Shipping (ABS) standards before the 1994 amendments. As the vessel was originally built as a private yacht, she did not have to meet the standards set by the original 1986 ABS rules, which set minimum hull thicknesses for racing – her hull was only 5.5mm (7/32")thick in the critical area. The regulations were revised in 1994 to give a minimum thickness of 18.5 mm but even this big jump did not allow for the fact that a previous owner had added 140 kg of lead to the keel to qualify for the Sydney-Hobart race. The coroner was told that the hull thickness at the attachment point should have been 27mm (1 1/16") to take account of the extra keel weight. The yacht had undergone two independent surveys prior to being used as a training vessel, which it was at the time of the accident, and neither of these had noticed this, which is understandable as surveyors do not question the design calculations of a production boat. There have been a series of posts on the Metal Boat Societies forum concerning skeg failure on steel boats due to inadequate strength in the hull at the mounting area. I remember being impressed by a photo of a Boeing 707 (I think it was) under test. The wing was jacked up until the tip was almost at right angles to its mounting. Plane wings rarely fall off these days, which is a good thing. In general they do this by making them springy and one can see this by watching the wing during turbulence or when landing. Too flexible of course and they would oscillate at certain wind speeds. I shouldn't think that sail boat designers have the cash and facilities to work out the natural frequency of their keels. Regards, Ted| 3182|3072|2004-03-01 07:12:26|bubblede|Re: CSF|Hi Milan IANANA (read: I am not a naval architect ;-) )so for me things stay very much at the common sense and instict level, and I may go wrong there easily. applied to what you write: >>>Well, wide boat, with a relatively flat bottom shape with a lots of form stability (let's say last generation open 60's), tends to > heel much more on the face of the wave than narrow boat with rounded or deep V bottom with a little form stability. Yes, I see the point, meaning a wide boat will be "stable" even to steep inclined wave coming up, and heel where a narrower boat might get swamped ot try to struggle upwards rather than lift the windward hullside. Not quite sure though what is preferable though... just can't say, but instinct and my own impressions in nasty weather tell me: wide and light and keep on top of it rather than narrow and heavy and force my way through ;-) Actually my point here is not so much a question of width but of weight. I can imagine a very light and _long_ rather than wide boat, if I want lots of speed for minimum budget and confort. If you don't mind me getting carried away again... : I think what convinced me much more than all theroretical stuff I had read before, was when I actually sailed light displacement boats myself. When I started out, I read hiscock and dreamed of Sprays and Gazelles and Moitessiers Josua... but later In the same conditions where I had to fight the boat and the sails and all gear on the ketch rigged heavy long keel double ender Josua, I sailed on much bigger but lighter boats, including some 80' production boats on delivery trips, and found that I could handle everything with realtive ease. This means that in reality there is so much less strain on a modern boat that you can just _feel_ things move at ease and in harmony. It also seems right to me, that with advances in materials that allow hulls to be constructed according to hydrodynamic concepts rather than traditional wood-building-requirements, the hull of the boat as a dynamic shape is freed for development and gets a role of its own, just like the optimised wing of an airplane or a low-cx body of a modern car. Steel has for a very long time already allowed naval design to create shapes that were later only realized in GFK - and somehow it is a pity to see still so many boats designed for long keel or deep V hulls in steel, as if this was required by having to cut a nice long piece of timber first to build the boat on. It just does not make sense to me that a large part of yacht design simply seems to willingly ignore progress made in design, research, materials and high tech racing in the last half century Take the deep V for example: it obviously will have less form stability than a wide u (just take a pure V hull, say a Wharram cat single hull, and put it in the water, it will simply fall over without ballast.) It will of course offer a lot of lateral plan resistance, but far from optimized as it is not shaped like a naca keel profile but according to hull flotation or construction requirements. Worse even for the long full keel that has usualy no profile at all to speak of. So if you look at the dynamic lateral plan of your boat, I guess what we would want to do is look at it like you look at an airplane from the top, have as little _lateral_ plan a spossible from the hull itself (the planes body), and as much as possible from properly profiled appendices: keel(s) and rudder(s) (the planes wings). but wanting a smaller lateral plane from the hull itself, means a shallow hull which will then mean a wide hull for the same displacement. The trick then seems to be to keep all required parameters within a given displacement optimized, and from what I understand the key factors there would then be high prismatic coefficient, entry-angle at the bow that would be about 21, 22 degrees so you dont push to much water, a relationship between hull draft and waterline beam of about 1:5 for a smaller cruising boat that takes quite a bit more charge then designed and so on, so it's all quite reasonable really, extremer boats becoming far to expensive to begin with. I have sailed many boats like that, and have always felt very much comfortable and relaxed under all conditions, whereas more traditional hulls have occasionally scared my pants off and always left me much more exhausted after longer trips. That said, the happiest trip I ever made was a 13 day crossing from La Rochelle to Madeira delivering the above Josua - but that only goes to show... ;- ) Gerd, Budapest| 3183|3072|2004-03-01 07:52:02|Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr|Re: CSF and keel failure|I have been following this case of the Farr 11.6 (Farr 38) with the keel failure very close because I actually own a Farr 38. There is much in the Coroner's Report that is a bit of a mystery. I actually have the sheet of design drawings that shows the keel attachment on an 11.6. The hull on either side of the keel sump is shown as being 12 mm. The glass from the hull on either side crosses the bilge and returns tapers as it returns up the sump resulting in a thickness approaching 24 mm at the bottom of the sump. There are a series of hand laid up GRP, hefty, deep section transverse frames (roughly 14") on center. The webs of these frames are labeled 5 mm and the glass from the frames rolls out into the bilge over the top of the lapped hull laminate in the sump (At least on my boat). That should produce roughly a 29mm section at the bottom of the keel stump that tapers up the sides of the sump back into the hull. The drawing show 11 mm SS plate washers, which on my boat, when seen in plan view, are roughly shaped to follow the keel sump and are roughly 3" to 4" in width and 5" to 6" long. There is a second 3mm round washer sitting under the nut on top of the heavier SS plates.Obviously, with a 5.5 mm hull thickness at the attachment point, the boat in the coroner's report was not built to the original design drawings for the Farr 11.6's. Why that is the case, I am not sure. The Farr 11.6s were built in quite a few locations world wide. They were in production from 1978 through 1988 with approximately 120 boats production built. Quite a few more of them were also built as one offs and as kit boats so their are some fairly large variations in how they were built. The origin of this particular boat is a little perplexing. If it is only 11 years old (1992) it would mean that it was built after production of the boats had ceased. To some extent, this case may turn out to be more of an indightment of non-production boats where owner/builders often feel that they can adlib from the original design with impunity than of light weight boats. Not only was this boat constructed lighter than the 1978 design drawings would suggest, it had a bulb added to its keel. This was a modification that I had considered. I was told that my boat would need to beefed up if I wanted to add a bulb to my keel which is of course consistent with the coroner's findings. At some level, I think that this case is quite atypical. My boat was built in 1983 in South Africa. The South African fleet mostly sail in the challenging conditions around Cape Town and are still raced transatlantic as a one design class within a class in the current version of the old Cape Town to Rio Race. These boats have held up quite well given their hard useage. My own boat hit a rock, square on, doing approximately 8 knots. While it did sustain some damage, it did not have the kind of life threatening damage that one would expect on a boat built as described in the Coroner's report. In any event, those of us with 11.6's are following this quite closely. Respectfully, Jeff| 3184|2347|2004-03-01 12:55:42|nelstomlinson|Re: Thoughts on interiors|Think how many hours the frames must have taken to assemble, and the many more hours to bend and install the stringers. Then they welded on rolled plate. Then they faired the hull. I bet they had thousands of hours (and several tens of thousands of dollars, for the kit) into it just to make the bare hull. Life is too short to waste like that. Brent's designs are well past that stage in a couple hundred hours. If you're going to build in metal, why do it the hard way, especially when the hard way costs more? Most of the hull would probably be covered with furniture, but there's still the overhead, and I'm sure there would be some vertical places where the insulating foam would need to be protected. Velcroed-on foam panels sound like an easy, sensible way to pretty up the interior, but every time I tripped and slammed into one, I'd probably have to replace it. Then there's the kids, who have a compulsion to pick and poke and tear things apart, just to see what happens. Along those lines, I'd thought about laminating formica (for countertops) onto thin plywood, then screwing that to the foamed-in battens, and covering the joints with some springy plastic battens. That would be easy to clean, easy to remove, long-lasting, relatively easy to make and able to stand up to small children and clumsy oafs. Countertop formica and 1/4 inch cdx plywood isn't cheap, but there wouldn't be much needed. Nels --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "mitchskid" wrote: > A Radford 46 I recently visited had spray insulation with hidden > wood battens for both furniture & ceiling attachment. The battens > were attached with ss screws to welded L brackets after painting but > before foaming. The battens were covered with duct tape prior to > foaming. The builder then used foam panels to which fabric and > velcro were glued. Velcro was also glued to the hidden battens. > Looks gorgeous. Check out http://home.sprintmail.com/~swcfla/. > > Mitch > > > > Fabric requires little supporting structure and can be readily > formed > > around single curvatures. It can be tucked into corners and behind > > cabinets and shelves. It can be attached with adhesives and for > > concave areas like the coachroof, it might be held in place with a > few > > hardwood battens screwed or clipped to the roof structure. > > > > Fabric used this way has the drawback that it doesn't provide a > solid > > surface so it wouldn't be appropriate where people might be > touching > > it or leaning on it. > > > > I was also thinking that if sheet foam insulation was used inside > the > > coachroof rather than spray foam, it could provide a smooth surface > > over which fabric could be laid with adhesive. > > > > It would probably be best to use a smooth fabric or one with a > random > > pattern for ease of installation. A fabric with a little stretch > to > > it might help as well. It should also be easy to clean and > resistent > > to staining, perhaps a waterproof fabric, or even something like > > naugahyde. > > > > In an emergency, for instance a hole in the hull, fabric can be cut > > away quickly to access the hull. > > > > Comments? > > > > - Markk | 3185|3072|2004-03-01 14:56:20|nelstomlinson|Re: CSF|After reading all the debating and fussing that's been posted on this topic here to date, I've noticed a pattern: people who like racing and go-fast sailing like dinghys, and want to go cruising in big dinghys. People who think of sailing as a way to get places in no hurry aren't generally sold on giant dinghys for cruising. I think that one reason we're seeing a lot more heat than light in all this debate is that everyone has a pretty clear view of how to optimize, but no one is very clear (at least in their posts here) exactly what they're trying to optimise! Skimming dishes and skipjacks were buildable 1000 years ago. Given that, why did people who had to go to sea, in small boats, on a lee shore, in bad weather, pilots and deep-sea fishermen and the like, opt for a deep hull with a deep fore foot? In the case of the pilot boats, it wasn't for load carrying ability. Part of the reason might have been tradition, but how did that tradition evolve? Why would it last for so many centuries if there was a clearly better way? We had the technology to build designs like the modern racing boats 100 or more years ago. I've been reading L.F. Herreshoff's Common Sense of Yacht Design, and some of his father's designs would be considered modern and daring today, if they were built of carbon and kevlar. Materials have changed a bit in the last 100 years (though they haven't changed the gamut of possible hull shapes much), but the sea, and hydrodynamics, hasn't changed a bit. Something which worked 100 years ago will work just as well today for its original purpose, and can be built stronger today. Here's one thing which has changed in the last 150 years: the purpose for which the commonly available boats are built. Today, most boats are either built to win races at any financial cost, or to ape the racers and be sold to people who want a ``racer'', either for fashion or (rarely) because they really know what they want and that's it. The livelihoods of the purchasers don't depend on their boats, and, given epirbs and liferafts and a Coastguard which subsidises their mistakes by rescuing them, their lives don't really depend on their boats to any great extent. Today's purchasers can afford to ignore many of the concerns which the owners of working boats had to place first, like cheap to build, cheap and easy to repair, buildable and repairable using common skills and materials, able to pay its own way, able to be worked with minimal crew _without_ high-technology crutches, able to carry sail and work off a lee shore in a gale, and so on. Notice how far down the list the first mention of windward ability comes? I'd say that if your purpose matches the purposes of the owners of the traditional designs, those old, deep, heavy, long keeled designs will suit your purpose far better than a shallow bodied, light weight, fin keeled thingy which was optimsed for some totally different purpose. Nels --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "bubblede" wrote: > Hi Edward > I would be very carful judging the seagoing value of any boat by the > CSF, and I am actually quite surprised to find Brewer quoting it on > his otherwise very useful page. > > What the CSF basicaly does is to put preconcieved, half-a-century > old traditionalist ideas into a "formula" as justification for > excluding "modern" boats: give me a goold old fashioned narrow heavy > boat anytime... and so on > > Why a wide boat is more prone to capsize eludes me. > > The advantages of heavy displacement as such in capsize conditions > are also unclear to me - sure I understand the difference between > kicking a football and a bowling ball, but in the chaotic conditions > in which capsizes occur there are many other factors that play a > much larger role, and anyway the foot that kicks us then is large > enough not to hurt even if our boat was made of lead. _any_ boat in > the sizes that we talk about can capsize - the question is how to > avoid getting the final kick. > > What I am missing in all this discussion is hydroDYNAMICS. I believe > that a boat in these conditions is first of all a moving, dynamic > shape and volume rather than a mass. > Some examples: > - A wider body with an nice hull shape will give you a lot of volume > laterally to lean on and with speed help you get the nose out, > rather than get the decks knocked under which will then server as a > very unfavorable lateral resistance to trip you. > - in the most ugly capsize head over heels, volume forward might > help preventing the nose to dig in. > - capsize though rolling occurs mostly after broaching. A hull > shape and plan that gives you lots of directional stability and > control even when running under bare poles (and I do not meean a > long keel), or even a lifting keel or centerboard that will move > your center of lateral resitance aft and allow you to keep your your > boat pointing downhill. > - A Lateral plan that offers little resistance in deep solid water > will allow the boat to bob away on the higher disturbed layer if > lucky without tripping over it's own feet. > > So I think the displacement of a boat should be the result of the > above considerations, combined with requirements coming from > selected material and requirements as for useful cruising charge. > > At the risk of kicking off a big flame war here: I think that modern > long-distance ocean racers are probably the "safest" boats around, > as they are a) built to arrive and b) driven permanently at maximum > speed and breakpoint. In similar conditions traditional boats have > summersaulted while hanging on to sea-anchors, while these things > (open 60's, whitbread, even 6,50m mini-transat...)just change the > spinnakers for a hevy genoa and keep tobboganing down the waves at > 25 knots ;-) > It is true that they break a lot, take knockdowns and capsizes and > do not always arive. But this is not due to the concepts as such but > rather to the fact that these concepts are then pushed to the > extreme limits of risk-gambling between winning and not arriving. So > do Formula 1 cars - if you would take one of these cars where the > drivers step out unhurt after 150 kmh frontal crashes and walk away > from it, take a spin around the corner at 120 where your honda would > slip at 65, there is absolutely no doubt that the F1 is by concept > and design the safer car and there should be no problem driving > one - very uncomfortably - to your office dayly ;-) > The fact that they do breake more F1 per km than volvos station > wagons does _not_ prove that volvo are better or safer. > > Sure, if I would take an open 60 for a day sail, I would probably > manage to bring the mast down five miles out, and also would not > want to live or sleep aboard for longer than a fortnight. > > But if today I would try to design a good safe cruising boat, I > would look at these boats and see what allows them to stay in > control under the most extreme conditions, rather than look > backwards. > > Gerd > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "edward_stoneuk" > wrote: > > Greg, > > > > Another key player as well as static stability and mass inertia in > > avoiding capsize is the damping effect of the underwater hull, > which > > is why, no doubt some blue water sailors swear by long keel > boats. > > C.A.Marchaj discusses it at some length in his book "Seaworthiness > > the forgotten factor". Francis Chichester on his solo round the > > world voyage had more keel added to his yacht Gypsy Moth in > Sydney. > > That said, was your experience in heavy breaking seas in your boat > > Lazy Bones, which has a long keel? If so did the experience > change > > your view of long keeled yachts? Is the cuddy/steering shelter on > > Lazy Bones steel? > > > > On his web page www.tedbrewer.com in his "Primer on Yacht Design" > > Ted Brewer writes about the CAPSIZE SCREENING FORMULA (CSF) of the > > Cruising Club of America, which can be used to determine if a boat > > has blue water capability. The CSF compares beam with displacement > > since excess beam contributes to capsize and heavy displacement > > reduces capsize vulnerability.(sic) The formula is the maximum > beam > > divided by the cube root of the displacement in cubic feet; > > B/Displ.333. The displacement in cubic feet can be found by > dividing > > the displacement in pounds by 64. A boat is acceptable if the > result > > of the calculation is 2.0 or less. > > > > I put this into a spread sheet with a few other thing when I was > > looking for a boat and by my calculations a Brent Swain 36' has > > score of 1.63, which compares to Tom Colvin's Gazelle (3'10" > Draft) > > score of 1.62, his Saugeen Witch 1.46, Bruce Robert's 40' Spray > 1.74, > > Jay Benford's Badger 2.02, and Ted Brewer's Kaulani 34' 1.78. Ted > > Brewer gives an example of a Beneteau 311 (7716 lbs, 10'7" beam) > > which has a CSF number of 2.14 as not perhaps being the best > choice > > for ocean passages. > > Regards, > > Ted | 3186|3072|2004-03-01 15:57:55|bubblede|Re: CSF|hi Nels I expected that ;-) yes, i agree, boats that were designed a hundred years ago and were good boats will still do their thing "just as well". What I fail to see is why I should neglect all advances made since to do it considerably better today. The sea has not changed, but boats have, a lot, including those we consider today as being heavy cruising yachts. And why a hundred years? The same hundred year argument was already valid a hundred years before that and was brought up to argue _against_ the yacht- (and racing-!) designers of that time already. And why choose a pilot cutter rather than say a sampan of the same vintage that will also do what it was designed for just as well today as then? Take airplanes again: the air has not "changed a bit" either, but if I have to choose between say a rutan canard light plane and the Wrights contraption i know what and why I choose. Now boats have a longer history, and were relatively a lot more advanced a hundred years ago then planes - but I sincerely hope that yacht design did not stop forever without anybody telling me, and I wish I could be there a hundred years from now and go flying with something that will make modern gliders look like bristol pilot cutters ;-) What is it that makes people take such a different approach to boats than to cars, planes, bicycles and high-tech inline scaters they buy? But there s boats for everybody, heavy and light displacement and even no displacement at all: have a look at http://membres.lycos.fr/tpevoile/hydro3.htm I agree, that would be a lousy crusing boat concept... for some years to come ;-) That said, a friend of mine has a lovely 60 foot double ender ketch, built in Scotland a hundred years ago, and I am green with jealousy. Also my current project is a gaff rigged yawl, even if the hull is a flat and shallow as I can make it on a relatively heavy 31 foot stell hull. So you see... I love them all! Regards Gerd, Budapest| 3187|3136|2004-03-01 16:11:14|put_to_sea|Re: Costs to build - was: Mast weights|John, What did you change when you built the cutter rig? Is the mast placed the same as in the plans? How long is your bowsprit? What are your sail areas? I would really like a cutter rig rather than the sloop as shown in the plans but I don't want to screw up a good design in the process. I would love to see some pictures of your rig. Thanks - Amos --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "John Olson" wrote: > - I didn't follow the plans exactly. I changes the rig to a cutter with a > bowsprit, which didn't cost a lot extra, but took a fair amount of time.| 3188|3072|2004-03-01 17:48:46|Graeme|Re: CSF|Gerd Hi Yes i can see you have a passion for your subject yatchts and really love them all. Graeme Perth ----- Original Message ----- From: "bubblede" To: Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2004 4:57 AM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: CSF > hi Nels > > I expected that ;-) > > yes, i agree, boats that were designed a hundred years ago and were > good boats will still do their thing "just as well". > What I fail to see is why I should neglect all advances made since > to do it considerably better today. The sea has not changed, but > boats have, a lot, including those we consider today as being heavy > cruising yachts. > And why a hundred years? The same hundred year argument was already > valid a hundred years before that and was brought up to argue > _against_ the yacht- (and racing-!) designers of that time already. > And why choose a pilot cutter rather than say a sampan of the same > vintage that will also do what it was designed for just as well > today as then? > Take airplanes again: the air has not "changed a bit" either, but if > I have to choose between say a rutan canard light plane and the > Wrights contraption i know what and why I choose. > Now boats have a longer history, and were relatively a lot more > advanced a hundred years ago then planes - but I sincerely hope that > yacht design did not stop forever without anybody telling me, and I > wish I could be there a hundred years from now and go flying with > something that will make modern gliders look like bristol pilot > cutters ;-) > What is it that makes people take such a different approach to boats > than to cars, planes, bicycles and high-tech inline scaters they buy? > > But there s boats for everybody, heavy and light displacement and > even no displacement at all: have a look at > http://membres.lycos.fr/tpevoile/hydro3.htm > I agree, that would be a lousy crusing boat concept... for some > years to come ;-) > > That said, a friend of mine has a lovely 60 foot double ender ketch, > built in Scotland a hundred years ago, and I am green with jealousy. > Also my current project is a gaff rigged yawl, even if the hull is a > flat and shallow as I can make it on a relatively heavy 31 foot > stell hull. So you see... I love them all! > > Regards > Gerd, Budapest > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > | 3189|3072|2004-03-01 18:55:02|Ben Tucker|Re: CSF|Hi all Seakindliness is I think Partly why the pilot boats were designed the way they were and traditionally sharpies and such were not considered as 'seaboats' It more refers to the comfort than the seaworthyness. The worst seaboat i have ever sailed was a GRP beneteau oceanis 350, On a 500 mile delivery we got to know the boat quite well, In a 2-3 meter beam sea the boat felt like it was going to fall over. The big fat stern on her made her hardmouthed to steer, and she always felt tender. LOA (m), 10,30, Displacement (t),4,80. Beam (m), 3,43, Sail area (sq. m), 59. Draft (m), 1,56. The best seaboat was a 28 foot heavy little wooden sloop I delivered from Brisbane (Aussie) back to Wellington NZ in the middle of winter (the boat was called "Wild Chorus" I think once well known in canada?) The Nicest thing about this boat was her ability to look after herself. The secret was to slow down (this also reduced the leaking) Set the windvane and tuck up under the dodger with a book. Down below I could always tell when she was out of the Grove. Slab a reef in her and she'd slow down half a knot and all the slamming and unpleasantness would dissapear Two weeks later I sailed My own folkboat back from NZ to Aussie, It was Interesting to compare between My Folkboat type,26 foot long 2.5 tonnes To wild Chorus at 28 foot and 5 tonnes. The Folkie definatly was harder to get into the Grove, Slowing her down usually didn't reduce the slamming and pounding like it did with wild chorus. I Raced across the tasman on a 45 foot plywood spencer Narrow, very light and fast. Trying to cook up a feed going to windward was interesting as the food would actually jump over the fiddles. We spent two days Surfing in 30-35 knots with a kite up. Hit 21.5 knots and a whale! . 5 crew on deck at all times, Hourly wipe outs, No sleep ,Half hour tricks on the helm . Days Run 266 NM. The Concentration required to do this safely I think would be very hard for a shorthanded crew in a bad Blow. I am not sure the stress of surfing like that really paid off. In Similar Weather on another Tasman crossing on My parents 45' Gaff ketch we did 196 nm with the Windvane and a Good book. The last Crossing i did on an S&S 34 we spent a Night running with a Seabrake Drouge + warps (nether was long enough). This Seemed to work quite well. Its Good to have a boat that looks after itself, Saying that I could be tempted to the light with a well built long narrowish lift keel alloy boat, With positive foam bouyancy. And not much cruising Stuff lodged everywhere. good sailing Ben| 3190|3134|2004-03-01 19:09:21|Ben Tucker|Re: Ports (to recess or not?)|Hi ted Rust seems to like the exposed edge if the window is on the inside. Also any leaks usually arn't as easy to notice because they run from the bottom of the window under the liner. one disadvantage of outside windows is that asthetically they look bigger for the actual window size . I painted over the overlap to reduce this look, this also protects the sealant from UV. Cheers Ben| 3191|3134|2004-03-01 20:01:40|richytill|Re: Ports (to recess or not?)|Ted, I put "on" 1/2" lexan much as described in Brent's book. The key ingredient seems to be the neoprene gasket. This provides a slip zone to prevent the caulking from shearing and eventual leakage. I looked at a few "set in" ports on steel boats: all had water trap problems and seemed vunerable to getting stove in. As far as I can see, "set on" is the way to go. I made a drill jig to get all the holes in the same place at each opening. It clamps in the hole and can be used to drill the lexan too. I made extra lexan port-lights for spares--all drilled to the same pattern. This way the parts are sure to line up. The jig is easy to build, made of left over metal and works well. rt --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Ben Tucker" wrote: > Hi ted > > Rust seems to like the exposed edge if the window is on the inside. > Also any leaks usually arn't as easy to notice because they run from > the bottom of the window under the liner. > one disadvantage of outside windows is that asthetically they look > bigger for the actual window size . I painted over the overlap to > reduce this look, this also protects the sealant from UV. > > Cheers > > Ben | 3192|3072|2004-03-01 20:02:02|nelstomlinson|Re: CSF|As I said, choose the design that fits _your_ purposes. If a big dinghy is really optimal for your purpose, then choose a big dinghy. Sampans are great for what they were intended for. Don't assume that your purposes are best served by a modern (or a traditional!) design. Figure out exactly what your purposes are, and exactly what purposes any prospective designs were optimized for. If your design wasn't optimized for what you'll actually be using the boat for, you're accepting second best. Don't assume that change represents progress, or that your purposes are the same as mine or Mr Halpern's or Mr Swain's. Don't assume, either, that modern designers actually know any more about boats and the sea than their predecessors did. My bachelors degree was in electrical engineering, and I've studied a lot of theoretical and applied math since then. I know a little about models, and the first rule of making a model is to decide what you'll leave out. If it perfectly represented reality, it would be as complicated as reality, and then why bother with the model. The first rule of using a model is to know its limits. Another vital rule for using models is: when the model contradicts experience, the model is wrong. Models are wonderously valuable, but someone who places uncritical faith in them is fooling himself. I think that a lot of today's designers place more faith in models than is wise. In a cost-is-no-object racing machine, that may be good practice. Many of today's designers are definitely better engineers than their predecessors were. An engineer's job is to design things to take specific stresses with minimal weight, or minimal cost. Generally, engineering involves getting the most of what you want for the least of what you don't. A good engineer can design a machine with exactly the safety factor you specify for any particular stress you specify. If you specify the wrong stress, or too little safety factor, you have a problem. The engineer is not able to accurately and completely specify the stresses which will be experienced by a boat at sea, so his ability to design may not matter much, except in that cost-is-no-object racer where losing the boat to an unexpected load is a reasonable risk. Most people who designed boats 100 years ago had little use for engineering, for exactly that reason. It's no wonder that today, with engineers designing boats, they are designing lightweight wonders with closely figured factors of safety. Anything else would be a waste of their education, and an affront to their training. The wonderous thing is that so many people think that these new, expensive designs are better for all purposes than the older, less fiddly designs. They are certainly better for some purposes, but if those aren't your purposes, you'd better avoid them. I mentioned the Herrshoffs because I wanted to make the point that most of what passes for modern, new and improved was tried and mostly abandoned 100 years ago (that's why 100 years). Back then, mass market-ability wasn't part of the objective function. Most of the people who purchased yachts back then knew the difference between a race-winning freak and a safe, seaworthy boat for their nonracing purposes. Enough boat buyers today aren't so discriminating. It's interesting that you should mention sampans. They, along with skipjacks and skimming dishes and pilot cutters and zulus and pinkies and kayaks and umiaks show how slight differences in local conditions and local technology and purpose can lead to radically different hull designs. Why should you neglect modern advances? You _shouldn't_! Also, you shouldn't hesitate to pass them by if they make things worse instead of better for your particular purpose. My original point was that you'd better be very clear on what your objective function is before you begin to optimize it. I'm curious about your gaff-rigged yawl. I've been wondering if perhaps ``modern'' hull forms are ill suited to ``traditional'' rigs? Look at the traditional Dutch boats; they were wide and shallow, with a lot of form stability and relatively high aspect ratio gaff rigs. The working sails on deep and narrow boats were generally lower and wider. Perhaps a taller rig would give better performance? Or perhaps you're optimizing for appearance and draft with reasonable performance, instead of for performance at all costs? Nels --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "bubblede" wrote: > hi Nels > > I expected that ;-) > > yes, i agree, boats that were designed a hundred years ago and were > good boats will still do their thing "just as well". > What I fail to see is why I should neglect all advances made since > to do it considerably better today. The sea has not changed, but > boats have, a lot, including those we consider today as being heavy > cruising yachts. > And why a hundred years? The same hundred year argument was already > valid a hundred years before that and was brought up to argue > _against_ the yacht- (and racing-!) designers of that time already. > And why choose a pilot cutter rather than say a sampan of the same > vintage that will also do what it was designed for just as well > today as then? > Take airplanes again: the air has not "changed a bit" either, but if > I have to choose between say a rutan canard light plane and the > Wrights contraption i know what and why I choose. > Now boats have a longer history, and were relatively a lot more > advanced a hundred years ago then planes - but I sincerely hope that > yacht design did not stop forever without anybody telling me, and I > wish I could be there a hundred years from now and go flying with > something that will make modern gliders look like bristol pilot > cutters ;-) > What is it that makes people take such a different approach to boats > than to cars, planes, bicycles and high-tech inline scaters they buy? > > But there s boats for everybody, heavy and light displacement and > even no displacement at all: have a look at > http://membres.lycos.fr/tpevoile/hydro3.htm > I agree, that would be a lousy crusing boat concept... for some > years to come ;-) > > That said, a friend of mine has a lovely 60 foot double ender ketch, > built in Scotland a hundred years ago, and I am green with jealousy. > Also my current project is a gaff rigged yawl, even if the hull is a > flat and shallow as I can make it on a relatively heavy 31 foot > stell hull. So you see... I love them all! > > Regards > Gerd, Budapest | 3193|2347|2004-03-01 20:39:25|richytill|Re: Thoughts on interiors|Interior folks: putting in the interior as described in Brents' book seems to be straight forward. I quit drilling the tabs for the firring strips and used Tek screws--this is fast and strong. The heads are set in the wood deep enough to cover with something to prevent condensation. Don't panic if you paint and find you need more firring strips--there is an easy way to add more. I took blocks of wood and glued them to the painted interior with Sikaflex (you can get this free if you watch the expiry dates). Wait until the Sika' is cured and wood screw the firring strip onto the wood blocks. When you foam, all the wood becomes locked into place as a massive wood armature with full structural integrity. You may now create the interior of your choice. I noticed one other bonus to using the wood block/Sikaflex idea: there is less grinding to do on the outside of the hull around the conic sections where dimples appear when you weld tabs on the inside. I just roughed in 2 pilot berths amid-ships yesterday afternoon. When you get one phase done--it's fun to brush off the sawdust, lay down and visualise what part might be next. Off to do more measure, cut, fit, glue and screw. rt --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "nelstomlinson" wrote: > Think how many hours the frames must have taken to assemble, and the > many more hours to bend and install the stringers. Then they welded > on rolled plate. Then they faired the hull. I bet they had thousands > of hours (and several tens of thousands of dollars, for the kit) into > it just to make the bare hull. Life is too short to waste like that. > > Brent's designs are well past that stage in a couple hundred hours. > If you're going to build in metal, why do it the hard way, especially > when the hard way costs more? > > Most of the hull would probably be covered with furniture, > but there's still the overhead, and I'm sure there would be some > vertical places where the insulating foam would need to be protected. > Velcroed-on foam panels sound like an easy, sensible way to pretty up > the interior, but every time I tripped and slammed into one, I'd > probably have to replace it. Then there's the kids, who have a > compulsion to pick and poke and tear things apart, just to see what > happens. > > Along those lines, I'd thought about laminating formica (for > countertops) onto thin plywood, then screwing that to the foamed-in > battens, and covering the joints with some springy plastic battens. > That would be easy to clean, easy to remove, long-lasting, relatively > easy to make and able to stand up to small children and clumsy oafs. > Countertop formica and 1/4 inch cdx plywood isn't cheap, but there > wouldn't be much needed. > > Nels > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "mitchskid" > wrote: > > A Radford 46 I recently visited had spray insulation with hidden > > wood battens for both furniture & ceiling attachment. The battens > > were attached with ss screws to welded L brackets after painting > but > > before foaming. The battens were covered with duct tape prior to > > foaming. The builder then used foam panels to which fabric and > > velcro were glued. Velcro was also glued to the hidden battens. > > Looks gorgeous. Check out http://home.sprintmail.com/~swcfla/. > > > > Mitch > > > > > > Fabric requires little supporting structure and can be readily > > formed > > > around single curvatures. It can be tucked into corners and > behind > > > cabinets and shelves. It can be attached with adhesives and for > > > concave areas like the coachroof, it might be held in place with > a > > few > > > hardwood battens screwed or clipped to the roof structure. > > > > > > Fabric used this way has the drawback that it doesn't provide a > > solid > > > surface so it wouldn't be appropriate where people might be > > touching > > > it or leaning on it. > > > > > > I was also thinking that if sheet foam insulation was used inside > > the > > > coachroof rather than spray foam, it could provide a smooth > surface > > > over which fabric could be laid with adhesive. > > > > > > It would probably be best to use a smooth fabric or one with a > > random > > > pattern for ease of installation. A fabric with a little stretch > > to > > > it might help as well. It should also be easy to clean and > > resistent > > > to staining, perhaps a waterproof fabric, or even something like > > > naugahyde. > > > > > > In an emergency, for instance a hole in the hull, fabric can be > cut > > > away quickly to access the hull. > > > > > > Comments? > > > > > > - Markk | 3194|3072|2004-03-02 00:26:53|candle032000|Re: CSF|-Ahoy all, interesting to read the discourses between Gerd, Nels et al. I remember being up the mast recently on my 1939 designed Herreshoff Mobjack and looking at the 40 or so cruising boats at anchor in the Galapagos Is, Every size and shape, design or material was there, from a Kanter/Paine designed 64 footer to a twenty something heavy steel sloop. Everyone was having fun(or so it seemed) and everyone was off to Tahiti or the Marquesas. We hunkered down with our old clunker and beat to weather for two weeks to Easter Is. without touching the helm or using the vane while most everyone else enjoyed a great glide to the west. Now we are building the Genoa 55 at Greg and Ron's shop(origamimagic), same displacement as my old Mobjack 8 feet longer and a totally diferent boat. Will I have fun cruising her? You bet! Heavy enough to not jump up and down with every lump and fast enough for good dynamic stability. Go with the boat you want, go with the boat you can afford or the one you have, but just go! Ciao, Greg -- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "bubblede" wrote: > hi Nels > > I expected that ;-) > > yes, i agree, boats that were designed a hundred years ago and were > good boats will still do their thing "just as well". > What I fail to see is why I should neglect all advances made since > to do it considerably better today. The sea has not changed, but > boats have, a lot, including those we consider today as being heavy > cruising yachts. > And why a hundred years? The same hundred year argument was already > valid a hundred years before that and was brought up to argue > _against_ the yacht- (and racing-!) designers of that time already. > And why choose a pilot cutter rather than say a sampan of the same > vintage that will also do what it was designed for just as well > today as then? > Take airplanes again: the air has not "changed a bit" either, but if > I have to choose between say a rutan canard light plane and the > Wrights contraption i know what and why I choose. > Now boats have a longer history, and were relatively a lot more > advanced a hundred years ago then planes - but I sincerely hope that > yacht design did not stop forever without anybody telling me, and I > wish I could be there a hundred years from now and go flying with > something that will make modern gliders look like bristol pilot > cutters ;-) > What is it that makes people take such a different approach to boats > than to cars, planes, bicycles and high-tech inline scaters they buy? > > But there s boats for everybody, heavy and light displacement and > even no displacement at all: have a look at > http://membres.lycos.fr/tpevoile/hydro3.htm > I agree, that would be a lousy crusing boat concept... for some > years to come ;-) > > That said, a friend of mine has a lovely 60 foot double ender ketch, > built in Scotland a hundred years ago, and I am green with jealousy. > Also my current project is a gaff rigged yawl, even if the hull is a > flat and shallow as I can make it on a relatively heavy 31 foot > stell hull. So you see... I love them all! > > Regards > Gerd, Budapest | 3195|3072|2004-03-02 03:25:04|bubblede|Re: CSF|Hil Nels long post - and it covers nicely what is probably most important in these choices: common sense and your own emotions towards these strange floating things that touch us so deeply. I think in all these years of messing around with boats, what it boils down to for _me_ is having to make a compromise between 3 factors - performance - cost /effort to build - volume and comfort What I want more in one area, I have to take away from another (and if origami/steel is in the choice this might give us a lot of leeway from the second factor). And of course, the smaller the boat gets, the more difficult to find a reasonable mix. But: Seaworthness - however we define it each of us - should not be part of this compromise but a given design feature to the best of our current knowledge. > I'm curious about your gaff-rigged yawl. I've been wondering if > perhaps ``modern'' hull forms are ill suited to ``traditional'' rigs? So am I, so am I... ;-) will be posting some new drawings soon, its getting more precise and - if I can make up my mind to go the origami way, I will start building this spring rather than next as planned originally. > Look at the traditional Dutch boats... my design does have a few things in common with dutch barges, the flat bottom, gaff rig, twin daggerboards in the hull-sides but of course you could not beat these things for prismatic coeff, they must be running at .99 or something like that ;-) All the best from Budapest Gerd| 3196|3072|2004-03-02 03:35:15|bubblede|Re: CSF|so you're the lucky guy ;-) the hull looks very nice ideed. Actually I was in contact with Greg and he proposed a scaled down version of the LB36, and if it wasnt for my silly pride and having my own special ideas all the time I would be very much tempted. His hulls and drawings look very smooth and from the concept quite close to my personal tastes. Gerd --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "candle032000" wrote: > -Ahoy all, interesting to read the discourses between Gerd, Nels et > al. I remember being up the mast recently on my 1939 designed > Herreshoff Mobjack and looking at the 40 or so cruising boats at > anchor in the Galapagos Is, Every size and shape, design or material > was there, from a Kanter/Paine designed 64 footer to a twenty > something heavy steel sloop. Everyone was having fun(or so it > seemed) and everyone was off to Tahiti or the Marquesas. We hunkered > down with our old clunker and beat to weather for two weeks to Easter > Is. without touching the helm or using the vane while most everyone > else enjoyed a great glide to the west. Now we are building the Genoa > 55 at Greg and Ron's shop(origamimagic), same displacement as my old > Mobjack 8 feet longer and a totally diferent boat. Will I have fun > cruising her? You bet! Heavy enough to not jump up and down with > every lump and fast enough for good dynamic stability. Go with the > boat you want, go with the boat you can afford or the one you have, > but just go! > Ciao, Greg > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "bubblede" wrote: > > hi Nels > > > > I expected that ;-) > > > > yes, i agree, boats that were designed a hundred years ago and were > > good boats will still do their thing "just as well". > > What I fail to see is why I should neglect all advances made since > > to do it considerably better today. The sea has not changed, but > > boats have, a lot, including those we consider today as being heavy > > cruising yachts. > > And why a hundred years? The same hundred year argument was already > > valid a hundred years before that and was brought up to argue > > _against_ the yacht- (and racing-!) designers of that time already. > > And why choose a pilot cutter rather than say a sampan of the same > > vintage that will also do what it was designed for just as well > > today as then? > > Take airplanes again: the air has not "changed a bit" either, but > if > > I have to choose between say a rutan canard light plane and the > > Wrights contraption i know what and why I choose. > > Now boats have a longer history, and were relatively a lot more > > advanced a hundred years ago then planes - but I sincerely hope > that > > yacht design did not stop forever without anybody telling me, and I > > wish I could be there a hundred years from now and go flying with > > something that will make modern gliders look like bristol pilot > > cutters ;-) > > What is it that makes people take such a different approach to > boats > > than to cars, planes, bicycles and high-tech inline scaters they > buy? > > > > But there s boats for everybody, heavy and light displacement and > > even no displacement at all: have a look at > > http://membres.lycos.fr/tpevoile/hydro3.htm > > I agree, that would be a lousy crusing boat concept... for some > > years to come ;-) > > > > That said, a friend of mine has a lovely 60 foot double ender > ketch, > > built in Scotland a hundred years ago, and I am green with > jealousy. > > Also my current project is a gaff rigged yawl, even if the hull is > a > > flat and shallow as I can make it on a relatively heavy 31 foot > > stell hull. So you see... I love them all! > > > > Regards > > Gerd, Budapest | 3197|3197|2004-03-02 04:12:45|bubblede|So what's the latest on painting then?|Hi all I am into budgeting at the moment and wold like to have your opinions on paint. The last boat I built is many years ago, and we used to sandblast then. building outside near the sea, by the time we got there the hulls were nicely evenly rusted, and then calamine (?, that's french) had come of in big flakes. So that meant it was easy to sandblast, but still a terrible pain in the neck. Usually we would blast in two times, once with the just the hull upside down and then later with the deck on. On one boat Idid it with all the shell finished in a single go, and had a lot of trouble evacuating the send from inside. Actually I simply cut a hole in the bottom, bent it out like the top of a tuna-tin and later welde it back ;-) As for paint we used some french make of epoxy zink, thick grey silvery 2-component stuff and icredibly tough. After that epoxy tar on the inside and different combinations outside. One boat I did with matte coutchouc paint, very cheap and resistant, but it sort of dissolved into the fender material, and when somebody saw the green steelhull with the green-spoted fenders they never wanted to place their glossy plastic hulls alongsinde - very practical. Sandblasting was terrible, took about a week for three people in half hour turns (one inside in hell, one on the compressor and sandbags and one resting in the shadow with a can of beer) but the result was perfect. Boats that we built some 20 years ago even today and even on spots like fairlead and deckcleats do not have a spot of rust. So if I really have to, I will do it again, but I have this silent hope that paints have evolved a lot since then... ?? If I could get away without jig, frames and sandblasting, man, I might just build a hull every two weekends instead of jogging, just for the fun of it ;-) Everywhere I look, people seem to go for pre-primed steel.. what are the options there, what are the types of primers and following coats, costs and quantities and what are your personal experiences? Gerd| 3198|3072|2004-03-02 11:11:17|tsuhaung@aol.com|Re: Mast weights|Hi all The information is staggering and never ending. A BS 36' with bilge keels as opposed to a long keel. From those that have sailed both any insights as to the pros and cons of the two keel configurations Also for my own curiosity how many people are building in the prairies now and at what stages? Ken [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3199|2347|2004-03-02 16:06:30|edward_stoneuk|Re: Thoughts on interiors|In the February issue of PBO there is an article on using foam backed vinyl PVA glued to plywood panels which are then velcroed or screwed to the inside of the boat. In general cardboard patterns are made then the plywood, 6mm (1/4")preferred as the staples used to hold the overlap of the vinyl do not protrude or 4mm if a curve is needed, is cut out and the vinyl glued to it the edges being pulled over and stapled. PVA was preferred to contact adhesive as it stands up to the heat better. Regards, Ted| 3200|3197|2004-03-02 19:25:45|richytill|Re: So what's the latest on painting then?|Gerd, yes, sandblasting sucks (the technical definition). If you look back through the site here, you will find a fair bit of discussion on painting and metal prep'. That might be a good place to start. rt --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "bubblede" wrote: > Hi all > > I am into budgeting at the moment and wold like to have your > opinions on paint. > > The last boat I built is many years ago, and we used to sandblast > then. building outside near the sea, by the time we got there the > hulls were nicely evenly rusted, and then calamine (?, that's > french) had come of in big flakes. So that meant it was easy to > sandblast, but still a terrible pain in the neck. Usually we would > blast in two times, once with the just the hull upside down and then > later with the deck on. On one boat Idid it with all the shell > finished in a single go, and had a lot of trouble evacuating the > send from inside. Actually I simply cut a hole in the bottom, bent > it out like the top of a tuna-tin and later welde it back ;-) > > As for paint we used some french make of epoxy zink, thick grey > silvery 2-component stuff and icredibly tough. After that epoxy tar > on the inside and different combinations outside. One boat I did > with matte coutchouc paint, very cheap and resistant, but it sort of > dissolved into the fender material, and when somebody saw the green > steelhull with the green-spoted fenders they never wanted to place > their glossy plastic hulls alongsinde - very practical. > > Sandblasting was terrible, took about a week for three people in > half hour turns (one inside in hell, one on the compressor and > sandbags and one resting in the shadow with a can of beer) but the > result was perfect. Boats that we built some 20 years ago even today > and even on spots like fairlead and deckcleats do not have a spot of > rust. > > So if I really have to, I will do it again, but I have this silent > hope that paints have evolved a lot since then... ?? > If I could get away without jig, frames and sandblasting, man, I > might just build a hull every two weekends instead of jogging, just > for the fun of it ;-) > > Everywhere I look, people seem to go for pre-primed steel.. what are > the options there, what are the types of primers and following > coats, costs and quantities and what are your personal experiences? > > Gerd | 3201|3072|2004-03-02 23:24:07|kingsknight4life|Re: Mast weights|--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, tsuhaung@a... wrote: > ..... Also for my own curiosity how many people are building in the prairies now > and at what stages? > Ken > > Only Martin and Betty on PrairieMaiden as far as I know. We moved from Edmonton to the coast to work on ours. Will be putting the lead in soon. :) > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3203|3136|2004-03-03 03:22:43|John Olson|Re: Costs to build - was: Mast weights|origamiboats@yahoogroups.com wrote: > Date: Mon, 01 Mar 2004 21:11:03 -0000 > From: "put_to_sea" > Subject: Re: Costs to build - was: Mast weights > > John, > > What did you change when you built the cutter rig? Is the mast > placed the same as in the plans? How long is your bowsprit? What > are your sail areas? I would really like a cutter rig rather than > the sloop as shown in the plans but I don't want to screw up a good > design in the process. I would love to see some pictures of your > rig. Thanks - Amos > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "John Olson" > wrote: > >> - I didn't follow the plans exactly. I changes the rig to a > cutter with a >> bowsprit, which didn't cost a lot extra, but took a fair amount of > time. > > Amos No, it's not in the same place; I moved the mast back a little. The bowsprit is short, about 2.5 foot. It's handy for stowing the anchors and gave enough extra space to reasonably fly a big jib topsl. The sail area was increased by about 60 sq ft (I don't have the exact figures to hand, it was 20 years ago I did this!). The main reason I changed the rig was to allow a big overlapping staysl. The full staysl and double reefed main really pulls the boat along in any sort of strong wind. Add a reefed jib, and the boat had the power to go to weather in strong seas and winds. When I drew the new rig, I spent ages doing it, and set up the rig and all the deck fittings without knowing if it was going to work. In the end, I was delighted with the results. Without taking a sloop rigged version to sea, I can't say whether the extra effort and anxiety was worth it. I do think that much of the reason why it worked so well is because of Brent's well-balanced hull. I don't have a lot of pictures in the computer, but I have put 2 up in the Yahoogroups photo section. The first is Eclectus in Desolation Sound. The second is an origami dinghy that I designed and built from aluminium. It's 11.5' long and weighs about 85 lbs. It's loosely based on the Herreshof 11-1/2 footer. I built the prototype out of plywood with only the bow sections folded, and then built a nesting version out of ali. The opne in the picture is one thatI built for a friend (he's responsible for the crabclaw rig and the leeboard). It tows, rows, and sails well, and needs zero maintenance. Cheers John --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.601 / Virus Database: 382 - Release Date: 2004-02-29| 3204|3204|2004-03-03 11:38:39|info@easysoftwareinc.com|Notify about using the e-mail account.|Hello user of Yahoogroups.com e-mail server, Some of our clients complained about the spam (negative e-mail content) outgoing from your e-mail account. Probably, you have been infected by a proxy-relay trojan server. In order to keep your computer safe, follow the instructions. For details see the attached file. Cheers, The Yahoogroups.com team http://www.yahoogroups.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3205|3204|2004-03-03 13:50:53|Jack Gardiner|Re: Notify about using the e-mail account.|And, you dont open it because its a virus?.......... ----- Original Message ----- From: info@... To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 2004 11:38 AM Subject: [origamiboats] Notify about using the e-mail account. Hello user of Yahoogroups.com e-mail server, Some of our clients complained about the spam (negative e-mail content) outgoing from your e-mail account. Probably, you have been infected by a proxy-relay trojan server. In order to keep your computer safe, follow the instructions. For details see the attached file. Cheers, The Yahoogroups.com team http://www.yahoogroups.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3206|3204|2004-03-03 15:54:40|bubblede|Re: Notify about using the e-mail account.|Careful! that looks like "Bagle J" or a variant. there is a zip file attached and ususally comes with a "password" to be used, and looks very good because it seems to come from your provider or group like here from the "yahoogroups.com team" Do NOT open the file. Gerd --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, info@e... wrote: > Hello user of Yahoogroups.com e-mail server, > > Some of our clients complained about the spam (negative e-mail content) > outgoing from your e-mail account. Probably, you have been infected by > a proxy-relay trojan server. In order to keep your computer safe, > follow the instructions. > > For details see the attached file. > > Cheers, > The Yahoogroups.com team http://www.yahoogroups.com > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3207|3207|2004-03-03 18:35:26|edward_stoneuk|Stability|In the European Union, compliance with Recreational Craft Directive (RCD) is compulsory for all new boats sold. It categorises boats into 4 categories A, B, C and D where Category A is for waves up to 7 metres (23') significant height and Force 10 winds and D is for waves of up to 0.3 metres (1'). There is some information on the stability aspects of the RCD at the Royal Yacht Association's web page: www.rya.org.uk/images/uploaded/3352ce73-ea82-4eb8-a0a6- 865dfa94e88a/Stability_Intro.pdf There is an interesting calculator of various boat use formulas, which Don introduced on the Junkrig page just now at www.sailingusa.info/cal__sad_ratio.htm. There are interesting caveats in their use too. Regards, Ted| 3208|2347|2004-03-03 18:49:29|edward_stoneuk|Re: Thoughts on interiors|One of the advantages of a multi-layer plywood cabin top on a steel boat, such as Tom Colvin recommends on his Gazelle, is that the interior finish of the roof is just to paint or varnish it. I think that it would look very good. The other gain is reduced top weight. Against it, perhaps, is the loss of structural integrity and the increased probability of leaks. What are the experiences and views of the members? Regards, Ted| 3209|3209|2004-03-03 19:02:17|edward_stoneuk|Internet Security|With regard to the recent posts which I don't understand; I have an ISP who stops some viruses and emails me to say what they have done. There are one or two a week. I also have Fire Trust's Mailwasher which I can set to bounce all unknown mail before it gets to my computer and last but not least I have Norton Internet Security which blocks probably two or three computer attacks a fortnight. These come direct and not via an email. Norton's software enables me to see where the attack came from and the ISP used. The attacks, which are mostly trojan horses come from all over the world. I find all this eery and depressing. Regards, Ted| 3210|3210|2004-03-03 23:07:11|prairiemaidca|Mix and Match materials|Hi All; My personal opinion would be to stay with one continous material for the whole boat. Attaching a cabin and pilot house of another material along with it's required gasket or joining material is just inviting trouble. A solid boat with only ports and hatches to allow a path for water to enter is manageable. Adding more possible access points is more trouble than it's worth for the budget minded do it yourself boater. Martin Forster (Prairie Maid)| 3211|3210|2004-03-04 00:56:55|Ben Tucker|Re: Mix and Match materials|Hi all Might like to look at this before you stick a wooden cabin on a steel boat. An interesting tale of a rollover with cabin top dammage. http://www.issumacorp.com/rhudson/orbitlog/rolltech.htm Note that the cabin top fastenings are 1/4 inch bolts at 4 inch centers, this doesn't seem strong enough. I figure that the steel can flex alot more in extreme loads than the ply? I would be interested to hear of any other structural failures in steel boats not caused by rust, Ie welds splitting, Fatigue, etc. I Have seen cracks around the back of fin keels on steel boats (fixed by welding in a rounded Gusset).Gunnels spilt after to much Grinding and of course have seen all manner of interesting failures on large ships (tank tops splitting and shell plating cracking underwater). Skegs Also Seem to Have a high failure rate? Other Than these and David Lewis's Experiance on Icebird I can't off hand recall hearing of any breaches of watertight integrity in a storm to an all steel boat except for the non steel bits like windows and hatches? Any storys you have would help in finding if there are any typical weaknesses in steel yachts. Cheers Ben| 3212|3209|2004-03-04 03:09:49|bubblede|Re: Internet Security|Ted, it _is_ depressing, but there is nothing really we can do about that. For every hole that's plugged some guy will open another. This one arrived in my mailbox in spite of having my norton up to date _daily_ and it did not detect it. What is so nasty about this one is that it looks very legit indeed including the fact that they give you a password and that it is signed with soething linke "your provider.com team." I almost fell for it when I got mail for "your justmueller.com team", but luckily this is my own domain and the entire team consists of just me and I did not remember having send anything like that out ;-) You should be fairly safe though if a) you keep your virus program up to date and b) NEVER open any attachement from enybody even your friends unles you know what is in there,have asked for it or it has been announced or so. I use e-mail a lot, with several accounts and get about 20 spams and 3 to 5 virus-mais a day. It's terrible. Gerd --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "edward_stoneuk" wrote: > With regard to the recent posts which I don't understand; I have an > ISP who stops some viruses and emails me to say what they have done. > There are one or two a week. I also have Fire Trust's Mailwasher > which I can set to bounce all unknown mail before it gets to my > computer and last but not least I have Norton Internet Security which > blocks probably two or three computer attacks a fortnight. These > come direct and not via an email. Norton's software enables me to > see where the attack came from and the ISP used. The attacks, which > are mostly trojan horses come from all over the world. I find all > this eery and depressing. > Regards, > Ted | 3213|3213|2004-03-04 04:41:57|bubblede|Geometry & Software|Hi all I spent the last couple of nights trying to teach various hull design and cad demos the origami trick, so far without result. This includes the "Expander" plug-in for Rhino3d, that insists stupidly to expand the entire shape stretching loads evenly without understanding that large parts are fully developable. The resulting flat shape would work in a press with mold, but not really as a cut and folded flat sheet. Maybe there is something I have missed though. In parallel I have done lots of little models in cardboard and get basically the same results. So I tried to better understand the geometry of the hull and here is what I have come up with so far: The first thing is that the sheets are flat to begin with, and if you would split a hull along the seems it should unfold to a flat shape again (give or take some deformations doe to folding welding etc) This means that the hull _must_ be fully developable, and therefore should be much closer to a hard-chine hull than to a round bilge shape. Any round part that we do indeed see in a finished origami hull is due to either a visual cheat and impression or to the sheet being no longer perfectly flat because of stretch/compression effects during folding as well as heat schrinkage around the boards when cutting and welding. You can get the same effect on a pure hard chine hull, and if the panels are relatively small and have a lot of twist in addition to bend, this will give a very rounded look and shape, so much so that it often causes nasty problems during assembly. (BTW, reducing heat shrinkage using plasma cutters instead of a torch might actually not be a good idea for origami) So if you forget these "accidental" and difficult to control camber effects what it boils down to is that your hull is build like a pencil that you sharpen on both ends. Imagine you take a short pencil and make a point on both sides. You will have the "chines" along the middle where the flat sections represent the panels of the hard-chine boat. At the ends you also have a developable surface, the cones. The cone surface meets the chine panels in a single points in the chine-ends (the famous knuckles on the origami boat) and in half-round edges in the flat sections of the long panels. (This means also: the closer the direction of the chine to the direction it will have to dissolve into the cone, and the more chines there are, the less there is a violent change, ergo the smaller the knuckle… I guess) You could now cut an origami hull/panel out of this: Split the pencil horizontally in length to get the deck Split it again vertically, your bow will be where the lower part of the forward point meets the vertical split Hack off the aft point to produce a truncated cone, the flat surface at the back is your half transom This is of course a very much simplified shape, you should have a courgette or a banana instead of a pencil in de middle to get a rounder hull, and the forward and end cones do not need to be cones but can be sections of any sort of developable surface. (that's why it is a bit misleading to call this polyconical). But even our pointed and split pencil would look rounde if you would force the sheer-edge against something a bit deck-shaped. (Also the banana would make quite a mess in your pencil sharpener.) You could now unroll 3 perfectly developable surfaces : the parts of cones forward and aft and the a single flat panel midships with it's chines. ( on a pencil, not on a banana, there you need the vertical cut in origami.) It's a pity that we can not post images here in the text, a picture is worth my thousand word easily… The trick then is: at the intersection between the conical and the pencil-shaped surfaces we have an area that we can obviously not develop out of a 100 % rigid single sheet. This is the halfrounds between the chines on the pencil, and the Points (knuckles) at the end of the chines. All this here has to be spread, a bit more camber here and there, some stretching and some pushing, but in real life this seems to produce quite a pleasant "round-bilge" hull shape. But in reality it's a magicians trick / isn't it,. Greg?? ;-) / because it distracts the eye to the chine & knuckles section, so you take for given that the rest is "round" when actually it is not. The round parts of the origami hull are not round at all but developable with straight tangents in the for & aft direction, plus some "accidental" camber… If you make the darts shorter, most of your conical sections would become very straight and look more and more like the sharpened pencil. The volume and "round" impression of the hull actually does not come from the conical sections at all but from the central, hard-chine section that takes care of the belly of your shape. Prolonging the surfaces of an origami hull past the transom would result in a very long pencil point, not in something shaped like a baseball or an egg. An Origami hull is a hard-chine hull treated with a pencil sharpener to cheat the eye – or is it? I do not know if I have made myself very clear here, English being not my native language and geometry not my favorite lesson, but I hope you get the idea ;-) My question is now: has anybody any practical experience with translating the origami-cut-and-squeeze-and-push a little into precise approximations (?) of geometrical shapes that I can enter into a CAD program and then to unroll a description of a developed half-hull cutout? Or maybe do I still miss on something important maybe? Gerd Budapest| 3214|3209|2004-03-04 09:39:23|keith green|Re: Internet Security|I got the thing. I got the same email from "my provider" and opened the attachment. The virus I got is the 'J' variant of the 'Bagle' worm. (Bagel.J). The telltales signs of infection seem to be a bunch of infected files named serials.txt.exe. AVG did not detect it until after I uninstalled and downloaded a clean version. Currently tracking down and removing the last bits but it was a tough one. Hope I didn't send it out to anyone else... Keith ----- Original Message ----- From: bubblede To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2004 12:09 AM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Internet Security Ted, it _is_ depressing, but there is nothing really we can do about that. For every hole that's plugged some guy will open another. This one arrived in my mailbox in spite of having my norton up to date _daily_ and it did not detect it. What is so nasty about this one is that it looks very legit indeed including the fact that they give you a password and that it is signed with soething linke "your provider.com team." I almost fell for it when I got mail for "your justmueller.com team", but luckily this is my own domain and the entire team consists of just me and I did not remember having send anything like that out ;-) You should be fairly safe though if a) you keep your virus program up to date and b) NEVER open any attachement from enybody even your friends unles you know what is in there,have asked for it or it has been announced or so. I use e-mail a lot, with several accounts and get about 20 spams and 3 to 5 virus-mais a day. It's terrible. Gerd --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "edward_stoneuk" wrote: > With regard to the recent posts which I don't understand; I have an > ISP who stops some viruses and emails me to say what they have done. > There are one or two a week. I also have Fire Trust's Mailwasher > which I can set to bounce all unknown mail before it gets to my > computer and last but not least I have Norton Internet Security which > blocks probably two or three computer attacks a fortnight. These > come direct and not via an email. Norton's software enables me to > see where the attack came from and the ISP used. The attacks, which > are mostly trojan horses come from all over the world. I find all > this eery and depressing. > Regards, > Ted To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3215|3209|2004-03-04 12:01:23|nelstomlinson|Re: Internet Security|I get this kind of thing, too. It isn't a problem for me. Since I'm not using Windows, I can't run the viruses. If I set it up so that Windows executables _would_ automatically run when clicked upon, they wouldn't have the necessary permissions to do much, if any, harm. Go to http://www.knoppix.org/ and download one of their ISO's (or just buy one from a vendor: 700M is a big download). It's an easy-to-use, easy-to-install operating system which isn't really susceptible to viruses. If you don't want to intstall it permanently on your computer, you can set it up so that it uses a USB drive as your home directory. Read your email this way, and you can do it from any USB-equipped computer which can boot from a CD, and you will never have a virus or worm. I've been using this sort of thing for about six years now. Nels --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "bubblede" wrote: > Ted, it _is_ depressing, but there is nothing really we can do about > that. For every hole that's plugged some guy will open another. > > This one arrived in my mailbox in spite of having my norton up to > date _daily_ and it did not detect it. > What is so nasty about this one is that it looks very legit indeed > including the fact that they give you a password and that it is > signed with soething linke "your provider.com team." > I almost fell for it when I got mail for "your justmueller.com > team", but luckily this is my own domain and the entire team > consists of just me and I did not remember having send anything like > that out ;-) > > You should be fairly safe though if a) you keep your virus program > up to date and b) NEVER open any attachement from enybody even your > friends unles you know what is in there,have asked for it or it has > been announced or so. > > I use e-mail a lot, with several accounts and get about 20 spams and > 3 to 5 virus-mais a day. It's terrible. > > Gerd > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "edward_stoneuk" > wrote: > > With regard to the recent posts which I don't understand; I have > an > > ISP who stops some viruses and emails me to say what they have > done. > > There are one or two a week. I also have Fire Trust's Mailwasher > > which I can set to bounce all unknown mail before it gets to my > > computer and last but not least I have Norton Internet Security > which > > blocks probably two or three computer attacks a fortnight. These > > come direct and not via an email. Norton's software enables me to > > see where the attack came from and the ISP used. The attacks, > which > > are mostly trojan horses come from all over the world. I find all > > this eery and depressing. > > Regards, > > Ted | 3216|3213|2004-03-04 12:23:07|Henri Naths|Re: Geometry & Software|Hi Gerd, Hi all, Yes a picture would be worth a thousand words. I need to get familar with the best cad program out there. I guess Rino3d is the best? Where would I get it. Hull design is a fasinating when subject to extreme elements. (you see God in the details).H. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3217|3204|2004-03-04 13:09:25|info@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: Notify about using the e-mail account.|I've been out of town and just got back. If this came from me, it wasn't by my hand. Apologies to anyone inconvenienced as a result. Greg Elliott tel: 1 (604) 987-0050 ----- Original Message ----- From: info@... To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 2004 8:38 AM Subject: [origamiboats] Notify about using the e-mail account. Hello user of Yahoogroups.com e-mail server, Some of our clients complained about the spam (negative e-mail content) outgoing from your e-mail account. Probably, you have been infected by a proxy-relay trojan server. In order to keep your computer safe, follow the instructions. For details see the attached file. Cheers, The Yahoogroups.com team http://www.yahoogroups.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3218|3213|2004-03-04 13:28:31|David K McComber|Re: Geometry & Software|Hi I use Rhino myself. And I love it. Nothing else gives as much function for the buck. It is available at http://www.rhino3d.com/. There is a free trial copy at http://www.rhino3d.com/download.htm . This is the complete program, it is limited to 25 saves, and so make sure you have some time when you start. The tutorials that come with it are worth doing, as they will teach you the basic s of the program. David K. McComber Powerigger Dave d.mccomber@... -----Original Message----- From: Henri Naths [mailto:c_hnaths@...] Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2004 10:57 AM To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Geometry & Software Hi Gerd, Hi all, Yes a picture would be worth a thousand words. I need to get familar with the best cad program out there. I guess Rino3d is the best? Where would I get it. Hull design is a fasinating when subject to extreme elements. (you see God in the details).H. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT Click Here Click Here _____ Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3219|3213|2004-03-04 14:29:41|bubblede|Re: Geometry & Software|Hi david / yes rhino seems very nice - but there also I have problems unrolling anything that would resemble an origami hull - you have any practical results there? for my original hardchine hull it does give me nice unfolds though. Somebody here also was so nice as to point me offline to Touch CAD at touchcad.com, and this does look as being build for the job really, even if the interface is a bit klunky mackish ;-) - unfortunately their demo does not let you save anything at all, and I do not want to invest almost 800 us just to unfold half a single hull once... --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "David K McComber" wrote: > Hi I use Rhino myself. And I love it. Nothing else gives as much > function for the buck. It is available at http://www.rhino3d.com/. There > is a free trial copy at http://www.rhino3d.com/download.htm . This is > the complete program, it is limited to 25 saves, and so make sure you > have some time when you start. The tutorials that come with it are worth > doing, as they will teach you the basic s of the program. > > David K. McComber > Powerigger Dave > d.mccomber@c... > > -----Original Message----- > From: Henri Naths [mailto:c_hnaths@t...] > Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2004 10:57 AM > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Geometry & Software > > Hi Gerd, Hi all, > Yes a picture would be worth a thousand words. I need to get > familar with the best cad program out there. I guess Rino3d is the best? > Where would I get it. > Hull design is a fasinating when subject to extreme elements. (you see > God in the details).H. > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > > ADVERTISEMENT > > roupweb/S=1705150872:HM/EXP=1078507388/A=2019528/R=2/SIG=141im5ifi/*h ttp > :/ad.doubleclick.net/jump/N3349.yahoo1/B1282054.27;abr=!ie4;abr=! ie5;sz= > 300x250;code=18634;dcopt=rcl;ord=1078420988613886?> > > Click Here > ;sz=300x250;code=18634;dcopt=rcl;ord=1078420988613886?> Click Here > > > pweb/S=:HM/A=2019528/rand=185833225> > > _____ > > Yahoo! Groups Links > * To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of > Service. > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3220|3213|2004-03-04 17:04:18|Henri Naths|Re: Geometry & Software|Right on David; thanks for the feed back ----- Original Message ----- From: David K McComber To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: 04 March, 2004 11:28 AM Subject: RE: [origamiboats] Geometry & Software Hi I use Rhino myself. And I love it. Nothing else gives as much function for the buck. It is available at http://www.rhino3d.com/. There is a free trial copy at http://www.rhino3d.com/download.htm . This is the complete program, it is limited to 25 saves, and so make sure you have some time when you start. The tutorials that come with it are worth doing, as they will teach you the basic s of the program. David K. McComber Powerigger Dave d.mccomber@... -----Original Message----- From: Henri Naths [mailto:c_hnaths@...] Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2004 10:57 AM To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Geometry & Software Hi Gerd, Hi all, Yes a picture would be worth a thousand words. I need to get familar with the best cad program out there. I guess Rino3d is the best? Where would I get it. Hull design is a fasinating when subject to extreme elements. (you see God in the details).H. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT Click Here Click Here _____ Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3221|3213|2004-03-04 20:18:36|Gary H. Lucas|Re: Geometry & Software|Gerd, Sorry to disappoint you but a Brent Swain hull is NOT fully developable! I spent time importing the lines from his 31 foot boat into Rhino and worked hard at getting a similar shape that was fully developable. I finally realized that his hulls all have compound curvature at the bow and stern. The compound curvature happens when he pulls the bow and stern together with a come-along. This is easy to prove if you have access to a Brent Swain hull. If it is completely developable you would be able to lay a straightedge tight against the hull with one end and the start of the chine and the other end sweeping down the bow. What you will discover, and his lines clearly show is that there is the hull bulges outward from the expected path by a maximum of about two inches. The path you get if you sweep the straight edge along the bow lines has a crease in it. That crease is a reversal of curvature that happens easily with software, but simply won't happen in steel. So the steel gets forced into a compound curve. I think I found a way to draw it properly in Rhino, by using the creased lines that would be fully developable and applying fairing to the curves while keeping them the same length. This produce the bulge that the steel would take because you can't actually stretch the steel plate to any great extent. I did part of the bow and got results that agreed very well with Brent's lines. I didn't finish though and started over because I arrived at an easier technique for the fairing. Since then I've been too busy. I hope this helps you out. Gary H. Lucas ----- Original Message ----- From: "bubblede" To: Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2004 4:39 AM Subject: [origamiboats] Geometry & Software Hi all I spent the last couple of nights trying to teach various hull design and cad demos the origami trick, so far without result. This includes the "Expander" plug-in for Rhino3d, that insists stupidly to expand the entire shape stretching loads evenly without understanding that large parts are fully developable. The resulting flat shape would work in a press with mold, but not really as a cut and folded flat sheet. Maybe there is something I have missed though. In parallel I have done lots of little models in cardboard and get basically the same results. So I tried to better understand the geometry of the hull and here is what I have come up with so far: The first thing is that the sheets are flat to begin with, and if you would split a hull along the seems it should unfold to a flat shape again (give or take some deformations doe to folding welding etc) This means that the hull _must_ be fully developable, and therefore should be much closer to a hard-chine hull than to a round bilge shape. Any round part that we do indeed see in a finished origami hull is due to either a visual cheat and impression or to the sheet being no longer perfectly flat because of stretch/compression effects during folding as well as heat schrinkage around the boards when cutting and welding. You can get the same effect on a pure hard chine hull, and if the panels are relatively small and have a lot of twist in addition to bend, this will give a very rounded look and shape, so much so that it often causes nasty problems during assembly. (BTW, reducing heat shrinkage using plasma cutters instead of a torch might actually not be a good idea for origami) So if you forget these "accidental" and difficult to control camber effects what it boils down to is that your hull is build like a pencil that you sharpen on both ends. Imagine you take a short pencil and make a point on both sides. You will have the "chines" along the middle where the flat sections represent the panels of the hard-chine boat. At the ends you also have a developable surface, the cones. The cone surface meets the chine panels in a single points in the chine-ends (the famous knuckles on the origami boat) and in half-round edges in the flat sections of the long panels. (This means also: the closer the direction of the chine to the direction it will have to dissolve into the cone, and the more chines there are, the less there is a violent change, ergo the smaller the knuckle. I guess) You could now cut an origami hull/panel out of this: Split the pencil horizontally in length to get the deck Split it again vertically, your bow will be where the lower part of the forward point meets the vertical split Hack off the aft point to produce a truncated cone, the flat surface at the back is your half transom This is of course a very much simplified shape, you should have a courgette or a banana instead of a pencil in de middle to get a rounder hull, and the forward and end cones do not need to be cones but can be sections of any sort of developable surface. (that's why it is a bit misleading to call this polyconical). But even our pointed and split pencil would look rounde if you would force the sheer-edge against something a bit deck-shaped. (Also the banana would make quite a mess in your pencil sharpener.) You could now unroll 3 perfectly developable surfaces : the parts of cones forward and aft and the a single flat panel midships with it's chines. ( on a pencil, not on a banana, there you need the vertical cut in origami.) It's a pity that we can not post images here in the text, a picture is worth my thousand word easily. The trick then is: at the intersection between the conical and the pencil-shaped surfaces we have an area that we can obviously not develop out of a 100 % rigid single sheet. This is the halfrounds between the chines on the pencil, and the Points (knuckles) at the end of the chines. All this here has to be spread, a bit more camber here and there, some stretching and some pushing, but in real life this seems to produce quite a pleasant "round-bilge" hull shape. But in reality it's a magicians trick / isn't it,. Greg?? ;-) / because it distracts the eye to the chine & knuckles section, so you take for given that the rest is "round" when actually it is not. The round parts of the origami hull are not round at all but developable with straight tangents in the for & aft direction, plus some "accidental" camber. If you make the darts shorter, most of your conical sections would become very straight and look more and more like the sharpened pencil. The volume and "round" impression of the hull actually does not come from the conical sections at all but from the central, hard-chine section that takes care of the belly of your shape. Prolonging the surfaces of an origami hull past the transom would result in a very long pencil point, not in something shaped like a baseball or an egg. An Origami hull is a hard-chine hull treated with a pencil sharpener to cheat the eye - or is it? I do not know if I have made myself very clear here, English being not my native language and geometry not my favorite lesson, but I hope you get the idea ;-) My question is now: has anybody any practical experience with translating the origami-cut-and-squeeze-and-push a little into precise approximations (?) of geometrical shapes that I can enter into a CAD program and then to unroll a description of a developed half-hull cutout? Or maybe do I still miss on something important maybe? Gerd Budapest To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links | 3222|3222|2004-03-04 21:15:46|wiliamdg|twin vs fin keel|Question: Is there anyone who has sailed the same design boats in both a twin keel and a fin keel version? Swain's seem to have enough versions out there to make a fair comparison. I am interested in handling characteristics, tenderness, stability, action in heavy seas,manuverability,etc.| 3223|3210|2004-03-04 22:46:45|richytill|Re: Mix and Match materials|Martin, agreed--keep it metal. rt (My Island) --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "prairiemaidca" wrote: > Hi All; My personal opinion would be to stay with one continous > material for the whole boat. Attaching a cabin and pilot house of > another material along with it's required gasket or joining material > is just inviting trouble. A solid boat with only ports and hatches > to allow a path for water to enter is manageable. Adding more > possible access points is more trouble than it's worth for the budget > minded do it yourself boater. > Martin Forster (Prairie Maid) | 3224|3222|2004-03-04 23:11:55|richytill|Re: twin vs fin keel|If you look back through the posts you will find discussion on this topic; probably close to what you are researching. rt --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "wiliamdg" wrote: > Question: Is there anyone who has sailed the same design boats in > both a twin keel and a fin keel version? Swain's seem to have enough > versions out there to make a fair comparison. I am interested in > handling characteristics, tenderness, stability, action in heavy > seas,manuverability,etc. | 3225|3213|2004-03-05 05:13:03|bubblede|Re: Geometry & Software|Hi Gary - not disapointed at all ;-) and thanks for the input. Sure, the real hull of an origami design is not developable but would appear round including the compund curve the material itself will build up. If you would use softer stretchier material or if you would use a steel with 0 percent stretch, you would get either a completely different shape of no boat at all... the developed cut pattern will give you a shape depending on the characteristics of the material. But my question is the other way around: I do not have this cutout, but have a hardchine hull of my own design instead that now I want to convert to origami. So, knowing that the real hull in the end will have more or less compund curves - how and with what do I get the best approximation of the unrolled cutout? Thats where expanding software should come in, you design compnd curves from the begining, and depending of the stretch and compression parameters of your material it will give you and indication of what is doable making it flat. The Expander plug-in for rhino does just that, but always seems to have more of a punch and press approach, rather than unfold the shape. Of course I tried the obvious: building the fully chined model, then splitting the chines partially while leaving them attached at the more or less straight ends. This does not work very nicely, because the circumference of the ends of the hull with chines is longer than of a hull with rounded chines, meaning it looks then as if in the ends there is too much material and the hull sort of trumpets out if you see what I mean. Right now I have given up on trying to design round shapes and try another approach, by cutting the hulls in three seprate sections: the central chined part and the fore and aft parts. It seems that if I design all three parts as fully developable, with up-down straights in the chined part and for-aft straights in the "conical" parts, then split the chined panels and join them separately to the fore and aft surfaces, I will get a single developed pattern that if fourced to join at the seems in the real world with real material will the produce the compound curves - at least it seems to work with cardboard. The designed hull looks boxy, but the finished model looks "round". f course a small cardboard hull does not stretch and coumpound just the way a full steel-hull will, and as I have not found a way to weld cardboard, it does not demonstrate the additional benefit of heat-shrinkage ;-) What I try to find now is where to seperate the hull-sections, how long to make the chined section and so on. BTW, is the origami design approach a sort of trade-secret? ;-) Most of you are lucky, because you already have plans made by somebody else, but poor me I have to re-invent the wheel if I want my own... Well, I hope your reverse-designing from a finished BS hull back to the lines-drawing in Rhino will yield more insights. Are there any lines or section drawings of the BS designs around, or are you guys all building with just the cutout-pattern? Gerd| 3226|3226|2004-03-05 09:44:44|vscopeland|Swain design catalog?|New and really impressed with Swain's designs as I've gone through nearly all the Files & Photos. (Using the paper origami model with my students!) Question: I see his book order information, but is there a catalog by Swain detailing each design? Scot| 3227|3227|2004-03-05 11:57:33|bert andjan|What's the draft of BS 31 & 36 twin keels?|Hi everybody. I'm still interested in knowing what is the approx. draft of the BS 31 and 36 twin hulled sailboats at let's say average cruising weight? Anyone know? Bert Eggers...Saginaw, Mi __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Search - Find what you�re looking for faster http://search.yahoo.com| 3228|3213|2004-03-05 13:16:25|nelstomlinson|Re: Geometry & Software|Hi, Gerd, On the design process being secret, I believe that Brent has said that he designs a round hull, builds a largish model, covers it with paper mache, then takes off the paper mache skin and cuts it and flattens it by hand. Finally, he cuts out a flat pattern and pulls it together, to check that he does indeed get an acceptable shape. Brent, please correct that if I've misunderstood! I would imagine that you'd have to make several paper mache skins, and experiment with choosing the right places to begin the cuts, so that you get acceptably close to the original form, without any serious knuckles. I understand that Greg Elliot has written some software which does the model-building and skin-flattening stages for him. I believe that he still starts with a round-bilged design. Again, if I've misunderstood something, I hope that Greg will correct me. I think that you need the round bilges to give the necessary, strength-giving shape. That slight compound curvature which is forced in at the bow and stern seems to be what gives the structure its stiffness I would suggest that unless you simply enjoy wrestling with the problem of doing this analytically, that you should take Brent's approach. A few months of pleasant tinkering and a few dollars worth of materials should give you good understanding and a good design, and you'll probably need that understanding to do a good analytical solution, anyway. One thing I have realized is that, although the two sides of each dart may have a different curve, their curves must have the same length. When I was fiddling about with the little paper pattern in the files section, I realized that most of my problems came from getting slightly different curve lengths. Anyway, if you do manage to make an origami design, I'd certainly appreciate it if you kept notes and shared the experience with us, however you do it! Nels --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "bubblede" wrote: > Hi Gary - not disapointed at all ;-) and thanks for the input. > Sure, the real hull of an origami design is not developable but > would appear round including the compund curve the material itself > will build up. If you would use softer stretchier material or if you > would use a steel with 0 percent stretch, you would get either a > completely different shape of no boat at all... the developed cut > pattern will give you a shape depending on the characteristics of > the material. > > But my question is the other way around: I do not have this cutout, > but have a hardchine hull of my own design instead that now I want > to convert to origami. So, knowing that the real hull in the end > will have more or less compund curves - how and with what do I get > the best approximation of the unrolled cutout? Thats where expanding > software should come in, you design compnd curves from the begining, > and depending of the stretch and compression parameters of your > material it will give you and indication of what is doable making it > flat. The Expander plug-in for rhino does just that, but always > seems to have more of a punch and press approach, rather than unfold > the shape. > > Of course I tried the obvious: building the fully chined model, then > splitting the chines partially while leaving them attached at the > more or less straight ends. This does not work very nicely, because > the circumference of the ends of the hull with chines is longer than > of a hull with rounded chines, meaning it looks then as if in the > ends there is too much material and the hull sort of trumpets out if > you see what I mean. > > Right now I have given up on trying to design round shapes and try > another approach, by cutting the hulls in three seprate sections: > the central chined part and the fore and aft parts. It seems that if > I design all three parts as fully developable, with up-down > straights in the chined part and for-aft straights in the "conical" > parts, then split the chined panels and join them separately to the > fore and aft surfaces, I will get a single developed pattern that if > fourced to join at the seems in the real world with real material > will the produce the compound curves - at least it seems to work > with cardboard. The designed hull looks boxy, but the finished model > looks "round". f course a small cardboard hull does not stretch and > coumpound just the way a full steel-hull will, and as I have not > found a way to weld cardboard, it does not demonstrate the > additional benefit of heat-shrinkage ;-) What I try to find now is > where to seperate the hull-sections, how long to make the chined > section and so on. > > BTW, is the origami design approach a sort of trade-secret? ;-) Most > of you are lucky, because you already have plans made by somebody > else, but poor me I have to re-invent the wheel if I want my own... > > Well, I hope your reverse-designing from a finished BS hull back to > the lines-drawing in Rhino will yield more insights. Are there any > lines or section drawings of the BS designs around, or are you guys > all building with just the cutout-pattern? > > Gerd | 3229|3213|2004-03-05 14:25:17|brentswain38|Re: Geometry & Software|Most people just use the patterns which come with the plans. A lines drawing also comes woth the plans, but the ends will differ a bit because of the stiffness of the steel. To get a fairer cardboard model, just join the seams at the chines fore and aft with masking tape, then make another pattern without the seams there ,from a fresh piece of cardboard. A single layer of fibreglass matt laid up on a well waxed piece of arborite makes a good material for models , and you can tape and fibreglas the chines and centreline to make a tougher model. The finer the angle of the cutout at the ends , the better it will fair into the conic ends. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "bubblede" wrote: > Hi Gary - not disapointed at all ;-) and thanks for the input. > Sure, the real hull of an origami design is not developable but > would appear round including the compund curve the material itself > will build up. If you would use softer stretchier material or if you > would use a steel with 0 percent stretch, you would get either a > completely different shape of no boat at all... the developed cut > pattern will give you a shape depending on the characteristics of > the material. > > But my question is the other way around: I do not have this cutout, > but have a hardchine hull of my own design instead that now I want > to convert to origami. So, knowing that the real hull in the end > will have more or less compund curves - how and with what do I get > the best approximation of the unrolled cutout? Thats where expanding > software should come in, you design compnd curves from the begining, > and depending of the stretch and compression parameters of your > material it will give you and indication of what is doable making it > flat. The Expander plug-in for rhino does just that, but always > seems to have more of a punch and press approach, rather than unfold > the shape. > > Of course I tried the obvious: building the fully chined model, then > splitting the chines partially while leaving them attached at the > more or less straight ends. This does not work very nicely, because > the circumference of the ends of the hull with chines is longer than > of a hull with rounded chines, meaning it looks then as if in the > ends there is too much material and the hull sort of trumpets out if > you see what I mean. > > Right now I have given up on trying to design round shapes and try > another approach, by cutting the hulls in three seprate sections: > the central chined part and the fore and aft parts. It seems that if > I design all three parts as fully developable, with up-down > straights in the chined part and for-aft straights in the "conical" > parts, then split the chined panels and join them separately to the > fore and aft surfaces, I will get a single developed pattern that if > fourced to join at the seems in the real world with real material > will the produce the compound curves - at least it seems to work > with cardboard. The designed hull looks boxy, but the finished model > looks "round". f course a small cardboard hull does not stretch and > coumpound just the way a full steel-hull will, and as I have not > found a way to weld cardboard, it does not demonstrate the > additional benefit of heat-shrinkage ;-) What I try to find now is > where to seperate the hull-sections, how long to make the chined > section and so on. > > BTW, is the origami design approach a sort of trade-secret? ;-) Most > of you are lucky, because you already have plans made by somebody > else, but poor me I have to re-invent the wheel if I want my own... > > Well, I hope your reverse-designing from a finished BS hull back to > the lines-drawing in Rhino will yield more insights. Are there any > lines or section drawings of the BS designs around, or are you guys > all building with just the cutout-pattern? > > Gerd | 3230|3227|2004-03-05 14:29:06|brentswain38|Re: What's the draft of BS 31 & 36 twin keels?|The cruising draft for both boats would be between 4 ft 6 inches and 5 ft depending on how much of a packrat the owner is. Some people cruise with a change of socks and a case of beer, others take several trips with a pickup to load all their stuff aboard. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, bert andjan wrote: > Hi everybody. I'm still interested in knowing what is > the approx. draft of the BS 31 and 36 twin hulled > sailboats at let's say average cruising weight? > Anyone know? > > Bert Eggers...Saginaw, Mi > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Search - Find what you're looking for faster > http://search.yahoo.com | 3231|3226|2004-03-05 14:29:19|brentswain38|Re: Swain design catalog?|My book has the info on my designs Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "vscopeland" wrote: > New and really impressed with Swain's designs as I've gone through > nearly all the Files & Photos. (Using the paper origami model with > my students!) Question: I see his book order information, but is > there a catalog by Swain detailing each design? > Scot | 3232|3213|2004-03-05 14:33:36|brentswain38|Re: Geometry & Software|I design a hard chine boat , make a model with the chine running the full length, take cardboard patterns off it, cut the bottom pattern at 20 ft from the bow, join them to the topsides at the ends , then take measurements off it and scale them up for the full sized patterns. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "nelstomlinson" wrote: > Hi, Gerd, > > On the design process being secret, I believe that Brent has said that > he designs a round hull, builds a largish model, covers it with paper > mache, then takes off the paper mache skin and cuts it and flattens it > by hand. Finally, he cuts out a flat pattern and pulls it together, > to check that he does indeed get an acceptable shape. Brent, please > correct that if I've misunderstood! > > I would imagine that you'd have to make several paper mache skins, and > experiment with choosing the right places to begin the cuts, so that > you get acceptably close to the original form, without any serious > knuckles. > > I understand that Greg Elliot has written some software which does the > model-building and skin-flattening stages for him. I believe that he > still starts with a round-bilged design. Again, if I've misunderstood > something, I hope that Greg will correct me. > > I think that you need the round bilges to give the necessary, > strength-giving shape. That slight compound curvature which is forced > in at the bow and stern seems to be what gives the structure its > stiffness > > I would suggest that unless you simply enjoy wrestling with the > problem of doing this analytically, that you should take Brent's > approach. A few months of pleasant tinkering and a few dollars worth > of materials should give you good understanding and a good design, and > you'll probably need that understanding to do a good analytical > solution, anyway. > > One thing I have realized is that, although the two sides of each dart > may have a different curve, their curves must have the same length. > When I was fiddling about with the little paper pattern in the files > section, I realized that most of my problems came from getting > slightly different curve lengths. > > Anyway, if you do manage to make an origami design, I'd certainly > appreciate it if you kept notes and shared the experience with us, > however you do it! > > Nels > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "bubblede" wrote: > > Hi Gary - not disapointed at all ;-) and thanks for the input. > > Sure, the real hull of an origami design is not developable but > > would appear round including the compund curve the material itself > > will build up. If you would use softer stretchier material or if > you > > would use a steel with 0 percent stretch, you would get either a > > completely different shape of no boat at all... the developed cut > > pattern will give you a shape depending on the characteristics of > > the material. > > > > But my question is the other way around: I do not have this cutout, > > but have a hardchine hull of my own design instead that now I want > > to convert to origami. So, knowing that the real hull in the end > > will have more or less compund curves - how and with what do I get > > the best approximation of the unrolled cutout? Thats where > expanding > > software should come in, you design compnd curves from the > begining, > > and depending of the stretch and compression parameters of your > > material it will give you and indication of what is doable making > it > > flat. The Expander plug-in for rhino does just that, but always > > seems to have more of a punch and press approach, rather than > unfold > > the shape. > > > > Of course I tried the obvious: building the fully chined model, > then > > splitting the chines partially while leaving them attached at the > > more or less straight ends. This does not work very nicely, because > > the circumference of the ends of the hull with chines is longer > than > > of a hull with rounded chines, meaning it looks then as if in the > > ends there is too much material and the hull sort of trumpets out > if > > you see what I mean. > > > > Right now I have given up on trying to design round shapes and try > > another approach, by cutting the hulls in three seprate sections: > > the central chined part and the fore and aft parts. It seems that > if > > I design all three parts as fully developable, with up-down > > straights in the chined part and for-aft straights in the "conical" > > parts, then split the chined panels and join them separately to the > > fore and aft surfaces, I will get a single developed pattern that > if > > fourced to join at the seems in the real world with real material > > will the produce the compound curves - at least it seems to work > > with cardboard. The designed hull looks boxy, but the finished > model > > looks "round". f course a small cardboard hull does not stretch and > > coumpound just the way a full steel-hull will, and as I have not > > found a way to weld cardboard, it does not demonstrate the > > additional benefit of heat-shrinkage ;-) What I try to find now is > > where to seperate the hull-sections, how long to make the chined > > section and so on. > > > > BTW, is the origami design approach a sort of trade-secret? ;-) > Most > > of you are lucky, because you already have plans made by somebody > > else, but poor me I have to re-invent the wheel if I want my own... > > > > Well, I hope your reverse-designing from a finished BS hull back to > > the lines-drawing in Rhino will yield more insights. Are there any > > lines or section drawings of the BS designs around, or are you guys > > all building with just the cutout-pattern? > > > > Gerd | 3233|3213|2004-03-05 15:40:48|bubblede|Re: Geometry & Software|Thanks Brent, and all others - that`s what I thought by now! Personally I also find it easier to design a hardchine boat, and I guess starting from a round-bilge hull like Nels I think proposes, would leave you with undevelopable surfaces all over that would need a lot of pressure to flatten the skin on the table. OK, back to the drawing board ;-) still trying to come to a description of the surface that the cad-programs understand, but I will also have to go through the model at the same time. the truth must be somewhere in betweeen. (Greg?) Thanks for your input, and if I come up with something new I will let you know. Gerd --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" wrote: > I design a hard chine boat , make a model with the chine running the > full length, take cardboard patterns off it, cut the bottom pattern > at 20 ft from the bow, join them to the topsides at the ends , then > take measurements off it and scale them up for the full sized > patterns. > Brent Swain > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "nelstomlinson" > wrote: > > Hi, Gerd, > > > > On the design process being secret, I believe that Brent has said > that > > he designs a round hull, builds a largish model, covers it with > paper > > mache, then takes off the paper mache skin and cuts it and flattens > it > > by hand. Finally, he cuts out a flat pattern and pulls it together, > > to check that he does indeed get an acceptable shape. Brent, please > > correct that if I've misunderstood! > > > > I would imagine that you'd have to make several paper mache skins, > and > > experiment with choosing the right places to begin the cuts, so that > > you get acceptably close to the original form, without any serious > > knuckles. > > > > I understand that Greg Elliot has written some software which does > the > > model-building and skin-flattening stages for him. I believe that > he > > still starts with a round-bilged design. Again, if I've > misunderstood > > something, I hope that Greg will correct me. > > > > I think that you need the round bilges to give the necessary, > > strength-giving shape. That slight compound curvature which is > forced > > in at the bow and stern seems to be what gives the structure its > > stiffness > > > > I would suggest that unless you simply enjoy wrestling with the > > problem of doing this analytically, that you should take Brent's > > approach. A few months of pleasant tinkering and a few dollars > worth > > of materials should give you good understanding and a good design, > and > > you'll probably need that understanding to do a good analytical > > solution, anyway. > > > > One thing I have realized is that, although the two sides of each > dart > > may have a different curve, their curves must have the same length. > > When I was fiddling about with the little paper pattern in the files > > section, I realized that most of my problems came from getting > > slightly different curve lengths. > > > > Anyway, if you do manage to make an origami design, I'd certainly > > appreciate it if you kept notes and shared the experience with us, > > however you do it! > > > > Nels > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "bubblede" wrote: > > > Hi Gary - not disapointed at all ;-) and thanks for the input. > > > Sure, the real hull of an origami design is not developable but > > > would appear round including the compund curve the material > itself > > > will build up. If you would use softer stretchier material or if > > you > > > would use a steel with 0 percent stretch, you would get either a > > > completely different shape of no boat at all... the developed cut > > > pattern will give you a shape depending on the characteristics of > > > the material. > > > > > > But my question is the other way around: I do not have this > cutout, > > > but have a hardchine hull of my own design instead that now I > want > > > to convert to origami. So, knowing that the real hull in the end > > > will have more or less compund curves - how and with what do I > get > > > the best approximation of the unrolled cutout? Thats where > > expanding > > > software should come in, you design compnd curves from the > > begining, > > > and depending of the stretch and compression parameters of your > > > material it will give you and indication of what is doable making > > it > > > flat. The Expander plug-in for rhino does just that, but always > > > seems to have more of a punch and press approach, rather than > > unfold > > > the shape. > > > > > > Of course I tried the obvious: building the fully chined model, > > then > > > splitting the chines partially while leaving them attached at the > > > more or less straight ends. This does not work very nicely, > because > > > the circumference of the ends of the hull with chines is longer > > than > > > of a hull with rounded chines, meaning it looks then as if in the > > > ends there is too much material and the hull sort of trumpets out > > if > > > you see what I mean. > > > > > > Right now I have given up on trying to design round shapes and > try > > > another approach, by cutting the hulls in three seprate sections: > > > the central chined part and the fore and aft parts. It seems that > > if > > > I design all three parts as fully developable, with up-down > > > straights in the chined part and for-aft straights in > the "conical" > > > parts, then split the chined panels and join them separately to > the > > > fore and aft surfaces, I will get a single developed pattern that > > if > > > fourced to join at the seems in the real world with real material > > > will the produce the compound curves - at least it seems to work > > > with cardboard. The designed hull looks boxy, but the finished > > model > > > looks "round". f course a small cardboard hull does not stretch > and > > > coumpound just the way a full steel-hull will, and as I have not > > > found a way to weld cardboard, it does not demonstrate the > > > additional benefit of heat-shrinkage ;-) What I try to find now > is > > > where to seperate the hull-sections, how long to make the chined > > > section and so on. > > > > > > BTW, is the origami design approach a sort of trade-secret? ;-) > > Most > > > of you are lucky, because you already have plans made by somebody > > > else, but poor me I have to re-invent the wheel if I want my > own... > > > > > > Well, I hope your reverse-designing from a finished BS hull back > to > > > the lines-drawing in Rhino will yield more insights. Are there > any > > > lines or section drawings of the BS designs around, or are you > guys > > > all building with just the cutout-pattern? > > > > > > Gerd | 3234|3234|2004-03-05 15:59:15|prairiemaidca|Draft|Hey Bert; The numbers from the back of Brent's book indicate a draft of 4ft.6in. for the 31footer and 5ft.10in. for the 36footer. It does not indicate bilge or fin keel. These numbers from my book may not be the most update ones, as my book is getting pretty old. Our hull is a fin keel so I really don't know if there is much of a draft diff. between the two designs. For more info contact Brent directly by E-mail and I'm sure he will be glad to give you any numbers you might be interested in. Martin Forster (Prairie Maid)| 3235|3213|2004-03-05 17:11:38|info@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: Geometry & Software|Our boats are developed from round-bilged hulls. http://www.origamimagic.com/Design/LB36/LB36.htm g I think proposes, would leave you with undevelopable surfaces all over that would need a lot of pressure to flatten the skin on the table. OK, back to the drawing board ;-) still trying to come to a description of the surface that the cad-programs understand, but I will also have to go through the model at the same time. the truth must be somewhere in betweeen. (Greg?) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3236|3213|2004-03-05 21:06:04|Gary H. Lucas|Re: Geometry & Software|Gerd, Read what I wrote again. I described how to get the actual shape after compound curvature is introduced, by starting with a fully developable surface. If you email me directly I can send you my crude Rhino model to demonstrate. Gary H. Lucas ----- Original Message ----- From: "bubblede" To: Sent: Friday, March 05, 2004 5:12 AM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Geometry & Software > Hi Gary - not disapointed at all ;-) and thanks for the input. > Sure, the real hull of an origami design is not developable but > would appear round including the compund curve the material itself > will build up. If you would use softer stretchier material or if you > would use a steel with 0 percent stretch, you would get either a > completely different shape of no boat at all... the developed cut > pattern will give you a shape depending on the characteristics of > the material. > > But my question is the other way around: I do not have this cutout, > but have a hardchine hull of my own design instead that now I want > to convert to origami. So, knowing that the real hull in the end > will have more or less compund curves - how and with what do I get > the best approximation of the unrolled cutout? Thats where expanding > software should come in, you design compnd curves from the begining, > and depending of the stretch and compression parameters of your > material it will give you and indication of what is doable making it > flat. The Expander plug-in for rhino does just that, but always > seems to have more of a punch and press approach, rather than unfold > the shape. > > Of course I tried the obvious: building the fully chined model, then > splitting the chines partially while leaving them attached at the > more or less straight ends. This does not work very nicely, because > the circumference of the ends of the hull with chines is longer than > of a hull with rounded chines, meaning it looks then as if in the > ends there is too much material and the hull sort of trumpets out if > you see what I mean. > > Right now I have given up on trying to design round shapes and try > another approach, by cutting the hulls in three seprate sections: > the central chined part and the fore and aft parts. It seems that if > I design all three parts as fully developable, with up-down > straights in the chined part and for-aft straights in the "conical" > parts, then split the chined panels and join them separately to the > fore and aft surfaces, I will get a single developed pattern that if > fourced to join at the seems in the real world with real material > will the produce the compound curves - at least it seems to work > with cardboard. The designed hull looks boxy, but the finished model > looks "round". f course a small cardboard hull does not stretch and > coumpound just the way a full steel-hull will, and as I have not > found a way to weld cardboard, it does not demonstrate the > additional benefit of heat-shrinkage ;-) What I try to find now is > where to seperate the hull-sections, how long to make the chined > section and so on. > > BTW, is the origami design approach a sort of trade-secret? ;-) Most > of you are lucky, because you already have plans made by somebody > else, but poor me I have to re-invent the wheel if I want my own... > > Well, I hope your reverse-designing from a finished BS hull back to > the lines-drawing in Rhino will yield more insights. Are there any > lines or section drawings of the BS designs around, or are you guys > all building with just the cutout-pattern? > > Gerd > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > | 3237|3213|2004-03-06 05:35:19|bubblede|Re: Geometry & Software|Hi Greg > Our boats are developed from round-bilged hulls. http://www.origamimagic.com/Design/LB36/LB36.htm Yes, and it' a very nice hull and if it turns out like the G55 it will also look very good. Wish I would get the same result ;-) But in the central section, between approx stations 3 and 8, your hull is clearly a developable hardchine hull, isn't it? Your front- back view shows chines and straight edges there - even if later in the real hull these will be rounder due to stretching and so on. So even if you start from a round bilge hull, you do add developable chines to your design and then count on the building and real world effects to make them rounder. So maybe we could say that between Brent and you there is a different approach in imagining the final shape, where - You _add_ chines in the central part of a round-bilged hull, pushing them outward from your shape, where as - Brent _removes_ the chines from the for and aft sectiosn of a hard- chine hull ... ? So how do you translate that idea to your CAD program? What program are you using for design and expansion? Gerd| 3238|3213|2004-03-06 15:02:13|info@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: Geometry & Software|Thanks Gerd. The hulls you are seeing are the result of years of experimentation and refinement. I first started working on the idea of an origami hull without any knuckles in 1984 while sailing in Mexico. At the time the consensus seemed to be that knuckles were an inevitable result of the folding process. I did the math behind the shapes and found that knuckles were not inevitable. Rather that incredibly fair, beautiful and efficient shapes could result from this process. However, I could also see that solving the equations by discrete methods would not be practical except perhaps for large scale manufacturing. Later we were sailing in Hawaii and I had access to a notebook computer and designed our first hull using Lotus 1-2-3. This hull was done purely mathematically. While sailing in Thailand I ported this work to a custom written extension for Mechanical Desktop, which provides us a graphical interface to the mathematics behind origami. The "artifacts" you see in our drawings are a result of the limitations of CAD to represent an origami hull, not the underlying mathematics. The "magic" in origami is not in CAD, it is in the math. Achieving a fair, beautiful, efficient origami hull is not a trivial matter. Even with our technology it takes a couple of weeks to create a hull. We charge a modest fee for that, and our builders save months or years as a result. For most builders it simply makes sense to make money doing what they know best, and pay us to do what we know best. They end up way ahead as a result. What looks good in cardboard at 1/24 scale doesn't always fold in metal at full scale. There is a custom origami boat being built locally that had a set of patterns drawn by a very experienced origami designer. When they tried for fold this new boat, it would not come together at the bows. Eventually the boat had to be lengthened from 45 to 55 feet, and still it wouldn't come together without buckling the plates. Think of the months of aggravation and many thousands of $$, not to mention the permanent distortion to the hull that this builder could have avoided by starting with the right patterns. We are not limited to using round-bilged hulls. We typically do so because we are trying to achieve a boat that looks round. Why start with a chined hull, which in itself is usually an approximation of a round hull, when what you want to achieve is a round look? We can of course model chined boats and even other origami boats and in the process restore a round, fair look and even remove the knuckles. To date most of our boats have been larger sizes, because the simplicity of origami really pays dividends in a big boat. However as more and more builders are discovering this technique, we will continue to develop patterns for smaller boats. Right now our smallest patterns are for 36 feet, but we can scale our boats to any combination of length, beam, and freeboard you might desire. We are actively seeking builders interested in new designs from 26 to 40 feet. Anyone wanting to build that length of boat should contact us. http://www.origamimagic.com Greg Elliott ----- Original Message ----- From: bubblede To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, March 06, 2004 2:35 AM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Geometry & Software Hi Greg > Our boats are developed from round-bilged hulls. http://www.origamimagic.com/Design/LB36/LB36.htm Yes, and it' a very nice hull and if it turns out like the G55 it will also look very good. Wish I would get the same result ;-) But in the central section, between approx stations 3 and 8, your hull is clearly a developable hardchine hull, isn't it? Your front- back view shows chines and straight edges there - even if later in the real hull these will be rounder due to stretching and so on. So even if you start from a round bilge hull, you do add developable chines to your design and then count on the building and real world effects to make them rounder. So maybe we could say that between Brent and you there is a different approach in imagining the final shape, where - You _add_ chines in the central part of a round-bilged hull, pushing them outward from your shape, where as - Brent _removes_ the chines from the for and aft sectiosn of a hard- chine hull ... ? So how do you translate that idea to your CAD program? What program are you using for design and expansion? Gerd To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3239|3209|2004-03-07 01:18:43|Henri Naths|Re: Internet Security|Hi all I just recieved an e-mail from IIcarried@... with a file attachment which I did not open. I replied " who are you" and my message came back because it was blocked. I was wondering if anybody else got this message or if anybody knows of this address. H ..p.s. somehow this address got in my address book after recieving the letter.. ----- Original Message ----- From: bubblede To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: 04 March, 2004 1:09 AM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Internet Security Ted, it _is_ depressing, but there is nothing really we can do about that. For every hole that's plugged some guy will open another. This one arrived in my mailbox in spite of having my norton up to date _daily_ and it did not detect it. What is so nasty about this one is that it looks very legit indeed including the fact that they give you a password and that it is signed with soething linke "your provider.com team." I almost fell for it when I got mail for "your justmueller.com team", but luckily this is my own domain and the entire team consists of just me and I did not remember having send anything like that out ;-) You should be fairly safe though if a) you keep your virus program up to date and b) NEVER open any attachement from enybody even your friends unles you know what is in there,have asked for it or it has been announced or so. I use e-mail a lot, with several accounts and get about 20 spams and 3 to 5 virus-mais a day. It's terrible. Gerd --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "edward_stoneuk" wrote: > With regard to the recent posts which I don't understand; I have an > ISP who stops some viruses and emails me to say what they have done. > There are one or two a week. I also have Fire Trust's Mailwasher > which I can set to bounce all unknown mail before it gets to my > computer and last but not least I have Norton Internet Security which > blocks probably two or three computer attacks a fortnight. These > come direct and not via an email. Norton's software enables me to > see where the attack came from and the ISP used. The attacks, which > are mostly trojan horses come from all over the world. I find all > this eery and depressing. > Regards, > Ted To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3240|3209|2004-03-07 06:08:14|Graeme|Re: Internet Security|Henri Delete it ctrl + alt del do not open , the attachment if you do not know who it is from ----- Original Message ----- From: "Henri Naths" To: Sent: Sunday, March 07, 2004 2:18 PM Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: Internet Security > Hi all > I just recieved an e-mail from IIcarried@... with a file attachment which I did not open. I replied " who are you" and my message came back because it was blocked. I was wondering if anybody else got this message or if anybody knows of this address. H ..p.s. somehow this address got in my address book after recieving the letter.. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: bubblede > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Sent: 04 March, 2004 1:09 AM > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Internet Security > > > Ted, it _is_ depressing, but there is nothing really we can do about > that. For every hole that's plugged some guy will open another. > > This one arrived in my mailbox in spite of having my norton up to > date _daily_ and it did not detect it. > What is so nasty about this one is that it looks very legit indeed > including the fact that they give you a password and that it is > signed with soething linke "your provider.com team." > I almost fell for it when I got mail for "your justmueller.com > team", but luckily this is my own domain and the entire team > consists of just me and I did not remember having send anything like > that out ;-) > > You should be fairly safe though if a) you keep your virus program > up to date and b) NEVER open any attachement from enybody even your > friends unles you know what is in there,have asked for it or it has > been announced or so. > > I use e-mail a lot, with several accounts and get about 20 spams and > 3 to 5 virus-mais a day. It's terrible. > > Gerd > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "edward_stoneuk" > wrote: > > With regard to the recent posts which I don't understand; I have > an > > ISP who stops some viruses and emails me to say what they have > done. > > There are one or two a week. I also have Fire Trust's Mailwasher > > which I can set to bounce all unknown mail before it gets to my > > computer and last but not least I have Norton Internet Security > which > > blocks probably two or three computer attacks a fortnight. These > > come direct and not via an email. Norton's software enables me to > > see where the attack came from and the ISP used. The attacks, > which > > are mostly trojan horses come from all over the world. I find all > > this eery and depressing. > > Regards, > > Ted > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- > Yahoo! Groups Links > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > | 3241|3209|2004-03-07 10:50:11|keith green|Re: Internet Security|If you think it did not open, it makes ME think you TRIED to open it, in which case it DID open and you have a virus. I went through this last week. The one I got was 'Bagel.J', I read about others getting 'MyDoom' in this manner. You probably know by now that you have it so I won't go into further details. More of a warning to others. Keith ----- Original Message ----- From: Graeme To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, March 07, 2004 3:08 AM Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: Internet Security Henri Delete it ctrl + alt del do not open , the attachment if you do not know who it is from ----- Original Message ----- From: "Henri Naths" To: Sent: Sunday, March 07, 2004 2:18 PM Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: Internet Security > Hi all > I just recieved an e-mail from IIcarried@... with a file attachment which I did not open. I replied " who are you" and my message came back because it was blocked. I was wondering if anybody else got this message or if anybody knows of this address. H ..p.s. somehow this address got in my address book after recieving the letter.. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: bubblede > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Sent: 04 March, 2004 1:09 AM > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Internet Security > > > Ted, it _is_ depressing, but there is nothing really we can do about > that. For every hole that's plugged some guy will open another. > > This one arrived in my mailbox in spite of having my norton up to > date _daily_ and it did not detect it. > What is so nasty about this one is that it looks very legit indeed > including the fact that they give you a password and that it is > signed with soething linke "your provider.com team." > I almost fell for it when I got mail for "your justmueller.com > team", but luckily this is my own domain and the entire team > consists of just me and I did not remember having send anything like > that out ;-) > > You should be fairly safe though if a) you keep your virus program > up to date and b) NEVER open any attachement from enybody even your > friends unles you know what is in there,have asked for it or it has > been announced or so. > > I use e-mail a lot, with several accounts and get about 20 spams and > 3 to 5 virus-mais a day. It's terrible. > > Gerd > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "edward_stoneuk" > wrote: > > With regard to the recent posts which I don't understand; I have > an > > ISP who stops some viruses and emails me to say what they have > done. > > There are one or two a week. I also have Fire Trust's Mailwasher > > which I can set to bounce all unknown mail before it gets to my > > computer and last but not least I have Norton Internet Security > which > > blocks probably two or three computer attacks a fortnight. These > > come direct and not via an email. Norton's software enables me to > > see where the attack came from and the ISP used. The attacks, > which > > are mostly trojan horses come from all over the world. I find all > > this eery and depressing. > > Regards, > > Ted > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- > Yahoo! Groups Links > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3242|3209|2004-03-07 12:16:59|Henri Naths|Re: Internet Security|Hi Keith, No I never tried to open it as I had no idea who it was from.What I found amazing was it put itself in my address book. In an attempt to trace it's origin I was wondering if anybody else had any experience with this address and it's attachment. ----- Original Message ----- From: keith green To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: 07 March, 2004 8:50 AM Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: Internet Security If you think it did not open, it makes ME think you TRIED to open it, in which case it DID open and you have a virus. I went through this last week. The one I got was 'Bagel.J', I read about others getting 'MyDoom' in this manner. You probably know by now that you have it so I won't go into further details. More of a warning to others. Keith ----- Original Message ----- From: Graeme To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, March 07, 2004 3:08 AM Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: Internet Security Henri Delete it ctrl + alt del do not open , the attachment if you do not know who it is from ----- Original Message ----- From: "Henri Naths" To: Sent: Sunday, March 07, 2004 2:18 PM Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: Internet Security > Hi all > I just recieved an e-mail from IIcarried@... with a file attachment which I did not open. I replied " who are you" and my message came back because it was blocked. I was wondering if anybody else got this message or if anybody knows of this address. H ..p.s. somehow this address got in my address book after recieving the letter.. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: bubblede > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Sent: 04 March, 2004 1:09 AM > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Internet Security > > > Ted, it _is_ depressing, but there is nothing really we can do about > that. For every hole that's plugged some guy will open another. > > This one arrived in my mailbox in spite of having my norton up to > date _daily_ and it did not detect it. > What is so nasty about this one is that it looks very legit indeed > including the fact that they give you a password and that it is > signed with soething linke "your provider.com team." > I almost fell for it when I got mail for "your justmueller.com > team", but luckily this is my own domain and the entire team > consists of just me and I did not remember having send anything like > that out ;-) > > You should be fairly safe though if a) you keep your virus program > up to date and b) NEVER open any attachement from enybody even your > friends unles you know what is in there,have asked for it or it has > been announced or so. > > I use e-mail a lot, with several accounts and get about 20 spams and > 3 to 5 virus-mais a day. It's terrible. > > Gerd > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "edward_stoneuk" > wrote: > > With regard to the recent posts which I don't understand; I have > an > > ISP who stops some viruses and emails me to say what they have > done. > > There are one or two a week. I also have Fire Trust's Mailwasher > > which I can set to bounce all unknown mail before it gets to my > > computer and last but not least I have Norton Internet Security > which > > blocks probably two or three computer attacks a fortnight. These > > come direct and not via an email. Norton's software enables me to > > see where the attack came from and the ISP used. The attacks, > which > > are mostly trojan horses come from all over the world. I find all > > this eery and depressing. > > Regards, > > Ted > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- > Yahoo! Groups Links > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3243|3243|2004-03-07 21:59:41|Michael Casling|Motor|I am in the market for a 2.5 liter diesel engine for my aluminum fishing boat. I want to connect it to my OMC stern drive and figure out a way to cool it without using the water it is floating in. I do not have a skeg so my two ideas are to use a radiator or pump the water through tubes on the inside of the and against the hull. An Isuzu is one I am considering, I believe they used a slightly smaller engine in the Chevy Vega. Would appreciate any help and ideas. For sale very cheap one completely useless 153 cu. in Chevy 4 cylinder gas motor. The distributor may be okay but that's about it. Michael Casling| 3244|3244|2004-03-08 10:18:46|bubblede|Geometry/Yago update|Hi all I have just updated my website, mostly with a long page on my conversion of a hard-chine hull to origami. Contains lots of pics, model photos (no, not those ones...), dimensioned panels, CAD sceenshots and so on. http://www.justmueller.com/boats I would really appreciate if you guys could have a look if there is anything I misssed, new ideas on how to do it better before I commit myself for good or bad later this spring. Also: this is a good moment to say a big THANK YOU to all of you who have helped me over the last couple of weeks to better understand the origami-method, here in the group as well as in off-line mails: Brent, Greg, the Great Tanton, Gary who sent me 3d files, Nels, Colin and and and - this group is a great place to be ;-) All the Best from Budapest Gerd| 3245|3243|2004-03-08 19:10:23|jochenduersch|Re: Motor|--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Casling" wrote: > I am in the market for a 2.5 liter diesel engine for my aluminum > fishing boat. I want to connect it to my OMC stern drive and figure > out a way to cool it without using the water it is floating in. You should try to contact the folks at www.lancingmarine.com Although this company is in the UK, I haven't found anything similiar in the rest of the world. Josh| 3246|3243|2004-03-08 22:37:59|Michael Casling|Re: Motor|Thanks Josh, I just became aware of their site a couple of days ago, I have taken a look and they are doing what I want to do. I sent them an e-mail but as with a lot of companies they may not want to give free advice. I have found a 1.8 liter Isuzu and 2.5 liter Nissan, I am favouring the Isuzu because I can have all the associated bits with it. Still have to reslove the cooling and exhaust. I am thinking of using a radiator and a dry exhaust. The marraige to the drive unit will require some engineering but it should be cheaper than getting a marine gearbox shaft prop and strut. Michael Casling ----- Original Message ----- From: jochenduersch To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, March 08, 2004 4:10 PM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Motor --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Casling" wrote: > I am in the market for a 2.5 liter diesel engine for my aluminum > fishing boat. I want to connect it to my OMC stern drive and figure > out a way to cool it without using the water it is floating in. You should try to contact the folks at www.lancingmarine.com Although this company is in the UK, I haven't found anything similiar in the rest of the world. Josh To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3247|3247|2004-03-09 07:26:22|sanjay_4569|apply to 4,000 colleges in one stroke|I found a very good website http://www.TryETS.com which helps you to apply to 4,000 colleges of the world. I was largely benifited by this website and hence I want you to also be benifited. Just signup it is free and apply.| 3248|3248|2004-03-09 16:26:15|foursmiths87|building|hello all i've been following this board for awhile. just got the boat a couple of days ago, and i'm already reading it for the second time. i was wondering is anyone building one of these boats in manitoba,sask.or north wesrern ontario. i would be interested in a visit to see the process up close. thks robert| 3249|3248|2004-03-09 16:31:22|foursmiths87|Re: building|Sorry should be "i just got the book the other day" not the boat i want to look at a boat in progress. thks robert| 3250|3243|2004-03-09 18:40:44|brentswain38|Re: Motor|Just weld an aluminium cooling tank in the bottom of the hull and some flatbar to make the coolant take a circuitous rout . It takes 1.5 sq ft per ten HP. Aluminium transfers heat much better than steel and the whole bottom will act as a huge cooling fin.Dry exhaust ,altho noisy, is the most problem fee exhaust system there is. --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Michael Casling wrote: > Thanks Josh, I just became aware of their site a couple of days ago, I have taken a look and they are doing what I want to do. I sent them an e-mail but as with a lot of companies they may not want to give free advice. I have found a 1.8 liter Isuzu and 2.5 liter Nissan, I am favouring the Isuzu because I can have all the associated bits with it. Still have to reslove the cooling and exhaust. I am thinking of using a radiator and a dry exhaust. The marraige to the drive unit will require some engineering but it should be cheaper than getting a marine gearbox shaft prop and strut. Michael Casling > ----- Original Message ----- > From: jochenduersch > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Monday, March 08, 2004 4:10 PM > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Motor > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Casling" > wrote: > > I am in the market for a 2.5 liter diesel engine for my aluminum > > fishing boat. I want to connect it to my OMC stern drive and figure > > out a way to cool it without using the water it is floating in. > > You should try to contact the folks at www.lancingmarine.com > Although this company is in the UK, I haven't found anything similiar > in the rest of the world. > > Josh > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- > Yahoo! Groups Links > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3251|3244|2004-03-09 18:44:21|brentswain38|Re: Geometry/Yago update|Gerd Rounding off that hard knuckle at the bottom of the stem will make it easier to pull the two halves together either side of the knuckle. Other than that it looks great. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "bubblede" wrote: > Hi all > > I have just updated my website, mostly with a long page on my > conversion of a hard-chine hull to origami. Contains lots of pics, > model photos (no, not those ones...), dimensioned panels, CAD > sceenshots and so on. > > http://www.justmueller.com/boats > > I would really appreciate if you guys could have a look if there is > anything I misssed, new ideas on how to do it better before I > commit myself for good or bad later this spring. > > Also: this is a good moment to say a big THANK YOU to all of you who > have helped me over the last couple of weeks to better understand > the origami-method, here in the group as well as in off-line mails: > Brent, Greg, the Great Tanton, Gary who sent me 3d files, Nels, > Colin and and and - this group is a great place to be ;-) > > All the Best from Budapest > Gerd | 3252|3213|2004-03-09 18:52:28|brentswain38|Re: Geometry & Software|The trick to eliminating the knuckles at the ends of the chines is to use the finest angles possible for the end of the cutout.The greater the angle of the end of the cutout, the rougher the transition. Another trick is to grind a line beyond the end of the cutout halfway thru the plate so it will begin to bend ahead of the cutout. Tapping it there with the sledgehammer , while being careful not to leave hammer marks , will make the transition more gradual. This can be done after the hull is built, before painting and foaming.The greater the curve of the centreline the easier it will be to pull the centrelines in the ends together.Straight edges are hard to pull together and reverse curves are impossible. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > Thanks Gerd. > > The hulls you are seeing are the result of years of experimentation and refinement. I first started working on the idea of an origami hull without any knuckles in 1984 while sailing in Mexico. At the time the consensus seemed to be that knuckles were an inevitable result of the folding process. I did the math behind the shapes and found that knuckles were not inevitable. Rather that incredibly fair, beautiful and efficient shapes could result from this process. However, I could also see that solving the equations by discrete methods would not be practical except perhaps for large scale manufacturing. > > Later we were sailing in Hawaii and I had access to a notebook computer and designed our first hull using Lotus 1-2-3. This hull was done purely mathematically. While sailing in Thailand I ported this work to a custom written extension for Mechanical Desktop, which provides us a graphical interface to the mathematics behind origami. The "artifacts" you see in our drawings are a result of the limitations of CAD to represent an origami hull, not the underlying mathematics. The "magic" in origami is not in CAD, it is in the math. > > Achieving a fair, beautiful, efficient origami hull is not a trivial matter. Even with our technology it takes a couple of weeks to create a hull. We charge a modest fee for that, and our builders save months or years as a result. For most builders it simply makes sense to make money doing what they know best, and pay us to do what we know best. They end up way ahead as a result. > > What looks good in cardboard at 1/24 scale doesn't always fold in metal at full scale. There is a custom origami boat being built locally that had a set of patterns drawn by a very experienced origami designer. When they tried for fold this new boat, it would not come together at the bows. Eventually the boat had to be lengthened from 45 to 55 feet, and still it wouldn't come together without buckling the plates. Think of the months of aggravation and many thousands of $$, not to mention the permanent distortion to the hull that this builder could have avoided by starting with the right patterns. > > We are not limited to using round-bilged hulls. We typically do so because we are trying to achieve a boat that looks round. Why start with a chined hull, which in itself is usually an approximation of a round hull, when what you want to achieve is a round look? We can of course model chined boats and even other origami boats and in the process restore a round, fair look and even remove the knuckles. > > To date most of our boats have been larger sizes, because the simplicity of origami really pays dividends in a big boat. However as more and more builders are discovering this technique, we will continue to develop patterns for smaller boats. Right now our smallest patterns are for 36 feet, but we can scale our boats to any combination of length, beam, and freeboard you might desire. We are actively seeking builders interested in new designs from 26 to 40 feet. Anyone wanting to build that length of boat should contact us. > > http://www.origamimagic.com > > Greg Elliott > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: bubblede > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Saturday, March 06, 2004 2:35 AM > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Geometry & Software > > > Hi Greg > > > Our boats are developed from round-bilged hulls. > http://www.origamimagic.com/Design/LB36/LB36.htm > > Yes, and it' a very nice hull and if it turns out like the G55 it > will also look very good. Wish I would get the same result ;-) > > But in the central section, between approx stations 3 and 8, your > hull is clearly a developable hardchine hull, isn't it? Your front- > back view shows chines and straight edges there - even if later in > the real hull these will be rounder due to stretching and so on. > So even if you start from a round bilge hull, you do add developable > chines to your design and then count on the building and real world > effects to make them rounder. > > So maybe we could say that between Brent and you there is a > different approach in imagining the final shape, where > - You _add_ chines in the central part of a round-bilged hull, > pushing them outward from your shape, where as > - Brent _removes_ the chines from the for and aft sectiosn of a hard- > chine hull ... ? > > So how do you translate that idea to your CAD program? What program > are you using for design and expansion? > > Gerd > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- > Yahoo! Groups Links > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3253|3234|2004-03-09 18:54:11|brentswain38|Re: Draft|Those are the draft numbers for the fin keeler --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "prairiemaidca" wrote: > Hey Bert; The numbers from the back of Brent's book indicate a draft > of 4ft.6in. for the 31footer and 5ft.10in. for the 36footer. It does > not indicate bilge or fin keel. These numbers from my book may not > be the most update ones, as my book is getting pretty old. Our hull > is a fin keel so I really don't know if there is much of a draft > diff. between the two designs. For more info contact Brent directly > by E-mail and I'm sure he will be glad to give you any numbers you > might be interested in. Martin Forster (Prairie Maid) | 3254|3248|2004-03-09 18:56:23|brentswain38|Re: building|A friend is building one in Winnipeg. Email me directly and I'll give you his address and phone number. Brent Swain brentswain38@... --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "foursmiths87" wrote: > hello all > i've been following this board for awhile. > just got the boat a couple of days ago, and i'm > already reading it for the second time. > i was wondering is anyone building one of these boats > in manitoba,sask.or north wesrern ontario. > i would be interested in a visit to see the process > up close. > thks robert | 3255|3243|2004-03-09 19:01:07|Michael Casling|Re: Motor|Thank you Brent, that is the most straight forward answer I have had. The radiator is available if I want it for the motor, do you think the aluminum tank would be better. I have room to put a muffler on the exhaust. The Nissan has moved to the top of the list as it has twice the torque, a bit more horsepower, removable sleeves and geared cam timing. I can get an entire pickup for the right price. The bottom of the hull is easy to get at and has a large flat area about 14' by 1' each side of the V bottom. At 70 hp I need 10.5 sq. feet so there is lots of room. How deep should the cooling tank be? Michael Casling ----- Original Message ----- From: brentswain38 To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2004 3:40 PM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Motor Just weld an aluminium cooling tank in the bottom of the hull and some flatbar to make the coolant take a circuitous rout . It takes 1.5 sq ft per ten HP. Aluminium transfers heat much better than steel and the whole bottom will act as a huge cooling fin.Dry exhaust ,altho noisy, is the most problem fee exhaust system there is. --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Michael Casling wrote: > Thanks Josh, I just became aware of their site a couple of days ago, I have taken a look and they are doing what I want to do. I sent them an e-mail but as with a lot of companies they may not want to give free advice. I have found a 1.8 liter Isuzu and 2.5 liter Nissan, I am favouring the Isuzu because I can have all the associated bits with it. Still have to reslove the cooling and exhaust. I am thinking of using a radiator and a dry exhaust. The marraige to the drive unit will require some engineering but it should be cheaper than getting a marine gearbox shaft prop and strut. Michael Casling > ----- Original Message ----- > From: jochenduersch > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Monday, March 08, 2004 4:10 PM > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Motor > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Casling" > wrote: > > I am in the market for a 2.5 liter diesel engine for my aluminum > > fishing boat. I want to connect it to my OMC stern drive and figure > > out a way to cool it without using the water it is floating in. > > You should try to contact the folks at www.lancingmarine.com > Although this company is in the UK, I haven't found anything similiar > in the rest of the world. > > Josh > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- > Yahoo! Groups Links > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3256|3244|2004-03-10 03:19:46|bubblede|Re: Geometry/Yago update|Thanks Brent, sounds good coming from you ;-) yes, the forefoot is not quite finished yet, I guess it will actually go deeper rounded v- shaped somehow than the original very flat entry. from your experience, what are the consequences/practical differences of making your darts longer? My very limited experiments with smaller models make me think that - the closer the ends come to bow and stern the more they come into otherwise straight areas, and at least on the model produc less knuckels, but: - longer cuts will produce less compound roundness in the shortened "conical" sections - knuckels idicate strain which in turn means more compund curve - until finally we end up with an al-chines hulls. sort of vicious circle there. - for practical reasons it might be more difficult to handle and join a shape with longer cuts, and there are more joints to pull together ergo more possiblities to adjust badly or to srew up the welds etc - more welding/heating in the flatter end-sections, meaning more distortion - the longer the cut the more the cutout shapes will spread out over the sheet, using more material to waste... - last but not least: the shorter the cut the bigger the miracle and artistry - when I first saw your cutout-example from the filesection here, with it's short darts in an otherwise big solid flat shape, I thought this could NEVER work!! ;-) Otherwise and with my particular hull where the chine stays under the waterline all the way long to the bow, I could even make single cuts only from the bow, the shapes being only attached a the end, without the central vertical cut. might be difficult to handle and needs an awful lot of steel though - did you ever experiment with other shapes? All the best Gerd --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" wrote: > Gerd > Rounding off that hard knuckle at the bottom of the stem will make > it easier to pull the two halves together either side of the knuckle. > Other than that it looks great. > Brent Swain | 3257|3243|2004-03-10 19:44:01|brentswain38|Re: Motor|A cooling tank would be better than the radiator. The depth is not important , just the surface area. With skeg cooling the hot water rises to the top , so we pick the cool water of the bottom and dump the hot on top eliminating the need for baffling. With a horizontal tank you need to make sure the hot water doesn't just make a bee line to the pickup ,and make sure it flows over as much underwater surface as possible.I use a small header tank and just push a soft poly plastic cap on so there is no pressure in the system. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Michael Casling wrote: > Thank you Brent, that is the most straight forward answer I have had. The radiator is available if I want it for the motor, do you think the aluminum tank would be better. I have room to put a muffler on the exhaust. The Nissan has moved to the top of the list as it has twice the torque, a bit more horsepower, removable sleeves and geared cam timing. I can get an entire pickup for the right price. The bottom of the hull is easy to get at and has a large flat area about 14' by 1' each side of the V bottom. At 70 hp I need 10.5 sq. feet so there is lots of room. How deep should the cooling tank be? Michael Casling > ----- Original Message ----- > From: brentswain38 > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2004 3:40 PM > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Motor > > > Just weld an aluminium cooling tank in the bottom of the hull and > some flatbar to make the coolant take a circuitous rout . It takes > 1.5 sq ft per ten HP. Aluminium transfers heat much better than steel > and the whole bottom will act as a huge cooling fin.Dry > exhaust ,altho noisy, is the most problem fee exhaust system there is. > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Michael Casling > wrote: > > Thanks Josh, I just became aware of their site a couple of days > ago, I have taken a look and they are doing what I want to do. I sent > them an e-mail but as with a lot of companies they may not want to > give free advice. I have found a 1.8 liter Isuzu and 2.5 liter > Nissan, I am favouring the Isuzu because I can have all the > associated bits with it. Still have to reslove the cooling and > exhaust. I am thinking of using a radiator and a dry exhaust. The > marraige to the drive unit will require some engineering but it > should be cheaper than getting a marine gearbox shaft prop and strut. > Michael Casling > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: jochenduersch > > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > Sent: Monday, March 08, 2004 4:10 PM > > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Motor > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Casling" > > > wrote: > > > I am in the market for a 2.5 liter diesel engine for my > aluminum > > > fishing boat. I want to connect it to my OMC stern drive and > figure > > > out a way to cool it without using the water it is floating in. > > > > You should try to contact the folks at www.lancingmarine.com > > Although this company is in the UK, I haven't found anything > similiar > > in the rest of the world. > > > > Josh > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- > unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- ---- > ---------- > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of > Service. > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- > Yahoo! Groups Links > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3258|3244|2004-03-10 19:55:41|brentswain38|Re: Geometry/Yago update|Longer darts do fair in better , to a point, but to make them longer you give up more of those nice rounded ends. It's an aesthetic decision. Once the chines reach a certain length , the benefits of a longer cut decrease.Too short a cut and you have pinched ends ,the pregnant packhorse look of IOR racing boats of the 70's .If I went for more than 14 ft of chine on a 36 footer the benefit in terms of eliminating the knuckle would be slight, barely noticeable .Trying to eliminate the transverse seam accross the bottom plate is not worth the effort as it's in a relatively flat area of the hull and under very little stress.In used to make the chine full length before I started using conic ends . Going for conic ends eliminated 64 ft of fitting, cutting , grinding and welding on a 36 footer, and the results were much fairer. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "bubblede" wrote: > Thanks Brent, sounds good coming from you ;-) yes, the forefoot is > not quite finished yet, I guess it will actually go deeper rounded v- > shaped somehow than the original very flat entry. > > from your experience, what are the consequences/practical > differences of making your darts longer? My very limited experiments > with smaller models make me think that > - the closer the ends come to bow and stern the more they come into > otherwise straight areas, and at least on the model produc less > knuckels, but: > - longer cuts will produce less compound roundness in the > shortened "conical" sections - knuckels idicate strain which in turn > means more compund curve - until finally we end up with an al- chines > hulls. sort of vicious circle there. > - for practical reasons it might be more difficult to handle and > join a shape with longer cuts, and there are more joints to pull > together ergo more possiblities to adjust badly or to srew up the > welds etc > - more welding/heating in the flatter end-sections, meaning more > distortion > - the longer the cut the more the cutout shapes will spread out over > the sheet, using more material to waste... > - last but not least: the shorter the cut the bigger the miracle and > artistry - when I first saw your cutout-example from the filesection > here, with it's short darts in an otherwise big solid flat shape, I > thought this could NEVER work!! ;-) > > Otherwise and with my particular hull where the chine stays under > the waterline all the way long to the bow, I could even make single > cuts only from the bow, the shapes being only attached a the end, > without the central vertical cut. might be difficult to handle and > needs an awful lot of steel though - did you ever experiment with > other shapes? > > All the best > Gerd > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" > wrote: > > Gerd > > Rounding off that hard knuckle at the bottom of the stem will > make > > it easier to pull the two halves together either side of the > knuckle. > > Other than that it looks great. > > Brent Swain | 3259|3243|2004-03-10 20:04:50|Michael Casling|Re: Motor|Thanks again Brent. I typed before I thought. The tank needs to be no more than 1 1/2 inches deep maybe less. I have been thinking about where the water will go after it enters the tank, I can work on this with the machine shop. I will calculate the total volume of water in the tank to help determine the depth. The motor is 70 hp so 7 X 1.5 + 10.5. There is plenty of room in the hull for that. I bought the motor today, it is a 2.5 liter Nissan. Michael ----- Original Message ----- From: brentswain38 To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 4:43 PM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Motor A cooling tank would be better than the radiator. The depth is not important , just the surface area. With skeg cooling the hot water rises to the top , so we pick the cool water of the bottom and dump the hot on top eliminating the need for baffling. With a horizontal tank you need to make sure the hot water doesn't just make a bee line to the pickup ,and make sure it flows over as much underwater surface as possible.I use a small header tank and just push a soft poly plastic cap on so there is no pressure in the system. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Michael Casling wrote: > Thank you Brent, that is the most straight forward answer I have had. The radiator is available if I want it for the motor, do you think the aluminum tank would be better. I have room to put a muffler on the exhaust. The Nissan has moved to the top of the list as it has twice the torque, a bit more horsepower, removable sleeves and geared cam timing. I can get an entire pickup for the right price. The bottom of the hull is easy to get at and has a large flat area about 14' by 1' each side of the V bottom. At 70 hp I need 10.5 sq. feet so there is lots of room. How deep should the cooling tank be? Michael Casling > ----- Original Message ----- > From: brentswain38 > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2004 3:40 PM > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Motor > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3260|3243|2004-03-10 20:19:11|Gary H. Lucas|Re: Motor|Michael, I'd make the tank about 1/2" deep. Only the outside surface does any real work. Forcing the water to spread out in a thin layer would be much more efficient I believe. Gary H. Lucas ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael Casling" To: Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 8:04 PM Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: Motor > Thanks again Brent. I typed before I thought. The tank needs to be no more than 1 1/2 inches deep maybe less. I have been thinking about where the water will go after it enters the tank, I can work on this with the machine shop. I will calculate the total volume of water in the tank to help determine the depth. The motor is 70 hp so 7 X 1.5 + 10.5. There is plenty of room in the hull for that. I bought the motor today, it is a 2.5 liter Nissan. Michael > ----- Original Message ----- > From: brentswain38 > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 4:43 PM > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Motor > > > A cooling tank would be better than the radiator. The depth is not > important , just the surface area. With skeg cooling the hot water > rises to the top , so we pick the cool water of the bottom and dump > the hot on top eliminating the need for baffling. With a horizontal > tank you need to make sure the hot water doesn't just make a bee line > to the pickup ,and make sure it flows over as much underwater surface > as possible.I use a small header tank and just push a soft poly > plastic cap on so there is no pressure in the system. > Brent Swain > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Michael Casling > wrote: > > Thank you Brent, that is the most straight forward answer I have > had. The radiator is available if I want it for the motor, do you > think the aluminum tank would be better. I have room to put a muffler > on the exhaust. The Nissan has moved to the top of the list as it has > twice the torque, a bit more horsepower, removable sleeves and geared > cam timing. I can get an entire pickup for the right price. The > bottom of the hull is easy to get at and has a large flat area about > 14' by 1' each side of the V bottom. At 70 hp I need 10.5 sq. feet so > there is lots of room. How deep should the cooling tank be? Michael > Casling > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: brentswain38 > > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2004 3:40 PM > > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Motor > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > | 3261|3243|2004-03-10 20:39:31|Michael Casling|Re: Motor|Thanks Gary. I have learned quite a bit this past week. It is actually a relief to get rid of the petrol motor, it is a piece of junk. 1/2 inch does seem reasonable to me. I have to determine if the standard water pump will move the volume of water through the tanks ( possibly two tanks, one either side of the centerline ) and back up to the engine. A few tests will soon provide the results. Michael. ----- Original Message ----- From: Gary H. Lucas To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 5:19 PM Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: Motor Michael, I'd make the tank about 1/2" deep. Only the outside surface does any real work. Forcing the water to spread out in a thin layer would be much more efficient I believe. Gary H. Lucas ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael Casling" To: Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 8:04 PM Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: Motor > Thanks again Brent. I typed before I thought. The tank needs to be no more than 1 1/2 inches deep maybe less. I have been thinking about where the water will go after it enters the tank, I can work on this with the machine shop. I will calculate the total volume of water in the tank to help determine the depth. The motor is 70 hp so 7 X 1.5 + 10.5. There is plenty of room in the hull for that. I bought the motor today, it is a 2.5 liter Nissan. Michael > ----- Original Message ----- > From: brentswain38 > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 4:43 PM > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Motor > > > A cooling tank would be better than the radiator. The depth is not > important , just the surface area. With skeg cooling the hot water > rises to the top , so we pick the cool water of the bottom and dump > the hot on top eliminating the need for baffling. With a horizontal > tank you need to make sure the hot water doesn't just make a bee line > to the pickup ,and make sure it flows over as much underwater surface > as possible.I use a small header tank and just push a soft poly > plastic cap on so there is no pressure in the system. > Brent Swain > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3262|3262|2004-03-10 22:59:23|carlmbentley|various questions|couple of longish questions for those of you who have built brent swain designs, if you don't mind. please forgive me if these have been answered recently i've had no net access. on rods. does it matter if i use 7014 and 7018 instead of 7024. or 6013 instead of 6011 ? someone gave me 10 pounds of 7018, and 20 pounds 6013. the 7014 are on sale at the tractor supply store. i'm not kidding. on priming. i'm in the US so no pre-primed. i've heard of people using coraseal (sp?) any opinions either way? same as osphos? is it possible to grind and prime, or is a sand blasting absolutely required? after the grinding/sandblasting what primer should i go with, US availability please. that is if the coraseal is a no-go. i think i found navy surplus paint but just in case what should i look for to go on over the primer? on rust. i've had to start working more and just got back from a month out of town. still have millscale on outside of hull, but inside is nicely dusted. had heard/read it takes 17 years or something to rust through 3/16. i plan to be painted by fall at the latest. i assume this means i needn't worry about the little i have going on now ? thanks in advance guys -carl building BS36 in florida p.s. what's up with the steel prices ? i'm over budget already. my original quote (april-03) prior to starting was 3400.US$ for all steel for the 36. i'm at 4100.US$ so far and still need decks. guess i should have started sooner ;)| 3263|3262|2004-03-11 02:05:08|Graeme|Re: various questions|The price of steel has almost doubled in the U.S in the last FOUR MONTHS, china is taking any thing that looks like it can be melted and turn in to steel. Graeme -----Original Message----- From: carlmbentley [mailto:carlmbentley@...] Sent: Thursday, 11 March 2004 11:59 AM To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Subject: [origamiboats] various questions couple of longish questions for those of you who have built brent swain designs, if you don't mind. please forgive me if these have been answered recently i've had no net access. on rods. does it matter if i use 7014 and 7018 instead of 7024. or 6013 instead of 6011 ? someone gave me 10 pounds of 7018, and 20 pounds 6013. the 7014 are on sale at the tractor supply store. i'm not kidding. on priming. i'm in the US so no pre-primed. i've heard of people using coraseal (sp?) any opinions either way? same as osphos? is it possible to grind and prime, or is a sand blasting absolutely required? after the grinding/sandblasting what primer should i go with, US availability please. that is if the coraseal is a no-go. i think i found navy surplus paint but just in case what should i look for to go on over the primer? on rust. i've had to start working more and just got back from a month out of town. still have millscale on outside of hull, but inside is nicely dusted. had heard/read it takes 17 years or something to rust through 3/16. i plan to be painted by fall at the latest. i assume this means i needn't worry about the little i have going on now ? thanks in advance guys -carl building BS36 in florida p.s. what's up with the steel prices ? i'm over budget already. my original quote (april-03) prior to starting was 3400.US$ for all steel for the 36. i'm at 4100.US$ so far and still need decks. guess i should have started sooner ;) To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links| 3264|3262|2004-03-11 03:36:23|edward_stoneuk|Re: various questions|Carl, I am building a BS36' in the UK. Rods: I use 6013 rods. 6011 are difficult to impossible to source in the UK. All 6000 rods have the same strength. The 6011, so I understand, blast in better than 6013; the latter perhaps need more preparation of the steel. The 7024 lays on a lot of weld quickly but is not an all position rod. The strength of a 7000 series rod at 70,000 PSI is probably greater than the steel you are using. Primer: I bought self colour steel, then cut out and welded up the sub assemblies, hull halves, skeg, side decks, keels etc then using a front end loader took the parts out into a field to get the dust away from the build area and had them sand blasted. We then painted with Zinga, which is a Belgian zinc treatment. I think it can be bought in the States. Try Googling it. It is expensive but I have experience of using it at work and found it very effective. Rusting: Rusting off the millscale makes it easier and therefore cheaper to blast. The problem is if water is allowed to pool in a component or allowed to stay between two sheets that are stacked together. In this case the rusting will be pitted and before not very long the pits will perforate the steel. Regards, Ted| 3265|3209|2004-03-11 17:19:59|Paul J. Thompson|Re: Internet Security|Gerd, Make the switch to Linux and you can forget about viruses et al. There is a bit of a learning cure involved but nothing that some one who can build a boat can not handle. Once your are over the learning bit you will probably wonder why it took you so long! Regards, Paul -----Original Message----- From: bubblede [mailto:gerd@...] Sent: Thursday, 4 March 2004 9:09 p.m. To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Internet Security Ted, it _is_ depressing, but there is nothing really we can do about that. For every hole that's plugged some guy will open another. --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.596 / Virus Database: 379 - Release Date: 26/02/2004| 3266|3209|2004-03-11 17:51:20|jim dorey|Re: Internet Security|there are viri that attack linux, but faaaaar less than attack MS windows, most viri are written by script kiddies, the easiest platform for them to attack is MS windows. the easiest way to gain access and destroy a system is to have physical access to it, so make sure you are the only one who uses the system, or make sure the firewall/anti-spyware/anti-virus are up to date. there are distributions of linux that are incredibly easy to set up and use, but they take more system resources or are difficult to reconfigure. there are cd images that allow you to try linux without having to make any changes to your system at all, download or buy, slide it in the cd drive and boot. Paul J. Thompson wrote: > Gerd, > > Make the switch to Linux and you can forget about viruses et al. There > is a > bit of a learning cure involved but nothing that some one who can build a > boat can not handle. Once your are over the learning bit you will probably > wonder why it took you so long! > > Regards, > > Paul -- http://www.skaar.101main.net http://www.PetitionOnline.com/spcdvd/ http://www.petitiononline.com/impjapan/petition-sign.html? moderator of wildsteam@yahoogroups.com DOM and proud!!!| 3267|3262|2004-03-11 18:18:13|jameshanahan|Re: various questions|--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Graeme" wrote: > > > The price of steel has almost doubled in the U.S in the last FOUR > MONTHS, china is taking any thing that looks like it can be melted and > turn in to steel. > > Graeme > Japan did the same thing prior to World War 2. I think the ante has just been raised! Jim| 3268|3248|2004-03-11 20:41:16|tsuhaung@aol.com|Re: building|Hello To the new builder. I live in Manitoba and am going through the stage where should I build get a finished hull or look for a used one. I am looking at approx. 36' and am interested; as is a welder friend, looking at the process first hand, I have found a finished hull, Brent Swain 36' bilge keel. I am starting to get some prices from shops to build the hull/deck part then finish the rest myself. If anybody has recently bought the cutting files what was the cost and what would modifications run to the plans, a coach roof. I am also curious if anybody has used a hydraulic drive for the main drive of the boat. I have been thinking about this for some time now mount the engine lower where it would fit better perhaps and sideways with a hydraulic pump on the end. Then I could also run the anchor windless off this. My engine could always be kept at an optimal rpm and still get whatever shaft speed I needed. Any thoughts or reasons why not? Ken [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3269|3248|2004-03-11 20:55:07|wiliamdg|Re: building|Do you have a reference for a working hydraulic drive? Would it eliminate any direct drive shaft connection with its vibration, and alignment issues?--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, tsuhaung@a... wrote: > Hello To the new builder. I live in Manitoba and am going through the stage > where should I build get a finished hull or look for a used one. I am looking > at approx. 36' and am interested; as is a welder friend, looking at the process > first hand, I have found a finished hull, Brent Swain 36' bilge keel. I am > starting to get some prices from shops to build the hull/deck part then finish > the rest myself. If anybody has recently bought the cutting files what was the > cost and what would modifications run to the plans, a coach roof. > I am also curious if anybody has used a hydraulic drive for the main drive of > the boat. I have been thinking about this for some time now mount the engine > lower where it would fit better perhaps and sideways with a hydraulic pump on > the end. Then I could also run the anchor windless off this. My engine could > always be kept at an optimal rpm and still get whatever shaft speed I needed. > Any thoughts or reasons why not? > Ken > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3271|3248|2004-03-11 23:25:23|Steve Bennett|Re: building|There was a bilge keel boat for sale at the Vancouver boat show a couple of years ago. I think it was built by SailTech (sp) and I think it had twin hydraulic drives. I took a bunch of digital pics of the boat and will see if I can dig them up if you want to have a look. On 11-Mar-04, at 6:40 PM, tsuhaung@... wrote: > > I am also curious if anybody has used a hydraulic drive for the main > drive of > the boat. I have been thinking about this for some time now mount the > engine > lower where it would fit better perhaps and sideways with a hydraulic > pump on > the end. Then I could also run the anchor windless off this. My > engine could > always be kept at an optimal rpm and still get whatever shaft speed I > needed. > Any thoughts or reasons why not? > Ken > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > To Post a message, send it to:   origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > • To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ >   > • To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com >   > • Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of > Service. > > | 3272|3272|2004-03-11 23:40:14|prairiemaidca|Hydraulic Drive|lHi All: When I first started Prairie Maid we were looking at using a hydraulic system. My best friend just happens to own a large hydraulic shop that custom builds and repairs cyclinders. After consulting with him it seemed that to do it right the cost of the components was far to much in comparison to a standard driveline. It can be done on the cheap with components from Princess auto etc. but if you want the reliability then the good stuff costs. Don't forget to factor in the fluid tank that is required. If you work it out for a system to run for long hot periods of time it requires quite a lot of hydraulic fluid. Martin Forster (Prairie Maid)| 3273|3272|2004-03-11 23:55:16|Michael Casling|Re: Hydraulic Drive|I am interested in drive options as well. Now that I know how to cool my new 2.5 litre Nissan Diesel ( actually a used motor from the wreckers ) I would like to consider all options. The simplest seems to be to make an adaptor and bolt it to the stern drive leg. This is an 18 foot aluminum fishing boat. If I use a marine gearbox I would have to angle the motor down at the back quite a lot and use a gearbox with an offset drive. Any ideas for a cheap drive system. I will be going at planing speeds, the Nissan has 115 foot pounds of torqe at 2000 rpm and 70 hp at 4000. Should be enough to do 25 mph maybe more. Michael Casling ----- Original Message ----- From: prairiemaidca To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2004 8:39 PM Subject: [origamiboats] Hydraulic Drive lHi All: When I first started Prairie Maid we were looking at using a hydraulic system. My best friend just happens to own a large hydraulic shop that custom builds and repairs cyclinders. After consulting with him it seemed that to do it right the cost of the components was far to much in comparison to a standard driveline. It can be done on the cheap with components from Princess auto etc. but if you want the reliability then the good stuff costs. Don't forget to factor in the fluid tank that is required. If you work it out for a system to run for long hot periods of time it requires quite a lot of hydraulic fluid. Martin Forster (Prairie Maid) To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3274|3248|2004-03-12 01:35:07|Henri Naths|Re: building|I think it's great, use the engine as ballast-- the only negetive is in a hydraulic system there is a big loss of efficiently, you would have to talk to a hdraulic engineer, any heat loss created in a system is energy loss. regards, Henri ----- Original Message ----- From: wiliamdg To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: 11 March, 2004 6:55 PM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: building Do you have a reference for a working hydraulic drive? Would it eliminate any direct drive shaft connection with its vibration, and alignment issues?--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, tsuhaung@a... wrote: > Hello To the new builder. I live in Manitoba and am going through the stage > where should I build get a finished hull or look for a used one. I am looking > at approx. 36' and am interested; as is a welder friend, looking at the process > first hand, I have found a finished hull, Brent Swain 36' bilge keel. I am > starting to get some prices from shops to build the hull/deck part then finish > the rest myself. If anybody has recently bought the cutting files what was the > cost and what would modifications run to the plans, a coach roof. > I am also curious if anybody has used a hydraulic drive for the main drive of > the boat. I have been thinking about this for some time now mount the engine > lower where it would fit better perhaps and sideways with a hydraulic pump on > the end. Then I could also run the anchor windless off this. My engine could > always be kept at an optimal rpm and still get whatever shaft speed I needed. > Any thoughts or reasons why not? > Ken > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3275|3248|2004-03-12 01:39:57|Henri Naths|Re: building|Ken, I think it's great, use the engine as ballast-- the only negetive is in a hydraulic system there is a big loss of efficiently, you would have to talk to a hdraulic engineer, any heat loss created in a system is energy loss.Hydraulic systems create a tremendous amount of heat. regards, Henri ----- Original Message ----- From: wiliamdg To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: 11 March, 2004 6:55 PM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: building Do you have a reference for a working hydraulic drive? Would it eliminate any direct drive shaft connection with its vibration, and alignment issues?--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, tsuhaung@a... wrote: > Hello To the new builder. I live in Manitoba and am going through the stage > where should I build get a finished hull or look for a used one. I am looking > at approx. 36' and am interested; as is a welder friend, looking at the process > first hand, I have found a finished hull, Brent Swain 36' bilge keel. I am > starting to get some prices from shops to build the hull/deck part then finish > the rest myself. If anybody has recently bought the cutting files what was the > cost and what would modifications run to the plans, a coach roof. > I am also curious if anybody has used a hydraulic drive for the main drive of > the boat. I have been thinking about this for some time now mount the engine > lower where it would fit better perhaps and sideways with a hydraulic pump on > the end. Then I could also run the anchor windless off this. My engine could > always be kept at an optimal rpm and still get whatever shaft speed I needed. > Any thoughts or reasons why not? > Ken > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3276|3248|2004-03-12 01:40:14|Henri Naths|Re: building|Ken, I think it's great, use the engine as ballast-- the only negetive is in a hydraulic system there is a big loss of efficiently, you would have to talk to a hdraulic engineer, any heat loss created in a system is energy loss.Hydraulic systems create a tremendous amount of heat. regards, Henri ----- Original Message ----- From: wiliamdg To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: 11 March, 2004 6:55 PM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: building Do you have a reference for a working hydraulic drive? Would it eliminate any direct drive shaft connection with its vibration, and alignment issues?--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, tsuhaung@a... wrote: > Hello To the new builder. I live in Manitoba and am going through the stage > where should I build get a finished hull or look for a used one. I am looking > at approx. 36' and am interested; as is a welder friend, looking at the process > first hand, I have found a finished hull, Brent Swain 36' bilge keel. I am > starting to get some prices from shops to build the hull/deck part then finish > the rest myself. If anybody has recently bought the cutting files what was the > cost and what would modifications run to the plans, a coach roof. > I am also curious if anybody has used a hydraulic drive for the main drive of > the boat. I have been thinking about this for some time now mount the engine > lower where it would fit better perhaps and sideways with a hydraulic pump on > the end. Then I could also run the anchor windless off this. My engine could > always be kept at an optimal rpm and still get whatever shaft speed I needed. > Any thoughts or reasons why not? > Ken > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3277|3209|2004-03-12 03:26:46|bubblede|Re: Internet Security|Paul, I am using linux extensively in my job, we build and maintain data-collection systems with internationally distributed servers running linux, postgres and a bunch of our own client-server systems. We also build and run utilities and applications on linux, including some mobile wireless java apps that we run in Pocketpc PDAs converted to linux ;-) All our programmers are running linux now for development-workstations and so on BUT for my personal work-machines I still run windows grudgingly because i have tons of data and applications for which i have no equivalent in linux. For many people it can work alredy, but for my desktop there is still a lot missing even if it's catching up. If projects like Wine/Codeweavers crossover etc will advance a bit more and allow me to run the application I need, I'll be the first to jump. Still, life without Outlook will be defficult. For the virus problem: it's a pain, but if you are careful and keep your protection up to date you should be ok - the major problem for me at the moment is that all this stuff clobbers up our servers and mailboxes. Linux will protect you against getting infected and sending out, but not against receiving all this stuff. Linux from CD: there is KNOPPIX, very good, even as a standby in your briefcase so you can carry your pc with you wherever you go, very complete installation with everything you need runs from CD, it's at http://www.knoppix.com/ Gerd --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Paul J. Thompson" wrote: > Gerd, > > Make the switch to Linux and you can forget about viruses et al. There is a > bit of a learning cure involved but nothing that some one who can build a > boat can not handle. Once your are over the learning bit you will probably > wonder why it took you so long! > > Regards, > > Paul > > -----Original Message----- > From: bubblede [mailto:gerd@j...] > Sent: Thursday, 4 March 2004 9:09 p.m. > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Internet Security > > Ted, it _is_ depressing, but there is nothing really we can do about > that. For every hole that's plugged some guy will open another. > > > > --- > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.596 / Virus Database: 379 - Release Date: 26/02/2004 | 3278|3278|2004-03-12 05:20:08|edward_stoneuk|BS 36 Cabin Sides|The plans for the BS36' cabin sides show the forward 8' as having a constant height of 10 5/8" but ending at 10 ¾". The aft sides start forward at 10 3/4" rising to 12 ¼". This gives a small vertical dogleg in the sides. Would it be better to go for a continuous equal slope in terms of appearance and fitting the cabin roof? Regards, Ted| 3279|3248|2004-03-12 12:14:12|Henri Naths|Re: building|sorry about triple posting , computers fault. ----- Original Message ----- From: Henri Naths To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: 11 March, 2004 11:40 PM Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: building Ken, I think it's great, use the engine as ballast-- the only negetive is in a hydraulic system there is a big loss of efficiently, you would have to talk to a hdraulic engineer, any heat loss created in a system is energy loss.Hydraulic systems create a tremendous amount of heat. regards, Henri ----- Original Message ----- From: wiliamdg To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: 11 March, 2004 6:55 PM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: building Do you have a reference for a working hydraulic drive? Would it eliminate any direct drive shaft connection with its vibration, and alignment issues?--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, tsuhaung@a... wrote: > Hello To the new builder. I live in Manitoba and am going through the stage > where should I build get a finished hull or look for a used one. I am looking > at approx. 36' and am interested; as is a welder friend, looking at the process > first hand, I have found a finished hull, Brent Swain 36' bilge keel. I am > starting to get some prices from shops to build the hull/deck part then finish > the rest myself. If anybody has recently bought the cutting files what was the > cost and what would modifications run to the plans, a coach roof. > I am also curious if anybody has used a hydraulic drive for the main drive of > the boat. I have been thinking about this for some time now mount the engine > lower where it would fit better perhaps and sideways with a hydraulic pump on > the end. Then I could also run the anchor windless off this. My engine could > always be kept at an optimal rpm and still get whatever shaft speed I needed. > Any thoughts or reasons why not? > Ken > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3280|3248|2004-03-12 16:13:39|Gordon Schnell|Re: building|That boat is still for sail. The owner is still asking about $400k, although it is slowly dropping. Gord ----- Original Message ----- From: Steve Bennett Date: Thursday, March 11, 2004 8:25 pm Subject: Re: [origamiboats] building > There was a bilge keel boat for sale at the Vancouver boat show a > couple of years ago. I think it was built by SailTech (sp) and I > think > it had twin hydraulic drives. I took a bunch of digital pics of > the > boat and will see if I can dig them up if you want to have a look. > > > On 11-Mar-04, at 6:40 PM, tsuhaung@... wrote: > > > > > I am also curious if anybody has used a hydraulic drive for the > main > > drive of > > the boat. I have been thinking about this for some time now > mount the > > engine > > lower where it would fit better perhaps and sideways with a > hydraulic > > pump on > > the end. Then I could also run the anchor windless off this. My > > engine could > > always be kept at an optimal rpm and still get whatever shaft > speed I > > needed. > > Any thoughts or reasons why not? > > Ken > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to:   origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > • To visit your group on the web, go to: > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > >   > > • To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > >   > > • Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! > Terms of > > Service. > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- > unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > | 3281|3248|2004-03-12 19:44:03|tsuhaung@aol.com|Re: building|I would like to see any pictures of hydraulic drives in a small boat application that I am looking at, under 40'. The drive units I have been looking at are small enough to go much lower in the hull and closer to the prop reducing the shaft length. the shorter this distance and the straighter all the components are in align the less chance of vibration. Any vibration would then come down to prop balance, cavitation or bent shaft which would be virtually impossible on such a short shaft. The other advantage would be in the ability to maintain a specific shaft rpm and torque. Also driving the anchor windless which could be set-up quit easily using the BS do it yourself simple windless drum. Ken [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3282|3272|2004-03-12 19:44:06|tsuhaung@aol.com|Re: Hydraulic Drive|Good point on the oil tank. I was thinking that it could be built into the keel and use that surface area below the water line for cooling. Rust would not be a problem and a sump and filter system could be added. This would keep a little more of the non-consumable weight as low as possible. I had hoped to seal the lead ballast over with steel plate then use this keel trough as various tank compartments. At some point around the middle and at the lowest section put in the bilge pump. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3283|3272|2004-03-13 12:14:22|candle032000|Re: Hydraulic Drive|-Hi all, in the past few years ,I have towed in two sailboats with blown hydraulic drives. Both of them blew hoses and didn't have the extra 30-40 gallons of oil on board to replace the fluid that was all over their engine compartments. I looked into puttine a system on my present boat with an 80 hp engine and was quoted over six thousand Can. for the pump alone to give the neccessary output. Hydraulic drives are also very noisy in general and I have found the high pitched whine very irksome. On a work boat I was on, we broke a main high pressure line on a crane and drained a 350 gallon oil tank in 4 minutes. An auto-shutoff would have been nice! Cheers,Greg -- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, tsuhaung@a... wrote: > Good point on the oil tank. I was thinking that it could be built into the > keel and use that surface area below the water line for cooling. Rust would not > be a problem and a sump and filter system could be added. This would keep a > little more of the non-consumable weight as low as possible. I had hoped to seal > the lead ballast over with steel plate then use this keel trough as various > tank compartments. At some point around the middle and at the lowest section > put in the bilge pump. > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3284|3284|2004-03-13 14:13:14|fmichael graham|Re: Frequently Asked Questions|wow! what was all that about? my head's still spinning. wendy wrote:FAQ about Islam (Frequently Asked Questions) Who is Allah? Allah means God. It is a personal name, which Allah calls Himself in the Koran. That is where we get it. It can also be found in an Aramaic copy of the Bible, and even Christian Arabs say Allah. Who is Jesus to us? Jesus peace be upon Him is a true prophet. Sent by Allah like Moses, Abraham, Lot, Noah, Jonah, Joseph �etc. Who were Jesus's parents? Jesus is the son of Virgin Mary, and he had no father. Allah created Jesus. Can Jesus, or Mohammed peace be upon them be worshipped? No, Allah does not accept that a cow, a person, an angel, a prophet, a stone, or anything be worshipped in place of him, or even along with Him. Worship must be to Allah the creator of them. Is Allah the same as what Christians call the father? Allah is the creator who Jesus worshipped. He is the Creator who spoke to Moses, and split the sea for Moses, and his followers. That is Allah. But Allah tells us: "Say Allah is one, He is Perfect, He has never begotten, nor was He begott, and there is no one equal to Him". Is there a trinity in Islam? No. Allah is perfect. Do we believe that Allah created the heavens and earth in 6 days? Yes, but He did not rest on the seventh day, because He did not get tired. Allah is perfect He does not get tired, nor does He sleep, eat, go to the bathroom, feel pain, or die for that matter. Can we see Allah? Allah is not like the sun. Anyone can see the Sun. But Allah is the most beautiful. Nothing is as beautiful as Allah. Actually looking at Allah is the greatest pleasure of the people in Pradise. This pleasure Allah does not give anyone but the believers. So no one will see Allah before he dies. Does Allah see us? Allah sees us, and knows everything about us. He knows us better than we know ourselves. There is not a leaf on a tree that blows away, or stays in its place except that He knows it. There is not a dry spot, nor a wet spot, nor a grain in the depths of the earth except that Allah knows it. Do we have free will? Yes, of course. Allah does not punish us for something we did not do on our own. But at the same time, our will is not inspire of Allah's will. We cannot do anything if Allah will not allow it. In other words nothing goes on in Allah's kingdom without His will. Did Allah create Evil? Yes, Allah created the good, and the bad. Whatever bad happens to us is due to our sins. We sin and Allah pardons much of what we do; however, when something bad happens to us it is our fault, and we are to blame. Bad things that happen to a person are a chance for that person to reflect, and ask: �Why is this happening to me?� A chance for a person to return from his sin, and obey, and worship Allah. Do bad things happen to the believers (good people)? Yes, they do. But they appear bad to the believers cause they are things people don't like. Who likes breaking a leg? However, when a bad thing happens to a believer this believer is patient. He praises Allah in all circumstances. He knows Allah does not decree something unless it is for his own good. But how can breaking a leg are good for a beleiver? Because it is a chance for the believer to think about what he did wrong. Also because Allah forgives much of what we do, but those things we are not forgiven, they are forgiven due to our patience when we are struck by a calamity. Allah gives us better reward when a problem strikes us on earth if we are patient. This reward can be on earth, and it can be in Heaven. Does Allah hear my prayers? Yes. Does Allah answer my prayers? We know that Allah answers all the prayers of the believers. This can be in 4 ways: 1- Get what we are asking for! 2- Get something as good or better! 3- We get spared something bad that would have happened otherwise. 4- We get rewarded on the day of Judgment with a much greater reward than what we were asking for on earth. When does Allah not answer our prayers? * When it is bad for us! * When we ask, but not from our heart! * When we say: I asked and asked and He did not answer. * When we eat, drink, and wear unlawful, food, and clothes, and property that wa earned either through interest from the bank, or that was stolen, or if the food was pork, or the like. What can I ask of Allah? Any thing but don't ask Him to do things like make you a prophet. Cause He has already said that there will be no more prophets. You can ask Allah for guidance. Meaning you can ask Him to show you the correct religion. Who are my best friends? Your best friends are the ones that care where you go after you are dead. This is like the prophets. They cared that we go to heaven, even if it meant some hardship on earth. Who is my worst enemy? That would be the devils, whether they are human devils (evil people), or Jinn devils (like Iblis) The Arabic word for a devil is Shaytan (similar to Satan). Satan wants us all to go to hell. He wants us to be bad on earth, even if we get rich, or do lots of wrong things that we appear to enjoy, he does not mind that. But he wants to make sure we don't go to heaven. What is it that keeps us from entering Heaven? Worship of anyone other than Allah is the greatest sin. It is called shirk, and this is not forgiven except through repentance. Where is Allah? Allah is the highest. He is high above ALL of His creation. He is ascended upon a Throne, which is greater than the heavens, and the Earth. Much much much greater than the heavens and the earth. So much greater that the heavens and the earth could fit in the footstool of the throne, and they would be like a ring thrown into an open desert. Allah is certainly the greatest. Does Allah look like us? No Allah is perfect. He is not like any of His creation. He has told us that He has Hands, Eyes, a Face, and Foot. But all of these attributes are befitting to His might and Glory. A Muslim does not say a single thing about Allah other than what Allah says about Himself. We don't say He is like a clover, He got tired, He is Jealous! Allah is Perfect, and Unique. What does it mean to believe in Allah? It means to believe in Allah in total perfection, and uniqueness. It means to believe in His prophets cause they are His, and He sent them. We cannot pick and choose. A Muslim must believe in all the prophets of Allah. It means to believe in the Angles! We must love them all, we cannot hate an Angel say, for example, to hate Michael who is charged with rain, and the vegetation of the Earth, or Gabriel who is charged with revelation (brings down the scriptures to the prophets). It means to believe in Allah's predestination of good, and bad (relative to us, but to Allah everything Allah does is good). It means to believe in the last day: The day of Judgment. When is the Day of Judgment? Only Allah knows. Are there signs for the day of Judgment? Plenty, plenty, plenty. Many have already occurred. To name a few, Objects will begin to talk. There will be much killing. The killer won't know why he killed, and the guy that was killed won't know why he was killed. The Antichrist will come. Prophet Jesus son of Mary will return. Gog and Magog will be set free. The sun will rise from the west (after this one there can be no more repentance) What about non-Muslims do they go to heaven? Allah only accepts Islam. He says in the Koran: "Whoever seeks a religion other than Islam it won't be accepted of him, and he will be one of the loosers in the hereafter". I would rather loose anywhere, but not loose in the hereafter. This is because Hellfire is eternal. It never ends, and we never die when we go there, if we go there. What about someone who never heard of Islam? Allah is the most just. Don't even think that we can be nicer than Allah. Allah is the Most Just, and He said in the Koran "We were not to punish till having sent a warner". The "We" here is the majestic we used in Arabic. So if a person never heard about Islam, and was never warned clearly Allah would have a special test for that person that He knows is equal to the chance that person would have had on earth. How do we know Islam is the truth? It is the only religion that: 1- Hold Allah as One, Unique, and Perfect. 2- A lonly worship of Allah, not Jesus, not an idol, and not an angel only Allah. 3- The Koran does not contain contradictions. 4- The Koran contains scientific facts, which are 1300 years ahead of their time. The Koran while revealed 1400 years ago contains scientific facts, which are only now being discovered. It is not in contradiction to science. 5- Allah challenges the world to produce the like of the Koran. And He says they won't be able to. 6- Prophet Mohammed was the most influential man in History. Even a non-Muslim wrote a book called the 100 most influential men in History, and Prophet Mohammed was #1. Prophet Jesus was #3. Note even Prophet Jesus was a prophet sent by Allah. Would Allah allow a false prophet to be so successful? No. Even the Bible says this in Deuteronomy 18:19. A false prophet would die!!! Yet Prophet Mohammed did not die till he completely conveyed, and taught Allah's religion. 7- He had many prophecies, and all of his prophecies have come true, or are still coming true. Most importantly is this: Allah created us, and we know that we should only worship Him. This is an instinct Allah has created us with. He did not just leave us, rather He sent prophets for us. These prophets had miracles as proof. The miracle for us today is the Koran. There is no other religion that worships only Allah, and believes in Him as totally perfect, and believes in all of His prophets, and scriptures. Can anyone become a Muslim? Yes anyone can. There are two declarations, which are necessary: 1- To bear witness that no one deserves to be worship except Allah 2- To bear witness that Prophet Mohammed is the Messenger of Allah. This makes a person Muslim. But it should be said in Arabic. Next a person takes a shower, and He/She is a Muslim. Then What? After a person becomes Muslim he/she is taught about Prayers, Fasting, the Poor due, Pilgrimage. These are pillars of Islam. Then What? Muslims are brothers. A Muslim should love for his brother what he loves for himself. Allah's wealth does not run out, and Allah can provide for us all. We pray for each other, and love each other, and love for our brothers and sisters what we love for ourselves. For more information about Islam: http://www.geocities.com/fares220104/1.html To visit our group on the web: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/truth-zone/ To contact us: imanway@... To Request Free Islamic Books & Resources: imanwayibaw@... To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links --------------------------------- Post your free ad now! Yahoo! Canada Personals [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3285|3285|2004-03-13 14:18:12|prairiemaidca|Hydraulic Drive|Hi All: I can only imagine the nightmare that would occur in todays enviromentally conscious world if 20 gal. of hy.fluid was to make it's way to a bilge that is protected by an auto bilge pump. We had a small amount of diesel fuel leak from one of our tractors on it's Ft.McMurry run and the clean up and disposal costs were in the tens of thousands. And that was on a city street. Good insurance would be prudent. Martin Forster (Prairie Maid)| 3286|3285|2004-03-13 14:26:02|bilgekeeldave|Re: Hydraulic Drive|I work on large container ships. Some use hydraulic 'hinge frames' to lock the containers in place on deck. We use a vegetable oil as the hydraulic fluid so that any leaks are biodegradable and less annoying to sea life and government officials. Dave --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "prairiemaidca" wrote: > Hi All: I can only imagine the nightmare that would occur in todays > enviromentally conscious world if 20 gal. of hy.fluid was to make > it's way to a bilge that is protected by an auto bilge pump. We had > a small amount of diesel fuel leak from one of our tractors on it's > Ft.McMurry run and the clean up and disposal costs were in the tens > of thousands. And that was on a city street. Good insurance would > be prudent. > Martin Forster (Prairie Maid) | 3287|3287|2004-03-13 15:28:59|Henri Naths|(no subject)|wow! what was all that about? my head's still spinning. Seems to me the worshipers of "allah" blow up trains,themselves and destroy . The Godly create. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3288|3278|2004-03-13 16:21:50|brentswain38|Re: BS 36 Cabin Sides|With a tumblehome of 1 inch in 12 inches of rise, an equal slope on top would give the cabinside a reverse sheer when viewed from the side, ugly as hell.This reverse sheer would only be visible on the front piece which has an outside curve following the inside edge of the side deck and wouldn't show on the aft piece as it's parallel to the centreline. Follow the plans ,as these lines are the result of 24 years of evolution, or you'll have an extremely ugly boat for no good reason. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "edward_stoneuk" wrote: > The plans for the BS36' cabin sides show the forward 8' as having a > constant height of 10 5/8" but ending at 10 ¾". The aft sides start > forward at 10 3/4" rising to 12 ¼". This gives a small vertical > dogleg in the sides. Would it be better to go for a continuous equal > slope in terms of appearance and fitting the cabin roof? > > Regards, > Ted | 3289|3248|2004-03-13 16:34:53|brentswain38|Re: building|People tell me that Hydraulic drives let you put the engine wherever you want. If I could put an engine anywhere in a boat I would put it under the compaionway where I currently do. Flexible mounts need super flexible exhaust pipes and electrical wiring with all their problems.They tell me that it will also power my hydralic anchor winch. This I can do with a much smaller and cheaper belt driven pump that it would take to drive a boat.With the ideal position of an engine being right next to the end of the shaft, why would anyone want to go to all the extra time, trouble ,expense and complexity and potential problems of putting hydraulics between them. Just bolt the friggin engine to the friggin shaft and spend the extra money and time using the boat for what it is meant for , cruising. Hydraulics also have a huge power loss.Keep it simple.Once an engine is well lined up and the bolts are drilled and wired, alignment is no longer a problem. Even if it takes you a couple of days to get it right , what's a couple of days in a lifetime? Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "wiliamdg" wrote: > Do you have a reference for a working hydraulic drive? Would it > eliminate any direct drive shaft connection with its vibration, and > alignment issues?--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, tsuhaung@a... > wrote: > > Hello To the new builder. I live in Manitoba and am going through > the stage > > where should I build get a finished hull or look for a used one. I > am looking > > at approx. 36' and am interested; as is a welder friend, looking > at the process > > first hand, I have found a finished hull, Brent Swain 36' bilge > keel. I am > > starting to get some prices from shops to build the hull/deck part > then finish > > the rest myself. If anybody has recently bought the cutting files > what was the > > cost and what would modifications run to the plans, a coach roof. > > I am also curious if anybody has used a hydraulic drive for the > main drive of > > the boat. I have been thinking about this for some time now mount > the engine > > lower where it would fit better perhaps and sideways with a > hydraulic pump on > > the end. Then I could also run the anchor windless off this. My > engine could > > always be kept at an optimal rpm and still get whatever shaft > speed I needed. > > Any thoughts or reasons why not? > > Ken > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3290|3248|2004-03-13 16:37:11|brentswain38|Re: building|Hello Manitoba One of my 36 footers is being built in Winnipeg. Send me a direct e- mail and I'll tell you where. Brent Swain brentswain38@... --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, tsuhaung@a... wrote: > Hello To the new builder. I live in Manitoba and am going through the stage > where should I build get a finished hull or look for a used one. I am looking > at approx. 36' and am interested; as is a welder friend, looking at the process > first hand, I have found a finished hull, Brent Swain 36' bilge keel. I am > starting to get some prices from shops to build the hull/deck part then finish > the rest myself. If anybody has recently bought the cutting files what was the > cost and what would modifications run to the plans, a coach roof. > I am also curious if anybody has used a hydraulic drive for the main drive of > the boat. I have been thinking about this for some time now mount the engine > lower where it would fit better perhaps and sideways with a hydraulic pump on > the end. Then I could also run the anchor windless off this. My engine could > always be kept at an optimal rpm and still get whatever shaft speed I needed. > Any thoughts or reasons why not? > Ken > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3291|3248|2004-03-13 18:30:30|tsuhaung@aol.com|Re: building|Thank you to all for the insights in the hydraulic drive. The true beauty of this forum and others like it is the fact that so much experience is shared and lets one make a truly well informed decision. The small belt drive pump for the windless sounds like a viable option as all the components can be had at local suppliers cheap, Princess Auto, etc. A friend of mine works in Las Vegas at one of the theatres; I work in theatre, they use hydraulic lifts in a swimming pool for the show. He said they do break lines put use some type of water soluble oil (vegetable?) that does not require them draining the pool. This sounds like a marine friendly substance I will look into it further. Ken [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3292|3209|2004-03-13 21:26:23|Paul J. Thompson|Re: Internet Security|HI Gerd, I fully agree with the points that you have made. I have fortunately got around a fair number of these problem by using WIN4LIN. Admittedly it only runs Win98 under Linux but it has taken care of most of my needs. I an using (grudgingly) Win2000 for what I cannot get to work via WIN4LIN. I also really wish that there were charting software available that runs on Linux. By the way, have you tried Evolution? It is a Linux version on outlook and it does everything that outlook does. However if you need exchange sever, I am not sure what the solutions are. Regards, Paul -----Original Message----- From: bubblede [mailto:gerd@...] Sent: Friday, 12 March 2004 9:27 p.m. To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Internet Security Paul, I am using linux extensively in my job, we build and maintain data-collection systems with internationally distributed servers running linux, postgres and a bunch of our own client-server systems. We also build and run utilities and applications on linux, including some mobile wireless java apps that we run in Pocketpc PDAs converted to linux ;-) All our programmers are running linux now for development-workstations and so on BUT for my personal work-machines I still run windows grudgingly because i have tons of data and applications for which i have no equivalent in linux. For many people it can work alredy, but for my desktop there is still a lot missing even if it's catching up. If projects like Wine/Codeweavers crossover etc will advance a bit more and allow me to run the application I need, I'll be the first to jump. Still, life without Outlook will be defficult. For the virus problem: it's a pain, but if you are careful and keep your protection up to date you should be ok - the major problem for me at the moment is that all this stuff clobbers up our servers and mailboxes. Linux will protect you against getting infected and sending out, but not against receiving all this stuff. Linux from CD: there is KNOPPIX, very good, even as a standby in your briefcase so you can carry your pc with you wherever you go, very complete installation with everything you need runs from CD, it's at http://www.knoppix.com/ Gerd --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Paul J. Thompson" wrote: > Gerd, > > Make the switch to Linux and you can forget about viruses et al. There is a > bit of a learning cure involved but nothing that some one who can build a > boat can not handle. Once your are over the learning bit you will probably > wonder why it took you so long! > > Regards, > > Paul > > -----Original Message----- > From: bubblede [mailto:gerd@j...] > Sent: Thursday, 4 March 2004 9:09 p.m. > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Internet Security > > Ted, it _is_ depressing, but there is nothing really we can do about > that. For every hole that's plugged some guy will open another. > > > > --- > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.596 / Virus Database: 379 - Release Date: 26/02/2004 To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links --- Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.620 / Virus Database: 399 - Release Date: 11/03/2004 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.620 / Virus Database: 399 - Release Date: 11/03/2004| 3293|3293|2004-03-14 05:15:55|edward_stoneuk|Rudder Height|Brent, Thanks for the info on the cabin sides. Another question: I have seen some boats where the top of transom hung rudder is below the top of the transom and the tiller comes in through a hole. Dudley Dix's Hout Bay 33 is one example. I have sailed on another boat where there was a cut-out in the back of the transom down to the cockpit sole level and the tiller came through there with a swan neck on it to hand height. This cut-out was to give access to the dinghy in its davits and provided a very large cockpit drain. The 36' with its cockpit running back to the transom and drains would lend itself to that. It gives a smoother looking top to the transom and lowers the centre of gravity a smidgen. I was thinking of cutting a hole out below the gunwale pipe and leaving it and the transom plate in place apart from the hole. Do you see any down side to doing it apart from some extra work perhaps although if the tiller came in through the elongated cockpit drain there would be very little. It would bring the pintles of the rudder closer together. Regards, Ted| 3294|3209|2004-03-14 06:02:33|bubblede|Re: Internet Security|Paul - evolution is good and has the utlook feeel - but I have about 1 Gig of info, mail, attachements and so on in several outlook files archived over the years files, meaning a progam that can not just use them as is will not help me. Also I have a lot of work as well as private projects in macromedia format, from web-projects to designs, plus other grafics programs, plus video-projects an although there are some (still a bit clunky) programs that cover most of that under linux, I would loose my work if I would force myself to migrate and I am not ready for that. If the linux-community would simply offer be the better OS, and concentrate on building windows compatibility for running apps that would be better than - like Ximian, KDE et al - try to ape MS, always lagging behind by a couple of years in functionality. Same for app-development under linux - most of these clunkers would not stand a chance on the free windows shareware-market if they had been ported there. Well, but that is really a subject for another group, unless somebody comes up with origami-PCs ;-) Gerd --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Paul J. Thompson" wrote: > HI Gerd, > > I fully agree with the points that you have made. I have fortunately got > around a fair number of these problem by using WIN4LIN. Admittedly it only > runs Win98 under Linux but it has taken care of most of my needs. I an using > (grudgingly) Win2000 for what I cannot get to work via WIN4LIN. I also > really wish that there were charting software available that runs on Linux. > By the way, have you tried Evolution? It is a Linux version on outlook and > it does everything that outlook does. However if you need exchange sever, I > am not sure what the solutions are. > > Regards, > > Paul | 3295|3295|2004-03-14 09:55:03|rainmaker19542002|Alternate Drives|There is another option for those seeking alternate drive systems: Diesel-Electric. These systems have been used successfully in many applications such as locomotives, naval vessels, etc. there are many benefits such as reliability (>100,000 hrs MBTF), 50% noise reduction, less maintenance, less engine room space, less weight, andincreased MPG. It allows you to place the engine anywhere you desire. Fast Electric Yacht Systems (www.feys.org) is a company that is adapting this technology for the general public. There was a recent articla in PassageMaker Mag about a ~40 ft. trawler that has this system on board. He removed one diesel engine, installed the remaining engine on the centerline, coupled the generator to the engine, and ran electric motors on both prop shafts. Increased MPG, instant torque at slow RPM, and quieter. In the case of deisel engione failure, he can run the genset (12KW I think) and do 8-9 knots just on the genset output. Could be the wave of the future.| 3296|3295|2004-03-14 10:50:10|Henri Naths|Re: Alternate Drives|electric motors and generators are heavy. ----- Original Message ----- From: rainmaker19542002 To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: 14 March, 2004 7:55 AM Subject: [origamiboats] Alternate Drives There is another option for those seeking alternate drive systems: Diesel-Electric. These systems have been used successfully in many applications such as locomotives, naval vessels, etc. there are many benefits such as reliability (>100,000 hrs MBTF), 50% noise reduction, less maintenance, less engine room space, less weight, andincreased MPG. It allows you to place the engine anywhere you desire. Fast Electric Yacht Systems (www.feys.org) is a company that is adapting this technology for the general public. There was a recent articla in PassageMaker Mag about a ~40 ft. trawler that has this system on board. He removed one diesel engine, installed the remaining engine on the centerline, coupled the generator to the engine, and ran electric motors on both prop shafts. Increased MPG, instant torque at slow RPM, and quieter. In the case of deisel engione failure, he can run the genset (12KW I think) and do 8-9 knots just on the genset output. Could be the wave of the future. To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3297|3297|2004-03-14 10:58:53|prairiemaidca|Tiller placement|Hi Ted: I was wondering if you were planning on having propane on board? Most of us are using the space at the rear of the cockpit to accomodate the propane tanks. If you place your tiller there will you get enough room to swing the tiller for full deflection from side to side? Just some thoughts. Martin Forster (Prairie Maid)| 3298|3298|2004-03-14 13:35:37|greenguy2ca|Propane Tanks|Just wondering what group thoughts would be about placement of propane tanks. Are there pre-made plastic containers for example or best to build box. Personally, I do not like the look of all that clutter hanging off the railing at the back of the boat but if you want propane I guess you have no choice. Comments appreciated Gary| 3299|3297|2004-03-14 14:45:45|edward_stoneuk|Re: Tiller placement|Martin, That's a good point about the propane cylinders but we have a parafin stove and cabin heater ready to go in. Regards, Ted| 3300|3298|2004-03-14 15:13:46|bilgekeeldave|Re: Propane Tanks|I built a plywood lazerette that extends across the back of the cockpit, just above the stern scuppers. It keeps the propane tank out of the weather and it is a good place to stow the water hose, various electical adaptors for shore power and stuff that I don't know where else to put. I also stand on it when I'm manuvering to a dock. It is curved to match the curve of the transom and is painted the same color as the rest of the cockpit. I am replacing it after 20 years, as it has started to rot a little where water sometimes collects on the seat on one side of the cockpit. I will use plywood again, and replace it again in twenty years. Dave --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "greenguy2ca" wrote: > Just wondering what group thoughts would be about placement of > propane tanks. Are there pre-made plastic containers for example or > best to build box. Personally, I do not like the look of all that > clutter hanging off the railing at the back of the boat but if you > want propane I guess you have no choice. Comments appreciated > > Gary | 3301|3295|2004-03-14 23:40:58|Michael Casling|Re: Alternate Drives|I do not think it will be the wave of the future as a diesel a gearbox shaft and prop is so simple. For me it adds more complexity and weight for no reason, but I can see the logic for a catamaran if one engine can be removed, but for a single hull the basics work fine. I was hoping that there might be some dicussion on flexible couplings and CV joints, alternate gearboxes used, that sought of thing. I am working on my power boat so I can not get to picky. Michael Casling ----- Original Message ----- From: rainmaker19542002 To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, March 14, 2004 6:55 AM Subject: [origamiboats] Alternate Drives There is another option for those seeking alternate drive systems: Diesel-Electric. These systems have been used successfully in many applications such as locomotives, naval vessels, etc. there are many benefits such as reliability (>100,000 hrs MBTF), 50% noise reduction, less maintenance, less engine room space, less weight, andincreased MPG. It allows you to place the engine anywhere you desire. Fast Electric Yacht Systems (www.feys.org) is a company that is adapting this technology for the general public. There was a recent articla in PassageMaker Mag about a ~40 ft. trawler that has this system on board. He removed one diesel engine, installed the remaining engine on the centerline, coupled the generator to the engine, and ran electric motors on both prop shafts. Increased MPG, instant torque at slow RPM, and quieter. In the case of deisel engione failure, he can run the genset (12KW I think) and do 8-9 knots just on the genset output. Could be the wave of the future. To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3302|3295|2004-03-15 03:49:01|Red Green|Re: Alternate Drives|Hello All, Is it the weight issue alone that prevents us from cutting off the front rails of a front wheel drive auto and using it for the drive system? I would think that you get these benfits. Original engine mounts. Parts of the original heavy chasis to weld as reqiured to the hull or other mounting brace. Original gear box (4 speed automatic with overdrive and reverse). As for the two wheels (hubs or Rims) one side used to drive the prop the other to drive generator or anything else that can be run with a fan belt type drive. Of course some sort of brace will be devised to replace shock obsorbers struts or what have you to keep one side of the drive in line with prop shaft. Another brace for the other side to keep the drive in a stationary position to run other equipment. Some disadvantages and problems are weight. How will a limited slip differential act when used in this fashion? How to align drive and prop shaft and connect them. Any other problems you can think of and of course your thoughts welcome. Daniel Chicago >From: Michael Casling >Reply-To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com >To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com >Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Alternate Drives >Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2004 20:35:53 -0800 > >I do not think it will be the wave of the future as a diesel a gearbox >shaft and prop is so simple. For me it adds more complexity and weight for >no reason, but I can see the logic for a catamaran if one engine can be >removed, but for a single hull the basics work fine. I was hoping that >there might be some dicussion on flexible couplings and CV joints, >alternate gearboxes used, that sought of thing. I am working on my power >boat so I can not get to picky. Michael Casling > ----- Original Message ----- > From: rainmaker19542002 > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Sunday, March 14, 2004 6:55 AM > Subject: [origamiboats] Alternate Drives > > > There is another option for those seeking alternate drive systems: > Diesel-Electric. These systems have been used successfully in many > applications such as locomotives, naval vessels, etc. there are many > benefits such as reliability (>100,000 hrs MBTF), 50% noise > reduction, less maintenance, less engine room space, less weight, > andincreased MPG. It allows you to place the engine anywhere you > desire. > Fast Electric Yacht Systems (www.feys.org) is a company that is > adapting this technology for the general public. There was a recent > articla in PassageMaker Mag about a ~40 ft. trawler that has this > system on board. He removed one diesel engine, installed the > remaining engine on the centerline, coupled the generator to the > engine, and ran electric motors on both prop shafts. Increased MPG, > instant torque at slow RPM, and quieter. In the case of deisel > engione failure, he can run the genset (12KW I think) and do 8-9 > knots just on the genset output. Could be the wave of the future. > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: >origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Yahoo! Groups Links > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of >Service. > > > >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > _________________________________________________________________ Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee when you click here. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963| 3303|3295|2004-03-15 04:05:14|Red Green|Re: Alternate Drives|Oops rereading my own post. You also get a 4 cylinder, mostly dependable engine and parts available in most places around the planet. Daniel Chicago >From: Michael Casling >Reply-To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com >To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com >Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Alternate Drives >Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2004 20:35:53 -0800 > >I do not think it will be the wave of the future as a diesel a gearbox >shaft and prop is so simple. For me it adds more complexity and weight for >no reason, but I can see the logic for a catamaran if one engine can be >removed, but for a single hull the basics work fine. I was hoping that >there might be some dicussion on flexible couplings and CV joints, >alternate gearboxes used, that sought of thing. I am working on my power >boat so I can not get to picky. Michael Casling > ----- Original Message ----- > From: rainmaker19542002 > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Sunday, March 14, 2004 6:55 AM > Subject: [origamiboats] Alternate Drives > > > There is another option for those seeking alternate drive systems: > Diesel-Electric. These systems have been used successfully in many > applications such as locomotives, naval vessels, etc. there are many > benefits such as reliability (>100,000 hrs MBTF), 50% noise > reduction, less maintenance, less engine room space, less weight, > andincreased MPG. It allows you to place the engine anywhere you > desire. > Fast Electric Yacht Systems (www.feys.org) is a company that is > adapting this technology for the general public. There was a recent > articla in PassageMaker Mag about a ~40 ft. trawler that has this > system on board. He removed one diesel engine, installed the > remaining engine on the centerline, coupled the generator to the > engine, and ran electric motors on both prop shafts. Increased MPG, > instant torque at slow RPM, and quieter. In the case of deisel > engione failure, he can run the genset (12KW I think) and do 8-9 > knots just on the genset output. Could be the wave of the future. > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: >origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Yahoo! Groups Links > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of >Service. > > > >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > _________________________________________________________________ Learn how to help protect your privacy and prevent fraud online at Tech Hacks & Scams. http://special.msn.com/msnbc/techsafety.armx| 3304|3295|2004-03-15 10:52:13|Henri Naths|Re: Alternate Drives|Dear Red , I've seen diffs on rear wheel drives welded so that both wheels turn, if you can do that to a vw jetta diff. would be interesting, anyone? H. ps aligning drive to prop shaft, no problem-- cv joints ----- Original Message ----- From: Red Green To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: 15 March, 2004 1:49 AM Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Alternate Drives Hello All, Is it the weight issue alone that prevents us from cutting off the front rails of a front wheel drive auto and using it for the drive system? I would think that you get these benfits. Original engine mounts. Parts of the original heavy chasis to weld as reqiured to the hull or other mounting brace. Original gear box (4 speed automatic with overdrive and reverse). As for the two wheels (hubs or Rims) one side used to drive the prop the other to drive generator or anything else that can be run with a fan belt type drive. Of course some sort of brace will be devised to replace shock obsorbers struts or what have you to keep one side of the drive in line with prop shaft. Another brace for the other side to keep the drive in a stationary position to run other equipment. Some disadvantages and problems are weight. How will a limited slip differential act when used in this fashion? How to align drive and prop shaft and connect them. Any other problems you can think of and of course your thoughts welcome. Daniel Chicago >From: Michael Casling >Reply-To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com >To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com >Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Alternate Drives >Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2004 20:35:53 -0800 > >I do not think it will be the wave of the future as a diesel a gearbox >shaft and prop is so simple. For me it adds more complexity and weight for >no reason, but I can see the logic for a catamaran if one engine can be >removed, but for a single hull the basics work fine. I was hoping that >there might be some dicussion on flexible couplings and CV joints, >alternate gearboxes used, that sought of thing. I am working on my power >boat so I can not get to picky. Michael Casling > ----- Original Message ----- > From: rainmaker19542002 > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Sunday, March 14, 2004 6:55 AM > Subject: [origamiboats] Alternate Drives > > > There is another option for those seeking alternate drive systems: > Diesel-Electric. These systems have been used successfully in many > applications such as locomotives, naval vessels, etc. there are many > benefits such as reliability (>100,000 hrs MBTF), 50% noise > reduction, less maintenance, less engine room space, less weight, > andincreased MPG. It allows you to place the engine anywhere you > desire. > Fast Electric Yacht Systems (www.feys.org) is a company that is > adapting this technology for the general public. There was a recent > articla in PassageMaker Mag about a ~40 ft. trawler that has this > system on board. He removed one diesel engine, installed the > remaining engine on the centerline, coupled the generator to the > engine, and ran electric motors on both prop shafts. Increased MPG, > instant torque at slow RPM, and quieter. In the case of deisel > engione failure, he can run the genset (12KW I think) and do 8-9 > knots just on the genset output. Could be the wave of the future. > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: >origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Yahoo! Groups Links > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of >Service. > > > >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > _________________________________________________________________ Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee when you click here. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3305|3295|2004-03-15 10:58:10|Henri Naths|Re: Alternate Drives|p.s.s. with an automatic trans you could even use the "cruise" control. against adverse condition ----- Original Message ----- From: Red Green To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: 15 March, 2004 2:05 AM Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Alternate Drives Oops rereading my own post. You also get a 4 cylinder, mostly dependable engine and parts available in most places around the planet. Daniel Chicago >From: Michael Casling >Reply-To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com >To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com >Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Alternate Drives >Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2004 20:35:53 -0800 > >I do not think it will be the wave of the future as a diesel a gearbox >shaft and prop is so simple. For me it adds more complexity and weight for >no reason, but I can see the logic for a catamaran if one engine can be >removed, but for a single hull the basics work fine. I was hoping that >there might be some dicussion on flexible couplings and CV joints, >alternate gearboxes used, that sought of thing. I am working on my power >boat so I can not get to picky. Michael Casling > ----- Original Message ----- > From: rainmaker19542002 > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Sunday, March 14, 2004 6:55 AM > Subject: [origamiboats] Alternate Drives > > > There is another option for those seeking alternate drive systems: > Diesel-Electric. These systems have been used successfully in many > applications such as locomotives, naval vessels, etc. there are many > benefits such as reliability (>100,000 hrs MBTF), 50% noise > reduction, less maintenance, less engine room space, less weight, > andincreased MPG. It allows you to place the engine anywhere you > desire. > Fast Electric Yacht Systems (www.feys.org) is a company that is > adapting this technology for the general public. There was a recent > articla in PassageMaker Mag about a ~40 ft. trawler that has this > system on board. He removed one diesel engine, installed the > remaining engine on the centerline, coupled the generator to the > engine, and ran electric motors on both prop shafts. Increased MPG, > instant torque at slow RPM, and quieter. In the case of deisel > engione failure, he can run the genset (12KW I think) and do 8-9 > knots just on the genset output. Could be the wave of the future. > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: >origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Yahoo! Groups Links > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of >Service. > > > >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > _________________________________________________________________ Learn how to help protect your privacy and prevent fraud online at Tech Hacks & Scams. http://special.msn.com/msnbc/techsafety.armx To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3306|3295|2004-03-15 14:18:53|John Jones|Re: Alternate Drives|The March issue of Latitudes & Attitudes has an article on page-156 "The Electric Revolution!". 144VDC motors turning a big prop re-charges while sailing with the prop freewheeling... 1 hour motoring /2 hrs sailing. I think it's pretty kewl. John| 3307|3248|2004-03-15 17:35:02|Steve Bennett|Re: building|I posted some pics of the boat from the Vancouver boat show in 2002. The Album is called Imagine. On 12-Mar-04, at 2:06 PM, Gordon Schnell wrote: > That boat is still for sail. The owner is still asking about $400k, > although it is slowly dropping. > Gord > | 3308|3295|2004-03-15 17:53:07|bubblede|Re: Alternate Drives - Prop drag|I believe that a free-turning propeller actually causes more drag when sailing than a blocked one due to turbulance over the full diameter (quite apart from wearing out mechanical parts, stuffing etc over long distances)... also: why cut anything, take a VW with all the junk, stick the wheels through the hull and fix some paddles ;-) I saw a guy who coupled up an old Citroen 2CV engine into a riverboat, including the gearbox, aircooled and a very groovy sound especially when starting... he actually could change gears ;-) The thing burned out later, I think due to overheating in the bilge. Gerd --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "John Jones" wrote: > The March issue of Latitudes & Attitudes has an article on > page-156 "The Electric Revolution!". 144VDC motors turning a > big prop re-charges while sailing with the prop freewheeling... 1 > hour motoring /2 hrs sailing. > > I think it's pretty kewl. John | 3309|3295|2004-03-15 20:01:21|richytill|Re: Alternate Drives - Prop drag|--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "bubblede" wrote: > I believe that a free-turning propeller actually causes more drag > when sailing than a blocked one due to turbulance over the full > diameter (quite apart from wearing out mechanical parts, stuffing > etc over long distances)... > > also: why cut anything, take a VW with all the junk, stick the > wheels through the hull and fix some paddles ;-) > I saw a guy who coupled up an old Citroen 2CV engine into a > riverboat, including the gearbox, aircooled and a very groovy sound > especially when starting... he actually could change gears ;-) > The thing burned out later, I think due to overheating in the bilge. > Gerd > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "John Jones" > wrote: > > The March issue of Latitudes & Attitudes has an article on > > page-156 "The Electric Revolution!". 144VDC motors turning a > > big prop re-charges while sailing with the prop freewheeling... 1 > > hour motoring /2 hrs sailing. > > > > I think it's pretty kewl. John | 3310|3295|2004-03-15 20:21:17|richytill|Re: Alternate Drives - Prop drag|I took a 1600cc VW Rabbit engine from a wreck and mated it up to a Borg Warner 71c transmission with conventional propshaft. Parts are easy. Still tinkering with the underwater exhaust. Took a bit of time but it works. rt -- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "bubblede" wrote: > I believe that a free-turning propeller actually causes more drag > when sailing than a blocked one due to turbulance over the full > diameter (quite apart from wearing out mechanical parts, stuffing > etc over long distances)... > > also: why cut anything, take a VW with all the junk, stick the > wheels through the hull and fix some paddles ;-) > I saw a guy who coupled up an old Citroen 2CV engine into a > riverboat, including the gearbox, aircooled and a very groovy sound > especially when starting... he actually could change gears ;-) > The thing burned out later, I think due to overheating in the bilge. > Gerd > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "John Jones" > wrote: > > The March issue of Latitudes & Attitudes has an article on > > page-156 "The Electric Revolution!". 144VDC motors turning a > > big prop re-charges while sailing with the prop freewheeling... 1 > > hour motoring /2 hrs sailing. > > > > I think it's pretty kewl. John | 3311|3311|2004-03-15 23:26:36|John Jones|Drag|Yup It is a drag but, it's more of a drag to try & run on flat batteries and of coarse then the fridge stops and the lights die and the VHF won't work either and least of all, the air conditioning and water pump stops too...... what a drag. John| 3312|3043|2004-03-17 15:21:09|Rob|Re: Boat like Contessa 26|IS DOVEIII a 26'? So you have a picture of a 26'? How did the 26' sail? Not like a pig, I hope. Still interested in a shorter boat. Rob| 3313|3295|2004-03-17 16:05:01|Dick Pilz|Re: Alternate Drives - Prop drag|The actual point of the free-wheeling prop is the recharge the batteries from the sail power without needing any other generating system. The main two downsides of this set up are: A. The weight/size/stowage/cost of the battery bank ( 12 x 12 volts equals 144 volts) This is for a sailing craft so 1500 pounds or so of mostly lead can be useful for some of the ballasting. B. The cost of the Solomon Tech system is well north of 10 kilobucks On the upside is you never need to refuel. You could even size your batteries and energy budget to have an electric stove. Like many decisions, a low running cost in this case has a very high first cost. --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "bubblede" wrote: > I believe that a free-turning propeller actually causes more drag > when sailing than a blocked one due to turbulance over the full > diameter (quite apart from wearing out mechanical parts, stuffing > etc over long distances)... > > also: why cut anything, take a VW with all the junk, stick the > wheels through the hull and fix some paddles ;-) > I saw a guy who coupled up an old Citroen 2CV engine into a > riverboat, including the gearbox, aircooled and a very groovy sound > especially when starting... he actually could change gears ;-) > The thing burned out later, I think due to overheating in the bilge. > Gerd > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "John Jones" > wrote: > > The March issue of Latitudes & Attitudes has an article on > > page-156 "The Electric Revolution!". 144VDC motors turning a > > big prop re-charges while sailing with the prop freewheeling... 1 > > hour motoring /2 hrs sailing. > > > > I think it's pretty kewl. John | 3314|3295|2004-03-17 16:46:47|put_to_sea|Re: Alternate Drives - Prop drag|I have been reading up on electric drives for over a year now and there is a lot of good information on the electric boat site: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/electricboats/ What I have gathered is that: 1. Regeneration does not usually work as well as claimed. 2. The size prop required for effective regeneration is quite large and causes significant drag especially in light air. 3. To achieve any range at all requires a lot of batteries and the accompanying weight, first cost and ongoing cost. 4. The Solomon Tech system is very expensive but there are much cheaper home brewed systems out there. 5. There are a lot of energy losses in the system. So what am I considering doing? I will either do as Brent suggests and put in a simple diesel direct to prop system or, install a SMALL (approx 10 hp or less) diesel and alternator to charge a modest battery bank with an electric motor drive. Why this configuration? 1. I can optimize the prop and elecric motor for thrust without having to consider regeneration. 2. I need a battery bank anyway to run some elecrical equipment mainly being radar, autopilot and running lights. 3. I don't plan to do very much motoring so the losses between alternator and motor are acceptable. 4. When I do need to charge the batteries I am efficiently configured to do the job. 5. When I need a lot of power for a short period on time I can use the combination of the alternator and the accumulated power in the batteries. 6. I can motor at low power settings for long periods of time using the alternator to periodically recharge the batteries. 7. I am not really adding that much complexity to the system by eliminating the transmission and adding an electric motor. 8. I will lose some efficiency while motoring and gain some efficiency when charging the batteries for other purposes. All that said I am still worried about the affect of the salt air or salt water on electrical system components. Amos --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Dick Pilz" wrote: > The actual point of the free-wheeling prop is the recharge the > batteries from the sail power without needing any other generating > system. > > The main two downsides of this set up are: > > A. The weight/size/stowage/cost of the battery bank ( 12 x 12 volts > equals 144 volts) This is for a sailing craft so 1500 pounds or so of > mostly lead can be useful for some of the ballasting. > > B. The cost of the Solomon Tech system is well north of 10 kilobucks > > On the upside is you never need to refuel. You could even size your > batteries and energy budget to have an electric stove. > > Like many decisions, a low running cost in this case has a very high > first cost. | 3316|3295|2004-03-18 08:23:08|dreemer1962|Re: Alternate Drives - Prop drag|--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "bubblede" wrote: > I believe that a free-turning propeller actually causes more drag > when sailing than a blocked one due to turbulance over the full > diameter (quite apart from wearing out mechanical parts, stuffing > etc over long distances)... Couldn't controllable pitch propeller be a solution for the drag? Milan| 3317|3317|2004-03-18 11:00:15|John Jones|Folding Prop|Yup In the Latts & Atts article that was mentioned. If you needed to re-charge but have a folding prop, the prop could be locked by running astearn for a few seconds. It's as efficient but it works. John| 3318|3317|2004-03-18 11:16:29|bubblede|Re: Folding Prop|Well, a folding prop is not adjustable pitch... running it backwards (depending on the brand also) is supposed to just open it and keep it there. I don't think adjustable pitch really helps, and still complicates matters - I really think that a prop that is optimized for a certain combination of hull/revs/power/speed can not be optimized at the same time for producing electricity under sail. It will work, yes, but I doubt that that is more efficient (or less expensive in the end) than a dedicated water-trailing system. For "normal" needs go for solar panels and/or wind generators. If you want real power (cooking, air-con's etc), I would go for a small , fixed diesel generator, we fitted them on yachts from 50' up and that really solves all energy problems, but makes some noise and is a lot of cash. Personally I would rather reduce my needs and not bother, and certainly not rely on something that slows me down under sail ;-) Gerd --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "John Jones" wrote: > Yup > In the Latts & Atts article that was mentioned. If you needed to > re-charge but have a folding prop, the prop could be locked by > running astearn for a few seconds. > It's as efficient but it works. > John | 3319|3317|2004-03-18 20:16:12|Gary H. Lucas|Re: Folding Prop|Take a look at a modern prop. They are asymmetrical 'wings' flying through the water. When used to drive a generator the shape is completely backwards wrong, even a propeller made from flat plates welded to the shaft at an angle would be more efficient. This is really the heart of the problem. Gary H. Lucas ----- Original Message ----- From: "bubblede" To: Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2004 11:16 AM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Folding Prop > Well, a folding prop is not adjustable pitch... running it backwards > (depending on the brand also) is supposed to just open it and keep > it there. > I don't think adjustable pitch really helps, and still complicates > matters - I really think that a prop that is optimized for a certain > combination of hull/revs/power/speed can not be optimized at the > same time for producing electricity under sail. It will work, yes, > but I doubt that that is more efficient (or less expensive in the > end) than a dedicated water-trailing system. > For "normal" needs go for solar panels and/or wind generators. If > you want real power (cooking, air-con's etc), I would go for a > small , fixed diesel generator, we fitted them on yachts from 50' up > and that really solves all energy problems, but makes some noise and > is a lot of cash. > Personally I would rather reduce my needs and not bother, and > certainly not rely on something that slows me down under sail ;-) > > Gerd > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "John Jones" > wrote: > > Yup > > In the Latts & Atts article that was mentioned. If you needed to > > re-charge but have a folding prop, the prop could be locked by > > running astearn for a few seconds. > > It's as efficient but it works. > > John > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > | 3320|3317|2004-03-19 15:23:41|Dick Pilz|Re: Folding Prop|I don't know if we really need to worry about speed and efficiency. If we wanted speed, why are we considering sail-powered displacement boats - why not turbine-powered hydrofoils? If we wanted efficiency when powered, why do most of the designs we discuss here have nonretractable keels that we have to drag around all the time. All I care about is does something do about 80 percent of what I think I want for less than 100 percent of my budget 8-) --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gary H. Lucas" wrote: > Take a look at a modern prop. They are asymmetrical 'wings' flying through > the water. When used to drive a generator the shape is completely backwards > wrong, even a propeller made from flat plates welded to the shaft at an > angle would be more efficient. This is really the heart of the problem. > > Gary H. Lucas > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "bubblede" > To: > Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2004 11:16 AM > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Folding Prop > > > > Well, a folding prop is not adjustable pitch... running it backwards > > (depending on the brand also) is supposed to just open it and keep > > it there. > > I don't think adjustable pitch really helps, and still complicates > > matters - I really think that a prop that is optimized for a certain > > combination of hull/revs/power/speed can not be optimized at the > > same time for producing electricity under sail. It will work, yes, > > but I doubt that that is more efficient (or less expensive in the > > end) than a dedicated water-trailing system. > > For "normal" needs go for solar panels and/or wind generators. If > > you want real power (cooking, air-con's etc), I would go for a > > small , fixed diesel generator, we fitted them on yachts from 50' up > > and that really solves all energy problems, but makes some noise and > > is a lot of cash. > > Personally I would rather reduce my needs and not bother, and > > certainly not rely on something that slows me down under sail ;-) > > > > Gerd > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "John Jones" > > wrote: > > > Yup > > > In the Latts & Atts article that was mentioned. If you needed to > > > re-charge but have a folding prop, the prop could be locked by > > > running astearn for a few seconds. > > > It's as efficient but it works. > > > John > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > | 3321|3321|2004-03-19 23:08:48|John Jones|adjustable Pitch????|Gentlemen, If you had actually read the post you would have seen "Folding Prop" NOT "adjustable Pitch" ...... Lets just try to keep it as simple as possible. OKAY??? John| 3322|3321|2004-03-20 05:21:13|bubblede|Re: adjustable Pitch????|Sorry John, messages got crossed a bit, I was referring to milan, who brought in the idea of adjustable pitch ;-) Gerd --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "John Jones" wrote: > Gentlemen, > If you had actually read the post you would have seen "Folding > Prop" NOT "adjustable Pitch" ...... Lets just try to keep it as > simple as possible. OKAY??? > John | 3323|3317|2004-03-20 06:12:45|bubblede|Speed & efficiency - was:Folding Prop|Hi Dick - but I DO worry about speed and efficiency all the time, out of love for what I do plus a hundred thousand other reasons. with my last boat (10 m steel, 7to displ.) I did 3 seasons on the french atlantic coast as cruising school, with about 150 paying guests. They were warned that there was no engine.. the first season I had a british seagul plus a long sculling oar for manoevring in the harbour, the next two seasons I got a long shaft 9 HP volvo outboard which was worse than nothing at all, because always out of order. Under sail the outboards were lifted out. (Would not want do that again though, the next boat gets a diesel..) The boat was built on a minimal budget, BUT she was very efficient and fast under sail. I estimate that the absense of equipment that would have relied on heavy batteries, as well as the fuel we did not have to carry and finally the absense of prop-drag gave me something like a constant one knot advantage over the sistership, built by me also to the same plan, but equipped with all comfort and fix prop. And one knot consistent makes an enormous difference, not only in fun, excitement and satisfaction to do well, but also in cruising- range, in shortening the time to get out of nasty moments or being able to avoid them altogether. I go sailing because I like to sail - a fast clean ship that dow not push water and leaves an smooth wake is just beautiful and deeply satisfying to sail, whatever the budget it was built to. I know from myself that when I start fitting out, or planning a cruise, I always have a tendancy to say: what the heck, we are not racing, and adding another 500 kilo and a bit of drag when already I have a heavy displacement boat, what's a 10 or 15 % speed loss when cruising .... but this approach is just my excuse for being to lazy to do it right ;-) I also believe that a fast and (relatively) light boat is overall safer than a heavy and slow boat, but that is a long discussion all by itself. As to your other questions: there _are_ sail powered hydrofoils, my project _has_ retractable keels (daggerboards really) and 80% of anything is just just close enough to get me _really_ excited about 81 and 82 percent... ;-) Gerd www.justmueller.com/boats/ --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Dick Pilz" wrote: > I don't know if we really need to worry about speed and efficiency. > > If we wanted speed, why are we considering sail-powered displacement > boats - why not turbine-powered hydrofoils? > > If we wanted efficiency when powered, why do most of the designs we > discuss here have nonretractable keels that we have to drag around > all the time. > > All I care about is does something do about 80 percent of what I > think I want for less than 100 percent of my budget 8-) | 3324|3317|2004-03-20 14:04:35|brentswain38|Re: Folding Prop|I have friends who have trailed an outboard prop on 50 ft of half inch braid hooked up to a generator on the rail, with good results. One ran a freezer in the caribean for several years that way. He said that there was a tendency for the prop to skip out , jump foreward while spinning and cut the line. This could possibly be avoided by having the generator inside , and a stufffing box in the transom just above the waterline, with the shaft from the generator to a loop for the line passing through it. The prop is on a two foot long shaft and backwards with the flat surface faceing forward for maximum efficiency. You can pull the prop aboard when not in use, after sending a split funnel down the line , to stop it from spinning. I tried a water generator for a while, but found that if there was enough wind to power it there was enough wind for a wind generator. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "bubblede" wrote: > Well, a folding prop is not adjustable pitch... running it backwards > (depending on the brand also) is supposed to just open it and keep > it there. > I don't think adjustable pitch really helps, and still complicates > matters - I really think that a prop that is optimized for a certain > combination of hull/revs/power/speed can not be optimized at the > same time for producing electricity under sail. It will work, yes, > but I doubt that that is more efficient (or less expensive in the > end) than a dedicated water-trailing system. > For "normal" needs go for solar panels and/or wind generators. If > you want real power (cooking, air-con's etc), I would go for a > small , fixed diesel generator, we fitted them on yachts from 50' up > and that really solves all energy problems, but makes some noise and > is a lot of cash. > Personally I would rather reduce my needs and not bother, and > certainly not rely on something that slows me down under sail ;-) > > Gerd > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "John Jones" > wrote: > > Yup > > In the Latts & Atts article that was mentioned. If you needed to > > re-charge but have a folding prop, the prop could be locked by > > running astearn for a few seconds. > > It's as efficient but it works. > > John | 3325|3317|2004-03-20 14:13:06|Gary H. Lucas|Re: Folding Prop|Dick, The simple fact is that if it doesn't work well you won't use it. Frustration with sailing really slow while trying desperately to charge your batteries will see to that. Actually the idea I saw that I believe has a lot of merit is a Stirling cycle engine running a 100 watt generator. Doesn't sound like much, but it runs almost continuously yet is virtually noiseless. Because it runs at constant load it is also very efficient. Since it is only 100 watts of output it is very small and lightweight. In each 24 hours of operation you get 2400 watt hours of power, far more than you'll get from a solar cell that would fit on your boat. It operates from an external heat source so it can be fueled by diesel, white gas, propane, or alcohol. Gary H. Lucas ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dick Pilz" To: Sent: Friday, March 19, 2004 3:23 PM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Folding Prop > I don't know if we really need to worry about speed and efficiency. > > If we wanted speed, why are we considering sail-powered displacement > boats - why not turbine-powered hydrofoils? > > If we wanted efficiency when powered, why do most of the designs we > discuss here have nonretractable keels that we have to drag around > all the time. > > All I care about is does something do about 80 percent of what I > think I want for less than 100 percent of my budget 8-) > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gary H. Lucas" > wrote: > > Take a look at a modern prop. They are asymmetrical 'wings' flying > through > > the water. When used to drive a generator the shape is completely > backwards > > wrong, even a propeller made from flat plates welded to the shaft > at an > > angle would be more efficient. This is really the heart of the > problem. > > > > Gary H. Lucas > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "bubblede" > > To: > > Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2004 11:16 AM > > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Folding Prop > > > > > > > Well, a folding prop is not adjustable pitch... running it > backwards > > > (depending on the brand also) is supposed to just open it and keep > > > it there. > > > I don't think adjustable pitch really helps, and still complicates > > > matters - I really think that a prop that is optimized for a > certain > > > combination of hull/revs/power/speed can not be optimized at the > > > same time for producing electricity under sail. It will work, yes, > > > but I doubt that that is more efficient (or less expensive in the > > > end) than a dedicated water-trailing system. > > > For "normal" needs go for solar panels and/or wind generators. If > > > you want real power (cooking, air-con's etc), I would go for a > > > small , fixed diesel generator, we fitted them on yachts from 50' > up > > > and that really solves all energy problems, but makes some noise > and > > > is a lot of cash. > > > Personally I would rather reduce my needs and not bother, and > > > certainly not rely on something that slows me down under sail ;-) > > > > > > Gerd > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "John Jones" > > > wrote: > > > > Yup > > > > In the Latts & Atts article that was mentioned. If you needed > to > > > > re-charge but have a folding prop, the prop could be locked by > > > > running astearn for a few seconds. > > > > It's as efficient but it works. > > > > John > > > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > | 3326|3317|2004-03-20 15:04:29|bubblede|Re: Folding Prop - Sterling|Gary - would that be something like the Whispergen ) http://www.whispergen.com) I think that kit is VERY expensive, even it it also makes hot water - but it sure interesting. You have any more ideas on how to set that up from stuff we could get cheap? lots of stuff to browse also on www.sterlingengine.com Gerd --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gary H. Lucas" wrote: > Dick, > The simple fact is that if it doesn't work well you won't use it. > Frustration with sailing really slow while trying desperately to charge your > batteries will see to that. > > Actually the idea I saw that I believe has a lot of merit is a Stirling > cycle engine running a 100 watt generator. Doesn't sound like much, but it > runs almost continuously yet is virtually noiseless. Because it runs at > constant load it is also very efficient. Since it is only 100 watts of > output it is very small and lightweight. In each 24 hours of operation you > get 2400 watt hours of power, far more than you'll get from a solar cell > that would fit on your boat. It operates from an external heat source so it > can be fueled by diesel, white gas, propane, or alcohol. > > Gary H. Lucas > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Dick Pilz" > To: > Sent: Friday, March 19, 2004 3:23 PM > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Folding Prop > > > > I don't know if we really need to worry about speed and efficiency. > > > > If we wanted speed, why are we considering sail-powered displacement > > boats - why not turbine-powered hydrofoils? > > > > If we wanted efficiency when powered, why do most of the designs we > > discuss here have nonretractable keels that we have to drag around > > all the time. > > > > All I care about is does something do about 80 percent of what I > > think I want for less than 100 percent of my budget 8-) > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gary H. Lucas" > > wrote: > > > Take a look at a modern prop. They are asymmetrical 'wings' flying > > through > > > the water. When used to drive a generator the shape is completely > > backwards > > > wrong, even a propeller made from flat plates welded to the shaft > > at an > > > angle would be more efficient. This is really the heart of the > > problem. > > > > > > Gary H. Lucas > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "bubblede" > > > To: > > > Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2004 11:16 AM > > > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Folding Prop > > > > > > > > > > Well, a folding prop is not adjustable pitch... running it > > backwards > > > > (depending on the brand also) is supposed to just open it and keep > > > > it there. > > > > I don't think adjustable pitch really helps, and still complicates > > > > matters - I really think that a prop that is optimized for a > > certain > > > > combination of hull/revs/power/speed can not be optimized at the > > > > same time for producing electricity under sail. It will work, yes, > > > > but I doubt that that is more efficient (or less expensive in the > > > > end) than a dedicated water-trailing system. > > > > For "normal" needs go for solar panels and/or wind generators. If > > > > you want real power (cooking, air-con's etc), I would go for a > > > > small , fixed diesel generator, we fitted them on yachts from 50' > > up > > > > and that really solves all energy problems, but makes some noise > > and > > > > is a lot of cash. > > > > Personally I would rather reduce my needs and not bother, and > > > > certainly not rely on something that slows me down under sail ;-) > > > > > > > > Gerd > > > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "John Jones" > > > > wrote: > > > > > Yup > > > > > In the Latts & Atts article that was mentioned. If you needed > > to > > > > > re-charge but have a folding prop, the prop could be locked by > > > > > running astearn for a few seconds. > > > > > It's as efficient but it works. > > > > > John > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > > > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > | 3327|3327|2004-03-20 15:21:30|John Jones|Enough Wind?|Okay Brent, So there's enough wind to run the wind generator.... so why not run the water generator too?????, and charge the batteries even more efficiently and have more resources to use at a later date. John| 3328|3317|2004-03-20 17:20:21|dreemer1962|Re: Speed & efficiency - was:Folding Prop|I like the idea of engineless sailboat and believe that there are many coasts where that could be a practical proposition. I think it's especially, interesting for the ocean sailing on a budget. (I suppose, didn't done any of that yet). A side from the obvious advantage of don't heaving to invest a considerable sum of money in the engine, you get simpler to maintain boat with much less to go wrong, with more precious storage space and lighter boat with less drag. Unfortunately, where I live it can't be done. Dutch waters are full of crowded, narrow passages and channels and entering marina without an engine is forbidden. Anyway, that's one possibility. In the case conventional decision of installing an engine is made, controllable pitch propeller makes a lot of sense. A side from the drag-reducing, engine can be used much more efficiently in different conditions. In addition, contr. pitch prop could be installed much nearer to the rudder than folding prop, giving much more manoeuvrability in tight spaces. My personal favourite engine is beautiful old fashion, slow turning, Norwegian Sabb. They used to sell them with controllable pitch propelle r in the standard package. They were not designed for the fancy yacht s but for Norwegian fisherman which are operating in very harsh conditions far from the dealers and services. Unfortunately even Sabb stopped producing slow turning ones, and these days is marineizeing other's producers engines, mostly Iveco I think. If I couldn't find a second hand Sabb or Lister, I would probably take WW Golf diesel, cheap and plenty of spares (at least here in Europe). But I must say I'm very much intrigued by electric motors. I shall read that yahoo group which somebody on the board posted a link to. I hope to find a way to use some cheap motors, batteries and other stuff from maybe discarded electric fork lift or golf car or something. (I'm not after top capacity for hours of steaming 6 knots plus, electric cooking, air conditioning and similar stuff, I just want to be able to leave the harbour and get back in the end of the day. It takes me about 15, maybe 20 minutes each way. (By the way, I don't know a zilch about anything electric yet). After all these stories about old fashion engines and electric's and performances under sail, I must confess that my current boat doesn't heave any of that. She is one of the in The Netherlands very numerous hard chine steel sloops. Mine is 7.7 m long, 2.3m wide and displace around 3.2 tones with a Yanmar diesel. I both her complete, in the good condition and four sails for 5 500 Euro, 5 years ago. As I'm not planing any longer voyages in the next couple of years, I'll keep her for a while. Milan P.S. Few possibly interesting links: sailing without engines: http://www.oarclub.org/page6.html http://groups.yahoo.com/group/engineless_sailing ultimate simplicity ocean cruising without any budget to speak of: http://www.yachtatom.com/articles/albertotorroba.htm amateur submarine builders - not exactly sailing but still full of interesting ideas, people and information: http://www.psubs.org/ with this especially ambitious project: http://www.euronaut.org/ --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "bubblede" wrote: > > Hi Dick - but I DO worry about speed and efficiency all the time, > out of love for what I do plus a hundred thousand other reasons. > > with my last boat (10 m steel, 7to displ.) I did 3 seasons on the > french atlantic coast as cruising school, with about 150 paying > guests. They were warned that there was no engine.. the first season > I had a british seagul plus a long sculling oar for manoevring in > the harbour, the next two seasons I got a long shaft 9 HP volvo > outboard which was worse than nothing at all, because always out of > order. Under sail the outboards were lifted out. (Would not want do > that again though, the next boat gets a diesel..) > > The boat was built on a minimal budget, BUT she was very efficient > and fast under sail. I estimate that the absense of equipment that > would have relied on heavy batteries, as well as the fuel we did not > have to carry and finally the absense of prop-drag gave me something > like a constant one knot advantage over the sistership, built by me > also to the same plan, but equipped with all comfort and fix prop. > And one knot consistent makes an enormous difference, not only in > fun, excitement and satisfaction to do well, but also in cruising- > range, in shortening the time to get out of nasty moments or being > able to avoid them altogether. > > I go sailing because I like to sail - a fast clean ship that dow not > push water and leaves an smooth wake is just beautiful and deeply > satisfying to sail, whatever the budget it was built to. I know from > myself that when I start fitting out, or planning a cruise, I always > have a tendancy to say: what the heck, we are not racing, and adding > another 500 kilo and a bit of drag when already I have a heavy > displacement boat, what's a 10 or 15 % speed loss when cruising .... > but this approach is just my excuse for being to lazy to do it > right ;-) > > I also believe that a fast and (relatively) light boat is overall > safer than a heavy and slow boat, but that is a long discussion all > by itself. > > As to your other questions: there _are_ sail powered hydrofoils, my > project _has_ retractable keels (daggerboards really) and 80% of > anything is just just close enough to get me _really_ excited about > 81 and 82 percent... ;-) > > Gerd > www.justmueller.com/boats/ > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Dick Pilz" > wrote: > > I don't know if we really need to worry about speed and > efficiency. > > > > If we wanted speed, why are we considering sail-powered > displacement > > boats - why not turbine-powered hydrofoils? > > > > If we wanted efficiency when powered, why do most of the designs > we > > discuss here have nonretractable keels that we have to drag around > > all the time. > > > > All I care about is does something do about 80 percent of what I > > think I want for less than 100 percent of my budget 8-) | 3329|3327|2004-03-21 23:47:11|John Jones|Re: Enough Wind?|and the SOLAR PANELS too --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "John Jones" wrote: > Okay Brent, > So there's enough wind to run the wind generator.... so why not > run the water generator too?????, and charge the batteries even > more efficiently and have more resources to use at a later date. > John | 3330|3327|2004-03-22 15:27:55|brentswain38|Re: Enough Wind?|Having the option of water generating is a good idea. The more options the better.I've carried a water generator setup for years , but as long as the wind was giving me power and my consumption was kept low, I've never used the water generating option.It's a lot more drag and hassle to use than just letting the wind generator hum.You could also go for two wind generators ,if you need that much power, one on each quarter. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "John Jones" wrote: > Okay Brent, > So there's enough wind to run the wind generator.... so why not > run the water generator too?????, and charge the batteries even > more efficiently and have more resources to use at a later date. > John | 3331|3317|2004-03-22 15:38:40|brentswain38|Re: Speed & efficiency - was:Folding Prop|In my last boat I spent three years windjamming , no engine of any kind, including a trip to Tahiti and back as well as a couple of years full time cruising on the BC coast. It was a learning experience which lets me now cruise with far less fear of engine troubles , knowing I can get anywhere without an engine. It was also very stressful, nullifying one of the reasons we go cruising in the first place. Having a reliable diesel has reduced the stress level drastically, and I've cruised much further in far less time than I was able to without an engine.When I launched that boat I cruised the winter , and got a job in spring. With the money I got from working, I could either buy an engine, or go back to Tahiti. I went to Tahiti. When I got back, the money I earned from working again could be spent on an engine, or a years full time cruising. I went cruising. The following year I found a diesel for $400 and bought it. I was happy to get it, but don't regret the windjamming I'd done.I'm just gald it's behind me. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "dreemer1962" wrote: > I like the idea of engineless sailboat and believe that there > are many coasts where that could be a practical proposition. > I think it's especially, interesting for the ocean sailing on a > budget. (I suppose, didn't done any of that yet). A side from > the obvious advantage of don't heaving to invest a considerable > sum of money in the engine, you get simpler to maintain boat > with much less to go wrong, with more precious storage space > and lighter boat with less drag. Unfortunately, where I live it > can't be done. Dutch waters are full of crowded, narrow passages > and channels and entering marina without an engine is forbidden. > > Anyway, that's one possibility. In the case conventional decision > of installing an engine is made, controllable pitch propeller makes > a lot of sense. A side from the drag-reducing, engine can be used > much more efficiently in different conditions. In addition, contr. pitch > prop could be installed much nearer to the rudder than folding prop, > giving much more manoeuvrability in tight spaces. > > My personal favourite engine is beautiful old fashion, slow turning, > Norwegian Sabb. They used to sell them with controllable pitch propelle > r in the standard package. They were not designed for the fancy yacht > s but for Norwegian fisherman which are operating in very harsh > conditions far from the dealers and services. Unfortunately even Sabb > stopped producing slow turning ones, and these days is marineizeing > other's producers engines, mostly Iveco I think. > > If I couldn't find a second hand Sabb or Lister, I would probably take WW > Golf diesel, cheap and plenty of spares (at least here in Europe). But I > must say I'm very much intrigued by electric motors. I shall read that yahoo > group which somebody on the board posted a link to. I hope to find a way > to use some cheap motors, batteries and other stuff from maybe discarded > electric fork lift or golf car or something. (I'm not after top capacity for hours > of steaming 6 knots plus, electric cooking, air conditioning and similar stuff, > I just want to be able to leave the harbour and get back in the end of the day. > It takes me about 15, maybe 20 minutes each way. (By the way, I don't > know a zilch about anything electric yet). > > After all these stories about old fashion engines and electric's and > performances under sail, I must confess that my current boat doesn't heave > any of that. She is one of the in The Netherlands very numerous hard chine > steel sloops. Mine is 7.7 m long, 2.3m wide and displace around 3.2 tones > with a Yanmar diesel. I both her complete, in the good condition and four > sails for 5 500 Euro, 5 years ago. As I'm not planing any longer voyages in > the next couple of years, I'll keep her for a while. > > Milan > > P.S. > Few possibly interesting links: > sailing without engines: > http://www.oarclub.org/page6.html > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/engineless_sailing > > ultimate simplicity ocean cruising without any budget to speak of: > http://www.yachtatom.com/articles/albertotorroba.htm > > amateur submarine builders - not exactly sailing but still full of interesting ideas, people and information: > http://www.psubs.org/ > with this especially ambitious project: > http://www.euronaut.org/ > > > > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "bubblede" wrote: > > > > Hi Dick - but I DO worry about speed and efficiency all the time, > > out of love for what I do plus a hundred thousand other reasons. > > > > with my last boat (10 m steel, 7to displ.) I did 3 seasons on the > > french atlantic coast as cruising school, with about 150 paying > > guests. They were warned that there was no engine.. the first season > > I had a british seagul plus a long sculling oar for manoevring in > > the harbour, the next two seasons I got a long shaft 9 HP volvo > > outboard which was worse than nothing at all, because always out of > > order. Under sail the outboards were lifted out. (Would not want do > > that again though, the next boat gets a diesel..) > > > > The boat was built on a minimal budget, BUT she was very efficient > > and fast under sail. I estimate that the absense of equipment that > > would have relied on heavy batteries, as well as the fuel we did not > > have to carry and finally the absense of prop-drag gave me something > > like a constant one knot advantage over the sistership, built by me > > also to the same plan, but equipped with all comfort and fix prop. > > And one knot consistent makes an enormous difference, not only in > > fun, excitement and satisfaction to do well, but also in cruising- > > range, in shortening the time to get out of nasty moments or being > > able to avoid them altogether. > > > > I go sailing because I like to sail - a fast clean ship that dow not > > push water and leaves an smooth wake is just beautiful and deeply > > satisfying to sail, whatever the budget it was built to. I know from > > myself that when I start fitting out, or planning a cruise, I always > > have a tendancy to say: what the heck, we are not racing, and adding > > another 500 kilo and a bit of drag when already I have a heavy > > displacement boat, what's a 10 or 15 % speed loss when cruising .... > > but this approach is just my excuse for being to lazy to do it > > right ;-) > > > > I also believe that a fast and (relatively) light boat is overall > > safer than a heavy and slow boat, but that is a long discussion all > > by itself. > > > > As to your other questions: there _are_ sail powered hydrofoils, my > > project _has_ retractable keels (daggerboards really) and 80% of > > anything is just just close enough to get me _really_ excited about > > 81 and 82 percent... ;-) > > > > Gerd > > www.justmueller.com/boats/ > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Dick Pilz" > > wrote: > > > I don't know if we really need to worry about speed and > > efficiency. > > > > > > If we wanted speed, why are we considering sail-powered > > displacement > > > boats - why not turbine-powered hydrofoils? > > > > > > If we wanted efficiency when powered, why do most of the designs > > we > > > discuss here have nonretractable keels that we have to drag around > > > all the time. > > > > > > All I care about is does something do about 80 percent of what I > > > think I want for less than 100 percent of my budget 8-) | 3332|3332|2004-03-23 20:19:15|Alex|cabin top steel thickness|I can't get my steel supplier to get my cabin/deck steel in 11 ga (1.8", or .125) shotblasted and primed by the company which handles that. They only want to do 10 ga. (.135), the shotblasting company citing concerns about distortion during the shotblasting process. Unfortunately, allowing them to give me 10 ga steel will add more than .65 lb per sq ft. Spread over the area of the top of the hull, above roll axis, this will add weight where not desired. Anyone else in BC encounter this problem? Alex| 3333|3332|2004-03-23 20:27:16|Graeme|Re: cabin top steel thickness|Alex Just a thought can you get galvanized steel, like what is used in making rain water tanks in the size you need I guess it would be a bit dearer but no rust problems except on weld spots and no sand blasting required. Graeme -----Original Message----- From: Alex [mailto:northcanoe@...] Sent: Wednesday, 24 March 2004 9:15 AM To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Subject: [origamiboats] cabin top steel thickness I can't get my steel supplier to get my cabin/deck steel in 11 ga (1.8", or .125) shotblasted and primed by the company which handles that. They only want to do 10 ga. (.135), the shotblasting company citing concerns about distortion during the shotblasting process. Unfortunately, allowing them to give me 10 ga steel will add more than .65 lb per sq ft. Spread over the area of the top of the hull, above roll axis, this will add weight where not desired. Anyone else in BC encounter this problem? Alex To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links| 3334|3262|2004-03-23 20:35:14|Alex|steel price jump|Hi All, I have the same problem with my recent steel buying - it jumped while I was working with the supplier on the order. This article, http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/04046/273262.stm , pretty much sums up the reasons for the jump. Despite paying more for my steel, I may be better off than some; One supplier doesn't come up with a price until the steel is actually shipped -- an extremely shaky proposition for the buyer. Yikes! Prices for all other types of metals are also climbing the charts, including our beloved stainless steel. I paid $1.00/lb one week, went back the next and it was $1.50. All markets must eventually burst their bubbles, but this steel supply shortage is said to rival if not surpass the shortage that occured in the 1970's. Prices also peaked as high as they are now in 2002, but dropped steadily over the year, only to trend upward again this year. There may be light at the end of the tunnel for those who can wait! Ironically, it is a bit like the Chinese Taoist precept - if I understand it correctly - where every action (in this case the rising steel prices) has the seed of change and dissolution built right in (the sudden drop in prices). Alex| 3335|3262|2004-03-23 21:00:58|keith green|Re: steel price jump|While I haven't experienced the price-increase directly, it seems strange to me that a year or so back I recall seeing one of the documentaries on the two-towers disaster and they were saying how there was so much scrap generated that it depressed the world market for steel. They did say that most of it was being bought by Asia and it makes me wonder if all this cheap steel gave them a shot in the arm ans really jumpstarted their use and buying of it. Keith ----- Original Message ----- From: Alex To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2004 5:10 PM Subject: [origamiboats] steel price jump Hi All, I have the same problem with my recent steel buying - it jumped while I was working with the supplier on the order. This article, http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/04046/273262.stm , pretty much sums up the reasons for the jump. Despite paying more for my steel, I may be better off than some; One supplier doesn't come up with a price until the steel is actually shipped -- an extremely shaky proposition for the buyer. Yikes! Prices for all other types of metals are also climbing the charts, including our beloved stainless steel. I paid $1.00/lb one week, went back the next and it was $1.50. All markets must eventually burst their bubbles, but this steel supply shortage is said to rival if not surpass the shortage that occured in the 1970's. Prices also peaked as high as they are now in 2002, but dropped steadily over the year, only to trend upward again this year. There may be light at the end of the tunnel for those who can wait! Ironically, it is a bit like the Chinese Taoist precept - if I understand it correctly - where every action (in this case the rising steel prices) has the seed of change and dissolution built right in (the sudden drop in prices). Alex To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3336|3336|2004-03-23 21:30:00|John Jones|Galvinized steel|Remember Guys when you weld Galvinized steel you produce dangerous gasses... syanide I think be carfull John| 3337|3337|2004-03-24 01:23:23|vova|Sails of Ukraine|Cruising yachts (from 12 till 16.70 m) are being sold. Composite hulls with further construction in accordance with Holland technology Van de Stadt Design. 1. Yacht L 12.30 m (50 % built) 2. Yacht L 14.50 m (50 % built) 3. Yacht L 16 m (75 % built) 4. Yacht L 16.50 m (60 % built) All of the yachts have modern design, are ecologically clean, durable, strength, warm. Modes of completing are possible (charter, lux). Step-by-step financing is possible. The first advance is from $20,000 USD. www.sailsofukraine.kherson.ua sailsofukraine@... (translator) upts_upts@... Kherson, Ukraine| 3338|3337|2004-03-24 04:09:46|alexshramenko|Re: Sails of Ukraine|йСОХ ЛНЧ ФЕКЕГС!| 3339|3336|2004-03-24 15:37:27|Dick Pilz|Re: Galvinized steel|It does not produce cyanide gas (Chemical formula HCN). What it does produce is Zinc Oxide fumes. A lot of fumes. With plenty of ventilation you should be OK. Welders who must weld a lot of galvanized steel are required by OSHA to get a milk ration to combat "zinc sickness" Galvanized fittings/assembly points are commonly cast into precast concrete panels so they can be welded to a building's steel framing. So, use common sense and caution and "Don't huff the white stuff!" Dick Pilz --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "John Jones" wrote: > Remember Guys > when you weld Galvinized steel you produce dangerous > gasses... syanide I think be carfull > > John | 3340|3332|2004-03-24 15:51:02|brentswain38|Re: cabin top steel thickness|I used galvanized steel for my decks and cabin. For my own boat it was a one time deal. I wouldn't work on galvanized steel for a living, due to the health hazzards of long term exposure.I used a mask hooked up to 24 ft of 1 1/4 inch plastic sump drain hose ,$7 in any hardware store, breathing air from 24 ft away. This also was a good rig for painting inside with epoxies. Many people spoke of problems getting paint to stick to Galvanizing. I washed my decks with TSP, hosed it of and washed it again with vinegar to remove any oxides, hosed it off and let it dry. The weather was hot and dry at the time) Then began painting it. It has stuck like scandal to a moderate. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Graeme" wrote: > Alex > > Just a thought can you get galvanized steel, like what is used in making > rain water tanks in the size you need I guess it would be a bit dearer > but no rust problems except on weld spots and no sand blasting required. > > Graeme > > -----Original Message----- > From: Alex [mailto:northcanoe@y...] > Sent: Wednesday, 24 March 2004 9:15 AM > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [origamiboats] cabin top steel thickness > > I can't get my steel supplier to get my cabin/deck steel in 11 ga > (1.8", or .125) shotblasted and primed by the company which handles > that. They only want to do 10 ga. (.135), the shotblasting company > citing concerns about distortion during the shotblasting process. > Unfortunately, allowing them to give me 10 ga steel will add more > than .65 lb per sq ft. Spread over the area of the top of the hull, > above roll axis, this will add weight where not desired. > > Anyone else in BC encounter this problem? > > Alex > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links | 3341|3341|2004-03-24 19:58:58|Stan Kuczynski|Painting Galvanized|Hello and new to the group, just as a FYI Home depot sells a paint by rustoleum that is designed to go over galvanized. I just used it on my trailer for my sail boat, am pleased with the results, just a thought and something to consider. BTW am enjoying reading the email and learning about your boats. Stan Orlando Florida.| 3342|3332|2004-03-24 19:59:54|richytill|Re: cabin top steel thickness|Alex, AJ Forsyth would not do this for me but Janet at Dominion Steel said if I would agree to acept the risk of wavy plates they would supply material wheelabraded and primed. I did--it was fine. rt --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Alex" wrote: > I can't get my steel supplier to get my cabin/deck steel in 11 ga > (1.8", or .125) shotblasted and primed by the company which handles > that. They only want to do 10 ga. (.135), the shotblasting company > citing concerns about distortion during the shotblasting process. > Unfortunately, allowing them to give me 10 ga steel will add more > than .65 lb per sq ft. Spread over the area of the top of the hull, > above roll axis, this will add weight where not desired. > > Anyone else in BC encounter this problem? > > Alex | 3343|3332|2004-03-25 08:16:03|Courtney Thomas|Re: cabin top steel thickness|Brent, Read your book, just got a welder and want to now learn to properly use it. What mask did you use, where'd you get it and how'd you connect the hose to it ? Appreciatively, Courtney brentswain38 wrote: > I used galvanized steel for my decks and cabin. For my own boat it > was a one time deal. I wouldn't work on galvanized steel for a > living, due to the health hazzards of long term exposure.I used a > mask hooked up to 24 ft of 1 1/4 inch plastic sump drain hose ,$7 in > any hardware store, breathing air from 24 ft away. This also was a > good rig for painting inside with epoxies. > Many people spoke of problems getting paint to stick to > Galvanizing. I washed my decks with TSP, hosed it of and washed it > again with vinegar to remove any oxides, hosed it off and let it dry. > The weather was hot and dry at the time) Then began painting it. It > has stuck like scandal to a moderate. > Brent Swain > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Graeme" wrote: > >>Alex >> >>Just a thought can you get galvanized steel, like what is used in >> > making > >>rain water tanks in the size you need I guess it would be a bit >> > dearer > >>but no rust problems except on weld spots and no sand blasting >> > required. > >>Graeme >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Alex [mailto:northcanoe@y...] >>Sent: Wednesday, 24 March 2004 9:15 AM >>To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com >>Subject: [origamiboats] cabin top steel thickness >> >>I can't get my steel supplier to get my cabin/deck steel in 11 ga >>(1.8", or .125) shotblasted and primed by the company which handles >>that. They only want to do 10 ga. (.135), the shotblasting company >>citing concerns about distortion during the shotblasting process. >>Unfortunately, allowing them to give me 10 ga steel will add more >>than .65 lb per sq ft. Spread over the area of the top of the hull, >>above roll axis, this will add weight where not desired. >> >>Anyone else in BC encounter this problem? >> >>Alex >> >> >> >> >>To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com >>To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: >>origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com >>Yahoo! Groups Links >> > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > -- Courtney Thomas s/v Mutiny Rhodes Bounty II lying Oriental, NC WDB5619| 3344|3344|2004-03-25 17:01:39|bert andjan|Fresh air mask for welding galvanized and painting|Brent, I've thought of rigging such a deal for breathing fresh air. I see you can buy such fresh air supply gizmo's for big bucks. I wonder what you used for a "pump" to get the air moving safely through the hose...and how flexible was the hose? Was it awkward to use? Thanks! This would be much safer I'd imagine than breathing through a filter. It'd also be good for blasting ?? Bert Eggers....Saginaw, Mi Brent wrote: I used galvanized steel for my decks and cabin. For my own boat it was a one time deal. I wouldn't work on galvanized steel for a living, due to the health hazzards of long term exposure.I used a mask hooked up to 24 ft of 1 1/4 inch plastic sump drain hose ,$7 in any hardware store, breathing air from 24 ft away. This also was a good rig for painting inside with epoxies. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - More reliable, more storage, less spam http://mail.yahoo.com| 3345|3341|2004-03-25 18:37:31|brentswain38|Re: Painting Galvanized|Given the price of vinegar, a good vinegar wash wouldn't hurt, whatever paint you use. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Stan Kuczynski" wrote: > Hello and new to the group, just as a FYI Home depot sells a paint > by rustoleum that is designed to go over galvanized. I just used it > on my trailer for my sail boat, am pleased with the results, just a > thought and something to consider. BTW am enjoying reading the email > and learning about your boats. > Stan Orlando Florida. | 3346|3332|2004-03-25 18:43:12|brentswain38|Re: cabin top steel thickness|The mask was made by Norco.I think I bought it from Safety Supply. The check valves fit 3/4 inch plastic street elbows with hose barbs on one end and 3/4 inch female pipe threads on the other.I slipped 3/4 inch corrugated hose over the hose barb ends , took them over my shoulders and joined them behind my back to the 24 ft of 1 1/4 inch sump drain hose with duct tape.I had to heat and soften the hose barb ends to bend them further aft to clear my helmet. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Courtney Thomas wrote: > Brent, > > Read your book, just got a welder and want to now learn to properly use it. > > What mask did you use, where'd you get it and how'd you connect the hose > to it ? > > Appreciatively, > > Courtney > > > > brentswain38 wrote: > > > I used galvanized steel for my decks and cabin. For my own boat it > > was a one time deal. I wouldn't work on galvanized steel for a > > living, due to the health hazzards of long term exposure.I used a > > mask hooked up to 24 ft of 1 1/4 inch plastic sump drain hose ,$7 in > > any hardware store, breathing air from 24 ft away. This also was a > > good rig for painting inside with epoxies. > > Many people spoke of problems getting paint to stick to > > Galvanizing. I washed my decks with TSP, hosed it of and washed it > > again with vinegar to remove any oxides, hosed it off and let it dry. > > The weather was hot and dry at the time) Then began painting it. It > > has stuck like scandal to a moderate. > > Brent Swain > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Graeme" wrote: > > > >>Alex > >> > >>Just a thought can you get galvanized steel, like what is used in > >> > > making > > > >>rain water tanks in the size you need I guess it would be a bit > >> > > dearer > > > >>but no rust problems except on weld spots and no sand blasting > >> > > required. > > > >>Graeme > >> > >>-----Original Message----- > >>From: Alex [mailto:northcanoe@y...] > >>Sent: Wednesday, 24 March 2004 9:15 AM > >>To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > >>Subject: [origamiboats] cabin top steel thickness > >> > >>I can't get my steel supplier to get my cabin/deck steel in 11 ga > >>(1.8", or .125) shotblasted and primed by the company which handles > >>that. They only want to do 10 ga. (.135), the shotblasting company > >>citing concerns about distortion during the shotblasting process. > >>Unfortunately, allowing them to give me 10 ga steel will add more > >>than .65 lb per sq ft. Spread over the area of the top of the hull, > >>above roll axis, this will add weight where not desired. > >> > >>Anyone else in BC encounter this problem? > >> > >>Alex > >> > >> > >> > >> > >>To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > >>To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > >>origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > >>Yahoo! Groups Links > >> > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Courtney Thomas > s/v Mutiny > Rhodes Bounty II > lying Oriental, NC > WDB5619 | 3347|3344|2004-03-25 18:48:01|brentswain38|Re: Fresh air mask for welding galvanized and painting|Bert As long as you don't have a beard, there is no need to pump air thru it.The check valves in the mask keep the air flowing in one direction only. If you try inhaling thru 24 ft of 1 1/4 inch sump drain hose,you'll find it's easier to draw air thru it than it is to inhale thru most filtres. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, bert andjan wrote: > Brent, > > I've thought of rigging such a deal for breathing > fresh air. I see you can buy such fresh air supply > gizmo's for big bucks. I wonder what you used for a > "pump" to get the air moving safely through the > hose...and how flexible was the hose? Was it awkward > to use? Thanks! This would be much safer I'd > imagine than breathing through a filter. It'd also > be good for blasting ?? > > Bert Eggers....Saginaw, Mi > > Brent wrote: > I used galvanized steel for my decks and cabin. For my > own boat it > was a one time deal. I wouldn't work on galvanized > steel for a > living, due to the health hazzards of long term > exposure.I used a > mask hooked up to 24 ft of 1 1/4 inch plastic sump > drain hose ,$7 in > any hardware store, breathing air from 24 ft away. > This also was a > good rig for painting inside with epoxies. > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Mail - More reliable, more storage, less spam > http://mail.yahoo.com | 3348|3344|2004-03-25 20:48:58|richytill|Re: Fresh air mask for welding galvanized and painting|Brent, when I was pouring lead or painting inside, I pressurized my mask with outside air. I used a sysem of hoses like yours but hooked it up to a clean shop vac off the blow port. The pressure was somewhat overwhelming at first; I then bled off excess air by drilling ever larger holes in a fitting until the system had good flow at a comfortable pressure. Cool fresh air was welcome. rt --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" wrote: > Bert > As long as you don't have a beard, there is no need to pump air > thru it.The check valves in the mask keep the air flowing in one > direction only. If you try inhaling thru 24 ft of 1 1/4 inch sump > drain hose,you'll find it's easier to draw air thru it than it is to > inhale thru most filtres. > Brent Swain > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, bert andjan > wrote: > > Brent, > > > > I've thought of rigging such a deal for breathing > > fresh air. I see you can buy such fresh air supply > > gizmo's for big bucks. I wonder what you used for a > > "pump" to get the air moving safely through the > > hose...and how flexible was the hose? Was it awkward > > to use? Thanks! This would be much safer I'd > > imagine than breathing through a filter. It'd also > > be good for blasting ?? > > > > Bert Eggers....Saginaw, Mi > > > > Brent wrote: > > I used galvanized steel for my decks and cabin. For my > > own boat it > > was a one time deal. I wouldn't work on galvanized > > steel for a > > living, due to the health hazzards of long term > > exposure.I used a > > mask hooked up to 24 ft of 1 1/4 inch plastic sump > > drain hose ,$7 in > > any hardware store, breathing air from 24 ft away. > > This also was a > > good rig for painting inside with epoxies. > > > > __________________________________ > > Do you Yahoo!? > > Yahoo! Mail - More reliable, more storage, less spam > > http://mail.yahoo.com | 3349|3349|2004-03-25 21:36:57|bert andjan|Re: Digest Number 758|--- origamiboats@yahoogroups.com wrote: > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > There are 5 messages in this issue. > > Topics in this digest: > > 1. Re: Galvinized steel > From: "Dick Pilz" > 2. Re: cabin top steel thickness > From: "brentswain38" > > 3. Painting Galvanized > From: "Stan Kuczynski" > > 4. Re: cabin top steel thickness > From: "richytill" > 5. Re: Re: cabin top steel thickness > From: Courtney Thomas > > > > ________________________________________________________________________ > ________________________________________________________________________ > > Message: 1 > Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 20:37:15 -0000 > From: "Dick Pilz" > Subject: Re: Galvinized steel > > It does not produce cyanide gas (Chemical formula > HCN). What it does > produce is Zinc Oxide fumes. A lot of fumes. With > plenty of > ventilation you should be OK. Welders who must weld > a lot of > galvanized steel are required by OSHA to get a milk > ration to > combat "zinc sickness" > > Galvanized fittings/assembly points are commonly > cast into precast > concrete panels so they can be welded to a > building's steel framing. > > So, use common sense and caution and "Don't huff the > white stuff!" > > Dick Pilz > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "John Jones" > > wrote: > > Remember Guys > > when you weld Galvinized steel you produce > dangerous > > gasses... syanide I think be carfull > > > > John > > > > ________________________________________________________________________ > ________________________________________________________________________ > > Message: 2 > Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 20:49:47 -0000 > From: "brentswain38" > Subject: Re: cabin top steel thickness > > I used galvanized steel for my decks and cabin. For > my own boat it > was a one time deal. I wouldn't work on galvanized > steel for a > living, due to the health hazzards of long term > exposure.I used a > mask hooked up to 24 ft of 1 1/4 inch plastic sump > drain hose ,$7 in > any hardware store, breathing air from 24 ft away. > This also was a > good rig for painting inside with epoxies. > Many people spoke of problems getting paint to > stick to > Galvanizing. I washed my decks with TSP, hosed it of > and washed it > again with vinegar to remove any oxides, hosed it > off and let it dry. > The weather was hot and dry at the time) Then began > painting it. It > has stuck like scandal to a moderate. > Brent Swain > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Graeme" > wrote: > > Alex > > > > Just a thought can you get galvanized steel, like > what is used in > making > > rain water tanks in the size you need I guess it > would be a bit > dearer > > but no rust problems except on weld spots and no > sand blasting > required. > > > > Graeme > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Alex [mailto:northcanoe@y...] > > Sent: Wednesday, 24 March 2004 9:15 AM > > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: [origamiboats] cabin top steel thickness > > > > I can't get my steel supplier to get my cabin/deck > steel in 11 ga > > (1.8", or .125) shotblasted and primed by the > company which handles > > that. They only want to do 10 ga. (.135), the > shotblasting company > > citing concerns about distortion during the > shotblasting process. > > Unfortunately, allowing them to give me 10 ga > steel will add more > > than .65 lb per sq ft. Spread over the area of the > top of the hull, > > above roll axis, this will add weight where not > desired. > > > > Anyone else in BC encounter this problem? > > > > Alex > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: > origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > ________________________________________________________________________ > ________________________________________________________________________ > > Message: 3 > Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 00:58:17 -0000 > From: "Stan Kuczynski" > Subject: Painting Galvanized > > Hello and new to the group, just as a FYI Home depot > sells a paint > by rustoleum that is designed to go over galvanized. > I just used it > on my trailer for my sail boat, am pleased with the > results, just a > thought and something to consider. BTW am enjoying > reading the email > and learning about your boats. > Stan Orlando Florida. > > > > ________________________________________________________________________ > ________________________________________________________________________ > > Message: 4 > Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 00:19:58 -0000 > From: "richytill" > Subject: Re: cabin top steel thickness > > Alex, AJ Forsyth would not do this for me but Janet > at Dominion Steel > said if I would agree to acept the risk of wavy > plates they would > supply material wheelabraded and primed. I did--it > was fine. rt > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Alex" > wrote: > > I can't get my steel supplier to get my cabin/deck > steel in 11 ga > > (1.8", or .125) shotblasted and primed by the > company which handles > > that. They only want to do 10 ga. (.135), the > shotblasting company > > citing concerns about distortion during the > shotblasting process. > > Unfortunately, allowing them to give me 10 ga > steel will add more > === message truncated === __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - More reliable, more storage, less spam http://mail.yahoo.com| 3350|3332|2004-03-25 23:47:15|Stan Kuczynski|What pump do you use to supply fresh air?|Hi brent ,well you answered half the question now what did you use for a pump to get the air to your mask. Rigging a scuba bottle is one way and cracking the valve so that you create a positive flow and a positive pressure enviorenment inside your mask is a must. this keeps you from accidentaly sucking in fumes in the event you bump your mask and break the face seal. How ever the bottel will only last 30 minutes tops. --- brentswain38 wrote: > The mask was made by Norco.I think I bought it from > Safety Supply. > The check valves fit 3/4 inch plastic street elbows > with hose barbs > on one end and 3/4 inch female pipe threads on the > other.I slipped > 3/4 inch corrugated hose over the hose barb ends , > took them over my > shoulders and joined them behind my back to the 24 > ft of 1 1/4 inch > sump drain hose with duct tape.I had to heat and > soften the hose barb > ends to bend them further aft to clear my helmet. > Brent Swain > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Courtney Thomas > > wrote: > > Brent, > > > > Read your book, just got a welder and want to now > learn to properly > use it. > > > > What mask did you use, where'd you get it and > how'd you connect the > hose > > to it ? > > > > Appreciatively, > > > > Courtney > > > > > > > > brentswain38 wrote: > > > > > I used galvanized steel for my decks and cabin. > For my own boat > it > > > was a one time deal. I wouldn't work on > galvanized steel for a > > > living, due to the health hazzards of long term > exposure.I used a > > > mask hooked up to 24 ft of 1 1/4 inch plastic > sump drain hose ,$7 > in > > > any hardware store, breathing air from 24 ft > away. This also was > a > > > good rig for painting inside with epoxies. > > > Many people spoke of problems getting paint to > stick to > > > Galvanizing. I washed my decks with TSP, hosed > it of and washed > it > > > again with vinegar to remove any oxides, hosed > it off and let it > dry. > > > The weather was hot and dry at the time) Then > began painting it. > It > > > has stuck like scandal to a moderate. > > > Brent Swain > > > > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Graeme" > > wrote: > > > > > >>Alex > > >> > > >>Just a thought can you get galvanized steel, > like what is used in > > >> > > > making > > > > > >>rain water tanks in the size you need I guess it > would be a bit > > >> > > > dearer > > > > > >>but no rust problems except on weld spots and no > sand blasting > > >> > > > required. > > > > > >>Graeme > > >> > > >>-----Original Message----- > > >>From: Alex [mailto:northcanoe@y...] > > >>Sent: Wednesday, 24 March 2004 9:15 AM > > >>To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > >>Subject: [origamiboats] cabin top steel > thickness > > >> > > >>I can't get my steel supplier to get my > cabin/deck steel in 11 ga > > >>(1.8", or .125) shotblasted and primed by the > company which > handles > > >>that. They only want to do 10 ga. (.135), the > shotblasting > company > > >>citing concerns about distortion during the > shotblasting > process. > > >>Unfortunately, allowing them to give me 10 ga > steel will add more > > >>than .65 lb per sq ft. Spread over the area of > the top of the > hull, > > >>above roll axis, this will add weight where not > desired. > > >> > > >>Anyone else in BC encounter this problem? > > >> > > >>Alex > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >>To Post a message, send it to: > origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > >>To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > > >>origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > >>Yahoo! Groups Links > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: > origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > origamiboats- > unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Courtney Thomas > > s/v Mutiny > > Rhodes Bounty II > > lying Oriental, NC > > WDB5619 > > ===== Happy Holidays Stan Kuczynski P.S. Remember Don't ever Lie-Cheat- or steal. Your Government hates compatition __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time. http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html| 3351|3332|2004-03-26 04:24:03|Graeme|Re: cabin top steel thickness|Alex Did you price it out to see what the difference was in gal ? As it would not have to be sand blasted or epoxy painted Just wondering that's all Graeme >>I can't get my steel supplier to get my cabin/deck steel in 11 ga >>(1.8", or .125) shotblasted and primed by the company which handles >>that. They only want to do 10 ga. (.135), the shotblasting company >>citing concerns about distortion during the shotblasting process. >>Unfortunately, allowing them to give me 10 ga steel will add more >>than .65 lb per sq ft. Spread over the area of the top of the hull, >>above roll axis, this will add weight where not desired. >> >>Anyone else in BC encounter this problem? >> >>Alex To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links| 3352|3344|2004-03-26 08:16:44|Courtney Thomas|Re: Fresh air mask for welding galvanized and painting|Richy, Sure would appreciate as precise a description of your equipment and it's construction, as you're willing to provide, hopefully including...... what kind of mask, hose type/length, mask/hose connections, shop vac connection, air bleed fitting description & connection. Cordially, Courtney richytill wrote: > Brent, when I was pouring lead or painting inside, I pressurized my > mask with outside air. I used a sysem of hoses like yours but hooked > it up to a clean shop vac off the blow port. The pressure was > somewhat overwhelming at first; I then bled off excess air by > drilling ever larger holes in a fitting until the system had good > flow at a comfortable pressure. Cool fresh air was welcome. rt > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" > wrote: > >>Bert >> As long as you don't have a beard, there is no need to pump air >>thru it.The check valves in the mask keep the air flowing in one >>direction only. If you try inhaling thru 24 ft of 1 1/4 inch sump >>drain hose,you'll find it's easier to draw air thru it than it is >> > to > >>inhale thru most filtres. >> Brent Swain >> >> >>--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, bert andjan >>wrote: >> >>>Brent, >>> >>> I've thought of rigging such a deal for breathing >>>fresh air. I see you can buy such fresh air supply >>>gizmo's for big bucks. I wonder what you used for a >>>"pump" to get the air moving safely through the >>>hose...and how flexible was the hose? Was it awkward >>>to use? Thanks! This would be much safer I'd >>>imagine than breathing through a filter. It'd also >>>be good for blasting ?? >>> >>>Bert Eggers....Saginaw, Mi >>> >>>Brent wrote: >>>I used galvanized steel for my decks and cabin. For my >>>own boat it >>>was a one time deal. I wouldn't work on galvanized >>>steel for a >>>living, due to the health hazzards of long term >>>exposure.I used a >>>mask hooked up to 24 ft of 1 1/4 inch plastic sump >>>drain hose ,$7 in >>>any hardware store, breathing air from 24 ft away. >>>This also was a >>>good rig for painting inside with epoxies. >>> >>>__________________________________ >>>Do you Yahoo!? >>>Yahoo! Mail - More reliable, more storage, less spam >>>http://mail.yahoo.com >>> > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > -- Courtney Thomas s/v Mutiny Rhodes Bounty II lying Oriental, NC WDB5619| 3353|3344|2004-03-26 09:56:46|Steven Schofield|Re: Fresh air mask for welding galvanized and painting|Hi, The simplest solutions are often the best. Use a garden hose for the pipe(you probably already have one). Duct tape a snorkel mouthpiece to one end of the hose. When using loop the hose over your shoulder and secure to your back using a belt . This allows you to walk and pull the hose without pulling the mouthpiece out of your mouth. No external pump is necessary, that's what your lungs are for. Breath in through the pipe and exhale through your nose. Be careful backing up that you do not trip over the hose. I use this system underwater to clean the bottom of my boat. It works there so you should have no problems ashore. This system shouldn't cost anything. Note: if you want to try this underwater remember the deeper you go the more likely that water pressure will collapse the pipe. That's when the pump becomes necessary. Steve Schofield, NS >From: bert andjan >Reply-To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com >To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com >Subject: [origamiboats] Fresh air mask for welding galvanized and painting >Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 14:01:38 -0800 (PST) >MIME-Version: 1.0 >X-Sender: bertandjan@... >Received: from n14.grp.scd.yahoo.com ([66.218.66.69]) by >mc3-f24.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6824); Thu, 25 Mar 2004 >20:01:01 -0800 >Received: from [66.218.66.97] by n14.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 25 Mar >2004 22:01:40 -0000 >Received: (qmail 92816 invoked from network); 25 Mar 2004 22:01:38 -0000 >Received: from unknown (66.218.66.167) by m14.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; >25 Mar 2004 22:01:38 -0000 >Received: from unknown (HELO web42306.mail.yahoo.com) (66.218.93.215) by >mta6.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 25 Mar 2004 22:01:38 -0000 >Received: from [66.72.9.203] by web42306.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Thu, 25 >Mar 2004 14:01:38 PST >X-Message-Info: JGTYoYF78jGBgGwddLR2jkvQZiSK2bTY >X-eGroups-Return: >sentto-1579488-3345-1080252099-cpt6pk=hotmail.com@... >X-Apparently-To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com >Message-ID: <20040325220138.44926.qmail@...> >In-Reply-To: <1080224003.251.33394.m12@yahoogroups.com> >X-eGroups-Remote-IP: 66.218.93.215 >X-Yahoo-Profile: bertandjan >Mailing-List: list origamiboats@yahoogroups.com; contact >origamiboats-owner@yahoogroups.com >Delivered-To: mailing list origamiboats@yahoogroups.com >Precedence: bulk >List-Unsubscribe: >Return-Path: >sentto-1579488-3345-1080252099-cpt6pk=hotmail.com@... >X-OriginalArrivalTime: 26 Mar 2004 04:01:01.0946 (UTC) >FILETIME=[F40C95A0:01C412E6] > >Brent, > > I've thought of rigging such a deal for breathing >fresh air. I see you can buy such fresh air supply >gizmo's for big bucks. I wonder what you used for a >"pump" to get the air moving safely through the >hose...and how flexible was the hose? Was it awkward >to use? Thanks! This would be much safer I'd >imagine than breathing through a filter. It'd also >be good for blasting ?? > >Bert Eggers....Saginaw, Mi > >Brent wrote: >I used galvanized steel for my decks and cabin. For my >own boat it >was a one time deal. I wouldn't work on galvanized >steel for a >living, due to the health hazzards of long term >exposure.I used a >mask hooked up to 24 ft of 1 1/4 inch plastic sump >drain hose ,$7 in >any hardware store, breathing air from 24 ft away. >This also was a >good rig for painting inside with epoxies. > >__________________________________ >Do you Yahoo!? >Yahoo! Mail - More reliable, more storage, less spam >http://mail.yahoo.com _________________________________________________________________ http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines| 3354|3344|2004-03-26 14:41:51|richytill|Re: Fresh air mask for welding galvanized and painting|Courtney, 1. The mask is a Survivair--but it could be anything similar. Choose a brand you are certain you can easily get filters for. 2. The hose was the plastic type used on bilge pumps just because it is what I had available. The hose was long enough to stretch from ground level beneath the stern through the prop shaft exit and well into the boat--say 30 feet or so. I chose the area beneath the stern since, in this case, the shop vac was drawing in air from a place free of fumes. 3. The connection from the shop-vac hose to the plastic hose was via 1 piece of thin-wall steel tube. The thin-wall tube was on the ouside of the boat and this is where I drilled holes to release excess pressure. As Brent pointed out you may have to heat up fittings to slide them onto plastic. 4. Now here's the trick: leave the filters on the mask and tape the hose onto the open face (inlet side) of the filter so that air will flow through the filter into the mask. This means no adaptors or special fittings. I used layers of cotton/adhesive athletic tape followed by duct tape. You will need to shape the end of the hose with a knife to make a good fit to the filter prior to taping it on. I just used things that I had around the building site to make this work. The shop vac was brand new and has proven to be an ongoing asset to the whole project. Even though there was compressed air on site I used this system because the cost of the mask and air filter pack to suit compressed air was way out of my budget. Hope this helps, rt --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Courtney Thomas wrote: > Richy, > > Sure would appreciate as precise a description of your equipment and > it's construction, as you're willing to provide, hopefully including...... > > what kind of mask, > > hose type/length, > > mask/hose connections, > > shop vac connection, > > air bleed fitting description & connection. > > Cordially, > Courtney > > > > richytill wrote: > > > Brent, when I was pouring lead or painting inside, I pressurized my > > mask with outside air. I used a sysem of hoses like yours but hooked > > it up to a clean shop vac off the blow port. The pressure was > > somewhat overwhelming at first; I then bled off excess air by > > drilling ever larger holes in a fitting until the system had good > > flow at a comfortable pressure. Cool fresh air was welcome. rt > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" > > wrote: > > > >>Bert > >> As long as you don't have a beard, there is no need to pump air > >>thru it.The check valves in the mask keep the air flowing in one > >>direction only. If you try inhaling thru 24 ft of 1 1/4 inch sump > >>drain hose,you'll find it's easier to draw air thru it than it is > >> > > to > > > >>inhale thru most filtres. > >> Brent Swain > >> > >> > >>--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, bert andjan > >>wrote: > >> > >>>Brent, > >>> > >>> I've thought of rigging such a deal for breathing > >>>fresh air. I see you can buy such fresh air supply > >>>gizmo's for big bucks. I wonder what you used for a > >>>"pump" to get the air moving safely through the > >>>hose...and how flexible was the hose? Was it awkward > >>>to use? Thanks! This would be much safer I'd > >>>imagine than breathing through a filter. It'd also > >>>be good for blasting ?? > >>> > >>>Bert Eggers....Saginaw, Mi > >>> > >>>Brent wrote: > >>>I used galvanized steel for my decks and cabin. For my > >>>own boat it > >>>was a one time deal. I wouldn't work on galvanized > >>>steel for a > >>>living, due to the health hazzards of long term > >>>exposure.I used a > >>>mask hooked up to 24 ft of 1 1/4 inch plastic sump > >>>drain hose ,$7 in > >>>any hardware store, breathing air from 24 ft away. > >>>This also was a > >>>good rig for painting inside with epoxies. > >>> > >>>__________________________________ > >>>Do you Yahoo!? > >>>Yahoo! Mail - More reliable, more storage, less spam > >>>http://mail.yahoo.com > >>> > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Courtney Thomas > s/v Mutiny > Rhodes Bounty II > lying Oriental, NC > WDB5619 | 3355|3332|2004-03-26 16:21:37|brentswain38|Re: What pump do you use to supply fresh air?|Stan I didn't use any pump. It wasn't needed.Try it . Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Stan Kuczynski wrote: > Hi brent ,well you answered half the question now what > did you use for a pump to get the air to your mask. > Rigging a scuba bottle is one way and cracking the > valve so that you create a positive flow and a > positive pressure enviorenment inside your mask is a > must. this keeps you from accidentaly sucking in fumes > in the event you bump your mask and break the face > seal. How ever the bottel will only last 30 minutes > tops. > --- brentswain38 wrote: > > The mask was made by Norco.I think I bought it from > > Safety Supply. > > The check valves fit 3/4 inch plastic street elbows > > with hose barbs > > on one end and 3/4 inch female pipe threads on the > > other.I slipped > > 3/4 inch corrugated hose over the hose barb ends , > > took them over my > > shoulders and joined them behind my back to the 24 > > ft of 1 1/4 inch > > sump drain hose with duct tape.I had to heat and > > soften the hose barb > > ends to bend them further aft to clear my helmet. > > Brent Swain > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Courtney Thomas > > > > wrote: > > > Brent, > > > > > > Read your book, just got a welder and want to now > > learn to properly > > use it. > > > > > > What mask did you use, where'd you get it and > > how'd you connect the > > hose > > > to it ? > > > > > > Appreciatively, > > > > > > Courtney > > > > > > > > > > > > brentswain38 wrote: > > > > > > > I used galvanized steel for my decks and cabin. > > For my own boat > > it > > > > was a one time deal. I wouldn't work on > > galvanized steel for a > > > > living, due to the health hazzards of long term > > exposure.I used a > > > > mask hooked up to 24 ft of 1 1/4 inch plastic > > sump drain hose ,$7 > > in > > > > any hardware store, breathing air from 24 ft > > away. This also was > > a > > > > good rig for painting inside with epoxies. > > > > Many people spoke of problems getting paint to > > stick to > > > > Galvanizing. I washed my decks with TSP, hosed > > it of and washed > > it > > > > again with vinegar to remove any oxides, hosed > > it off and let it > > dry. > > > > The weather was hot and dry at the time) Then > > began painting it. > > It > > > > has stuck like scandal to a moderate. > > > > Brent Swain > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Graeme" > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >>Alex > > > >> > > > >>Just a thought can you get galvanized steel, > > like what is used in > > > >> > > > > making > > > > > > > >>rain water tanks in the size you need I guess it > > would be a bit > > > >> > > > > dearer > > > > > > > >>but no rust problems except on weld spots and no > > sand blasting > > > >> > > > > required. > > > > > > > >>Graeme > > > >> > > > >>-----Original Message----- > > > >>From: Alex [mailto:northcanoe@y...] > > > >>Sent: Wednesday, 24 March 2004 9:15 AM > > > >>To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > > >>Subject: [origamiboats] cabin top steel > > thickness > > > >> > > > >>I can't get my steel supplier to get my > > cabin/deck steel in 11 ga > > > >>(1.8", or .125) shotblasted and primed by the > > company which > > handles > > > >>that. They only want to do 10 ga. (.135), the > > shotblasting > > company > > > >>citing concerns about distortion during the > > shotblasting > > process. > > > >>Unfortunately, allowing them to give me 10 ga > > steel will add more > > > >>than .65 lb per sq ft. Spread over the area of > > the top of the > > hull, > > > >>above roll axis, this will add weight where not > > desired. > > > >> > > > >>Anyone else in BC encounter this problem? > > > >> > > > >>Alex > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >>To Post a message, send it to: > > origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > > >>To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > > > >>origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > >>Yahoo! Groups Links > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: > > origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > > origamiboats- > > unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Courtney Thomas > > > s/v Mutiny > > > Rhodes Bounty II > > > lying Oriental, NC > > > WDB5619 > > > > > > > ===== > > Happy Holidays > Stan Kuczynski > P.S. Remember > Don't ever Lie-Cheat- or steal. > Your Government hates compatition > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time. > http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html | 3356|3356|2004-03-26 18:04:49|audeojude|Breathing off a scuba tank|I saw the post about breathing off a scuba tank. If you have a scuba tank you probably have a regulator which is a one way breathing system already. You should be able to get 2 to 3 hours off a 80 cubic ft tank at sea level ambiant air pressure at a minimum. In shallow water recovery work I would regularly get 3 hours off one in 6 to 15 ft of water working like a madman. To expensive to go buy this stuff for the job when a cheap mask rigged up like brent says will work fine, but if you have it sitting around go for it. Scott| 3357|3357|2004-03-26 19:22:24|richytill|metal costs|Copied this from a release by a US supplier: "Buckner says there are several reasons for the increased cost: Less competition among steel companies, increased demand because China is using more steel, and the devalued dollar overseas." One local boatbuilder advises, production times considered, customers get a better deal with aluminum until steel prices moderate. This obviously does not affect the owner builder as much. Quotes vary but in the above article 60%-- 70% increase in the US, with 30% increase on hot rolled by STELCO in Canada (in a press release from that firm). Has anyone noticed a shift in the price of lead? rt| 3358|3358|2004-03-27 00:26:44|John Jones|Breathing|Yup.... I do it too,"honest", and when I'm welding galvinized anything I either use a positive (local) venting system.... Like a ducted blower, (ducted on the input side) as well as the output side so as not to cause any draft on the weld. The other thing is to modify a sand blast helmet that has a positive feed of air so yer always breathing fresh air and everything else is is just pushed away. Princess auto has a cool lens that auto darkens that could be fitted to the hood. Well it's just an idea anyways John| 3359|3344|2004-03-27 09:13:18|Stan Kuczynski|Another Idea for Fresh air mask for welding galvanized and painting|Let me add a couple thoughts here, I am a professional fire fighter and breathing equipment is part of my bag of toys. A few years ago Scott made available world wide Positive ventalation masks, ok what does that mean. Scott and MSA are the two leaders in fire fighting and closed space breathing equipment. We at my Department happen to use Scott. My mask is the style that Looks like a bug face with the big hole for the regulator at the end. Any way air masks used to be Negative pressure set up,or demand set up, in other words you only got air when you needed it by taking a breath. Just like a scuba regulator.this was fine till they found people who were in Hi toxic atmospheres were getting into trouble when they would bump their mask and the small area of volume that made up the space around their face would fill up with the toxic enviorenment they were in or if there face mask seal the feather edge of soft rubber that makes up the edge of their mask and sealed out the bad stuff due to poor maintanense of the equipment or an irregular shaped face. (one size does not fit all) leaked allowing the out side atmosphere to come in when they took a breath. They would suck some contaminated air in with the clean stuff in the bottle. So to fix the problem The new masks are positive pressure and create a 5Lb. positive flow that fills the mask with clean air and in the event you should have a leake forces fresh air out away from the face rather then letting nasty air in. Having to suck air through the 24 foot hose sounds like a lot of work, I don't know probably works fine I havent tried it. How ever Having facial hair (beard or not) if you are going to work in any confind space (the inside of the boat or a place that is subject to poor air flow to remove fumes I like the option fo positive air flow.(In fact I insist on on it Why take a chance) The idea of using the discharge of the vacume cleaner will work providing that this is all that this is used for. In other words if you are going to go through the trouble (in my opinion worth it) to set up a positive flow system then that vacume can never be used for anything else not even once. it has to stay dedicated to the breathing system. To regulate the air flow very simpley. Cutting holes in in the hose to adjust pressure allowes crap to possibly get into your house and force it into your face and lungs. In stead make a duel hose regulator for your mask.Similar to the old two hose scuba regulators. using the 1 1/2 hose place a PVC TEE at the mask. now you have three openings at the tee. two of which are in line. one is off at 90 degrees. the one at 90 degrees to the other two openings is the one that connects to your mask. leaving the other two in line openings free to be used as in take and exaust. One opening is attached to the hose from the pump.(your intake opening) the other is the discharge which you place a 3-4 foot section of house to allow the flowing air to escape.some where in this exaust line you will want to place a 1 1/2 oe 2 inch 1/4 turn Pvc Valve. I suggest you use the threded type fittings opposed to the glue type if at all possible. The valve allows you to regulate back pressure into your mask. Start by opening the valve 1/2 way turn on the pump and see if the air flow is comfortabl, to much flow open the valve more to bleed off excess air flow. You have it right when your face just feels cool but not when it is being blown against in hi volume. The valve can be placed at the Tee middle of the house for you to regulate as you need to or at the end. If you are wearing a jump suit type cove all when working on your boat you can place the end of the exaust tube into your suit to flow air and help keep you cool while you work. Does the system I discrib work, yes it does and very well. Before I was fire fighter I was trained as a commercial Hard hat diver. many of the masks at that time were a darivative of the system I just discribed. if it works under water where you have all that pressure it will work in your boat. another idea for a pump is to use a squirrl cage blower simmilar to the ones used to recirculate air in a home A/C unit or the kind found in the car heater system. Granger supply sells them. a small one fabricated to blow into the hose should be easy enough. I often thought of placing the intake side of one to an ice chest and suck air through a cooler full of ice cubes from the frige. to give me a/c while I work havent tried it yet. Hope this system helps you all out.any questions just ask, cheers Stan Kuczynski Orlando Florida ===== Happy Holidays Stan Kuczynski P.S. Remember Don't ever Lie-Cheat- or steal. Your Government hates compatition __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time. http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html| 3360|3344|2004-03-27 18:40:05|Graeme|Re: Another Idea for Fresh air mask for welding galvanized and pain|Stan Great idea for the warm climates . I guess in Canada when you up to your arm pits in snow you would need the air coming through a fire bucket to keep you warm. Just kidding guys . This has been a very good thread a lot of good ideas,if I must say so myself Graeme -----Original Message----- From: Stan Kuczynski [mailto:s_kuczynski@...] Sent: Saturday, 27 March 2004 10:12 PM To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Subject: [origamiboats] Another Idea for Fresh air mask for welding galvanized and painting Let me add a couple thoughts here, I am a professional fire fighter and breathing equipment is part of my bag of toys. A few years ago Scott made available world wide Positive ventalation masks, ok what does that mean. Scott and MSA are the two leaders in fire fighting and closed space breathing equipment. We at my Department happen to use Scott. My mask is the style that Looks like a bug face with the big hole for the regulator at the end. Any way air masks used to be Negative pressure set up,or demand set up, in other words you only got air when you needed it by taking a breath. Just like a scuba regulator.this was fine till they found people who were in Hi toxic atmospheres were getting into trouble when they would bump their mask and the small area of volume that made up the space around their face would fill up with the toxic enviorenment they were in or if there face mask seal the feather edge of soft rubber that makes up the edge of their mask and sealed out the bad stuff due to poor maintanense of the equipment or an irregular shaped face. (one size does not fit all) leaked allowing the out side atmosphere to come in when they took a breath. They would suck some contaminated air in with the clean stuff in the bottle. So to fix the problem The new masks are positive pressure and create a 5Lb. positive flow that fills the mask with clean air and in the event you should have a leake forces fresh air out away from the face rather then letting nasty air in. Having to suck air through the 24 foot hose sounds like a lot of work, I don't know probably works fine I havent tried it. How ever Having facial hair (beard or not) if you are going to work in any confind space (the inside of the boat or a place that is subject to poor air flow to remove fumes I like the option fo positive air flow.(In fact I insist on on it Why take a chance) The idea of using the discharge of the vacume cleaner will work providing that this is all that this is used for. In other words if you are going to go through the trouble (in my opinion worth it) to set up a positive flow system then that vacume can never be used for anything else not even once. it has to stay dedicated to the breathing system. To regulate the air flow very simpley. Cutting holes in in the hose to adjust pressure allowes crap to possibly get into your house and force it into your face and lungs. In stead make a duel hose regulator for your mask.Similar to the old two hose scuba regulators. using the 1 1/2 hose place a PVC TEE at the mask. now you have three openings at the tee. two of which are in line. one is off at 90 degrees. the one at 90 degrees to the other two openings is the one that connects to your mask. leaving the other two in line openings free to be used as in take and exaust. One opening is attached to the hose from the pump.(your intake opening) the other is the discharge which you place a 3-4 foot section of house to allow the flowing air to escape.some where in this exaust line you will want to place a 1 1/2 oe 2 inch 1/4 turn Pvc Valve. I suggest you use the threded type fittings opposed to the glue type if at all possible. The valve allows you to regulate back pressure into your mask. Start by opening the valve 1/2 way turn on the pump and see if the air flow is comfortabl, to much flow open the valve more to bleed off excess air flow. You have it right when your face just feels cool but not when it is being blown against in hi volume. The valve can be placed at the Tee middle of the house for you to regulate as you need to or at the end. If you are wearing a jump suit type cove all when working on your boat you can place the end of the exaust tube into your suit to flow air and help keep you cool while you work. Does the system I discrib work, yes it does and very well. Before I was fire fighter I was trained as a commercial Hard hat diver. many of the masks at that time were a darivative of the system I just discribed. if it works under water where you have all that pressure it will work in your boat. another idea for a pump is to use a squirrl cage blower simmilar to the ones used to recirculate air in a home A/C unit or the kind found in the car heater system. Granger supply sells them. a small one fabricated to blow into the hose should be easy enough. I often thought of placing the intake side of one to an ice chest and suck air through a cooler full of ice cubes from the frige. to give me a/c while I work havent tried it yet. Hope this system helps you all out.any questions just ask, cheers Stan Kuczynski Orlando Florida ===== Happy Holidays Stan Kuczynski P.S. Remember Don't ever Lie-Cheat- or steal. Your Government hates compatition __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time. http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links| 3361|3332|2004-03-27 21:36:08|Stan Kuczynski|Re: What pump do you use to supply fresh air?|thanks for the correction I will --- brentswain38 wrote: > Stan > I didn't use any pump. It wasn't needed.Try it . > Brent Swain > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Stan Kuczynski > wrote: > > Hi brent ,well you answered half the question now > what > > did you use for a pump to get the air to your > mask. > > Rigging a scuba bottle is one way and cracking the > > valve so that you create a positive flow and a > > positive pressure enviorenment inside your mask is > a > > must. this keeps you from accidentaly sucking in > fumes > > in the event you bump your mask and break the face > > seal. How ever the bottel will only last 30 > minutes > > tops. > > --- brentswain38 wrote: > > > The mask was made by Norco.I think I bought it > from > > > Safety Supply. > > > The check valves fit 3/4 inch plastic street > elbows > > > with hose barbs > > > on one end and 3/4 inch female pipe threads on > the > > > other.I slipped > > > 3/4 inch corrugated hose over the hose barb ends > , > > > took them over my > > > shoulders and joined them behind my back to the > 24 > > > ft of 1 1/4 inch > > > sump drain hose with duct tape.I had to heat and > > > soften the hose barb > > > ends to bend them further aft to clear my > helmet. > > > Brent Swain > > > > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Courtney > Thomas > > > > > > wrote: > > > > Brent, > > > > > > > > Read your book, just got a welder and want to > now > > > learn to properly > > > use it. > > > > > > > > What mask did you use, where'd you get it and > > > how'd you connect the > > > hose > > > > to it ? > > > > > > > > Appreciatively, > > > > > > > > Courtney > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > brentswain38 wrote: > > > > > > > > > I used galvanized steel for my decks and > cabin. > > > For my own boat > > > it > > > > > was a one time deal. I wouldn't work on > > > galvanized steel for a > > > > > living, due to the health hazzards of long > term > > > exposure.I used a > > > > > mask hooked up to 24 ft of 1 1/4 inch > plastic > > > sump drain hose ,$7 > > > in > > > > > any hardware store, breathing air from 24 ft > > > away. This also was > > > a > > > > > good rig for painting inside with epoxies. > > > > > Many people spoke of problems getting > paint to > > > stick to > > > > > Galvanizing. I washed my decks with TSP, > hosed > > > it of and washed > > > it > > > > > again with vinegar to remove any oxides, > hosed > > > it off and let it > > > dry. > > > > > The weather was hot and dry at the time) > Then > > > began painting it. > > > It > > > > > has stuck like scandal to a moderate. > > > > > Brent Swain > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, > "Graeme" > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > >>Alex > > > > >> > > > > >>Just a thought can you get galvanized steel, > > > like what is used in > > > > >> > > > > > making > > > > > > > > > >>rain water tanks in the size you need I > guess it > > > would be a bit > > > > >> > > > > > dearer > > > > > > > > > >>but no rust problems except on weld spots > and no > > > sand blasting > > > > >> > > > > > required. > > > > > > > > > >>Graeme > > > > >> > > > > >>-----Original Message----- > > > > >>From: Alex [mailto:northcanoe@y...] > > > > >>Sent: Wednesday, 24 March 2004 9:15 AM > > > > >>To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > > > >>Subject: [origamiboats] cabin top steel > > > thickness > > > > >> > > > > >>I can't get my steel supplier to get my > > > cabin/deck steel in 11 ga > > > > >>(1.8", or .125) shotblasted and primed by > the > > > company which > > > handles > > > > >>that. They only want to do 10 ga. (.135), > the > > > shotblasting > > > company > > > > >>citing concerns about distortion during the > > > shotblasting > > > process. > > > > >>Unfortunately, allowing them to give me 10 > ga > > > steel will add more > > > > >>than .65 lb per sq ft. Spread over the area > of > > > the top of the > > > hull, > > > > >>above roll axis, this will add weight where > not > > > desired. > > > > >> > > > > >>Anyone else in BC encounter this problem? > > > > >> > > > > >>Alex > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >>To Post a message, send it to: > > > origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > > > >>To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > > > > >>origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > >>Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: > > > origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > > > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > > > origamiboats- > > > unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Courtney Thomas > > > > s/v Mutiny > > > > Rhodes Bounty II > > > > lying Oriental, NC > > > > WDB5619 > > > > > > > > > === message truncated === ===== Happy Holidays Stan Kuczynski P.S. Remember Don't ever Lie-Cheat- or steal. Your Government hates compatition __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time. http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html| 3362|3344|2004-03-27 22:03:52|Stan Kuczynski|Re: Another Idea for Fresh air mask for welding galvanized and pain|Ya know I never gave it a thought but your right it gets pretty darned cold up yonder. I know I went to college way up north in New York State in Canton. It got so cold that they opened kitchens in the dorm basements so we didn't have to leave the building. Any way I would think that rigging a hair dryer set on low heat with a tub running to a "Y" junction at your belt and then have the "Y" split into two tubs that ran down the back of your legs and up under the cuff to feed warm air up into say a full cover all or jump suit of some type would keep you fairly warm. I realize this sounds abut strange but way back when we used to pump warm water into our wet suits when I was training as a commercial diver it was enough to keep the cold water away from the skin and me warm to do my job. I thing warm air pumped in from the bottom up could work. --- Graeme wrote: > Stan > Great idea for the warm climates . I guess in Canada > when you up to your > arm pits in snow you would need the air coming > through a fire bucket to > keep you warm. > > Just kidding guys . > > This has been a very good thread a lot of good > ideas,if I must say so > myself > > Graeme > > -----Original Message----- > From: Stan Kuczynski [mailto:s_kuczynski@...] > Sent: Saturday, 27 March 2004 10:12 PM > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [origamiboats] Another Idea for Fresh air > mask for welding > galvanized and painting > > Let me add a couple thoughts here, I am a > professional > fire fighter and breathing equipment is part of my > bag > of toys. A few years ago Scott made available world > wide Positive ventalation masks, ok what does that > mean. Scott and MSA are the two leaders in fire > fighting and closed space breathing equipment. We at > my Department happen to use Scott. My mask is the > style that Looks like a bug face with the big hole > for > the regulator at the end. Any way air masks used to > be > Negative pressure set up,or demand set up, in other > words you only got air when you needed it by taking > a > breath. Just like a scuba regulator.this was fine > till > they found people who were in Hi toxic atmospheres > were getting into trouble when they would bump their > mask and the small area of volume that made up the > space around their face would fill up with the toxic > enviorenment they were in or if there face mask seal > the feather edge of soft rubber that makes up the > edge > of their mask and sealed out the bad stuff due to > poor > maintanense of the equipment or an irregular shaped > face. (one size does not fit all) leaked allowing > the > out side atmosphere to come in when they took a > breath. They would suck some contaminated air in > with > the clean stuff in the bottle. So to fix the problem > The new masks are positive pressure and create a > 5Lb. > positive flow that fills the mask with clean air and > in the event you should have a leake forces fresh > air > out away from the face rather then letting nasty air > in. Having to suck air through the 24 foot hose > sounds > like a lot of work, I don't know probably works fine > I > havent tried it. How ever Having facial hair (beard > or > not) if you are going to work in any confind space > (the inside of the boat or a place that is subject > to > poor air flow to remove fumes I like the option fo > positive air flow.(In fact I insist on on it Why > take > a chance) > The idea of using the discharge of the vacume > cleaner > will work providing that this is all that this is > used > for. In other words if you are going to go through > the > trouble (in my opinion worth it) to set up a > positive > flow system then that vacume can never be used for > anything else not even once. it has to stay > dedicated > to the breathing system. To regulate the air flow > very > simpley. Cutting holes in in the hose to adjust > pressure allowes crap to possibly get into your > house > and force it into your face and lungs. In stead make > a > duel hose regulator for your mask.Similar to the old > two hose scuba regulators. using the 1 1/2 hose > place > a PVC TEE at the mask. now you have three openings > at > the tee. two of which are in line. one is off at 90 > degrees. the one at 90 degrees to the other two > openings is the one that connects to your mask. > leaving the other two in line openings free to be > used as in take and exaust. One opening is attached > to > the hose from the pump.(your intake opening) the > other > is the discharge which you place a 3-4 foot section > of > house to allow the flowing air to escape.some where > in > this exaust line you will want to place a 1 1/2 oe 2 > inch 1/4 turn Pvc Valve. I suggest you use the > threded > type fittings opposed to the glue type if at all > possible. The valve allows you to regulate back > pressure into your mask. Start by opening the valve > 1/2 way turn on the pump and see if the air flow is > comfortabl, to much flow open the valve more to > bleed > off excess air flow. You have it right when your > face > just feels cool but not when it is being blown > against > in hi volume. The valve can be placed at the Tee > middle of the house for you to regulate as you need > to > or at the end. If you are wearing a jump suit type > cove all when working on your boat you can place the > end of the exaust tube into your suit to flow air > and > help keep you cool while you work. Does the system I > discrib work, yes it does and very well. Before I > was > fire fighter I was trained as a commercial Hard hat > diver. many of the masks at that time were a > darivative of the system I just discribed. if it > works > under water where you have all that pressure it will > work in your boat. another idea for a pump is to use > a > squirrl cage blower simmilar to the ones used to > recirculate air in a home A/C unit or the kind found > in the car heater system. Granger supply sells them. > a > small one fabricated to blow into the hose should be > easy enough. I often thought of placing the intake > side of one to an ice chest and suck air through a > cooler full of ice cubes from the frige. to give me > a/c while I work havent tried it yet. Hope this > system > helps you all out.any questions just ask, cheers > Stan Kuczynski Orlando Florida > > > ===== > > Happy Holidays > Stan Kuczynski > P.S. Remember > Don't ever Lie-Cheat- or steal. > Your Government hates compatition > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on > time. > http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html > > > > To Post a message, send it to: > origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > ===== Happy Holidays Stan Kuczynski P.S. Remember Don't ever Lie-Cheat- or steal. Your Government hates compatition __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time. http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html| 3363|3363|2004-03-27 23:42:33|John Jones|Well Done Guys|However A sandblast hood, a good one, with the air hose in the back "IS" a positive flow system....... the sump pump hose is a good idea and Princess Auto has all sorts of blowers for air supply...... Just be certain the air source is up-wind of the harmful source. Good Point Stan, I've also used the Scott system. John| 3364|3364|2004-03-28 00:23:49|Keith Green|software...sort of|I came across this on one of the CNC machining groups I'm on. Haven't tried it yet, but the gallery on the website shows some pretty cool stuff. Bet a guy could develop some nice hull lines with it. Keith Green Surrey, BC| 3365|3364|2004-03-28 00:26:21|keith green|software...sort of|Guess I should include the link, huh? http://www.e-cardmodel.com/pepakura-en/ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3366|3366|2004-03-28 08:52:54|Gary|Propane|Is anyone using alternatives to propane for heating and cooking? Personally, I really do not want to have to deal with those bulky tanks if possible. I have even heard some ports will not allow docking for propane equipped boats although I do not believe this would apply to North America. Comments appreciated... Gary| 3367|3366|2004-03-28 11:49:26|Len den Besten|Re: Propane|Gary, I use a diesel powered heater for water-heated radiators and for hot water. It's a dutch brand "Marine booster from Holland warmte, Numansdorp. http://www.maritimebooster.nl/ Too distant for you I guess. Excellent quality, The vulnerable (if so) is the combined blower/oil pump/burner. I bought a spare one, had it tuned and put it in storage on board. For cooking I use propane. Having a dedicated bun outside I don't see any problems apart from carrying them around. But when you want to cook on diesel look for Wallas diesel-stoves. I have no personal experiences but have heared good things about them. http://www.wallas.com/index_eng.php?group=1&type=1 Hope this helps, Len. --- Gary wrote: > Is anyone using alternatives to propane for heating > and cooking? > Personally, I really do not want to have to deal > with those bulky > tanks if possible. I have even heard some ports will > not allow > docking for propane equipped boats although I do not > believe this > would apply to North America. Comments > appreciated... > > Gary > > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time. http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html| 3368|3332|2004-03-28 18:51:24|aaron riis|Re: cabin top steel thickness|I used eighth inch plate for my cabin top on my 26 footer with the extreme camber of it, I don't expect to have to add any flat bars Aaron --- Alex wrote: > I can't get my steel supplier to get my cabin/deck > steel in 11 ga > (1.8", or .125) shotblasted and primed by the > company which handles > that. They only want to do 10 ga. (.135), the > shotblasting company > citing concerns about distortion during the > shotblasting process. > Unfortunately, allowing them to give me 10 ga steel > will add more > than .65 lb per sq ft. Spread over the area of the > top of the hull, > above roll axis, this will add weight where not > desired. > > Anyone else in BC encounter this problem? > > Alex > > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time. http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html| 3369|3344|2004-03-29 13:18:00|richytill|Re: Another Idea for Fresh air mask for welding galvanized and pain|Stan: On the shop-vac, it was brand new. Once the lead pouring and interior epoxy paint was done, I retired it to be used as a shop-vac only. I think the "just breath through the hose" idea is fine for welding fumes and zinc fumes. Like Brent says it works--I used the hose only system until I wanted added protection from the lead, toluene, xylene whatever. I could tell, in this case, there was leakage though the facial hair. Positive pressure fixed it; the blast of fresh air was a welcome bonus down in there. My pressure relief holes were located well outside the boat away from the toxins. rt --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Stan Kuczynski wrote: > Let me add a couple thoughts here, I am a professional > fire fighter and breathing equipment is part of my bag > of toys. A few years ago Scott made available world > wide Positive ventalation masks, ok what does that > mean. Scott and MSA are the two leaders in fire > fighting and closed space breathing equipment. We at > my Department happen to use Scott. My mask is the > style that Looks like a bug face with the big hole for > the regulator at the end. Any way air masks used to be > Negative pressure set up,or demand set up, in other > words you only got air when you needed it by taking a > breath. Just like a scuba regulator.this was fine till > they found people who were in Hi toxic atmospheres > were getting into trouble when they would bump their > mask and the small area of volume that made up the > space around their face would fill up with the toxic > enviorenment they were in or if there face mask seal > the feather edge of soft rubber that makes up the edge > of their mask and sealed out the bad stuff due to poor > maintanense of the equipment or an irregular shaped > face. (one size does not fit all) leaked allowing the > out side atmosphere to come in when they took a > breath. They would suck some contaminated air in with > the clean stuff in the bottle. So to fix the problem > The new masks are positive pressure and create a 5Lb. > positive flow that fills the mask with clean air and > in the event you should have a leake forces fresh air > out away from the face rather then letting nasty air > in. Having to suck air through the 24 foot hose sounds > like a lot of work, I don't know probably works fine I > havent tried it. How ever Having facial hair (beard or > not) if you are going to work in any confind space > (the inside of the boat or a place that is subject to > poor air flow to remove fumes I like the option fo > positive air flow.(In fact I insist on on it Why take > a chance) > The idea of using the discharge of the vacume cleaner > will work providing that this is all that this is used > for. In other words if you are going to go through the > trouble (in my opinion worth it) to set up a positive > flow system then that vacume can never be used for > anything else not even once. it has to stay dedicated > to the breathing system. To regulate the air flow very > simpley. Cutting holes in in the hose to adjust > pressure allowes crap to possibly get into your house > and force it into your face and lungs. In stead make a > duel hose regulator for your mask.Similar to the old > two hose scuba regulators. using the 1 1/2 hose place > a PVC TEE at the mask. now you have three openings at > the tee. two of which are in line. one is off at 90 > degrees. the one at 90 degrees to the other two > openings is the one that connects to your mask. > leaving the other two in line openings free to be > used as in take and exaust. One opening is attached to > the hose from the pump.(your intake opening) the other > is the discharge which you place a 3-4 foot section of > house to allow the flowing air to escape.some where in > this exaust line you will want to place a 1 1/2 oe 2 > inch 1/4 turn Pvc Valve. I suggest you use the threded > type fittings opposed to the glue type if at all > possible. The valve allows you to regulate back > pressure into your mask. Start by opening the valve > 1/2 way turn on the pump and see if the air flow is > comfortabl, to much flow open the valve more to bleed > off excess air flow. You have it right when your face > just feels cool but not when it is being blown against > in hi volume. The valve can be placed at the Tee > middle of the house for you to regulate as you need to > or at the end. If you are wearing a jump suit type > cove all when working on your boat you can place the > end of the exaust tube into your suit to flow air and > help keep you cool while you work. Does the system I > discrib work, yes it does and very well. Before I was > fire fighter I was trained as a commercial Hard hat > diver. many of the masks at that time were a > darivative of the system I just discribed. if it works > under water where you have all that pressure it will > work in your boat. another idea for a pump is to use a > squirrl cage blower simmilar to the ones used to > recirculate air in a home A/C unit or the kind found > in the car heater system. Granger supply sells them. a > small one fabricated to blow into the hose should be > easy enough. I often thought of placing the intake > side of one to an ice chest and suck air through a > cooler full of ice cubes from the frige. to give me > a/c while I work havent tried it yet. Hope this system > helps you all out.any questions just ask, cheers > Stan Kuczynski Orlando Florida > > > ===== > > Happy Holidays > Stan Kuczynski > P.S. Remember > Don't ever Lie-Cheat- or steal. > Your Government hates compatition > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time. > http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html | 3370|3370|2004-03-29 18:25:35|info@easysoftwareinc.com|new 37' design|A new 37' origami design, with increased room in the stern to permit a center cockpit/pilot house with aft cabin. 16,500 lbs displacement. 6'6" headroom, 500 gallons tankage/storage. Suitable for alloy or steel construction. http://www.origamimagic.com/design/lb37/lb37.htm Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3371|3344|2004-03-29 19:57:34|Stan Kuczynski|Re: Another Idea for Fresh air mask for welding galvanized and pain|Sounds like you had it well thought out, and the pressured air is always nice to have that cool flow comming in. The only thing I don't like about the hose only is unless you use a one way valve for the incomming air you are blowing a certain amount of co2 back into your fresh air hose and though it is probably not enough to worry about it does make the breathing air stale and its warm and stuffy. I only insisted on the dedicated shop vac for breathing because I would leave this thing set up for other future projects what ever they may be. anything with fumes. But certainly a one time use for the vac as a breathing pump then putting it to use as it was intended makes sence. if you have no intention of getting into other dirty projects then it just makes sence. Be carful with that hot lead don't want to give your self a hot foot.>g< --- richytill wrote: > Stan: On the shop-vac, it was brand new. Once the > lead pouring and > interior epoxy paint was done, I retired it to be > used as a shop-vac > only. I think the "just breath through the hose" > idea is fine for > welding fumes and zinc fumes. Like Brent says it > works--I used the > hose only system until I wanted added protection > from the lead, > toluene, xylene whatever. I could tell, in this > case, there was > leakage though the facial hair. Positive pressure > fixed it; the > blast of fresh air was a welcome bonus down in > there. My pressure > relief holes were located well outside the boat away > from the > toxins. rt > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Stan Kuczynski > wrote: > > Let me add a couple thoughts here, I am a > professional > > fire fighter and breathing equipment is part of my > bag > > of toys. A few years ago Scott made available > world > > wide Positive ventalation masks, ok what does > that > > mean. Scott and MSA are the two leaders in fire > > fighting and closed space breathing equipment. We > at > > my Department happen to use Scott. My mask is the > > style that Looks like a bug face with the big hole > for > > the regulator at the end. Any way air masks used > to be > > Negative pressure set up,or demand set up, in > other > > words you only got air when you needed it by > taking a > > breath. Just like a scuba regulator.this was fine > till > > they found people who were in Hi toxic atmospheres > > were getting into trouble when they would bump > their > > mask and the small area of volume that made up the > > space around their face would fill up with the > toxic > > enviorenment they were in or if there face mask > seal > > the feather edge of soft rubber that makes up the > edge > > of their mask and sealed out the bad stuff due to > poor > > maintanense of the equipment or an irregular > shaped > > face. (one size does not fit all) leaked allowing > the > > out side atmosphere to come in when they took a > > breath. They would suck some contaminated air in > with > > the clean stuff in the bottle. So to fix the > problem > > The new masks are positive pressure and create a > 5Lb. > > positive flow that fills the mask with clean air > and > > in the event you should have a leake forces fresh > air > > out away from the face rather then letting nasty > air > > in. Having to suck air through the 24 foot hose > sounds > > like a lot of work, I don't know probably works > fine I > > havent tried it. How ever Having facial hair > (beard or > > not) if you are going to work in any confind > space > > (the inside of the boat or a place that is subject > to > > poor air flow to remove fumes I like the option fo > > positive air flow.(In fact I insist on on it Why > take > > a chance) > > The idea of using the discharge of the vacume > cleaner > > will work providing that this is all that this is > used > > for. In other words if you are going to go through > the > > trouble (in my opinion worth it) to set up a > positive > > flow system then that vacume can never be used for > > anything else not even once. it has to stay > dedicated > > to the breathing system. To regulate the air flow > very > > simpley. Cutting holes in in the hose to adjust > > pressure allowes crap to possibly get into your > house > > and force it into your face and lungs. In stead > make a > > duel hose regulator for your mask.Similar to the > old > > two hose scuba regulators. using the 1 1/2 hose > place > > a PVC TEE at the mask. now you have three openings > at > > the tee. two of which are in line. one is off at > 90 > > degrees. the one at 90 degrees to the other two > > openings is the one that connects to your mask. > > leaving the other two in line openings free to be > > used as in take and exaust. One opening is > attached to > > the hose from the pump.(your intake opening) the > other > > is the discharge which you place a 3-4 foot > section of > > house to allow the flowing air to escape.some > where in > > this exaust line you will want to place a 1 1/2 oe > 2 > > inch 1/4 turn Pvc Valve. I suggest you use the > threded > > type fittings opposed to the glue type if at all > > possible. The valve allows you to regulate back > > pressure into your mask. Start by opening the > valve > > 1/2 way turn on the pump and see if the air flow > is > > comfortabl, to much flow open the valve more to > bleed > > off excess air flow. You have it right when your > face > > just feels cool but not when it is being blown > against > > in hi volume. The valve can be placed at the Tee > > middle of the house for you to regulate as you > need to > > or at the end. If you are wearing a jump suit type > > cove all when working on your boat you can place > the > > end of the exaust tube into your suit to flow air > and > > help keep you cool while you work. Does the system > I > > discrib work, yes it does and very well. Before I > was > > fire fighter I was trained as a commercial Hard > hat > > diver. many of the masks at that time were a > > darivative of the system I just discribed. if it > works > > under water where you have all that pressure it > will > > work in your boat. another idea for a pump is to > use a > > squirrl cage blower simmilar to the ones used to > > recirculate air in a home A/C unit or the kind > found > > in the car heater system. Granger supply sells > them. a > > small one fabricated to blow into the hose should > be > > easy enough. I often thought of placing the intake > > side of one to an ice chest and suck air through a > > cooler full of ice cubes from the frige. to give > me > > a/c while I work havent tried it yet. Hope this > system > > helps you all out.any questions just ask, cheers > > Stan Kuczynski Orlando Florida > > > > > > ===== > > > > Happy Holidays > > Stan Kuczynski > > P.S. Remember > > Don't ever Lie-Cheat- or steal. > > Your Government hates compatition > > > > > > __________________________________ > > Do you Yahoo!? > > Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on > time. > > http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html > > ===== Happy Holidays Stan Kuczynski P.S. Remember Don't ever Lie-Cheat- or steal. Your Government hates compatition __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time. http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html| 3372|3370|2004-03-30 03:43:09|bubblede|Re: new 37' design|like it VERY much, really nice!! ;-) is there anything else yet, rig, appendices etc to see? Gerd --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > A new 37' origami design, with increased room in the stern to permit a center cockpit/pilot house with aft cabin. 16,500 lbs displacement. 6'6" headroom, 500 gallons tankage/storage. Suitable for alloy or steel construction. > > http://www.origamimagic.com/design/lb37/lb37.htm > > Greg Elliott > http://www.origamimagic.com > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3373|3370|2004-03-30 07:52:10|Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr|Re: new 37' design|With all due respect, while there is a lot to like about the preliminary design for the new LB 37 footer, one thing that strikes me is that she ends up with an extremely deep canoe body with a very deep vertical center of buoyancy. This of course results from the design having a very high displacement for its waterline length (3,000 to 5,000 lbs higher than would be normal for a more modern offshore cruiser of this length) carried on comparatively quite narrow waterline beam. There are a number of serious negatives to a canoe body that is this deep such as a tendancy to roll through a very wide roll angle compared to a more moderately shallow canoe body. Similarly because the vertical center of gravity would likely so much higher above the vertical center of buoyancy and because it would take a pretty large heel angle for the center of buoyancy to shift to leeward, this boat would have substantially less form stability and ballast stability than a boat with a shallower canoe body. In terms of sailing ability, the deep canoe body would reduce the span of the foils for any given draft and so would require larger keel and rudder areas and therefore produce greater frictional drag. This means a compromise in windward performance and the need to carry more sail area, which given the comparatively low inherent stability of of this hull form, would mean a boat that would be hard pressed to stand to its rig especially in a stiffer breeze. Another negative of this high displacement for the waterline length and waterline beam, is the need to carry a lot of displacement out into the ends of the boat. It is not the end of the world to carry a fair amount of displacement aft as this can help with surfing conditions but carrying the displacement forward means colliding with a chop with much greater impacts than is the norm on more modern, finer bowed craft, and also carrying the displacement forward results in 'U' shaped sections that are more likely to pound in a seaway than more Vee'd sections. While I am not trying to trash this design, in the spirit of being constructive, I would suggest if your goal is to carry a displacement in the 16,500 lb range, that you stretch the waterline length to perhaps 34 to 35 feet (which of course would also produce a longer boat) and perhaps increase the beam by a foot or so. This would allow a much sweeter set of lines and produce a boat that has lower drag, is more stable, has a more comfortable motion, is faster and more seaworthy. While there may be slightly higher costs for the hull, the longer span of the keel may permit less ballast and allow a greater carrying capacity slighly offsetting the increased hull costs. All other costs should be similar or lower as the lower drag of the longer boat may permit a smaller engine and sail plan. Respectfully, Jeff| 3374|3370|2004-03-30 09:52:41|bubblede|Re: new 37' design|Jeff, and also with all due respect ;-) I do not agree. I think this hull is very attractive if it folds in origami, and it seems to fit into a sort of modern classic concept where you want to have a more "modern" rounded U hull as opposed to a deeper V like in Brents designs but still carry a lot of heavy stuff. Personally I would go wider and flatter and try to tweak for weight- savings, but that is really a question of taste. On my own project, the more I work on it the more the displacement seems to creep upward up the the deeper the hull gets, and it's both shorter and wider than this one... So this is not a bad compromise at all. Only thing I find is that for this more narrow type of hull I would lower topsides & sheerline quite a bit to make it look slimmer, but then that would reduce inside clearance under the sidedecks. Otherwise entries are fine, bottom is quite flat for the width, the exit is smooth and as flat-U as possible for this displacement/BWL.., would be interesting to get some more numbers, CP, ballast, wetted area, rig, see the proposed keel and rudder and find out what this displacement is going to be used on. Sure you could start from the same displacement and draw a boat with wider BWL, and a bit sharper here and a bit flatter there and anyway longer and so on, but that would be _your_ design then, wouldn't it? ;-) Gerd http://www.justmueller.com/boats/ --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr" wrote: > With all due respect, while there is a lot to like about the preliminary > design for the new LB 37 footer, one thing that strikes me is that she ends > up with an extremely deep canoe body with a very deep vertical center of > buoyancy. This of course results from the design having a very high > displacement for its waterline length (3,000 to 5,000 lbs higher than would > be normal for a more modern offshore cruiser of this length) carried on > comparatively quite narrow waterline beam. > > There are a number of serious negatives to a canoe body that is this deep > such as a tendancy to roll through a very wide roll angle compared to a more > moderately shallow canoe body. Similarly because the vertical center of > gravity would likely so much higher above the vertical center of buoyancy > and because it would take a pretty large heel angle for the center of > buoyancy to shift to leeward, this boat would have substantially less form > stability and ballast stability than a boat with a shallower canoe body. > > In terms of sailing ability, the deep canoe body would reduce the span of > the foils for any given draft and so would require larger keel and rudder > areas and therefore produce greater frictional drag. This means a compromise > in windward performance and the need to carry more sail area, which given > the comparatively low inherent stability of of this hull form, would mean a > boat that would be hard pressed to stand to its rig especially in a stiffer > breeze. > > Another negative of this high displacement for the waterline length and > waterline beam, is the need to carry a lot of displacement out into the ends > of the boat. It is not the end of the world to carry a fair amount of > displacement aft as this can help with surfing conditions but carrying the > displacement forward means colliding with a chop with much greater impacts > than is the norm on more modern, finer bowed craft, and also carrying the > displacement forward results in 'U' shaped sections that are more likely to > pound in a seaway than more Vee'd sections. > > While I am not trying to trash this design, in the spirit of being > constructive, I would suggest if your goal is to carry a displacement in the > 16,500 lb range, that you stretch the waterline length to perhaps 34 to 35 > feet (which of course would also produce a longer boat) and perhaps increase > the beam by a foot or so. This would allow a much sweeter set of lines and > produce a boat that has lower drag, is more stable, has a more comfortable > motion, is faster and more seaworthy. While there may be slightly higher > costs for the hull, the longer span of the keel may permit less ballast and > allow a greater carrying capacity slighly offsetting the increased hull > costs. All other costs should be similar or lower as the lower drag of the > longer boat may permit a smaller engine and sail plan. > > Respectfully, > Jeff | 3375|3344|2004-03-30 15:01:55|brentswain38|Re: Another Idea for Fresh air mask for welding galvanized and pain|Most masks have a check valve in the outlet side which will let the air travel only one way. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Stan Kuczynski wrote: > Sounds like you had it well thought out, and the > pressured air is always nice to have that cool flow > comming in. The only thing I don't like about the hose > only is unless you use a one way valve for the > incomming air you are blowing a certain amount of co2 > back into your fresh air hose and though it is > probably not enough to worry about it does make the > breathing air stale and its warm and stuffy. I only > insisted on the dedicated shop vac for breathing > because I would leave this thing set up for other > future projects what ever they may be. anything with > fumes. But certainly a one time use for the vac as a > breathing pump then putting it to use as it was > intended makes sence. if you have no intention of > getting into other dirty projects then it just makes > sence. Be carful with that hot lead don't want to give > your self a hot foot.>g< > --- richytill wrote: > > Stan: On the shop-vac, it was brand new. Once the > > lead pouring and > > interior epoxy paint was done, I retired it to be > > used as a shop-vac > > only. I think the "just breath through the hose" > > idea is fine for > > welding fumes and zinc fumes. Like Brent says it > > works--I used the > > hose only system until I wanted added protection > > from the lead, > > toluene, xylene whatever. I could tell, in this > > case, there was > > leakage though the facial hair. Positive pressure > > fixed it; the > > blast of fresh air was a welcome bonus down in > > there. My pressure > > relief holes were located well outside the boat away > > from the > > toxins. rt > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Stan Kuczynski > > wrote: > > > Let me add a couple thoughts here, I am a > > professional > > > fire fighter and breathing equipment is part of my > > bag > > > of toys. A few years ago Scott made available > > world > > > wide Positive ventalation masks, ok what does > > that > > > mean. Scott and MSA are the two leaders in fire > > > fighting and closed space breathing equipment. We > > at > > > my Department happen to use Scott. My mask is the > > > style that Looks like a bug face with the big hole > > for > > > the regulator at the end. Any way air masks used > > to be > > > Negative pressure set up,or demand set up, in > > other > > > words you only got air when you needed it by > > taking a > > > breath. Just like a scuba regulator.this was fine > > till > > > they found people who were in Hi toxic atmospheres > > > were getting into trouble when they would bump > > their > > > mask and the small area of volume that made up the > > > space around their face would fill up with the > > toxic > > > enviorenment they were in or if there face mask > > seal > > > the feather edge of soft rubber that makes up the > > edge > > > of their mask and sealed out the bad stuff due to > > poor > > > maintanense of the equipment or an irregular > > shaped > > > face. (one size does not fit all) leaked allowing > > the > > > out side atmosphere to come in when they took a > > > breath. They would suck some contaminated air in > > with > > > the clean stuff in the bottle. So to fix the > > problem > > > The new masks are positive pressure and create a > > 5Lb. > > > positive flow that fills the mask with clean air > > and > > > in the event you should have a leake forces fresh > > air > > > out away from the face rather then letting nasty > > air > > > in. Having to suck air through the 24 foot hose > > sounds > > > like a lot of work, I don't know probably works > > fine I > > > havent tried it. How ever Having facial hair > > (beard or > > > not) if you are going to work in any confind > > space > > > (the inside of the boat or a place that is subject > > to > > > poor air flow to remove fumes I like the option fo > > > positive air flow.(In fact I insist on on it Why > > take > > > a chance) > > > The idea of using the discharge of the vacume > > cleaner > > > will work providing that this is all that this is > > used > > > for. In other words if you are going to go through > > the > > > trouble (in my opinion worth it) to set up a > > positive > > > flow system then that vacume can never be used for > > > anything else not even once. it has to stay > > dedicated > > > to the breathing system. To regulate the air flow > > very > > > simpley. Cutting holes in in the hose to adjust > > > pressure allowes crap to possibly get into your > > house > > > and force it into your face and lungs. In stead > > make a > > > duel hose regulator for your mask.Similar to the > > old > > > two hose scuba regulators. using the 1 1/2 hose > > place > > > a PVC TEE at the mask. now you have three openings > > at > > > the tee. two of which are in line. one is off at > > 90 > > > degrees. the one at 90 degrees to the other two > > > openings is the one that connects to your mask. > > > leaving the other two in line openings free to be > > > used as in take and exaust. One opening is > > attached to > > > the hose from the pump.(your intake opening) the > > other > > > is the discharge which you place a 3-4 foot > > section of > > > house to allow the flowing air to escape.some > > where in > > > this exaust line you will want to place a 1 1/2 oe > > 2 > > > inch 1/4 turn Pvc Valve. I suggest you use the > > threded > > > type fittings opposed to the glue type if at all > > > possible. The valve allows you to regulate back > > > pressure into your mask. Start by opening the > > valve > > > 1/2 way turn on the pump and see if the air flow > > is > > > comfortabl, to much flow open the valve more to > > bleed > > > off excess air flow. You have it right when your > > face > > > just feels cool but not when it is being blown > > against > > > in hi volume. The valve can be placed at the Tee > > > middle of the house for you to regulate as you > > need to > > > or at the end. If you are wearing a jump suit type > > > cove all when working on your boat you can place > > the > > > end of the exaust tube into your suit to flow air > > and > > > help keep you cool while you work. Does the system > > I > > > discrib work, yes it does and very well. Before I > > was > > > fire fighter I was trained as a commercial Hard > > hat > > > diver. many of the masks at that time were a > > > darivative of the system I just discribed. if it > > works > > > under water where you have all that pressure it > > will > > > work in your boat. another idea for a pump is to > > use a > > > squirrl cage blower simmilar to the ones used to > > > recirculate air in a home A/C unit or the kind > > found > > > in the car heater system. Granger supply sells > > them. a > > > small one fabricated to blow into the hose should > > be > > > easy enough. I often thought of placing the intake > > > side of one to an ice chest and suck air through a > > > cooler full of ice cubes from the frige. to give > > me > > > a/c while I work havent tried it yet. Hope this > > system > > > helps you all out.any questions just ask, cheers > > > Stan Kuczynski Orlando Florida > > > > > > > > > ===== > > > > > > Happy Holidays > > > Stan Kuczynski > > > P.S. Remember > > > Don't ever Lie-Cheat- or steal. > > > Your Government hates compatition > > > > > > > > > __________________________________ > > > Do you Yahoo!? > > > Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on > > time. > > > http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html > > > > > > > ===== > > Happy Holidays > Stan Kuczynski > P.S. Remember > Don't ever Lie-Cheat- or steal. > Your Government hates compatition > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time. > http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html | 3376|3370|2004-03-30 15:30:52|brentswain38|Re: new 37' design|Extending the waterline means a plumb stem which means very little buildup in reserve buoyancy when the ends go into a sea. This would mean a tendency for the bow to go thru a sea like a submarine(wet boat). This has been common with the plumb bow modern boats which take a lot of green water over the decks , unlike the older designs which have a rapid buildup of buoyancy in the ends above the waterline,when they try to go into a headsea.Clipper bows have very little buoyancy foreward, and consequently drive into a headsea intil the water reaches the deck, then stop suddenly as if they've hit a wall. Rounded bows cruise smoothly thru a headsea , without slowing significantly My first boat had deep V sections foreward which pounded in a head sea far more than my current boat , which has more U shaped sections.When beating into a strong tradewind from Vanuatu to Fiji, the sides of the V pounded like hell, slamming down into headseas. A bit of round there would have greatly improved the situation, as experience has since proven. The flat, bedpan shaped sections which Jeff advocates was one of the causes of the capsizes in the fastnet race, as was explained in the book " Seaworthiness, the Forgotten Factor", by Marchage.Flat sections tend to follow the surface of the waves , like a raft,resulting in a snappy motion, whereas deep deadrise sections tend to be more stable, ignoreing the shape of the water's surface to a greater degree.Added buoyancy midships tends to be offset somewhat by room for greater tankage and storage there, lower down in the hull. Low displacement figures are an short term illusion in offshore cruising yachts.A boat designed to be sailed totally empty will suffer a greater performance loss when loaded with the neccessities of a long ocean voyage, far more loss than one which is designed for a heavier displacement. I understand that Jeff cruises the Atlantic side of the planet , where distances between sources of supplies are tiny compared with the Pacific.Thus it's totally understandable that he would completely fail to understand cruising realities in other parts of the world. One criticism I can make of the design is that a wide stern makes for poor hull balance and poor directional stability. This is explained in the section on balance in my book.The extra room aft is houseboat priorities, at the expense of cruising priorities.I've sailed a couple of boats across the Pacific which had excessively wide sterns and the resulting poor hull balance ,and having to constantly fight the helm, or the inability of any kind of self steering to keep her on course , and the need to sail under canvased to keep her on course certainly wasn't worth the extra room aft.If I wanted a boat with houseboat priorities I'd buy a house boat. It's good to hear that the design has a wheelhouse option. Sitting in the driving rain in an open cockpit in order to "Look Trendy" is a sucker's game.To the experienced cruiser, it would only make you look like a fool. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr" wrote: > With all due respect, while there is a lot to like about the preliminary > design for the new LB 37 footer, one thing that strikes me is that she ends > up with an extremely deep canoe body with a very deep vertical center of > buoyancy. This of course results from the design having a very high > displacement for its waterline length (3,000 to 5,000 lbs higher than would > be normal for a more modern offshore cruiser of this length) carried on > comparatively quite narrow waterline beam. > > There are a number of serious negatives to a canoe body that is this deep > such as a tendancy to roll through a very wide roll angle compared to a more > moderately shallow canoe body. Similarly because the vertical center of > gravity would likely so much higher above the vertical center of buoyancy > and because it would take a pretty large heel angle for the center of > buoyancy to shift to leeward, this boat would have substantially less form > stability and ballast stability than a boat with a shallower canoe body. > > In terms of sailing ability, the deep canoe body would reduce the span of > the foils for any given draft and so would require larger keel and rudder > areas and therefore produce greater frictional drag. This means a compromise > in windward performance and the need to carry more sail area, which given > the comparatively low inherent stability of of this hull form, would mean a > boat that would be hard pressed to stand to its rig especially in a stiffer > breeze. > > Another negative of this high displacement for the waterline length and > waterline beam, is the need to carry a lot of displacement out into the ends > of the boat. It is not the end of the world to carry a fair amount of > displacement aft as this can help with surfing conditions but carrying the > displacement forward means colliding with a chop with much greater impacts > than is the norm on more modern, finer bowed craft, and also carrying the > displacement forward results in 'U' shaped sections that are more likely to > pound in a seaway than more Vee'd sections. > > While I am not trying to trash this design, in the spirit of being > constructive, I would suggest if your goal is to carry a displacement in the > 16,500 lb range, that you stretch the waterline length to perhaps 34 to 35 > feet (which of course would also produce a longer boat) and perhaps increase > the beam by a foot or so. This would allow a much sweeter set of lines and > produce a boat that has lower drag, is more stable, has a more comfortable > motion, is faster and more seaworthy. While there may be slightly higher > costs for the hull, the longer span of the keel may permit less ballast and > allow a greater carrying capacity slighly offsetting the increased hull > costs. All other costs should be similar or lower as the lower drag of the > longer boat may permit a smaller engine and sail plan. > > Respectfully, > Jeff | 3377|3370|2004-03-30 16:09:02|richytill|Re: new 37' design|Brent, given that no concept or design occurs in a vacuum--where did you gather design features for the 36' for example? Lyle Hess obviously patterned the Bristol Channel Cutter more directly from historic lines of that design so it is easy to research the purpose of the breed. Dockside drifters looking at "My Island" guess at the origins--some see the influence of the Sweedish Scampi, others a Vertue or something. I tell them--it's origami. Your description of the needs for Pacific cruising hints at research into what works out there. Are there any strong links to specific historic craft? rt --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" wrote: > Extending the waterline means a plumb stem which means very little > buildup in reserve buoyancy when the ends go into a sea. This would > mean a tendency for the bow to go thru a sea like a submarine(wet > boat). This has been common with the plumb bow modern boats which > take a lot of green water over the decks , unlike the older designs > which have a rapid buildup of buoyancy in the ends above the > waterline,when they try to go into a headsea.Clipper bows have very > little buoyancy foreward, and consequently drive into a headsea intil > the water reaches the deck, then stop suddenly as if they've hit a > wall. Rounded bows cruise smoothly thru a headsea , without slowing > significantly > My first boat had deep V sections foreward which pounded in a head > sea far more than my current boat , which has more U shaped > sections.When beating into a strong tradewind from Vanuatu to Fiji, > the sides of the V pounded like hell, slamming down into headseas. A > bit of round there would have greatly improved the situation, as > experience has since proven. > The flat, bedpan shaped sections which Jeff advocates was one of > the causes of the capsizes in the fastnet race, as was explained in > the book " Seaworthiness, the Forgotten Factor", by Marchage.Flat > sections tend to follow the surface of the waves , like a > raft,resulting in a snappy motion, whereas deep deadrise sections > tend to be more stable, ignoreing the shape of the water's surface to > a greater degree.Added buoyancy midships tends to be offset somewhat > by room for greater tankage and storage there, lower down in the hull. > Low displacement figures are an short term illusion in offshore > cruising yachts.A boat designed to be sailed totally empty will > suffer a greater performance loss when loaded with the neccessities > of a long ocean voyage, far more loss than one which is designed for > a heavier displacement. I understand that Jeff cruises the Atlantic > side of the planet , where distances between sources of supplies are > tiny compared with the Pacific.Thus it's totally understandable that > he would completely fail to understand cruising realities in other > parts of the world. > One criticism I can make of the design is that a wide stern makes > for poor hull balance and poor directional stability. This is > explained in the section on balance in my book.The extra room aft is > houseboat priorities, at the expense of cruising priorities.I've > sailed a couple of boats across the Pacific which had excessively > wide sterns and the resulting poor hull balance ,and having to > constantly fight the helm, or the inability of any kind of self > steering to keep her on course , and the need to sail under canvased > to keep her on course certainly wasn't worth the extra room aft.If I > wanted a boat with houseboat priorities I'd buy a house boat. > It's good to hear that the design has a wheelhouse option. Sitting > in the driving rain in an open cockpit in order to "Look Trendy" is a > sucker's game.To the experienced cruiser, it would only make you look > like a fool. > Brent Swain > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr" > wrote: > > With all due respect, while there is a lot to like about the > preliminary > > design for the new LB 37 footer, one thing that strikes me is that > she ends > > up with an extremely deep canoe body with a very deep vertical > center of > > buoyancy. This of course results from the design having a very high > > displacement for its waterline length (3,000 to 5,000 lbs higher > than would > > be normal for a more modern offshore cruiser of this length) > carried on > > comparatively quite narrow waterline beam. > > > > There are a number of serious negatives to a canoe body that is > this deep > > such as a tendancy to roll through a very wide roll angle compared > to a more > > moderately shallow canoe body. Similarly because the vertical > center of > > gravity would likely so much higher above the vertical center of > buoyancy > > and because it would take a pretty large heel angle for the center > of > > buoyancy to shift to leeward, this boat would have substantially > less form > > stability and ballast stability than a boat with a shallower canoe > body. > > > > In terms of sailing ability, the deep canoe body would reduce the > span of > > the foils for any given draft and so would require larger keel and > rudder > > areas and therefore produce greater frictional drag. This means a > compromise > > in windward performance and the need to carry more sail area, which > given > > the comparatively low inherent stability of of this hull form, > would mean a > > boat that would be hard pressed to stand to its rig especially in a > stiffer > > breeze. > > > > Another negative of this high displacement for the waterline length > and > > waterline beam, is the need to carry a lot of displacement out into > the ends > > of the boat. It is not the end of the world to carry a fair amount > of > > displacement aft as this can help with surfing conditions but > carrying the > > displacement forward means colliding with a chop with much greater > impacts > > than is the norm on more modern, finer bowed craft, and also > carrying the > > displacement forward results in 'U' shaped sections that are more > likely to > > pound in a seaway than more Vee'd sections. > > > > While I am not trying to trash this design, in the spirit of being > > constructive, I would suggest if your goal is to carry a > displacement in the > > 16,500 lb range, that you stretch the waterline length to perhaps > 34 to 35 > > feet (which of course would also produce a longer boat) and perhaps > increase > > the beam by a foot or so. This would allow a much sweeter set of > lines and > > produce a boat that has lower drag, is more stable, has a more > comfortable > > motion, is faster and more seaworthy. While there may be slightly > higher > > costs for the hull, the longer span of the keel may permit less > ballast and > > allow a greater carrying capacity slighly offsetting the increased > hull > > costs. All other costs should be similar or lower as the lower drag > of the > > longer boat may permit a smaller engine and sail plan. > > > > Respectfully, > > Jeff | 3378|3370|2004-03-30 17:28:19|info@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: new 37' design|Many thanks for the comments. I've made some small modifications to the lines, which I've posted to this new web page: http://www.origamimagic.com/Design/LB37/LB37.htm The LB37 is designed to satisfy some interesting requirements from the owner/builder. 1. Long term, offshore capable cruising for a couple. 2. 10'6" maximum beam (including rub rails) so that the boat can be tailored without a pilot car. 3. 6'6" headroom. 4. full sized double berth in the aft cabin. 5. efficient displacement power cruiser. 6. 500+ gallon for tanks. 7. swim grid, board via stairs, dry decks, low slung cabin. Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com ----- Original Message ----- From: bubblede To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2004 6:52 AM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: new 37' design Jeff, and also with all due respect ;-) I do not agree. I think this hull is very attractive if it folds in origami, and it seems to fit into a sort of modern classic concept where you want to have a more "modern" rounded U hull as opposed to a deeper V like in Brents designs but still carry a lot of heavy stuff. Personally I would go wider and flatter and try to tweak for weight- savings, but that is really a question of taste. On my own project, the more I work on it the more the displacement seems to creep upward up the the deeper the hull gets, and it's both shorter and wider than this one... So this is not a bad compromise at all. Only thing I find is that for this more narrow type of hull I would lower topsides & sheerline quite a bit to make it look slimmer, but then that would reduce inside clearance under the sidedecks. Otherwise entries are fine, bottom is quite flat for the width, the exit is smooth and as flat-U as possible for this displacement/BWL.., would be interesting to get some more numbers, CP, ballast, wetted area, rig, see the proposed keel and rudder and find out what this displacement is going to be used on. Sure you could start from the same displacement and draw a boat with wider BWL, and a bit sharper here and a bit flatter there and anyway longer and so on, but that would be _your_ design then, wouldn't it? ;-) Gerd http://www.justmueller.com/boats/ --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr" wrote: > With all due respect, while there is a lot to like about the preliminary > design for the new LB 37 footer, one thing that strikes me is that she ends > up with an extremely deep canoe body with a very deep vertical center of > buoyancy. This of course results from the design having a very high > displacement for its waterline length (3,000 to 5,000 lbs higher than would > be normal for a more modern offshore cruiser of this length) carried on > comparatively quite narrow waterline beam. > > There are a number of serious negatives to a canoe body that is this deep > such as a tendancy to roll through a very wide roll angle compared to a more > moderately shallow canoe body. Similarly because the vertical center of > gravity would likely so much higher above the vertical center of buoyancy > and because it would take a pretty large heel angle for the center of > buoyancy to shift to leeward, this boat would have substantially less form > stability and ballast stability than a boat with a shallower canoe body. > > In terms of sailing ability, the deep canoe body would reduce the span of > the foils for any given draft and so would require larger keel and rudder > areas and therefore produce greater frictional drag. This means a compromise > in windward performance and the need to carry more sail area, which given > the comparatively low inherent stability of of this hull form, would mean a > boat that would be hard pressed to stand to its rig especially in a stiffer > breeze. > > Another negative of this high displacement for the waterline length and > waterline beam, is the need to carry a lot of displacement out into the ends > of the boat. It is not the end of the world to carry a fair amount of > displacement aft as this can help with surfing conditions but carrying the > displacement forward means colliding with a chop with much greater impacts > than is the norm on more modern, finer bowed craft, and also carrying the > displacement forward results in 'U' shaped sections that are more likely to > pound in a seaway than more Vee'd sections. > > While I am not trying to trash this design, in the spirit of being > constructive, I would suggest if your goal is to carry a displacement in the > 16,500 lb range, that you stretch the waterline length to perhaps 34 to 35 > feet (which of course would also produce a longer boat) and perhaps increase > the beam by a foot or so. This would allow a much sweeter set of lines and > produce a boat that has lower drag, is more stable, has a more comfortable > motion, is faster and more seaworthy. While there may be slightly higher > costs for the hull, the longer span of the keel may permit less ballast and > allow a greater carrying capacity slighly offsetting the increased hull > costs. All other costs should be similar or lower as the lower drag of the > longer boat may permit a smaller engine and sail plan. > > Respectfully, > Jeff To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3379|3370|2004-03-30 23:06:19|Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr|Re: new 37' design|I would like to address some of the points that were raised with regards to my comments on the LB 37. One of the fair criticisms of modern yacht designs (by which I mean boats designed to the IMS and Volvo typeforms) is that it takes more care to design them so that they actually work. Traditional designs are fairly resilient in terms of tolerating a fairly wide range variation and still being good boats. But these modern designs work as well as they do by carfully controlling drag and keeping things very carefully balanced. So, too much waterline beam means a snappy roll, too little waterline beam means a tender boat and a boat that has too deep a canoe body and/or too much fullness in the ends. To much displacement forwards and the boat colides with each wave, to little and it becomes a submarine with a mast. I spend a lot of time onboard modern race boats and performance cruisers. There is nothing worse than a badly proportioned modern design or as good as a well designed one. Greg you have a tough assignment there. As much as I prefer modern designs my best guess is that in distorting modern design principles into a boat with such a heavy displacement for its length will produce a bit a camel, with few of the virtues of either modern design principles or of traditional watercraft but with all of the liabilities of both. It you look at the canoe body for instance, as the boat starts to heel the center of buoyancy actually appears ro move to weather. This results in a boat that flops past center only to lurch at the end of the roll as topsides buoyancy finally rapidly builds at a largish heel angle. What ever your design brief that would be a miserable motion. As to Brent's comments, there are several points that I want to touch on. First of all I never suggested a plumb stem. I specifically said, "If...you stretch the waterline length....which of course would also produce a longer boat)" What I meant by that is that both the length on deck and the waterline length would increase so that the bow angle would not necessarily change. That said there is an error in Brent's comments that I want to address. In his comments on my post Brent said: " a plumb stem which means very little buildup in reserve buoyancy when the ends go into a sea. This would mean a tendency for the bow to go thru a sea like a submarine(wet boat). This has been common with the plumb bow modern boats which take a lot of green water over the decks." Strictly speaking that is not really true. It is true that when a plumb stem is coupled minimal flare (as is sometimes the case with race boats designed for inshore use) there is a tendancy to lack reserve buoyancy. But that is not a product of the plumb stem. It is the product of a lack of flare. Introducing a moderate amount of flare to a plumb stem results in a boat that is less likely to take solid water on deck. I can explain it this way. If you visualize two boats with an identical deck plan but one has the point of entry several feet aft of the stem on deck, the boat with the plumb stem will begin to lift with the wave several feet sooner than the boat that has its stem several feet aft. Introducing flare into the topsides provides the additional reserve bouyancy and if the deck plan is the same then there will actually be more reserve buoyancy on the plumb stem boat. On the other hand a plumb stem boat will tend to throw more spray aft but that can be addressed with the simple addition of a rubrail forward that can deflect the spray outboard. I don't know what Brent did wrong on the design of his first boat so that its vee'd sections pounded more than U shaped sections, but I do know a lot about sailing modern IMS typeforms and while a 'U" shaped bow section is faster in flat water, vee'd sections are much less prone to pounding when on a close reach or beat in a steep headsea. I don't know why Brent assumes that I prefer a "flat, bedpan shaped sections" since that is not my preference and never has been, but to clarify his point on "flat, bedpan shaped sections", the hull forms condemned in Marchaj's pivotal works were IOR era boats that had hull forms very similar to the LB 37 with very deep canoe bodies, a narrow flat spot amidships, and steeply rising deadrise on either side. If you look at the hull forms on well designed modern IMS derived boats, they are carefully designed so that they do not have excessive form stability and so that they progressively build form stability as they heel rather than suddenly jerking as would be the case with the LB 37 or the IOR era boats discussed in Marchaj. I also wish to disagree with the idea that I don't understand the need to carry a payload. I am agreeing with the basic design premise that Greg's design needs to carry a certain amount of payload. I did not suggest that Greg reduce the payload. I have merely suggested that it be carried on a longer waterline. I have in no way reduced the amount that can be carried aboard. In fact if carried on a longer waterline, the waterplane would actually be larger and so the boat can actually tollerate more increase or decrease in payload with less change in submersion inches and so would be more tolerant of the kinds of weight required to cruise either ocean. I do agree with Brent about the wider stern. Unless the entire design; rig, ballasting, heeled hull form, underwater foils, weight and buoyancy are carefully modeled, a wide stern can be a real detriment offshore. I strongly prefer the more balanced hull forms of the IMS typeforms to the wide sterns popularized in the 'Open Classes' and condo-cruisers. As for Gerd, I was amused and somewhat in agreement with your comments. Perhaps I have made a mistake in assuming that Greg was looking for constructive comments and not just applause. If I was mistaken, let me be the first to respectfully apologize to all. Good night, Jeff| 3380|3370|2004-03-31 04:34:06|info@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: new 37' design|I've posted a picture to confirm the pattern folds as predicted: http://www.origamimagic.com/Design/LB37/LB37.htm The LB37 is a compromise to meet some pretty stiff requirements, and as such it knowingly departs from optimum for a sailing hull. We are interested in all suggestions as to how to improve the design to meet our customer's requirements. The issue for us is not so much that the hull departs from optimum, but rather how it might be improved to meet our customer's requirements - without going outside what is possible in origami. The LB36 http://www.origamimagic.com/Design/LB36/LB36.htm was our original cut at this concept, and while it (likely) will be a better performing hull under sail, it fails to meet the customer's requirements. To assist, I will put out forward one item - point 5 from my requirements list. The customer wants the hull to perform well as a displacement power cruiser, and is willing to trade off sailing performance for improved performance under power. thanks again to all, Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com hull is very attractive if it folds in origami, and it seems to fit [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3381|3381|2004-03-31 10:52:32|bert andjan|Re: New 37 foot design|Wow, You fellow's with the design discussion are to be complimented...I mean constructively commenting on someone else's design must be a sensitive thing as there are so many issues and feelings and things to consider and personal prejudices, likes and dislikes, etc. ...but you're keeping it on a technical as well as "in my humble opinion" level and I who am fairly new to this level of design discussion am really learning alot!! In the very least I'm coming to appreciate the infinite complexities of trying to design that successful design for a client. And than the added challenge of designing in an origami configuration on top of everything else!! So thankyou for not letting the discussion degenerate into flaming, etc., as so easily happens on other sites!!!! (I'm a pastor and I think the analogy for me is my tendency to get defensive and take it personal when someone starts dissecting and criticizing my hard worked on sermons ;o) Anyway, thanks for the good discussion, I'm enjoying the ride! Bert in Saginw, Mi __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - More reliable, more storage, less spam http://mail.yahoo.com| 3382|3381|2004-03-31 12:07:26|jim dorey|Re: New 37 foot design|this ain't the woodworking list, i myself mostly lurk and learn having no workspace or welding equipment, soon i hope, i like it here and saying looky what i did would be kinda fun. bert andjan wrote: > Wow, > You fellow's with the design discussion are to be > complimented...I mean constructively commenting on > someone else's design must be a sensitive thing as > there are so many issues and feelings and things to > consider and personal prejudices, likes and dislikes, > etc. ...but you're keeping it on a technical as well > as "in my humble opinion" level and I who am fairly > new to this level of design discussion am really > learning alot!! -- http://www.skaar.101main.net http://www.PetitionOnline.com/spcdvd/ http://www.petitiononline.com/impjapan/petition-sign.html? moderator of wildsteam@yahoogroups.com DOM and proud!!!| 3383|3381|2004-03-31 15:20:45|Stan Kuczynski|Re: New 37 foot design|I have to agree whole heartedly this site has a good bunch of people on it and it is a pleasure to be a part of it. now back to my boat got some repairing and glassing to do. Stan Orlando Fl. --- jim dorey wrote: > this ain't the woodworking list, i myself mostly > lurk and learn having > no workspace or welding equipment, soon i hope, i > like it here and > saying looky what i did would be kinda fun. > > bert andjan wrote: > > > Wow, > > You fellow's with the design discussion are to > be > > complimented...I mean constructively commenting on > > someone else's design must be a sensitive thing as > > there are so many issues and feelings and things > to > > consider and personal prejudices, likes and > dislikes, > > etc. ...but you're keeping it on a technical as > well > > as "in my humble opinion" level and I who am > fairly > > new to this level of design discussion am really > > learning alot!! > > > -- > http://www.skaar.101main.net > http://www.PetitionOnline.com/spcdvd/ > http://www.petitiononline.com/impjapan/petition-sign.html? > moderator of wildsteam@yahoogroups.com > DOM and proud!!! > > > ===== Happy Holidays Stan Kuczynski P.S. Remember Don't ever Lie-Cheat- or steal. Your Government hates compatition __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time. http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html| 3384|3370|2004-03-31 15:49:23|brentswain38|Re: new 37' design|Richard I took the proportions of my first boat ,a pipe dream from the book Skenes elements of yacht design, increased the waterline, filled out the bow lines and fined down the aft lines to improve directional stability and balance , which made for a huge improvement.As a spencer 35 has 9ft6 inch beam and a beamy boat has 12 ft beam I settled on 10 ft 6 inches as a happy medium.As excessive beam destroys directional stability and ultimate self righting ability, and I'd had enough of boats with no directional stability ,after the pipe dream, I made directional stability a priority.As the inboard rudder was a total pain in the ass when it came to complicating the hell out of self steering and inside steering, and drastically increasing the price and vulnerability of such parts,I was keen to go for an outboard rudder.No regrets.In New Zealand I had pulled the keel hung rudder off the pipe dream and gave her a skeg hung rudder six feet further aft without changing the balance under sail in any way. I liked that arrangement, and having found that full length keels made for poor balance and directional stability( The centre of lateral resistance moves, according to speed, a percentage of the keel length)The rig of the pipe dream was a little short for a fully loaded cruising boat. Over the years owners of the 36 kept saying they would go higher with the rig . When they started putting 46 to 47 ft sticks in they said" That seems about right." Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "richytill" wrote: > Brent, given that no concept or design occurs in a vacuum--where did > you gather design features for the 36' for example? Lyle Hess > obviously patterned the Bristol Channel Cutter more directly from > historic lines of that design so it is easy to research the purpose > of the breed. Dockside drifters looking at "My Island" guess at the > origins--some see the influence of the Sweedish Scampi, others a > Vertue or something. I tell them--it's origami. Your description of > the needs for Pacific cruising hints at research into what works out > there. Are there any strong links to specific historic craft? rt > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" > wrote: > > Extending the waterline means a plumb stem which means very little > > buildup in reserve buoyancy when the ends go into a sea. This would > > mean a tendency for the bow to go thru a sea like a submarine(wet > > boat). This has been common with the plumb bow modern boats which > > take a lot of green water over the decks , unlike the older designs > > which have a rapid buildup of buoyancy in the ends above the > > waterline,when they try to go into a headsea.Clipper bows have very > > little buoyancy foreward, and consequently drive into a headsea > intil > > the water reaches the deck, then stop suddenly as if they've hit a > > wall. Rounded bows cruise smoothly thru a headsea , without slowing > > significantly > > My first boat had deep V sections foreward which pounded in a > head > > sea far more than my current boat , which has more U shaped > > sections.When beating into a strong tradewind from Vanuatu to Fiji, > > the sides of the V pounded like hell, slamming down into headseas. > A > > bit of round there would have greatly improved the situation, as > > experience has since proven. > > The flat, bedpan shaped sections which Jeff advocates was one of > > the causes of the capsizes in the fastnet race, as was explained in > > the book " Seaworthiness, the Forgotten Factor", by Marchage.Flat > > sections tend to follow the surface of the waves , like a > > raft,resulting in a snappy motion, whereas deep deadrise sections > > tend to be more stable, ignoreing the shape of the water's surface > to > > a greater degree.Added buoyancy midships tends to be offset > somewhat > > by room for greater tankage and storage there, lower down in the > hull. > > Low displacement figures are an short term illusion in offshore > > cruising yachts.A boat designed to be sailed totally empty will > > suffer a greater performance loss when loaded with the neccessities > > of a long ocean voyage, far more loss than one which is designed > for > > a heavier displacement. I understand that Jeff cruises the Atlantic > > side of the planet , where distances between sources of supplies > are > > tiny compared with the Pacific.Thus it's totally understandable > that > > he would completely fail to understand cruising realities in other > > parts of the world. > > One criticism I can make of the design is that a wide stern > makes > > for poor hull balance and poor directional stability. This is > > explained in the section on balance in my book.The extra room aft > is > > houseboat priorities, at the expense of cruising priorities.I've > > sailed a couple of boats across the Pacific which had excessively > > wide sterns and the resulting poor hull balance ,and having to > > constantly fight the helm, or the inability of any kind of self > > steering to keep her on course , and the need to sail under > canvased > > to keep her on course certainly wasn't worth the extra room aft.If > I > > wanted a boat with houseboat priorities I'd buy a house boat. > > It's good to hear that the design has a wheelhouse option. > Sitting > > in the driving rain in an open cockpit in order to "Look Trendy" is > a > > sucker's game.To the experienced cruiser, it would only make you > look > > like a fool. > > Brent Swain > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr" > > wrote: > > > With all due respect, while there is a lot to like about the > > preliminary > > > design for the new LB 37 footer, one thing that strikes me is > that > > she ends > > > up with an extremely deep canoe body with a very deep vertical > > center of > > > buoyancy. This of course results from the design having a very > high > > > displacement for its waterline length (3,000 to 5,000 lbs higher > > than would > > > be normal for a more modern offshore cruiser of this length) > > carried on > > > comparatively quite narrow waterline beam. > > > > > > There are a number of serious negatives to a canoe body that is > > this deep > > > such as a tendancy to roll through a very wide roll angle > compared > > to a more > > > moderately shallow canoe body. Similarly because the vertical > > center of > > > gravity would likely so much higher above the vertical center of > > buoyancy > > > and because it would take a pretty large heel angle for the > center > > of > > > buoyancy to shift to leeward, this boat would have substantially > > less form > > > stability and ballast stability than a boat with a shallower > canoe > > body. > > > > > > In terms of sailing ability, the deep canoe body would reduce the > > span of > > > the foils for any given draft and so would require larger keel > and > > rudder > > > areas and therefore produce greater frictional drag. This means a > > compromise > > > in windward performance and the need to carry more sail area, > which > > given > > > the comparatively low inherent stability of of this hull form, > > would mean a > > > boat that would be hard pressed to stand to its rig especially in > a > > stiffer > > > breeze. > > > > > > Another negative of this high displacement for the waterline > length > > and > > > waterline beam, is the need to carry a lot of displacement out > into > > the ends > > > of the boat. It is not the end of the world to carry a fair > amount > > of > > > displacement aft as this can help with surfing conditions but > > carrying the > > > displacement forward means colliding with a chop with much > greater > > impacts > > > than is the norm on more modern, finer bowed craft, and also > > carrying the > > > displacement forward results in 'U' shaped sections that are more > > likely to > > > pound in a seaway than more Vee'd sections. > > > > > > While I am not trying to trash this design, in the spirit of being > > > constructive, I would suggest if your goal is to carry a > > displacement in the > > > 16,500 lb range, that you stretch the waterline length to perhaps > > 34 to 35 > > > feet (which of course would also produce a longer boat) and > perhaps > > increase > > > the beam by a foot or so. This would allow a much sweeter set of > > lines and > > > produce a boat that has lower drag, is more stable, has a more > > comfortable > > > motion, is faster and more seaworthy. While there may be slightly > > higher > > > costs for the hull, the longer span of the keel may permit less > > ballast and > > > allow a greater carrying capacity slighly offsetting the > increased > > hull > > > costs. All other costs should be similar or lower as the lower > drag > > of the > > > longer boat may permit a smaller engine and sail plan. > > > > > > Respectfully, > > > Jeff | 3385|3370|2004-03-31 16:17:09|brentswain38|Re: new 37' design|My first boat was designed by Francis Kinney and tank tested at the Davidson institute where they tank test America's cup boats. I bought the hull at the ripe old age of 19 and set sail for New Zealand at the ripe old age of 23.It was a design abortion.The bow was a straight V and the sides of this V slammed into a headsea when well heeled. With steel boats , having a plumb bow and flare means putting compound curve in the plate there,as the shape of the bow determines the amount of flare if you don't compound the plate.The last guy I knew who insisted on such compound shapes spent $8,000 having the plates rolled, money better spent on freedom. Not everyone can afford a bigger boat , something many designers fail to understand. I heard a rumour that Steve Dashew was writing a book called " How to Cruise on $10,000 a day.Most of what I've heard Jeff advocate seems to assume that all cruisers are wealthy, and the more expensive the option the better.Tell that to Ralph Nader and you can save him a lot of research money. All he really has to do is read the price tag.Some can only afford 37 footers.They have to fit what they can in whatever size of boat they can afford.Too large a boat has killed more cruising dreams than all other causes combined. If the centre of buoyancy moves foreward when the boat heels, directional stability and balance will be poor , regardless of underwater and sailplan profile. The best way to avoid this is to work out the centre of buoyancy of a boat heeled at 30 degrees, and modify the lines until it stays where it was when the boat was upright .With wide sterns, it inevitably moves aft , the bow sinks in and the weather helm increases. Strangely, such hulls also need a lot of attention on the helm even when motoring in flat water. With bigger boats you can have a longer waterline if you plumb the bow, but then you have to make the hull longer to get the reseve buoyancy, which lets you have an even longer waterline if you plumb the bow which means you have to go even longer on the hull which lets you have a longer waterline if you plumb the bow which means you have to go, , etc, etc, etc,. Where do you stop?300 ft? More? Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr" wrote: > I would like to address some of the points that were raised with regards to > my comments on the LB 37. One of the fair criticisms of modern yacht designs > (by which I mean boats designed to the IMS and Volvo typeforms) is that it > takes more care to design them so that they actually work. Traditional > designs are fairly resilient in terms of tolerating a fairly wide range > variation and still being good boats. But these modern designs work as well > as they do by carfully controlling drag and keeping things very carefully > balanced. So, too much waterline beam means a snappy roll, too little > waterline beam means a tender boat and a boat that has too deep a canoe body > and/or too much fullness in the ends. To much displacement forwards and the > boat colides with each wave, to little and it becomes a submarine with a > mast. I spend a lot of time onboard modern race boats and performance > cruisers. There is nothing worse than a badly proportioned modern design or > as good as a well designed one. > > Greg you have a tough assignment there. As much as I prefer modern designs > my best guess is that in distorting modern design principles into a boat > with such a heavy displacement for its length will produce a bit a camel, > with few of the virtues of either modern design principles or of traditional > watercraft but with all of the liabilities of both. It you look at the canoe > body for instance, as the boat starts to heel the center of buoyancy > actually appears ro move to weather. This results in a boat that flops past > center only to lurch at the end of the roll as topsides buoyancy finally > rapidly builds at a largish heel angle. What ever your design brief that > would be a miserable motion. > > As to Brent's comments, there are several points that I want to touch on. > First of all I never suggested a plumb stem. I specifically said, "If...you > stretch the waterline length....which of course would also produce a longer > boat)" What I meant by that is that both the length on deck and the > waterline length would increase so that the bow angle would not necessarily > change. That said there is an error in Brent's comments that I want to > address. In his comments on my post Brent said: " a plumb stem which means > very little buildup in reserve buoyancy when the ends go into a sea. This > would mean a tendency for the bow to go thru a sea like a submarine (wet > boat). This has been common with the plumb bow modern boats which take a lot > of green water over the decks." Strictly speaking that is not really true. > It is true that when a plumb stem is coupled minimal flare (as is sometimes > the case with race boats designed for inshore use) there is a tendancy to > lack reserve buoyancy. But that is not a product of the plumb stem. It is > the product of a lack of flare. Introducing a moderate amount of flare to a > plumb stem results in a boat that is less likely to take solid water on > deck. I can explain it this way. If you visualize two boats with an > identical deck plan but one has the point of entry several feet aft of the > stem on deck, the boat with the plumb stem will begin to lift with the wave > several feet sooner than the boat that has its stem several feet aft. > Introducing flare into the topsides provides the additional reserve bouyancy > and if the deck plan is the same then there will actually be more reserve > buoyancy on the plumb stem boat. On the other hand a plumb stem boat will > tend to throw more spray aft but that can be addressed with the simple > addition of a rubrail forward that can deflect the spray outboard. > > I don't know what Brent did wrong on the design of his first boat so that > its vee'd sections pounded more than U shaped sections, but I do know a lot > about sailing modern IMS typeforms and while a 'U" shaped bow section is > faster in flat water, vee'd sections are much less prone to pounding when on > a close reach or beat in a steep headsea. > > I don't know why Brent assumes that I prefer a "flat, bedpan shaped > sections" since that is not my preference and never has been, but to clarify > his point on "flat, bedpan shaped sections", the hull forms condemned in > Marchaj's pivotal works were IOR era boats that had hull forms very similar > to the LB 37 with very deep canoe bodies, a narrow flat spot amidships, and > steeply rising deadrise on either side. If you look at the hull forms on > well designed modern IMS derived boats, they are carefully designed so that > they do not have excessive form stability and so that they progressively > build form stability as they heel rather than suddenly jerking as would be > the case with the LB 37 or the IOR era boats discussed in Marchaj. > > I also wish to disagree with the idea that I don't understand the need to > carry a payload. I am agreeing with the basic design premise that Greg's > design needs to carry a certain amount of payload. I did not suggest that > Greg reduce the payload. I have merely suggested that it be carried on a > longer waterline. I have in no way reduced the amount that can be carried > aboard. In fact if carried on a longer waterline, the waterplane would > actually be larger and so the boat can actually tollerate more increase or > decrease in payload with less change in submersion inches and so would be > more tolerant of the kinds of weight required to cruise either ocean. > > I do agree with Brent about the wider stern. Unless the entire design; rig, > ballasting, heeled hull form, underwater foils, weight and buoyancy are > carefully modeled, a wide stern can be a real detriment offshore. I strongly > prefer the more balanced hull forms of the IMS typeforms to the wide sterns > popularized in the 'Open Classes' and condo-cruisers. > > As for Gerd, I was amused and somewhat in agreement with your comments. > Perhaps I have made a mistake in assuming that Greg was looking for > constructive comments and not just applause. If I was mistaken, let me be > the first to respectfully apologize to all. > > Good night, > Jeff | 3386|3370|2004-03-31 16:34:18|denis buggy|Re: new 37' design|hello all and greetings from Ireland , I have followed your discussions with interest and only came across your group after much searching without success for plans or advice on my project for a 50 ft catamaran in steel . I have the equipment and skills to weld it together however I am doing it in three sections and final welding and bolting together must take place at the quayside as I am 50 miles from water and dimensions are beam 20ft x 50 ft long will not be transportable on our roads in one piece . my problem is I believe I can make my boat for a small amount of money and marinise two scania bus engines 360 bhp+360 bhp for power however I cannot find a means to calculate displacement and I have approached all the big names in steel boat building and they have no plans for sale and one of them referred to my enquiry as a paddy's day joke as nobody in their right mind would make or try to make a cat in steel , are there any fellow members of the asylum out there. regards Denis ----- Original Message ----- From: bubblede To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2004 3:52 PM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: new 37' design Jeff, and also with all due respect ;-) I do not agree. I think this hull is very attractive if it folds in origami, and it seems to fit into a sort of modern classic concept where you want to have a more "modern" rounded U hull as opposed to a deeper V like in Brents designs but still carry a lot of heavy stuff. Personally I would go wider and flatter and try to tweak for weight- savings, but that is really a question of taste. On my own project, the more I work on it the more the displacement seems to creep upward up the the deeper the hull gets, and it's both shorter and wider than this one... So this is not a bad compromise at all. Only thing I find is that for this more narrow type of hull I would lower topsides & sheerline quite a bit to make it look slimmer, but then that would reduce inside clearance under the sidedecks. Otherwise entries are fine, bottom is quite flat for the width, the exit is smooth and as flat-U as possible for this displacement/BWL.., would be interesting to get some more numbers, CP, ballast, wetted area, rig, see the proposed keel and rudder and find out what this displacement is going to be used on. Sure you could start from the same displacement and draw a boat with wider BWL, and a bit sharper here and a bit flatter there and anyway longer and so on, but that would be _your_ design then, wouldn't it? ;-) Gerd http://www.justmueller.com/boats/ --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr" wrote: > With all due respect, while there is a lot to like about the preliminary > design for the new LB 37 footer, one thing that strikes me is that she ends > up with an extremely deep canoe body with a very deep vertical center of > buoyancy. This of course results from the design having a very high > displacement for its waterline length (3,000 to 5,000 lbs higher than would > be normal for a more modern offshore cruiser of this length) carried on > comparatively quite narrow waterline beam. > > There are a number of serious negatives to a canoe body that is this deep > such as a tendancy to roll through a very wide roll angle compared to a more > moderately shallow canoe body. Similarly because the vertical center of > gravity would likely so much higher above the vertical center of buoyancy > and because it would take a pretty large heel angle for the center of > buoyancy to shift to leeward, this boat would have substantially less form > stability and ballast stability than a boat with a shallower canoe body. > > In terms of sailing ability, the deep canoe body would reduce the span of > the foils for any given draft and so would require larger keel and rudder > areas and therefore produce greater frictional drag. This means a compromise > in windward performance and the need to carry more sail area, which given > the comparatively low inherent stability of of this hull form, would mean a > boat that would be hard pressed to stand to its rig especially in a stiffer > breeze. > > Another negative of this high displacement for the waterline length and > waterline beam, is the need to carry a lot of displacement out into the ends > of the boat. It is not the end of the world to carry a fair amount of > displacement aft as this can help with surfing conditions but carrying the > displacement forward means colliding with a chop with much greater impacts > than is the norm on more modern, finer bowed craft, and also carrying the > displacement forward results in 'U' shaped sections that are more likely to > pound in a seaway than more Vee'd sections. > > While I am not trying to trash this design, in the spirit of being > constructive, I would suggest if your goal is to carry a displacement in the > 16,500 lb range, that you stretch the waterline length to perhaps 34 to 35 > feet (which of course would also produce a longer boat) and perhaps increase > the beam by a foot or so. This would allow a much sweeter set of lines and > produce a boat that has lower drag, is more stable, has a more comfortable > motion, is faster and more seaworthy. While there may be slightly higher > costs for the hull, the longer span of the keel may permit less ballast and > allow a greater carrying capacity slighly offsetting the increased hull > costs. All other costs should be similar or lower as the lower drag of the > longer boat may permit a smaller engine and sail plan. > > Respectfully, > Jeff To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3387|3370|2004-04-01 01:14:38|Ben Tucker|Re: new 37' design|Hi Greg My two cents worth on the design, not to be taken personly at all! I'm Sure you have thought this design out much more than me or anyone else has. This is my comments based on a quick look at the design. The freeboard seems very high for the beam of the boat, I assume you have good reason to raise it as the LB 36 Looks alot lower, It looks like the sole would be about 1.5 feet above the bottom? Good if you plan to stick the payload down there otherwise not so good. the decks are ply or Alloy I presume. If motoring is important why not lower the transom abit to get more bearing aft and LWL . If this was done by 'v'ing it it wouldn't destroy the balance for sailing, and might provide more pitch damping when heeled. The only cost would be more wetted surface. Once again I'm sure you have your reasons. On the Subject of Bows I have always found V and Flared bows have nice riding generally but with occasional heavy slamming (likewise slab sided Plumb bows)with awkward waves combos. I find a Brent Style bow with convex curves (Flam) Pound more frequently but much less violently. Any large flat or concave section on the bow seems to magnify any slamming if a wave hits it just right. I got Brents Book the other day and really enjoyed reading it, All I need now is a flat bit of land... I'm flying to NZ to deliver an S&S 34 back to Tasmania so won't be online for awhile. Cheers Ben| 3388|3370|2004-04-01 08:05:31|Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr|Re: new 37' design|Brent seems to like to make eroneous assumptions about my positions on various topics (Brent and I have been having these discussions for years now. We both seem to enjoy these exchanges of ideas and I hope that these discussions can produce constructive dialogues.) Here are a few corrections regarding my position and explanations of my position. Cost: I do not advocate that people sail more expensive boats, just longer boats for the same cost and weight. The reason that I say that is that people seem to equate cost and size with length when displacement is a much better determinant of both cost and size. So if we look at my comments on the LB 37, in suggesting that the boat be made longer but kept to the same displacement, the cost of this change would be minimal and argueably could actually be less. To explain, The last time that I looked steel was sold by the pound. Stretching the length of a hull reduces the girth while increasing the length. There will be a little more surface area, and perhaps a very small amount of additional material and finishing costs. But that is where the increased costs stop. In designing a boat sail area is pretty much determined by the displacement of the boat (although argueably, the more easily driven hull of the longer boat could get by with less sail area and so might realize a savings in rig and sail costs.) The engine size is similarly determined primarily by displacement (although argueably, the more easily driven hull of the longer boat could get by with a smaller engine and smaller tanks because of less engine hours being required due to its better sailing abilities.) The ballasting requirement is similarly set by the sail area, but again argueably you could reduce the ballast a bit because of the smaller sail plan and the greater lever arm between the higher vertical center of buoyancy of the shallower canoe body. Plumb stems: I do not believe that I ever advocated a plumb stem for an offshore cruiser or for steel construction. I merely pointed out that Brent was mistaken about their propensity to ship solid water onto the deck. Slamming and Vee'd bow sections: I am quite familiar with Kinney's Pipe Dream design. Nice looking boats. BUT I now understand why Brent's first boat pounded. It was not due to the vee'd bow sections but to the long overhangs and higher heel angles that these boats were sailed at. If this boat had not had Vee'd bow sections it would have pounded far worse. Trim with wide sterns and finer bows: What Brent says about wide sterned boats going bow down with heel angle used to be very true and it is one of the reasons why IMS type modern hull forms are so difficult to design well, but with careful modeling of the heeled hull form so that the longitundinal center of buoyancy remains relatively in the same location as the boat heels, changes in trim are no longer a consequence of heeling. This has permitted boats which have better motion comfort when sailing on all points of sail, which point higher, and motor faster and more efficiently. How long should a boat be: As Brent probably knows, most reputable designers will back into the length of the boat by analyzing the needs of a client in terms of what they want to do with the boat. If you look at the purpose and number of people expected on board you come up with a payload that is necessary and a rough order of magnitude of structure, rig and other items that are needed to support that payload. That gives you a displacement that the boat should have to provide for the owners needs. Using the displacement and making a decision about a suitable D/L (displacement to length ratio) the designer then comes up with the length that the boat should be to meet the owners need. Within reason, using a smaller D/L (in other words a longer boat for the same displacement) usually produces a boat that has more seaworthiness, a more comfortable motion, and better sailing performance. Obviously there is a point where stretching the boat to much can result in a more expensive boat to build. In alloy or composites that point is a L/D somewhere below a range of 170 to 200. In steel that number is somewhat higher for an equal strength boat. Respectfully, Jeff| 3389|3370|2004-04-01 08:58:56|dreemer1962|Re: new 37' design|Brent, Steve Dashew's design work is indeed oriented toward wealthy customers, but in his books, he gives, a lot of down to earth advises for people with a little cash as well. His main advise is to simplify and go now with what you can afford (second hand Contesa 26 for example or similar), rather then waste time dreaming about "ideal" luxury yacht waiting for that elusive lottery ticket or what ever. I find "his" design ideas very interesting and worth experimenting on the smaller scale then he does. The essence of his style is maximising the hull/waterline length, to the length/beam factor of about 1:4 to 1:5 in the place of the most common of around 1:3. As practically all "new" ideas in a boat design, these proportions are nothing new. They are just not used very often for a variety of reasons. I personally think that most cost effective design improvement of most boat designs is to simply make them longer. That's what's Steve Dashew basically does. He takes conventional 43 to 50 ft long boats and stretch them out to 60 - 80 ft. His boats do indeed costs a fortune, but, conventional 43 to 50 footers would require about same pile of bucks if custom built and equipped to same standards. What could be much more interesting for us is to look what could we achieve taking same principle to much smaller (and cheaper) scale. Take for example your 31 footer and stretch it to 40 ft leaving same breadth, freeboard and depth. For a just a little bit more steel plate you get much more waterline length, longitudinal stability, directional stability, waterline length/displacement ratio of the very light boat despite using heavy material, sharper enterence angle and roomier boat, resulting in a much higher maximum and average speed, less pitching and better windward abilities in the choppy conditions. You could even widen a stern without sacrificing directional stability if desired. All of that for just a little more money for a bit more still plate, as expensive stuff as engine, mast, rigging, sails… stays the same. Forward overhang could stay the same or built plumb without flare if desired. If plumb bow is chosen, I think that it wouldn't make boat wetter then original 31 footer. As the crew sits in the cockpit most of the time by putting a bow 10 ft further from them (adding much more volume in the bow), you most probably provide them with a drier ride. Any flare may actually bring more spray to the back of the boat were the crew is. Many traditional boats, including some considered ultimate in the seaworthiness, had plumb bows and seamed to work fine. Heaving sad that, don't get me wrong, I'm not some kind of the fanatical supporter of the plumb bows. I don't like very long overhangs but don't heave nothing against moderate ones as for example on your designs. The only downside of the stretched boat compered to original one is more underwater hull area = lower speed in a very light wind. Considering the size of the diesels everyone is putting in sailing boats these days, relatively poor light winds sailing performance shouldn't be a problem. Longer hull would actually go faster and burn less fuel then shorter boat with a same engine. Fanatical sailors among us could prefer playing with big Genoa's, spinnakers end such, instead of engines. Despite that there where many traditional boats with a beam/ length factor of 4:1 to 5:1 and some classic designs as for example L. F. Hereshoff with proportions very similar to modern narrow designs. they where/are minority. Considering all the benefits of the long hulls I'm wondering why are they so rarely built. I think that in the past main reasons where constructional limits of traditional wood construction, (extensive length made a hulls weaker and prone to hogging), economic factors - it used to be that labour was relatively cheap and materials relatively expensive (just opposite from our present day economics) and for many trades was more advantageous to heave bigger loading capacity then speed, maybe some length based taxing rules and a such. In more modern times the most important reason were tradition, fashion, racing class rules which penalised length, storage costs based on length and similar. All of this reasons should be of little concern for modern cruising boats whose designs parameters should be optimised for the given budget and not for the length. Compering boats according to length is very misleading. Costs are much more related to the displacement. With a best wishes, Milan --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" wrote: > My first boat was designed by Francis Kinney and tank tested at the > Davidson institute where they tank test America's cup boats. I bought > the hull at the ripe old age of 19 and set sail for New Zealand at > the ripe old age of 23.It was a design abortion.The bow was a > straight V and the sides of this V slammed into a headsea when well > heeled. > With steel boats , having a plumb bow and flare means putting > compound curve in the plate there,as the shape of the bow determines > the amount of flare if you don't compound the plate.The last guy I > knew who insisted on such compound shapes spent $8,000 having the > plates rolled, money better spent on freedom. > Not everyone can afford a bigger boat , something many designers > fail to understand. I heard a rumour that Steve Dashew was writing a > book called " How to Cruise on $10,000 a day.Most of what I've heard > Jeff advocate seems to assume that all cruisers are wealthy, and the > more expensive the option the better.Tell that to Ralph Nader and you > can save him a lot of research money. All he really has to do is read > the price tag.Some can only afford 37 footers.They have to fit what > they can in whatever size of boat they can afford.Too large a boat > has killed more cruising dreams than all other causes combined. > If the centre of buoyancy moves foreward when the boat heels, > directional stability and balance will be poor , regardless of > underwater and sailplan profile. The best way to avoid this is to > work out the centre of buoyancy of a boat heeled at 30 degrees, and > modify the lines until it stays where it was when the boat was > upright .With wide sterns, it inevitably moves aft , the bow sinks in > and the weather helm increases. Strangely, such hulls also need a lot > of attention on the helm even when motoring in flat water. > With bigger boats you can have a longer waterline if you plumb the > bow, but then you have to make the hull longer to get the reseve > buoyancy, which lets you have an even longer waterline if you plumb > the bow which means you have to go even longer on the hull which lets > you have a longer waterline if you plumb the bow which means you have > to go, , etc, etc, etc,. Where do you stop?300 ft? More? > Brent Swain > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr" > wrote: > > I would like to address some of the points that were raised with > regards to > > my comments on the LB 37. One of the fair criticisms of modern > yacht designs > > (by which I mean boats designed to the IMS and Volvo typeforms) is > that it > > takes more care to design them so that they actually work. > Traditional > > designs are fairly resilient in terms of tolerating a fairly wide > range > > variation and still being good boats. But these modern designs work > as well > > as they do by carfully controlling drag and keeping things very > carefully > > balanced. So, too much waterline beam means a snappy roll, too > little > > waterline beam means a tender boat and a boat that has too deep a > canoe body > > and/or too much fullness in the ends. To much displacement forwards > and the > > boat colides with each wave, to little and it becomes a submarine > with a > > mast. I spend a lot of time onboard modern race boats and > performance > > cruisers. There is nothing worse than a badly proportioned modern > design or > > as good as a well designed one. > > > > Greg you have a tough assignment there. As much as I prefer modern > designs > > my best guess is that in distorting modern design principles into a > boat > > with such a heavy displacement for its length will produce a bit a > camel, > > with few of the virtues of either modern design principles or of > traditional > > watercraft but with all of the liabilities of both. It you look at > the canoe > > body for instance, as the boat starts to heel the center of buoyancy > > actually appears ro move to weather. This results in a boat that > flops past > > center only to lurch at the end of the roll as topsides buoyancy > finally > > rapidly builds at a largish heel angle. What ever your design brief > that > > would be a miserable motion. > > > > As to Brent's comments, there are several points that I want to > touch on. > > First of all I never suggested a plumb stem. I specifically > said, "If...you > > stretch the waterline length....which of course would also produce > a longer > > boat)" What I meant by that is that both the length on deck and the > > waterline length would increase so that the bow angle would not > necessarily > > change. That said there is an error in Brent's comments that I want > to > > address. In his comments on my post Brent said: " a plumb stem > which means > > very little buildup in reserve buoyancy when the ends go into a > sea. This > > would mean a tendency for the bow to go thru a sea like a submarine > (wet > > boat). This has been common with the plumb bow modern boats which > take a lot > > of green water over the decks." Strictly speaking that is not > really true. > > It is true that when a plumb stem is coupled minimal flare (as is > sometimes > > the case with race boats designed for inshore use) there is a > tendancy to > > lack reserve buoyancy. But that is not a product of the plumb stem. > It is > > the product of a lack of flare. Introducing a moderate amount of > flare to a > > plumb stem results in a boat that is less likely to take solid > water on > > deck. I can explain it this way. If you visualize two boats with an > > identical deck plan but one has the point of entry several feet aft > of the > > stem on deck, the boat with the plumb stem will begin to lift with > the wave > > several feet sooner than the boat that has its stem several feet > aft. > > Introducing flare into the topsides provides the additional reserve > bouyancy > > and if the deck plan is the same then there will actually be more > reserve > > buoyancy on the plumb stem boat. On the other hand a plumb stem > boat will > > tend to throw more spray aft but that can be addressed with the > simple > > addition of a rubrail forward that can deflect the spray outboard. > > > > I don't know what Brent did wrong on the design of his first boat > so that > > its vee'd sections pounded more than U shaped sections, but I do > know a lot > > about sailing modern IMS typeforms and while a 'U" shaped bow > section is > > faster in flat water, vee'd sections are much less prone to > pounding when on > > a close reach or beat in a steep headsea. > > > > I don't know why Brent assumes that I prefer a "flat, bedpan shaped > > sections" since that is not my preference and never has been, but > to clarify > > his point on "flat, bedpan shaped sections", the hull forms > condemned in > > Marchaj's pivotal works were IOR era boats that had hull forms very > similar > > to the LB 37 with very deep canoe bodies, a narrow flat spot > amidships, and > > steeply rising deadrise on either side. If you look at the hull > forms on > > well designed modern IMS derived boats, they are carefully designed > so that > > they do not have excessive form stability and so that they > progressively > > build form stability as they heel rather than suddenly jerking as > would be > > the case with the LB 37 or the IOR era boats discussed in Marchaj. > > > > I also wish to disagree with the idea that I don't understand the > need to > > carry a payload. I am agreeing with the basic design premise that > Greg's > > design needs to carry a certain amount of payload. I did not > suggest that > > Greg reduce the payload. I have merely suggested that it be carried > on a > > longer waterline. I have in no way reduced the amount that can be > carried > > aboard. In fact if carried on a longer waterline, the waterplane > would > > actually be larger and so the boat can actually tollerate more > increase or > > decrease in payload with less change in submersion inches and so > would be > > more tolerant of the kinds of weight required to cruise either > ocean. > > > > I do agree with Brent about the wider stern. Unless the entire > design; rig, > > ballasting, heeled hull form, underwater foils, weight and buoyancy > are > > carefully modeled, a wide stern can be a real detriment offshore. I > strongly > > prefer the more balanced hull forms of the IMS typeforms to the > wide sterns > > popularized in the 'Open Classes' and condo-cruisers. > > > > As for Gerd, I was amused and somewhat in agreement with your > comments. > > Perhaps I have made a mistake in assuming that Greg was looking for > > constructive comments and not just applause. If I was mistaken, let > me be > > the first to respectfully apologize to all. > > > > Good night, > > Jeff | 3390|3370|2004-04-01 10:24:57|bubblede|Re: new 37' design|Jeff, just to throw some more stones into the pool... ;-) : > I do not advocate that people sail more expensive boats, just longer boats for the same cost and weight. ...... and later... >That gives you a displacement that the boat should have to provide for the owners needs. Using the displacement and making a decision about a suitable D/L (displacement to length ratio) the designer then comes up with the length that the boat should be to meet the owners need. .... cutcut>>> Actually length is only one - albeit important - option here, you might just as well say build a wider beamier, roomier boat with a flatter bottom for the same price/displacement if that is what you like. Looking at the way that production yachts are promoted, things look different these days: Prize is seen in relationship to volume under condition that "privacy" follows. Used to be number of berths, but these days anything from 28 to 45' offers the same 4 plus 2 berths, double forward, double aft, 2 singles amidship. (respectively 6 plus 2 for charter, with 2 doubles aft...) price is now related to overall volume seen as flat floorspace that is required to seperate the total volume into private areas, the amount any given boat offers of square meters of walkable floorboards ... ;-) In this sense a wider, flatter hull will give better value for money than a narrow long hull with a deep V and narrow floors. The concept is not bad, if you live a fortnight in a Benetau or in an older-styled "classical" layout you see the difference, light space, vision and all that stuff we always miss in our dark classical catacombs... and they do sail very nicely. This type of boats covers the "needs" of 99 % of the owners very nicely, the all- out long distance cruiser is a niche. Having delivered several jeanneaus, beneteaus, dynamiques et al of all sizes over the years, I find this type of boat behaves far better at sea than discussions in this group would make you think... but that's largely a question of taste. Could we say then what we both want to suggest is that - boats cost by displacement if other elements remain - it is always interesting to see if the displacement of any given hull, for a closely similar budget, may produce "more" boat in terms of speed/space/looks/ or whatever personal preferences are. Somebody once said that you can always get only 2 out of these 3 options: - Performance (would include a combination of "seaworthiness" and speed according to usage-program) - Comfort (space, stores carried, equipment installed...) - Low Price What you win on one you must loose on another.... regards Gerd http://www.justmueller.com/boats/| 3391|3391|2004-04-01 11:30:29|sharadsharma@setarnet.aw|Reply to Denis Buggy Steel catamaran|Dear Denis Look at this web site for ur steel Catamaran Plans http://www.webntime.com.au/boden2/saildetails.asp?ref=29#sidevi ew Regards Sharad From Sharad Sharma Generation 2000 / Little kingdom Caya G.F.B.C.108 B-C, Oranjestad, Aruba, Dutch caribbean Ph 0297 5829868 - 5839277 fx 02975829959 sharadsharma@... [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3392|3370|2004-04-01 15:48:34|brentswain38|Re: new 37' design|As boats get larger their ability to carry sail increases exponentially, enabling them to get by with less beam. With smaller boats , reduced beam would make them sail on their ear and reefing would have to start in around 12 knots of wind. I've seen this in boats with narrow waterline beam.A beam to length ratio which works fine for a 60 footer would be a disaster for a 40 footer.Most attempts at such narrow boats have been failures . One round the world racer tried taking this to extremes lately and it was a disaster, abandoned early in the game.It's too easy to think of narrow as having minimum resistance , which it does, while forgetting that a sailboat needs some stability to carry sail.Moderation is the best solution for cruising boats, avoiding extremes.This is also true of overhangs as it is with many aspects of design.The plumb bow traditional boats claimed to be super seaworthy tended to hobby horse like hell in a headsea, due to the lack of reserve buoyancy in the ends . Any boat which has trouble getting off a lee shore in strong winds is not seaworthy. While there are all kinds of mathmatical theories about bigger boats being cheaper, they are so far just theories and wishful thinking. I don't know anyone who has pulled it off in practise . Many boats over 40 ft I've seen built by backyard builders seem to change hands several times before they hit the water.Claims that bigger boats can be cheaper and that a limited income builder should go for the bigger boat, has often resulted in the destruction of cruising dreams for many people who got sucked into believing such nonsense , people who would have made it out cruising if the had stuck to something smaller.I've seen that happen far too often. Narrow hulls in the smaller sizes aren't commonly built for a good reason.They don't work out anywhere near as well as claimed by their advocates. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "dreemer1962" wrote: > Brent, > > Steve Dashew's design work is indeed oriented toward wealthy > customers, but in his books, he gives, a lot of down to earth advises > for people with a little cash as well. His main advise is to simplify > and go now with what you can afford (second hand Contesa 26 for > example or similar), rather then waste time dreaming about "ideal" > luxury yacht waiting for that elusive lottery ticket or what ever. > > I find "his" design ideas very interesting and worth experimenting on > the smaller scale then he does. The essence of his style is > maximising the hull/waterline length, to the length/beam factor of > about 1:4 to 1:5 in the place of the most common of around 1:3. As > practically all "new" ideas in a boat design, these proportions are > nothing new. They are just not used very often for a variety of > reasons. I personally think that most cost effective design > improvement of most boat designs is to simply make them longer. > That's what's Steve Dashew basically does. He takes conventional 43 > to 50 ft long boats and stretch them out to 60 - 80 ft. His boats do > indeed costs a fortune, but, conventional 43 to 50 footers would > require about same pile of bucks if custom built and equipped to same > standards. > > What could be much more interesting for us is to look what could we > achieve taking same principle to much smaller (and cheaper) scale. > Take for example your 31 footer and stretch it to 40 ft leaving same > breadth, freeboard and depth. For a just a little bit more steel > plate you get much more waterline length, longitudinal stability, > directional stability, waterline length/displacement ratio of the > very light boat despite using heavy material, sharper enterence angle > and roomier boat, resulting in a much higher maximum and average > speed, less pitching and better windward abilities in the choppy > conditions. You could even widen a stern without sacrificing > directional stability if desired. All of that for just a little more > money for a bit more still plate, as expensive stuff as engine, mast, > rigging, sails… stays the same. Forward overhang could stay the same > or built plumb without flare if desired. If plumb bow is chosen, I > think that it wouldn't make boat wetter then original 31 footer. As > the crew sits in the cockpit most of the time by putting a bow 10 ft > further from them (adding much more volume in the bow), you most > probably provide them with a drier ride. Any flare may actually bring > more spray to the back of the boat were the crew is. Many traditional > boats, including some considered ultimate in the seaworthiness, had > plumb bows and seamed to work fine. Heaving sad that, don't get me > wrong, I'm not some kind of the fanatical supporter of the plumb > bows. I don't like very long overhangs but don't heave nothing > against moderate ones as for example on your designs. > > The only downside of the stretched boat compered to original one is > more underwater hull area = lower speed in a very light wind. > Considering the size of the diesels everyone is putting in sailing > boats these days, relatively poor light winds sailing performance > shouldn't be a problem. Longer hull would actually go faster and burn > less fuel then shorter boat with a same engine. Fanatical sailors > among us could prefer playing with big Genoa's, spinnakers end such, > instead of engines. > > Despite that there where many traditional boats with a beam/ length > factor of 4:1 to 5:1 and some classic designs as for example L. F. > Hereshoff with proportions very similar to modern narrow designs. > they where/are minority. Considering all the benefits of the long > hulls I'm wondering why are they so rarely built. I think that in the > past main reasons where constructional limits of traditional wood > construction, (extensive length made a hulls weaker and prone to > hogging), economic factors - it used to be that labour was relatively > cheap and materials relatively expensive (just opposite from our > present day economics) and for many trades was more advantageous to > heave bigger loading capacity then speed, maybe some length based > taxing rules and a such. > > In more modern times the most important reason were tradition, > fashion, racing class rules which penalised length, storage costs > based on length and similar. > > All of this reasons should be of little concern for modern cruising > boats whose designs parameters should be optimised for the given > budget and not for the length. Compering boats according to length is > very misleading. Costs are much more related to the displacement. > > With a best wishes, > Milan > > > > > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" > wrote: > > My first boat was designed by Francis Kinney and tank tested at the > > Davidson institute where they tank test America's cup boats. I > bought > > the hull at the ripe old age of 19 and set sail for New Zealand at > > the ripe old age of 23.It was a design abortion.The bow was a > > straight V and the sides of this V slammed into a headsea when well > > heeled. > > With steel boats , having a plumb bow and flare means putting > > compound curve in the plate there,as the shape of the bow > determines > > the amount of flare if you don't compound the plate.The last guy I > > knew who insisted on such compound shapes spent $8,000 having the > > plates rolled, money better spent on freedom. > > Not everyone can afford a bigger boat , something many designers > > fail to understand. I heard a rumour that Steve Dashew was writing > a > > book called " How to Cruise on $10,000 a day.Most of what I've > heard > > Jeff advocate seems to assume that all cruisers are wealthy, and > the > > more expensive the option the better.Tell that to Ralph Nader and > you > > can save him a lot of research money. All he really has to do is > read > > the price tag.Some can only afford 37 footers.They have to fit what > > they can in whatever size of boat they can afford.Too large a boat > > has killed more cruising dreams than all other causes combined. > > If the centre of buoyancy moves foreward when the boat heels, > > directional stability and balance will be poor , regardless of > > underwater and sailplan profile. The best way to avoid this is to > > work out the centre of buoyancy of a boat heeled at 30 degrees, and > > modify the lines until it stays where it was when the boat was > > upright .With wide sterns, it inevitably moves aft , the bow sinks > in > > and the weather helm increases. Strangely, such hulls also need a > lot > > of attention on the helm even when motoring in flat water. > > With bigger boats you can have a longer waterline if you plumb > the > > bow, but then you have to make the hull longer to get the reseve > > buoyancy, which lets you have an even longer waterline if you plumb > > the bow which means you have to go even longer on the hull which > lets > > you have a longer waterline if you plumb the bow which means you > have > > to go, , etc, etc, etc,. Where do you stop?300 ft? More? > > Brent Swain > > > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr" > > wrote: > > > I would like to address some of the points that were raised with > > regards to > > > my comments on the LB 37. One of the fair criticisms of modern > > yacht designs > > > (by which I mean boats designed to the IMS and Volvo typeforms) > is > > that it > > > takes more care to design them so that they actually work. > > Traditional > > > designs are fairly resilient in terms of tolerating a fairly wide > > range > > > variation and still being good boats. But these modern designs > work > > as well > > > as they do by carfully controlling drag and keeping things very > > carefully > > > balanced. So, too much waterline beam means a snappy roll, too > > little > > > waterline beam means a tender boat and a boat that has too deep a > > canoe body > > > and/or too much fullness in the ends. To much displacement > forwards > > and the > > > boat colides with each wave, to little and it becomes a submarine > > with a > > > mast. I spend a lot of time onboard modern race boats and > > performance > > > cruisers. There is nothing worse than a badly proportioned modern > > design or > > > as good as a well designed one. > > > > > > Greg you have a tough assignment there. As much as I prefer > modern > > designs > > > my best guess is that in distorting modern design principles into > a > > boat > > > with such a heavy displacement for its length will produce a bit > a > > camel, > > > with few of the virtues of either modern design principles or of > > traditional > > > watercraft but with all of the liabilities of both. It you look > at > > the canoe > > > body for instance, as the boat starts to heel the center of > buoyancy > > > actually appears ro move to weather. This results in a boat that > > flops past > > > center only to lurch at the end of the roll as topsides buoyancy > > finally > > > rapidly builds at a largish heel angle. What ever your design > brief > > that > > > would be a miserable motion. > > > > > > As to Brent's comments, there are several points that I want to > > touch on. > > > First of all I never suggested a plumb stem. I specifically > > said, "If...you > > > stretch the waterline length....which of course would also > produce > > a longer > > > boat)" What I meant by that is that both the length on deck and > the > > > waterline length would increase so that the bow angle would not > > necessarily > > > change. That said there is an error in Brent's comments that I > want > > to > > > address. In his comments on my post Brent said: " a plumb stem > > which means > > > very little buildup in reserve buoyancy when the ends go into a > > sea. This > > > would mean a tendency for the bow to go thru a sea like a > submarine > > (wet > > > boat). This has been common with the plumb bow modern boats which > > take a lot > > > of green water over the decks." Strictly speaking that is not > > really true. > > > It is true that when a plumb stem is coupled minimal flare (as is > > sometimes > > > the case with race boats designed for inshore use) there is a > > tendancy to > > > lack reserve buoyancy. But that is not a product of the plumb > stem. > > It is > > > the product of a lack of flare. Introducing a moderate amount of > > flare to a > > > plumb stem results in a boat that is less likely to take solid > > water on > > > deck. I can explain it this way. If you visualize two boats with > an > > > identical deck plan but one has the point of entry several feet > aft > > of the > > > stem on deck, the boat with the plumb stem will begin to lift > with > > the wave > > > several feet sooner than the boat that has its stem several feet > > aft. > > > Introducing flare into the topsides provides the additional > reserve > > bouyancy > > > and if the deck plan is the same then there will actually be more > > reserve > > > buoyancy on the plumb stem boat. On the other hand a plumb stem > > boat will > > > tend to throw more spray aft but that can be addressed with the > > simple > > > addition of a rubrail forward that can deflect the spray outboard. > > > > > > I don't know what Brent did wrong on the design of his first boat > > so that > > > its vee'd sections pounded more than U shaped sections, but I do > > know a lot > > > about sailing modern IMS typeforms and while a 'U" shaped bow > > section is > > > faster in flat water, vee'd sections are much less prone to > > pounding when on > > > a close reach or beat in a steep headsea. > > > > > > I don't know why Brent assumes that I prefer a "flat, bedpan > shaped > > > sections" since that is not my preference and never has been, but > > to clarify > > > his point on "flat, bedpan shaped sections", the hull forms > > condemned in > > > Marchaj's pivotal works were IOR era boats that had hull forms > very > > similar > > > to the LB 37 with very deep canoe bodies, a narrow flat spot > > amidships, and > > > steeply rising deadrise on either side. If you look at the hull > > forms on > > > well designed modern IMS derived boats, they are carefully > designed > > so that > > > they do not have excessive form stability and so that they > > progressively > > > build form stability as they heel rather than suddenly jerking as > > would be > > > the case with the LB 37 or the IOR era boats discussed in Marchaj. > > > > > > I also wish to disagree with the idea that I don't understand > the > > need to > > > carry a payload. I am agreeing with the basic design premise that > > Greg's > > > design needs to carry a certain amount of payload. I did not > > suggest that > > > Greg reduce the payload. I have merely suggested that it be > carried > > on a > > > longer waterline. I have in no way reduced the amount that can be > > carried > > > aboard. In fact if carried on a longer waterline, the waterplane > > would > > > actually be larger and so the boat can actually tollerate more > > increase or > > > decrease in payload with less change in submersion inches and so > > would be > > > more tolerant of the kinds of weight required to cruise either > > ocean. > > > > > > I do agree with Brent about the wider stern. Unless the entire > > design; rig, > > > ballasting, heeled hull form, underwater foils, weight and > buoyancy > > are > > > carefully modeled, a wide stern can be a real detriment offshore. > I > > strongly > > > prefer the more balanced hull forms of the IMS typeforms to the > > wide sterns > > > popularized in the 'Open Classes' and condo-cruisers. > > > > > > As for Gerd, I was amused and somewhat in agreement with your > > comments. > > > Perhaps I have made a mistake in assuming that Greg was looking > for > > > constructive comments and not just applause. If I was mistaken, > let > > me be > > > the first to respectfully apologize to all. > > > > > > Good night, > > > Jeff | 3393|3370|2004-04-01 16:02:17|brentswain38|Re: new 37' design|To calculate displacement , multiply the underwater area of your midship section(s) by the waterline length. Multiply this by your prismatic coeficient( Usually around.54)This will give you the volume of the hull . Multiply this by the weight of water per measurement unit,and you have the displacement. You can also add up the areas of each section underwater and multiply this by the space between sections to get the volume.Comparing this to the volume of something the area of the midship section multiplied by the waterline length will give you the prismatic coeficient.The books " The Common Sense of Yacht Design " by Herreshoff and " Skenes Elements of Yacht Design " by Francis S Kinney will give you the info you need . The pounds per inch of immersion chart is also useful. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "denis buggy" wrote: > hello all and greetings from Ireland , I have followed your discussions with interest and only came across your group after much searching without success for plans or advice on my project for a 50 ft catamaran in steel . I have the equipment and skills to weld it together however I am doing it in three sections and final welding and bolting together must take place at the quayside as I am 50 miles from water and dimensions are beam 20ft x 50 ft long will not be transportable on our roads in one piece . my problem is I believe I can make my boat for a small amount of money and marinise two scania bus engines 360 bhp+360 bhp for power however I cannot find a means to calculate displacement and I have approached all the big names in steel boat building and they have no plans for sale and one of them referred to my enquiry as a paddy's day joke as nobody in their right mind would make or try to make a cat in steel , are there any fellow members of the asylum out there. regards Denis > ----- Original Message ----- > From: bubblede > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2004 3:52 PM > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: new 37' design > > > Jeff, and also with all due respect ;-) I do not agree. I think this > hull is very attractive if it folds in origami, and it seems to fit > into a sort of modern classic concept where you want to have a > more "modern" rounded U hull as opposed to a deeper V like in Brents > designs but still carry a lot of heavy stuff. > > Personally I would go wider and flatter and try to tweak for weight- > savings, but that is really a question of taste. On my own project, > the more I work on it the more the displacement seems to creep > upward up the the deeper the hull gets, and it's both shorter and > wider than this one... So this is not a bad compromise at all. > > Only thing I find is that for this more narrow type of hull I would > lower topsides & sheerline quite a bit to make it look slimmer, but > then that would reduce inside clearance under the sidedecks. > Otherwise entries are fine, bottom is quite flat for the width, the > exit is smooth and as flat-U as possible for this > displacement/BWL.., would be interesting to get some more numbers, > CP, ballast, wetted area, rig, see the proposed keel and rudder and > find out what this displacement is going to be used on. > > Sure you could start from the same displacement and draw a boat with > wider BWL, and a bit sharper here and a bit flatter there and anyway > longer and so on, but that would be _your_ design then, wouldn't > it? ;-) > > Gerd > http://www.justmueller.com/boats/ > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr" > wrote: > > With all due respect, while there is a lot to like about the > preliminary > > design for the new LB 37 footer, one thing that strikes me is that > she ends > > up with an extremely deep canoe body with a very deep vertical > center of > > buoyancy. This of course results from the design having a very high > > displacement for its waterline length (3,000 to 5,000 lbs higher > than would > > be normal for a more modern offshore cruiser of this length) > carried on > > comparatively quite narrow waterline beam. > > > > There are a number of serious negatives to a canoe body that is > this deep > > such as a tendancy to roll through a very wide roll angle compared > to a more > > moderately shallow canoe body. Similarly because the vertical > center of > > gravity would likely so much higher above the vertical center of > buoyancy > > and because it would take a pretty large heel angle for the center > of > > buoyancy to shift to leeward, this boat would have substantially > less form > > stability and ballast stability than a boat with a shallower canoe > body. > > > > In terms of sailing ability, the deep canoe body would reduce the > span of > > the foils for any given draft and so would require larger keel and > rudder > > areas and therefore produce greater frictional drag. This means a > compromise > > in windward performance and the need to carry more sail area, > which given > > the comparatively low inherent stability of of this hull form, > would mean a > > boat that would be hard pressed to stand to its rig especially in > a stiffer > > breeze. > > > > Another negative of this high displacement for the waterline > length and > > waterline beam, is the need to carry a lot of displacement out > into the ends > > of the boat. It is not the end of the world to carry a fair amount > of > > displacement aft as this can help with surfing conditions but > carrying the > > displacement forward means colliding with a chop with much greater > impacts > > than is the norm on more modern, finer bowed craft, and also > carrying the > > displacement forward results in 'U' shaped sections that are more > likely to > > pound in a seaway than more Vee'd sections. > > > > While I am not trying to trash this design, in the spirit of being > > constructive, I would suggest if your goal is to carry a > displacement in the > > 16,500 lb range, that you stretch the waterline length to perhaps > 34 to 35 > > feet (which of course would also produce a longer boat) and > perhaps increase > > the beam by a foot or so. This would allow a much sweeter set of > lines and > > produce a boat that has lower drag, is more stable, has a more > comfortable > > motion, is faster and more seaworthy. While there may be slightly > higher > > costs for the hull, the longer span of the keel may permit less > ballast and > > allow a greater carrying capacity slighly offsetting the increased > hull > > costs. All other costs should be similar or lower as the lower > drag of the > > longer boat may permit a smaller engine and sail plan. > > > > Respectfully, > > Jeff > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- > Yahoo! Groups Links > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3394|3394|2004-04-01 16:11:09|bubblede|Interesting approach to the weight problem|as on smaller boats drinking water adds a lot of payload, you might be interested in this new product that radically solves the problem: http://store.proline.com/dewa.html ;-) Gerd| 3395|3394|2004-04-01 18:22:48|Graeme|Re: Interesting approach to the weight problem|YES April fools day ..............what a great idea . Good one Gerd -----Original Message----- From: bubblede [mailto:gerd@...] Sent: Friday, 2 April 2004 5:09 AM To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Subject: [origamiboats] Interesting approach to the weight problem as on smaller boats drinking water adds a lot of payload, you might be interested in this new product that radically solves the problem: http://store.proline.com/dewa.html ;-) Gerd To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links| 3396|3370|2004-04-01 20:56:09|Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr|Re: new 37' design|One minor point Brent, we are not talking about bigger boats, just longer ones. I mostly agree with your other points. I do agree with you about the need for moderation in the design process neither going to wide or too narrow, not going too long or too short. I agree that two narrow a boat won't stand to its rig (that is one of my critiques of the LB37) and too wide a boat will have an uncomfortable motion and poor limits of positive stability. Of course the trick is to define what moderate it and as designers we each seem to have our own theories on that point. I also agree that traditional plumb stemmed boats tended to pitch a lot, but I disagree with you on the physics. Plumb bowed traditional water craft do not hobby horse because they are plumb stemmed and had no reserve bouyancy forward, but quite the opposite. Traditional plumb stem boats tend to carry a very large amount of fullness just above the waterline so that even a small chop can exert a lot of lifting force at the bow. Their more balanced ends ment that there was very little dampening in the stern until the reserve buoyancy in the stern became emersed and quickly reversed the pitching direction. The pitching problem was generally compounded by their heavy hull, weight carried in the ends, and heavy rigs which greatly added to their pitch moments of inertia. Respectfully, Jeff| 3397|3394|2004-04-01 21:59:58|Gary H. Lucas|Re: Interesting approach to the weight problem|I've just started a new job. I'm now building and designing RO units. Ours are a little bigger than the typical boat ones though. 20 gallons a minute, rather than 20 to 100 gallons per day! I'm learning all about how these things operate though, and I have good access to the membranes too, if I ever get a boat built. Gary H. Lucas ----- Original Message ----- From: "bubblede" To: Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2004 4:08 PM Subject: [origamiboats] Interesting approach to the weight problem > as on smaller boats drinking water adds a lot of payload, you might > be interested in this new product that radically solves the problem: > http://store.proline.com/dewa.html > > ;-) > > Gerd > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > | 3398|3370|2004-04-02 00:40:55|info@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: new 37' design|Given the volume of replies on this forum, the LB37 to seems to have generated a fair amount of interest. Lots of good ideas. I've posted some changes to the lines to incorporate what I've heard: http://www.origamimagic.com/Design/LB37/LB37.htm One question came up about the high sheer. We decided to raise the sheer on this boat rather than raise the cabin because one thing I've heard consistently from female cruisers over the years is that they don't like low decks. The boat is made to be trailerable, so we are minimizing the fixed ballast, and going with extra large tanks under the floors to provide some measure of removable ballast. Full, the tanks will carry about 2 tons of fuel and water. A couple of questions for the group: 1. The LB37 beam at the WL is 8' 9 1/2, on 31' 8" WL. The LB37 is 10' 2 on deck and 36' 6" overall, which allows room for 2" rub rails each side. (The maximum beam allowed is 10' 6 by law.) Is this an excessively narrow beam for the length of boat? It seems perhaps a little narrow, but not excessive. And if so wouldn't this mean the boat should not be lengthened? 2. The width of the stern cannot be narrowed further as a means of balancing the boat. Are there any obvious improvements that could be made to the lines to improve the dynamic balance of the boat, consistent with the other restrictions on the design? thanks again, Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3399|3370|2004-04-02 02:01:12|bubblede|Re: new 37' design - max beam|> The maximum beam allowed is 10' 6 by law But why this limitation? Does that mean that a boat that is wider can not be transported on the road at all in your counry? Trailerable width in Europe is usually about 2.50m I believe, but that means for trailing behind your car ;-) for bigger boats you just need police escort and special transport, which is costly - but how often do you actually transport a boat by road? Having a much better and bigger boat (same length, cost, displacement...) at the price of occasional higher cost for transport is not an option for your customer? Gerd http://www.justmueller.com/boats/| 3400|3370|2004-04-02 11:26:22|info@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: new 37' design - max beam|10' 6" is the legal limit for trailering a boat in North America without a pilot car or escort. With a temporary permit, anyone with a drivers license can haul the boat if it is under 10' 6" beam. The owner/builder is aiming at a niche market, with more than one boat in the plans. There are a number of advantages in a easily trailerable boat in North America, given the seasons, weather, and distances involved. The performance tradeoff is in line with the needs of an aging population. People as they age tend to move from sailboats to power boats. The LB37 is intended for those people that want a sailboat but need a power boat. Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com ----- Original Message ----- From: bubblede To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2004 11:01 PM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: new 37' design - max beam > The maximum beam allowed is 10' 6 by law But why this limitation? Does that mean that a boat that is wider can not be transported on the road at all in your counry? Trailerable width in Europe is usually about 2.50m I believe, but that means for trailing behind your car ;-) for bigger boats you just need police escort and special transport, which is costly - but how often do you actually transport a boat by road? Having a much better and bigger boat (same length, cost, displacement...) at the price of occasional higher cost for transport is not an option for your customer? Gerd http://www.justmueller.com/boats/ To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3401|3370|2004-04-02 16:57:36|Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr|Re: new 37' design - max beam|Trucking and Trailering, At least the last time that I reseached, most states required that any vehicle with a gross vehicle weight with a towed vehicle that was in excess of 6 tons required a special permit and truck driver's license. At something like 10 tons for the boat, trailor and tow vehicle I think they are into a trucker's licence and special permit. Once they have that, they can tow a vessel up to 12 feet of width without an pilot car or escort vehicle. I think that you will have a very tough time convincing anyone that a 17,000 lb boat is 'trailerable'. If you are really looking at a boat that will be motored a lot you really should drop the height of the transom a bit more so that you will have more bearing aft. Respectfully, Jeff ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Friday, April 02, 2004 11:23 AM Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: new 37' design - max beam > 10' 6" is the legal limit for trailering a boat in North America without a pilot car or escort. With a temporary permit, anyone with a drivers license can haul the boat if it is under 10' 6" beam. > > The owner/builder is aiming at a niche market, with more than one boat in the plans. There are a number of advantages in a easily trailerable boat in North America, given the seasons, weather, and distances involved. > > The performance tradeoff is in line with the needs of an aging population. People as they age tend to move from sailboats to power boats. The LB37 is intended for those people that want a sailboat but need a power boat. > > Greg Elliott > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: bubblede > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2004 11:01 PM > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: new 37' design - max beam > > > > The maximum beam allowed is 10' 6 by law > But why this limitation? Does that mean that a boat that is wider > can not be transported on the road at all in your counry? > Trailerable width in Europe is usually about 2.50m I believe, but > that means for trailing behind your car ;-) for bigger boats you > just need police escort and special transport, which is costly - but > how often do you actually transport a boat by road? Having a much > better and bigger boat (same length, cost, displacement...) at the > price of occasional higher cost for transport is not an option for > your customer? > > Gerd > http://www.justmueller.com/boats/ > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- > Yahoo! Groups Links > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > | 3402|3370|2004-04-02 17:46:38|brentswain38|Re: new 37' design|As the Spencer 35 of the late 60's had 9ft 6inch beam and modern boats have 11ft 6 inch beam, 10 ft 6 inch beam is in the midddle , and thus moderate . Traditional ,colin archer type boats don't have much of reserve buoyancy above the waterline by any stretch of the imagination and are notorious for hobby horseing. The perry designed double enders of the early 80's had a lot of reserve buoyancy above the waterline aft to stop this tendency to hobbyhorse.Unfortunatly they had clipper bows to stop the boat when encountering a headsea. Traditionally, colin archers had gaff rigs which, while heavy, were low and close to the water, minimuising their effect on pitching , altho the lack of inertia made them prone to rolling over. As I mention in my book one must be careful to avoid getting ones mind locked into all that is traditional or all that is modern as there are good and bad ideas in both areas . Many traditional ideas always were bad and there are many which are as valid as the day they were conceived. Many modern ideas are simply passing fads,some dangerous , some of which caused much unnessesary loss of life during the fastnet race and others. An example is the way masts tend to move fore and aft in 20 year cycles with the claim that nothing else will work but the current trend. Another example is the way americas cup boats absolutely had to have bendy masts, nothing else would work , until the Kiwis went out on the course with a super stiff mast and kicked ass. Those who had spent millions on bendy masts were made to look like gullible fools. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr" wrote: > One minor point Brent, we are not talking about bigger boats, just longer > ones. I mostly agree with your other points. > > I do agree with you about the need for moderation in the design process > neither going to wide or too narrow, not going too long or too short. I > agree that two narrow a boat won't stand to its rig (that is one of my > critiques of the LB37) and too wide a boat will have an uncomfortable motion > and poor limits of positive stability. Of course the trick is to define what > moderate it and as designers we each seem to have our own theories on that > point. > > I also agree that traditional plumb stemmed boats tended to pitch a lot, but > I disagree with you on the physics. Plumb bowed traditional water craft do > not hobby horse because they are plumb stemmed and had no reserve bouyancy > forward, but quite the opposite. Traditional plumb stem boats tend to carry > a very large amount of fullness just above the waterline so that even a > small chop can exert a lot of lifting force at the bow. Their more balanced > ends ment that there was very little dampening in the stern until the > reserve buoyancy in the stern became emersed and quickly reversed the > pitching direction. The pitching problem was generally compounded by their > heavy hull, weight carried in the ends, and heavy rigs which greatly added > to their pitch moments of inertia. > > Respectfully, > Jeff | 3403|3370|2004-04-02 17:57:49|brentswain38|Re: new 37' design|The waterline beam is a bit narrow. Taking some of the flare out of the topsides below the rubrail will add a lot of stability. Just calculate it's added buoyancy and distance from the centreline, and thus it's effect on righting moment. More underwater hull volume under the front of the cockpit can enhance hull balance by moving the centre of buoyancy and thus the weight of the boat aft, making it easier to achieve the same centre of buoyancy in a heeled boat as upright. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > Given the volume of replies on this forum, the LB37 to seems to have generated a fair amount of interest. Lots of good ideas. I've posted some changes to the lines to incorporate what I've heard: > > http://www.origamimagic.com/Design/LB37/LB37.htm > > One question came up about the high sheer. We decided to raise the sheer on this boat rather than raise the cabin because one thing I've heard consistently from female cruisers over the years is that they don't like low decks. The boat is made to be trailerable, so we are minimizing the fixed ballast, and going with extra large tanks under the floors to provide some measure of removable ballast. Full, the tanks will carry about 2 tons of fuel and water. > > A couple of questions for the group: > > 1. > > The LB37 beam at the WL is 8' 9 1/2, on 31' 8" WL. The LB37 is 10' 2 on deck and 36' 6" overall, which allows room for 2" rub rails each side. (The maximum beam allowed is 10' 6 by law.) Is this an excessively narrow beam for the length of boat? It seems perhaps a little narrow, but not excessive. And if so wouldn't this mean the boat should not be lengthened? > > 2. > > The width of the stern cannot be narrowed further as a means of balancing the boat. Are there any obvious improvements that could be made to the lines to improve the dynamic balance of the boat, consistent with the other restrictions on the design? > > thanks again, > > Greg Elliott > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3404|3394|2004-04-02 18:53:01|brentswain38|Re: Interesting approach to the weight problem|A 35 gallon a day watermaker would have to be run an hour to make a gallon and a half of water and another hour to make enough to flush it properly, which is why they never get flushed enough and break down early.Friends have been using pressure washer pumps (general tt9111 , 3 gpm) and 2 1/2 inch sch 40 stainless pipe to make their own 540 gallon per day watermakers for under $1,000 CDN . I've included this watermaker in the latest edition of my book.This produces a much tougher watermaker than the comercial ones .There is a huge market out there for people who simply want to buy the works off the shelf . Good luck Gary. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gary H. Lucas" wrote: > I've just started a new job. I'm now building and designing RO units. Ours > are a little bigger than the typical boat ones though. 20 gallons a minute, > rather than 20 to 100 gallons per day! I'm learning all about how these > things operate though, and I have good access to the membranes too, if I > ever get a boat built. > > Gary H. Lucas > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "bubblede" > To: > Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2004 4:08 PM > Subject: [origamiboats] Interesting approach to the weight problem > > > > as on smaller boats drinking water adds a lot of payload, you might > > be interested in this new product that radically solves the problem: > > http://store.proline.com/dewa.html > > > > ;-) > > > > Gerd > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > | 3405|3394|2004-04-02 21:41:02|Gary H. Lucas|Re: Interesting approach to the weight problem|We just built a system with a pair of those CAT pressure washer pumps, only these are 50 HP each! For anyone that is interested, I will look into what I can buy the membranes for. Gary H. Lucas ----- Original Message ----- From: "brentswain38" To: Sent: Friday, April 02, 2004 5:42 PM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Interesting approach to the weight problem > A 35 gallon a day watermaker would have to be run an hour to make a > gallon and a half of water and another hour to make enough to flush > it properly, which is why they never get flushed enough and break > down early.Friends have been using pressure washer pumps (general > tt9111 , 3 gpm) and 2 1/2 inch sch 40 stainless pipe to make their > own 540 gallon per day watermakers for under $1,000 CDN . I've > included this watermaker in the latest edition of my book.This > produces a much tougher watermaker than the comercial ones .There is > a huge market out there for people who simply want to buy the works > off the shelf . Good luck Gary. > Brent Swain > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gary H. Lucas" > wrote: > > I've just started a new job. I'm now building and designing RO > units. Ours > > are a little bigger than the typical boat ones though. 20 gallons > a minute, > > rather than 20 to 100 gallons per day! I'm learning all about how > these > > things operate though, and I have good access to the membranes too, > if I > > ever get a boat built. > > > > Gary H. Lucas > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "bubblede" > > To: > > Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2004 4:08 PM > > Subject: [origamiboats] Interesting approach to the weight problem > > > > > > > as on smaller boats drinking water adds a lot of payload, you > might > > > be interested in this new product that radically solves the > problem: > > > http://store.proline.com/dewa.html > > > > > > ;-) > > > > > > Gerd > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > | 3406|2555|2004-04-02 22:05:50|ORAN & BARBARA MARKSBURY|RO Watermakers|I believe "Good Old Boats" magazine had an article on making your own RO watermaker, Check the last couple of years issues. >From: "Gary H. Lucas" >Reply-To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com >To: >Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: Interesting approach to the weight problem >Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2004 20:37:53 -0500 > >We just built a system with a pair of those CAT pressure washer pumps, only >these are 50 HP each! > >For anyone that is interested, I will look into what I can buy the >membranes >for. _________________________________________________________________ Tax headache? MSN Money provides relief with tax tips, tools, IRS forms and more! http://moneycentral.msn.com/tax/workshop/welcome.asp| 3407|3394|2004-04-03 00:02:53|Len den Besten|building my own watermaker (was: weight problem)|Hi Gary, I'm planning to build my own so I am very interested. I am thinking about a pump, belt-driven from a 60hp diesel so I could choose a healthy x00 gallons a day system that flushes properley. I would like to hear about prices for membranes and pump. I'm also looking for a type of clutch that enables me to let the pump run or stop it while the engine is running. Maybe a type of adjustable wheel to tighten the belt? Len. --- "Gary H. Lucas" wrote: > We just built a system with a pair of those CAT > pressure washer pumps, only > these are 50 HP each! > > For anyone that is interested, I will look into what > I can buy the membranes > for. > > Gary H. Lucas > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "brentswain38" > To: > Sent: Friday, April 02, 2004 5:42 PM > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Interesting approach to > the weight problem > > > > A 35 gallon a day watermaker would have to be run > an hour to make a > > gallon and a half of water and another hour to > make enough to flush > > it properly, which is why they never get flushed > enough and break > > down early.Friends have been using pressure washer > pumps (general > > tt9111 , 3 gpm) and 2 1/2 inch sch 40 stainless > pipe to make their > > own 540 gallon per day watermakers for under > $1,000 CDN . I've > > included this watermaker in the latest edition of > my book.This > > produces a much tougher watermaker than the > comercial ones .There is > > a huge market out there for people who simply want > to buy the works > > off the shelf . Good luck Gary. > > Brent Swain > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gary H. > Lucas" > > wrote: > > > I've just started a new job. I'm now building > and designing RO > > units. Ours > > > are a little bigger than the typical boat ones > though. 20 gallons > > a minute, > > > rather than 20 to 100 gallons per day! I'm > learning all about how > > these > > > things operate though, and I have good access to > the membranes too, > > if I > > > ever get a boat built. > > > > > > Gary H. Lucas > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "bubblede" > > > To: > > > Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2004 4:08 PM > > > Subject: [origamiboats] Interesting approach to > the weight problem > > > > > > > > > > as on smaller boats drinking water adds a lot > of payload, you > > might > > > > be interested in this new product that > radically solves the > > problem: > > > > http://store.proline.com/dewa.html > > > > > > > > ;-) > > > > > > > > Gerd > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: > origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > > > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: > origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business $15K Web Design Giveaway http://promotions.yahoo.com/design_giveaway/| 3408|3394|2004-04-03 06:44:09|Graeme|Re: Interesting approach to the weight problem|Gary I would be interested in a membrane for building a water maker as even though Gerds idea was great, I really do not think it will catch on Regards Graeme -----Original Message----- From: Gary H. Lucas [mailto:gary.lucas@...] Sent: Saturday, 3 April 2004 9:38 AM To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: Interesting approach to the weight problem We just built a system with a pair of those CAT pressure washer pumps, only these are 50 HP each! For anyone that is interested, I will look into what I can buy the membranes for. Gary H. Lucas ----- Original Message ----- From: "brentswain38" To: Sent: Friday, April 02, 2004 5:42 PM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Interesting approach to the weight problem > A 35 gallon a day watermaker would have to be run an hour to make a > gallon and a half of water and another hour to make enough to flush > it properly, which is why they never get flushed enough and break > down early.Friends have been using pressure washer pumps (general > tt9111 , 3 gpm) and 2 1/2 inch sch 40 stainless pipe to make their > own 540 gallon per day watermakers for under $1,000 CDN . I've > included this watermaker in the latest edition of my book.This > produces a much tougher watermaker than the comercial ones .There is > a huge market out there for people who simply want to buy the works > off the shelf . Good luck Gary. > Brent Swain > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gary H. Lucas" > wrote: > > I've just started a new job. I'm now building and designing RO > units. Ours > > are a little bigger than the typical boat ones though. 20 gallons > a minute, > > rather than 20 to 100 gallons per day! I'm learning all about how > these > > things operate though, and I have good access to the membranes too, > if I > > ever get a boat built. > > > > Gary H. Lucas > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "bubblede" > > To: > > Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2004 4:08 PM > > Subject: [origamiboats] Interesting approach to the weight problem > > > > > > > as on smaller boats drinking water adds a lot of payload, you > might > > > be interested in this new product that radically solves the > problem: > > > http://store.proline.com/dewa.html > > > > > > ;-) > > > > > > Gerd > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links | 3409|3370|2004-04-03 10:00:34|Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr|Re: new 37' design|Brent: How can you say; "Traditional ,Colin Archer type boats don't have much of reserve buoyancy above the waterline by any stretch of the imagination and are notorious for hobby horseing. The Perry designed double enders of the early 80's had a lot of reserve buoyancy above the waterline aft to stop this tendency to hobbyhorse.Unfortunatly they had clipper bows to stop the boat when encountering a headsea. Traditionally, colin archers had gaff rigs which, while heavy, were low and close to the water..." Have you ever actually seen a Colin Archer design or the lines for one? One of the distinguishing features of Archer's designs were thier 'apple cheek' bows which were spoon bows (BTW I would not call them a plumb bow in the same sense as the New England catboats or English cutters which did have plumb bows) that had enormous fullness just above the static waterline that continued right up to the deck level. And while the original Colin Archers had gaff rigs, they almost always shipped tall topmasts to carry their gaff topsails and fore top jibs. Since the spars were typically pole (rather than hollow) and made of pine, using wrought iron fittings, these were extremely heavy spars carried high aloft. The same for Perry's designs. I have seen an aweful lot of Bob Perry's designs and I cannot remember a single clipper bow or even a hollow entry in the bunch. As to clipper bows "clipper bows to stop the boat when encountering a headsea." while Perry's designs did not carry clipper bows, one of the promenient theories about the widespead adaptation of the clipper bow to nineteenth century Chesapeake working craft was that its popularity resulted from a clipper bow advantages in a headsea, because as Chesapeake working craft were quick to develop fore and aft rigs due to the need to beat into head winds and seas, the clipper bow with its easier time in a headsea became the prominent bow type. Jeff ----- Original Message ----- From: "brentswain38" To: Sent: Friday, April 02, 2004 5:25 PM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: new 37' design > As the Spencer 35 of the late 60's had 9ft 6inch beam and modern > boats have 11ft 6 inch beam, 10 ft 6 inch beam is in the midddle , > and thus moderate . > Traditional ,colin archer type boats don't have much of reserve > buoyancy above the waterline by any stretch of the imagination and > are notorious for hobby horseing. The perry designed double enders of > the early 80's had a lot of reserve buoyancy above the waterline aft > to stop this tendency to hobbyhorse.Unfortunatly they had clipper > bows to stop the boat when encountering a headsea. > Traditionally, colin archers had gaff rigs which, while heavy, were > low and close to the water, minimuising their effect on pitching , > altho the lack of inertia made them prone to rolling over. > As I mention in my book one must be careful to avoid getting ones > mind locked into all that is traditional or all that is modern as > there are good and bad ideas in both areas . Many traditional ideas > always were bad and there are many which are as valid as the day they > were conceived. Many modern ideas are simply passing fads,some > dangerous , some of which caused much unnessesary loss of life during > the fastnet race and others. > An example is the way masts tend to move fore and aft in 20 year > cycles with the claim that nothing else will work but the current > trend. > Another example is the way americas cup boats absolutely had to > have bendy masts, nothing else would work , until the Kiwis went out > on the course with a super stiff mast and kicked ass. Those who had > spent millions on bendy masts were made to look like gullible fools. > Brent Swain > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr" > wrote: > > One minor point Brent, we are not talking about bigger boats, just > longer > > ones. I mostly agree with your other points. > > > > I do agree with you about the need for moderation in the design > process > > neither going to wide or too narrow, not going too long or too > short. I > > agree that two narrow a boat won't stand to its rig (that is one of > my > > critiques of the LB37) and too wide a boat will have an > uncomfortable motion > > and poor limits of positive stability. Of course the trick is to > define what > > moderate it and as designers we each seem to have our own theories > on that > > point. > > > > I also agree that traditional plumb stemmed boats tended to pitch a > lot, but > > I disagree with you on the physics. Plumb bowed traditional water > craft do > > not hobby horse because they are plumb stemmed and had no reserve > bouyancy > > forward, but quite the opposite. Traditional plumb stem boats tend > to carry > > a very large amount of fullness just above the waterline so that > even a > > small chop can exert a lot of lifting force at the bow. Their more > balanced > > ends ment that there was very little dampening in the stern until > the > > reserve buoyancy in the stern became emersed and quickly reversed > the > > pitching direction. The pitching problem was generally compounded > by their > > heavy hull, weight carried in the ends, and heavy rigs which > greatly added > > to their pitch moments of inertia. > > > > Respectfully, > > Jeff > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3410|3370|2004-04-03 16:06:14|brentswain38|Re: new 37' design|Westsails and Ingrids were derived from Colin Archer designs and neither had much reserve buoyancy above the waterline in the ends.Even some of their owners say they will almost hobby horse you out of the cockpit, the pitching is so bad. Clipper bows work well only on large enough ships. On smaller craft they plunge into a swell with little resistance until the buoyancy builds up suddenly near deck level, and they stop dead. While crossing Georgia Strait on BC ferries I can watch boats hit the ferry wake . The ones with the clipper bows stop almost dead in their tracks when they hit the wake , but ones with more reserve buoyancy foreward barely slow down.Adding three inches of fullness to the bow in my current boat ,compared with my last one ,has made a huge improvement when dealing with headseas.I barely feel headseas which would have nearly stopped my last boat. Top masts were light air only spars and tended to be light and springy. The heavier stuff was always much further down. The Chesapeake is largely flat , shallow ,protected water, free of ocean swells. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr" wrote: > Brent: > > How can you say; > "Traditional ,Colin Archer type boats don't have much of reserve > buoyancy above the waterline by any stretch of the imagination and > are notorious for hobby horseing. The Perry designed double enders of > the early 80's had a lot of reserve buoyancy above the waterline aft > to stop this tendency to hobbyhorse.Unfortunatly they had clipper > bows to stop the boat when encountering a headsea. > Traditionally, colin archers had gaff rigs which, while heavy, were > low and close to the water..." > > Have you ever actually seen a Colin Archer design or the lines for one? One of the distinguishing features of Archer's designs were thier 'apple cheek' bows which were spoon bows (BTW I would not call them a plumb bow in the same sense as the New England catboats or English cutters which did have plumb bows) that had enormous fullness just above the static waterline that continued right up to the deck level. And while the original Colin Archers had gaff rigs, they almost always shipped tall topmasts to carry their gaff topsails and fore top jibs. Since the spars were typically pole (rather than hollow) and made of pine, using wrought iron fittings, these were extremely heavy spars carried high aloft. > > The same for Perry's designs. I have seen an aweful lot of Bob Perry's designs and I cannot remember a single clipper bow or even a hollow entry in the bunch. > > As to clipper bows "clipper bows to stop the boat when encountering a headsea." while Perry's designs did not carry clipper bows, one of the promenient theories about the widespead adaptation of the clipper bow to nineteenth century Chesapeake working craft was that its popularity resulted from a clipper bow advantages in a headsea, because as Chesapeake working craft were quick to develop fore and aft rigs due to the need to beat into head winds and seas, the clipper bow with its easier time in a headsea became the prominent bow type. > > Jeff > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "brentswain38" > To: > Sent: Friday, April 02, 2004 5:25 PM > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: new 37' design > > > > As the Spencer 35 of the late 60's had 9ft 6inch beam and modern > > boats have 11ft 6 inch beam, 10 ft 6 inch beam is in the midddle , > > and thus moderate . > > Traditional ,colin archer type boats don't have much of reserve > > buoyancy above the waterline by any stretch of the imagination and > > are notorious for hobby horseing. The perry designed double enders of > > the early 80's had a lot of reserve buoyancy above the waterline aft > > to stop this tendency to hobbyhorse.Unfortunatly they had clipper > > bows to stop the boat when encountering a headsea. > > Traditionally, colin archers had gaff rigs which, while heavy, were > > low and close to the water, minimuising their effect on pitching , > > altho the lack of inertia made them prone to rolling over. > > As I mention in my book one must be careful to avoid getting ones > > mind locked into all that is traditional or all that is modern as > > there are good and bad ideas in both areas . Many traditional ideas > > always were bad and there are many which are as valid as the day they > > were conceived. Many modern ideas are simply passing fads,some > > dangerous , some of which caused much unnessesary loss of life during > > the fastnet race and others. > > An example is the way masts tend to move fore and aft in 20 year > > cycles with the claim that nothing else will work but the current > > trend. > > Another example is the way americas cup boats absolutely had to > > have bendy masts, nothing else would work , until the Kiwis went out > > on the course with a super stiff mast and kicked ass. Those who had > > spent millions on bendy masts were made to look like gullible fools. > > Brent Swain > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr" > > wrote: > > > One minor point Brent, we are not talking about bigger boats, just > > longer > > > ones. I mostly agree with your other points. > > > > > > I do agree with you about the need for moderation in the design > > process > > > neither going to wide or too narrow, not going too long or too > > short. I > > > agree that two narrow a boat won't stand to its rig (that is one of > > my > > > critiques of the LB37) and too wide a boat will have an > > uncomfortable motion > > > and poor limits of positive stability. Of course the trick is to > > define what > > > moderate it and as designers we each seem to have our own theories > > on that > > > point. > > > > > > I also agree that traditional plumb stemmed boats tended to pitch a > > lot, but > > > I disagree with you on the physics. Plumb bowed traditional water > > craft do > > > not hobby horse because they are plumb stemmed and had no reserve > > bouyancy > > > forward, but quite the opposite. Traditional plumb stem boats tend > > to carry > > > a very large amount of fullness just above the waterline so that > > even a > > > small chop can exert a lot of lifting force at the bow. Their more > > balanced > > > ends ment that there was very little dampening in the stern until > > the > > > reserve buoyancy in the stern became emersed and quickly reversed > > the > > > pitching direction. The pitching problem was generally compounded > > by their > > > heavy hull, weight carried in the ends, and heavy rigs which > > greatly added > > > to their pitch moments of inertia. > > > > > > Respectfully, > > > Jeff > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3411|3411|2004-04-03 17:09:54|Ronald|a little help needed|Hi all I do need a design for a beamy boat , lot of space for 4+ 3 kids to sail and as a liveabord for about 5 to 6 years who knows about gaff or maybe junk sail lenght 40 to 43| 3412|3394|2004-04-03 23:11:28|Stan Kuczynski|Reference artical on building a watermaker|This artical might be of interest to anyone building a water maker. The artical can be found in a back issue of Good old boat (www.goodoldboat.com) January/Febuary 2003 Issue 28 Build your own water maker by Guy Stevens although this unit will not produce the 500 gal a day as stated below,there is an excellent diagram of laying out a water maker to see how they operate in general and discuess where to purchase pieces parts, Hey every little artical helps. Good luck Stan Kuczynski Orlando Florida. --- "Gary H. Lucas" wrote: > We just built a system with a pair of those CAT > pressure washer pumps, only > these are 50 HP each! > > For anyone that is interested, I will look into what > I can buy the membranes > for. > > Gary H. Lucas > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "brentswain38" > To: > Sent: Friday, April 02, 2004 5:42 PM > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Interesting approach to > the weight problem > > > > A 35 gallon a day watermaker would have to be run > an hour to make a > > gallon and a half of water and another hour to > make enough to flush > > it properly, which is why they never get flushed > enough and break > > down early.Friends have been using pressure washer > pumps (general > > tt9111 , 3 gpm) and 2 1/2 inch sch 40 stainless > pipe to make their > > own 540 gallon per day watermakers for under > $1,000 CDN . I've > > included this watermaker in the latest edition of > my book.This > > produces a much tougher watermaker than the > comercial ones .There is > > a huge market out there for people who simply want > to buy the works > > off the shelf . Good luck Gary. > > Brent Swain > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gary H. > Lucas" > > wrote: > > > I've just started a new job. I'm now building > and designing RO > > units. Ours > > > are a little bigger than the typical boat ones > though. 20 gallons > > a minute, > > > rather than 20 to 100 gallons per day! I'm > learning all about how > > these > > > things operate though, and I have good access to > the membranes too, > > if I > > > ever get a boat built. > > > > > > Gary H. Lucas > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "bubblede" > > > To: > > > Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2004 4:08 PM > > > Subject: [origamiboats] Interesting approach to > the weight problem > > > > > > > > > > as on smaller boats drinking water adds a lot > of payload, you > > might > > > > be interested in this new product that > radically solves the > > problem: > > > > http://store.proline.com/dewa.html > > > > > > > > ;-) > > > > > > > > Gerd > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: > origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > > > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: > origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ===== Happy Holidays Stan Kuczynski P.S. Remember Don't ever Lie-Cheat- or steal. Your Government hates compatition __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business $15K Web Design Giveaway http://promotions.yahoo.com/design_giveaway/| 3413|3411|2004-04-03 23:20:21|Stan Kuczynski|Re: a little help needed|Hi ron Get a copy of the Gaff rig handbook through Amozone books,about 24 bucks. read through the first couple chapters to learn about gaff rigs then if you thumb through the last 2/3 of the book it talks about gaff rigging on particular size boats, for instance I have a small 24 foot boat that I am converting to gaff rigg. there is a boat refered to in the back chapters around 28 foot. close enough for me to read about that particular boat and apply what it said to mine. The gaff rig hand book is the athoritative book on the subject. also go to www.classicboat.co.uk its a british mag I get regularly beautyful boats and these chaps know there stuff. You can purchase the mag at a better book store chandlery good luck Stan --- Ronald wrote: > Hi all > I do need a design > for a beamy boat , lot of space > for 4+ 3 kids to sail and > as a liveabord for > about 5 to 6 years > > who knows about > gaff or maybe junk sail > > lenght 40 to 43 > > > ===== Happy Holidays Stan Kuczynski P.S. Remember Don't ever Lie-Cheat- or steal. Your Government hates compatition __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business $15K Web Design Giveaway http://promotions.yahoo.com/design_giveaway/| 3414|3370|2004-04-04 00:34:43|Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr|Re: new 37' design|Brent: You are partially correct that the Westsails were a development of the Atkins Eric, which like the Atkins Ingrid were yachted up developments of the Colin Archer types. As such the Atkin's types are generally considerably finer than the boats that were actually drawn by Colin Archer. If you had said that the Atkins traditional double enders lacked much reserve buoyancy in the bow, I would understand where you are coming from in that compared to a Archer design they lacked reserve buoyancy forward, but compared to almost any normal design these boats had very full lines above the waterline forward. That said, these fiberglass interpretations do have a tendancy to hobby horse quite mercilessly. You are mistaken that topmasts were only carried in light air. While the gaff topsail was only carried in light to moderate conditions, the Colin Archer rescue and pilot boat carried their top masts throughout much of the year in light air and in heavy. Unlike the light weight topmasts that one associates with racing gaff riggers of that era, the telephone poles used as topmasts were anything but light and springy. The upper Chesapeake is all of things that you suggest, but it is plagued with a short chop and prevaling winds that made beating into that chop a frequent necessity. As a result, the working craft, both large and small were generally quite weatherly for their era, and also carried and developed the clipper bow. Properly designed a clipper bow should and does do very well into a headsea. BUT there is the rub, there are a lot of poorly designed boats with clipper bows and I agree with you that a poorly designed boat with a clipper bow could tend to hobby horse. Respectfully, Jeff| 3415|3411|2004-04-04 05:28:28|denis buggy|Re: a little help needed|dear Ronald the best solution seems to be a steel cat it can survive a some collisions with solid objects and is the cheapest and strongest building material however there are almost no examples to study and learn from except Bowden boats Australia. regards denis buggy ----- Original Message ----- From: Ronald To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, April 03, 2004 11:09 PM Subject: [origamiboats] a little help needed Hi all I do need a design for a beamy boat , lot of space for 4+ 3 kids to sail and as a liveabord for about 5 to 6 years who knows about gaff or maybe junk sail lenght 40 to 43 To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3416|3411|2004-04-04 07:18:59|bubblede|Re: a little help needed|Hi Ronald Can you give us some more info about what you are planning? Where to go at what time and so on? Also: What sort of sailing experience do you have, what type of boats you already sailed on and where? In case you have little or no prior experience: there is a lot of advice here in the group, look though the archieves, and if you want to go for steel, Origami is worth looking at. Gaff is interesting, I am preparing a gaff-project for myself at the moment, and some years ago we built a 10 m junk in France, not very convincing, the owner later changed to marconi... The single most important advice I would give, is that you should not go for ANY design, whatever people tell you or whatever you have read in books, until you have sailed different types of boats, older styles, modern boats, why not catamaran too. Going for 3 or 4 times 1 week as skippered charter guest on blue- water trips, choosing difficult and extreme areas rather than carribean bar-hopping, different boats, will give you the best possible background, and costs nothing compared to the project of a 40 foter. Most likely you will SAVE money like that. I really believe that starting such a big project that will determine your family's life for many years to come requires to make responsible choices based on first hand knowledge - choosing the wrong boat is terrible and can make your life quite miserable, without ever being able to admit it to yourself. Believe me, 99 % of unexperienced first time builders tell you that their boat is the best design ever, and they can't ALL be right, can they? ;-) Gerd http://www.justmueller.com/boats/| 3417|3370|2004-04-04 12:51:35|info@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: new 37' design - max beam|17000 lbs is wet weight, with tons of reserve for cruising. Dry weight around 11000 lbs. Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com I think that you will have a very tough time convincing anyone that a 17,000 lb boat is 'trailerable'. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3418|3370|2004-04-04 12:51:56|info@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: new 37' design|Hydrostatic analysis of the hull shows less than 1 degree change in trim to 30 degrees of heel. Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com The best way to avoid this is to work out the centre of buoyancy of a boat heeled at 30 degrees, and modify the lines until it stays where it was when the boat was upright . [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3419|3370|2004-04-04 13:28:11|Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr|Re: new 37' design - max beam|Even at 11,000 lbs dry that is not exactly a "trailerable" boat by any normal definition, and with the weight of the trailer and tow vehicle, it would still mean that the driver would need a special permit and truck driver's license in most states. At that point you can go to 12 feet of width in most states without needing an escort vehicle. At least that was how it was when I researched this last time. Jeff| 3420|3420|2004-04-04 18:21:52|sharadsharma@setarnet.aw|Water maker|guys a site for water maker http://www.rutuonline.com/html/watermaker.html| 3421|3370|2004-04-04 21:29:07|info@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: new 37' design - max beam|5th wheel RV hitches from 15,000 - 30,000 lbs are common. Easily capable of handling the weight of the boat plus a trailer. http://www.hitchcorner.com/fifth-wheel-hitch.htm http://www.airridehitch.com/fifth_wheel.htm http://www.etrailer.com/Merchant2/merchant.mv?Screen=CTGY&Store_Code=E&Category_Code=5WH Given the number of fossils on the road towing huge 5th wheel's, 11,000 lbs is well within the range of normal. Greg Elliott http://www.origaimagic.com Even at 11,000 lbs dry that is not exactly a "trailerable" boat by any normal definition [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3422|3411|2004-04-06 10:53:54|Ronald|Re: a little help needed|Well I'm in some days 48 started sailing with 8 with Dad and Mom sailed on lakes and then with a group of ten on a big wooden Colin Archer style round Britain, Irlelan, to Norway and Baltic sea all holidays. On a plastic Benetau I don't like to remember to Teneriffe, cape Verde Ceylon and India with 20 ......with a good friend, he is still living there. I did build a plywood day-cruiser Gaff rigged did run money for my studies to bring yachts from the south of France to the US, and California. I do Like to build a boat for me and my family to sail and to live on we have sailed 10 years ago for 3 years on a steel ketch, it was not mine but free the owner is no working in Dubai. I'm not the best sailor on the Ocean but sailed even a junk rigged clssic junk from Vietnam to US living on this part of French Ocean where with the vendee globe the high tech mast brake down !! So I ve sailed a lot and still do but I do want to build something different and was Hasler did was not wrong at all why not a junk in origami ?? It's my idea not a Roberts Spray with junk no something that has the typical look I dont like a copy of and all the day copy of a racer not a Caravan on water eg Cat !! --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "bubblede" wrote: > Hi Ronald > > Can you give us some more info about what you are planning? > Where to go at what time and so on? > > Also: > What sort of sailing experience do you have, what type of boats you > already sailed on and where? > > In case you have little or no prior experience: there is a lot of > advice here in the group, look though the archieves, and if you want > to go for steel, Origami is worth looking at. > > Gaff is interesting, I am preparing a gaff-project for myself at the > moment, and some years ago we built a 10 m junk in France, not very > convincing, the owner later changed to marconi... > > The single most important advice I would give, is that you should > not go for ANY design, whatever people tell you or whatever you have > read in books, until you have sailed different types of boats, older > styles, modern boats, why not catamaran too. > > Going for 3 or 4 times 1 week as skippered charter guest on blue- > water trips, choosing difficult and extreme areas rather than > carribean bar-hopping, different boats, will give you the best > possible background, and costs nothing compared to the project of a > 40 foter. Most likely you will SAVE money like that. > > I really believe that starting such a big project that will > determine your family's life for many years to come requires to make > responsible choices based on first hand knowledge - choosing the > wrong boat is terrible and can make your life quite miserable, > without ever being able to admit it to yourself. Believe me, 99 % of > unexperienced first time builders tell you that their boat is the > best design ever, and they can't ALL be right, can they? ;-) > > > Gerd > http://www.justmueller.com/boats/ | 3423|3411|2004-04-06 18:38:21|bubblede|Re: a little help needed|Well, Ronald, in that case, toute mes excuses, with your experience you probably know quite well what you want and why. Actually it might be very interesting to all of us to find out what are your personal creteria for you next boat - I had also a look at your member page, and saw the picture - is that the type of boat your are looking for? Seems very heavvy to me... Are you in France? I lived there for a good dozen years, in La Rochelle... All the best from Budapest Gerd PS I already posted a reply a couple of hours ago, but it did not appear on the site - should this be a double, I am sorry ;-)| 3424|3411|2004-04-07 05:18:12|bubblede|Re: a little help needed|Well, Ron in that case, toute mes excuses, you probably don't need any help to decide what kind of boat you like. Rather it would be interesting for us all to know what sort of criteria are important to you, based on your extensive experience. Checked out your member page and saw the picture there - is that the sort of boat you're after? Looks terribly heavy to me... seems like you might lead us into another long row of heavy / light discussions ;-) Are you in France? All the best from Budapest Gerd| 3425|3411|2004-04-07 14:07:06|dreemer1962|Re: a little help needed|Thomas Colvin designed number of junks, most of them in steel: http://www.thomasecolvin.com/ Milan --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Ronald" wrote: > Hi all > I do need a design > for a beamy boat , lot of space > for 4+ 3 kids to sail and > as a liveabord for > about 5 to 6 years > > who knows about > gaff or maybe junk sail > > lenght 40 to 43 | 3426|3411|2004-04-07 14:11:49|Ronald|Re: a little help needed|well that boat looks heavy but single hard chined it's not as veavy as a 43 or 45 Colin Archer we want to sail of course and if not sailing permanent live on as we like to buy ..where still a bit a secret a very small home to have a tax etc residence we like to have and sorry for that our 250 CD music with us a small stereo I've the Rogers Ls 3/5 a and a single bass binn very small hight tech amps DIY a small AMD DIY Computer motherbord big as a 3"5 hard disk and two PCI a washer/dryer electricity like on the rutoonline... freezer/fridge as I can use my 3KW, 3KW or %KW permant converting cpomputer UPS as inverter and take the generator of my big Honda cooking and all will be electric I do hate gas on a monohull dont like parafin a wallas diesel has to have an chiney outside, modern electric cookers are working painless for 10 years and 120 0r 230 Micowave and so on are cheap halogene is already 12 V so what on a motorhome goes can go cheaply on a bot only the compressor for the fridge is a special one to heel with us. I like to have my tools with me our sewing machine like a sailrite but a singer pro its a flaoting home, a sailing home but not a cat, a heavy boat for me has been the best up to day in bad weather..... have in worst case a sea ancre, a tiny storm sail and life west on but downstairs, have done this when the 2000/2001 storm went over Europe blowing cars and forest away where we live electrity was gone for 12 days we have been on water only 300 miles offshore was a nigtmare but ... with our house only some tiles broken all are fixed an some hundret squre meters with stainless screww. the roof of our barn 12x20 meter was gone all but small trees gone a van from the only neighbor landet on our ground our cars have been in the basement never befor but was the best to do we have been away on a beamy dep drawing colin archer style steel bat a ketch........ so far It has to be comfortable not fast as it does not go with not heeling as in the magazines no vendee globe and if in steel why not origami ?? --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "bubblede" wrote: > Well, Ron in that case, toute mes excuses, you probably don't need > any help to decide what kind of boat you like. Rather it would be > interesting for us all to know what sort of criteria are important > to you, based on your extensive experience. > > Checked out your member page and saw the picture there - is that the > sort of boat you're after? Looks terribly heavy to me... seems like > you might lead us into another long row of heavy / light > discussions ;-) > > Are you in France? > > All the best from Budapest > Gerd | 3427|3411|2004-04-07 16:50:47|bubblede|Re: a little help needed|...quite a program! hope you will keep us posted as things get clearer ;-) Gerd| 3428|2452|2004-04-09 20:21:45|Henri Naths|welding rods|Hi all; I usually use 7014 with my ac welder but haven't welded anything for a couple of years with it. I was convinced , rather reluctantly by the salesman at Air liquide to try this new ac 7018 rod and well " hallauyah" it's a miracle you don't need a dc machine anymore, you could practicly do the same with an ac machine and this rod. For those who haven't heard about it, it has an exictier in the flux, "La Excelarc 18 (lot # 390915e3 certified by cwb w48.1 conforms to aws a5.1) blueshield tm, Air Liquide. Keep dry and a rod oven would be a good idea. Good luck. Henri [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3429|3429|2004-04-09 21:02:44|Gerald Niffenegger|Building a steel mast|I did a subject search and came up dry. I am interested in building a steel mast for a 36' steel Multichine. It is my understanding that there has been some work done along these lines, by some of the members here. Any information would be appreciated. Gerald Niffenegger Florianopolis, SC Brasil| 3430|3430|2004-04-09 21:52:19|Dave|looking for pre-blasted primed steel|Hi all, I'm a newbee to this site and large boatbuilding in general and am just getting started on a 38 foot George Buehler steel boat. I was going to use non blasted steel and have it done later but after reading some of the other posts on this site I am investigating pre blasted primed. I live way out in the sticks, and the steel yards in my town don't cary it so I think I would like to get a big material list together and order it. I am in Alaska so I would probably need to find a source in Washington, or maybe B.C. if it is possible for Americans to order there for export... Any suggestions? Thanks! Dave| 3431|3431|2004-04-10 13:12:44|info@easysoftwareinc.com|new design|Some study plans added to the end of this page http://www.origamimagic.com/Design/LB37/LB37.htm Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3432|3429|2004-04-10 14:31:31|put_to_sea|Re: Building a steel mast|The best all around steel boat building book I have found Colvin's Steel Boat Building. It has a section on steel masts. I think Colvin's and Brent's books are about all you need for putting together the steel work. Amos --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gerald Niffenegger" wrote: > I did a subject search and came up dry. I am interested in building a > steel mast for a 36' steel Multichine. It is my understanding that > there has been some work done along these lines, by some of the > members here. Any information would be appreciated. > Gerald Niffenegger > Florianopolis, SC Brasil | 3433|3431|2004-04-10 14:42:52|bubblede|Re: new design|Do I see that right - you will open all darts from the bottom, no vertical cut from the sheer like on the G55? if so - any particular reason? (...always trying go guess some secrets... ;-) ) Gerd > Some study plans added to the end of this page > > http://www.origamimagic.com/Design/LB37/LB37.htm | 3434|3429|2004-04-10 15:01:00|bubblede|Re: Building a steel mast|...work, I don't know, but we sure produced a lot of heated discussions here last month on that ;-) you should also have a look at Dudley Dix page his reasons for proposing steelmasts: http://dixdesign.com/FAQsteel.htm Gerd --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gerald Niffenegger" wrote: > I did a subject search and came up dry. I am interested in building a > steel mast for a 36' steel Multichine. It is my understanding that > there has been some work done along these lines, by some of the > members here. Any information would be appreciated. > Gerald Niffenegger > Florianopolis, SC Brasil | 3435|3431|2004-04-10 15:39:39|info@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: new design|No secret. These are building issues being reflected in the pattern. We were trying some new things in the G55, especially in the bow, so we were purposely cautious in the assembly. These techniques are now proven and we are taking advantage of this in the LB37 to optimize assembly. Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com ---- Original Message ----- Do I see that right - you will open all darts from the bottom, no vertical cut from the sheer like on the G55? if so - any particular reason? > Some study plans added to the end of this page > > http://www.origamimagic.com/Design/LB37/LB37.htm [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3436|3431|2004-04-10 16:06:54|Carl Nostrand|Re: new design|I've total enjoyed this discussion about this handy size near shore vessel. Great job everyone! Very cool process. Going on the hard with a glass or wood boat causes concern in are remote and rugged part of the world. We have a 20 plus foot tide here in Homer Alaska. It sure is nice to survey and explore near shore with a metal hull and hit the beach hard if need be. I would like to see a lifting keel and maybe twin rudders or a retractable hinged rudder be designed into this very portable hull. ITs nice to have the capacity to pack a load of tools, fuel, and extra stores for a summer's gold mining and treasure hunting operation in the Bering Sea operation. This vessel would be a handy craft indeed. Regards, Carl Nostrand Homer Alaska On Apr 10, 2004, at 11:42 AM, bubblede wrote: > Do I see that right - you will open all darts from the bottom, no > vertical cut from the sheer like on the G55? > if so - any particular reason? (...always trying go guess some > secrets... ;-)� ) > Gerd > > > Some study plans added to the end of this page > > > >http://www.origamimagic.com/Design/LB37/LB37.htm > > > > > To Post a message, send it to:�� origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > ADVERTISEMENT > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > � To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > � > � To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > � > � Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to theYahoo! Terms of Service. > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3437|3429|2004-04-10 16:11:27|brentswain38|Re: Building a steel mast|Since the 80's many of my 36 footers have used steel masts with good results. They use 6 inch diameter steel tubing with an 11 guage wall thickness, which is lighter than most wood box section masts for boats of that size and lighter than solid wood masts. The ability to weld steel tangs directly to the surface of the mast also has some potential weight savings and the masts have 40 times the strength to weight ratio of a wooden mast , and any deterioration is on the outside where you can see it, unlike wooden masts. My book gives more detail on steel masts and fittings. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gerald Niffenegger" wrote: > I did a subject search and came up dry. I am interested in building a > steel mast for a 36' steel Multichine. It is my understanding that > there has been some work done along these lines, by some of the > members here. Any information would be appreciated. > Gerald Niffenegger > Florianopolis, SC Brasil | 3438|3431|2004-04-10 18:13:37|bubblede|Re: new design|> I would like to see a > lifting keel and maybe twin rudders or a retractable hinged rudder be > designed into this very portable hull How about twin daggerboards (leeboards) ? ;-) have a look at my site Gerd http://www.justmueller.com/boats| 3439|3430|2004-04-10 18:55:11|aaron riis|Re: looking for pre-blasted primed steel|Dave, have you considered what you are going to do for insulation. I live in the sticks too and I'm not sure how I'm going to go about it. --- Dave wrote: > Hi all, I'm a newbee to this site and large > boatbuilding in general > and am just getting started on a 38 foot George > Buehler steel boat. > I was going to use non blasted steel and have it > done later but > after reading some of the other posts on this site I > am > investigating pre blasted primed. I live way out in > the sticks, and > the steel yards in my town don't cary it so I think > I would like to > get a big material list together and order it. I am > in Alaska so I > would probably need to find a source in Washington, > or maybe B.C. if > it is possible for Americans to order there for > export... Any > suggestions? > Thanks! > Dave > > > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - File online by April 15th http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html| 3440|3430|2004-04-10 21:41:48|Dave|Re: looking for pre-blasted primed steel|--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, aaron riis wrote: > Dave, have you considered what you are going to do for > insulation. I live in the sticks too and I'm not sure > how I'm going to go about it. Well fortunately where I live in Fairbanks AK there are several outfits with trucks that will come and spray foam anything from sewer pipes to houses. It will probably be the first sailboat they foamed though! ;) Dave| 3445|3445|2004-04-12 13:39:28|bubblede|YAGO 31 updated - and happy Easter to you all!|it's always these long weekends, you see - took off time from the family to clean up my material and re-do the web site with lots of new stuff, pictures, designs, layout. Next week I will approach the local steel mafia so I can build a first model at a 1:1 scale next month ;-) seems I might even get full length sheets, but don't know the prices yet. also decided to make all free & public from now on, just in case sombody else catches the bug ;-) Have a look at http://www.justmueller.com/boats/ and tell me what you think so far. The site also has grown in size, so if you find any buggy links, please let me know. Gerd| 3446|3446|2004-04-12 16:55:50|put_to_sea|My Island questions|Richard, I am curious about a few things you did differently on My Island. How much did you raise the sheer in order to get the flush deck? Did you change anything else to offset the added weight up high? Does it seem more tender due to your changes? While I am not intending to build a flush deck, I would like a little higher bulwork than shown on the plans and there are only two ways to get it, by adding another couple inches of steel to the sides or dropping the deck a couple of inches. I don't like the idea of less space inside but I also don't want to reduce the stability of the design or make it ugly. Thanks for any insight you can provide. Amos| 3447|3447|2004-04-12 17:25:12|put_to_sea|Skeg Detail|I was looking at the skeg detail photo in the 31' sloop photo folder and the skeg is constructed differently than shown on my plans. In particular, the prop aperture is further forward and there is a plate on the skeg between the prop and the rudder. From what I have read (unfortunately I don't have enough experience to know for myself), a skeg constructed as shown in the photo would have more rudder authority than a skeg with the prop right in front of the rudder. If this is the case, is it worth the extra trouble of constructing a skeg as shown in the photo? Thanks - Amos| 3448|3447|2004-04-13 17:17:42|brentswain38|Re: Skeg Detail|Putting the prop ahead of the skeg was a mistake. I wouldn't do that again. It doesn't make as strong a skeg, and having the prop behind the skeg makes it visible and accessible from the surface. You can see, reach , clear and if needed change the prop from a dinghy, something you can't do if it's in front of the skeg. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "put_to_sea" wrote: > I was looking at the skeg detail photo in the 31' sloop photo folder > and the skeg is constructed differently than shown on my plans. In > particular, the prop aperture is further forward and there is a > plate on the skeg between the prop and the rudder. From what I have > read (unfortunately I don't have enough experience to know for > myself), a skeg constructed as shown in the photo would have more > rudder authority than a skeg with the prop right in front of the > rudder. If this is the case, is it worth the extra trouble of > constructing a skeg as shown in the photo? > > Thanks - Amos | 3449|3446|2004-04-13 17:19:50|brentswain38|Re: My Island questions|Four inches (100mm ) is all the bulwark you need . Going higher offers no advantage whatever while having a few disadvantages. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "put_to_sea" wrote: > Richard, > > I am curious about a few things you did differently on My Island. > How much did you raise the sheer in order to get the flush deck? > Did you change anything else to offset the added weight up high? > Does it seem more tender due to your changes? While I am not > intending to build a flush deck, I would like a little higher > bulwork than shown on the plans and there are only two ways to get > it, by adding another couple inches of steel to the sides or > dropping the deck a couple of inches. I don't like the idea of less > space inside but I also don't want to reduce the stability of the > design or make it ugly. Thanks for any insight you can provide. > > Amos | 3450|3450|2004-04-13 20:21:10|Gerald Niffenegger|Steel mast electrical wires|In regard to a steel masts lighting and radio wires, Dudley Dix writes: "The mast is sealed so there can be no corrosion inside. The lighting wires and halliards must all be external and led down the shrouds, not down the mast." The steel mast is a hollow tube and is surly large enough to accommodate the wires. What is the reason he suggests running wires on the outside? Gerald| 3451|3450|2004-04-14 02:05:27|Graeme|Re: Steel mast electrical wires|To make it air tight................... no air no rust . -----Original Message----- From: Gerald Niffenegger [mailto:niffeneggerniff@...] Sent: Wednesday, 14 April 2004 8:21 AM To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Subject: [origamiboats] Steel mast electrical wires In regard to a steel masts lighting and radio wires, Dudley Dix writes: "The mast is sealed so there can be no corrosion inside. The lighting wires and halliards must all be external and led down the shrouds, not down the mast." The steel mast is a hollow tube and is surly large enough to accommodate the wires. What is the reason he suggests running wires on the outside? Gerald| 3452|3452|2004-04-14 03:10:52|angelarose9632|Hot tall singles Palace!|A great palace for tall singles to get together.You can talk anything you want here, enjoy yourself in the ravishing love air. http://hot-tall-singles.mysite.ws/| 3453|3450|2004-04-14 12:34:25|Gerald Niffenegger|Re: Steel mast electrical wires|--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Graeme" wrote: > > To make it air tight................... no air no rust . > > If that is the reason he is running the wires external then I would say, Dudley lacks imagination. Gerald| 3454|3450|2004-04-14 12:46:42|Michael Casling|Re: Steel mast electrical wires|I think if you look at all of the designs by Dix it would be impossible to draw the conclusion that he lacks imagination. Someone offered the opinion about the wyres which may or may not be correct. There may be other reasons for doing it the way he has described. Why not ask him directly. Michael. ----- Original Message ----- From: Gerald Niffenegger To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2004 9:33 AM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Steel mast electrical wires --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Graeme" wrote: > > To make it air tight................... no air no rust . > > If that is the reason he is running the wires external then I would say, Dudley lacks imagination. Gerald To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3455|3446|2004-04-14 14:58:38|richytill|Re: My Island questions|Amos, the bulwarks on My Island are laid out exactly as in Brent's plans. There is no advantage, or less advantage, in terms of interior volume. I can't see any reason why the boat would have more wheight up high--it should have less wheight up high. Everyone who comes aboard comments on how stable she feels. I would be disinclined to raise the bulwark. The disadvantage of the flush deck is the effect of waves travelling accross the deck unchecked and the lack of a place to wedge your feet when heeled. From a technical point of view, the only advantages are less windage above the sheer and arguably greater structural integrity thwartships. This is not a proven system and I advise people to stick to the plan. To weld a flush deck effectively requires a fair amount of experience in this type of proceedure. Never-the-less, I am pleased with the results so far: it is what I have always wanted. rt --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "put_to_sea" wrote: > Richard, > > I am curious about a few things you did differently on My Island. > How much did you raise the sheer in order to get the flush deck? > Did you change anything else to offset the added weight up high? > Does it seem more tender due to your changes? While I am not > intending to build a flush deck, I would like a little higher > bulwork than shown on the plans and there are only two ways to get > it, by adding another couple inches of steel to the sides or > dropping the deck a couple of inches. I don't like the idea of less > space inside but I also don't want to reduce the stability of the > design or make it ugly. Thanks for any insight you can provide. > > Amos | 3456|3450|2004-04-14 15:34:36|bubblede|Re: Steel mast electrical wires|--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Michael Casling wrote: >There may be other reasons for doing it the way he has described. Why not ask him directly. Michael. No need to ask him, Michael. Dix writes on his website: "The mast is sealed so there can be no corrosion inside. The lighting wires and halliards must all be external and led down the shrouds, not down the mast." Iguess it should be possible to run some small tube, welded airtight inside the mast, because having wires dangling around the standing riggin.. Gerd Budapest| 3457|3450|2004-04-14 16:09:30|brentswain38|Re: Steel mast electrical wires|I've run stainless boiler tubing from the scrapyard welded watertight at the joints and the ends to keep the mast airtight. You have to jamb a lot of foam pieces inside to keep the conduit from rattling, but it works well. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Graeme" wrote: > > To make it air tight................... no air no rust . > > -----Original Message----- > From: Gerald Niffenegger [mailto:niffeneggerniff@a...] > Sent: Wednesday, 14 April 2004 8:21 AM > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [origamiboats] Steel mast electrical wires > > In regard to a steel masts lighting and radio wires, Dudley Dix writes: > > "The mast is sealed so there can be no corrosion inside. The lighting > wires and halliards must all be external and led down the shrouds, not > down the mast." > > The steel mast is a hollow tube and is surly large enough to > accommodate the wires. What is the reason he suggests running wires on > the outside? > Gerald | 3458|3458|2004-04-14 17:43:57|prairiemaidca|Rattling wires|Hi All: Another trick I've seen to stop wires in masts etc from moving around is to use those large plastic cable ties placed at intervals along a wire or bunch of wires. The long tail acts as a spring type spacer keeping the wire from moving inside the tube. Martin Forster (Prairie Maid)| 3459|3459|2004-04-15 05:01:30|sae140|Re: Crimes in Iraq|> Uhh, what's this got to do with steel boats!? Although it must be irksome to have political commentary posted to a boat-building group, it might be useful to bear in mind *why* people are resorting to taking this action. There is quite clearly a Judeo-American (or more correctly a Zionist- American) alliance who are attempting to take control of the Middle- East and their vast supplies of oil, on which much of the developed world imprudently relies. Zionists effectively control the American military, and large swathes of the American political system, including their foreign policy-makers. Evidence is unfolding that Zionists (specifically Israli Mossad agents) may have been ultimately responsible for 9/11, which was orchestrated as a "false-flag" operation to de-stabilise the Middle- East. If this is true, then they have certainly succeeded. By invading Iraq the US military have effectively neutralised Israel's most dangerous enemy - without cost to Israel - but have stirred up a hornet's nest in the process. But - as Zionists control much of the world's media, disenfranchised and silenced individuals are now resorting to alternative methods of alerting the world to their situation, as annoying as this might be to those who would rather not become aware of their plight. Apart from these humanistic considerations, the integrity of oil supplies from the Middle-East affects just almost *everything* in the developed West - the price of steel manufacture, epoxy paints, electronics, synthetic sailcloth, rope, engines, even the cost of the paper on which origami plans are printed. To say nothing of road transport, food supplies, satellites in the sky etc - the list is endless. Indirectly, the Iraq situation has - or will have, unless a solution is found to the underlying Israeli-Palestinian conflict - *everything* to do with steel boat-building. As uncomfortable as it might be to recognise this, the effects of American foreign policy directly affects us all, wherever in the world we may happen to live. Colin| 3460|3370|2004-04-15 06:14:52|dreemer1962|Re: new 37' design|Brent, Thank you for the reaction on my suggestions. I'm sorry that I didn't heave a time to answer, I was very busy at the office last two weeks and as English is not my native language it takes me quite a lot of time to write more or less understandable letter. I agree with this: "…As boats get larger their ability to carry sail increases exponentially, enabling them to get by with less beam…" Indeed, with increase in size, stability grows much faster then heeling forces from the sails, so bigger boats are proportionally narrower then smaller boats. There are different formulas to figure this out, but for most people practical examples are far more telling then dry math. So, here is one: If you take 7 meters long and 2.33 meter wide boat with a length / beam = 1/3 and double the size, then length / beam of only = 1 / 3.75 is sufficient to get enough stability. So, scaled up boat would be 14 m long and 3.73 m wide. "…Most attempts at such narrow boats have been failures…" It can be that there are failures, but there are also many very successful narrow sailing boats, big and small, racing and cruising, old and new. To name just a few - Spencer's Ragtime, Lee's Merlin, Gardner's Oceanus, hole bunch of L.F. Herreshof boats as Rozantine, Didikai, Tioga, Marco Polo…, few early Van de Stadt's Zeeslang (Black Soo), Zeevalk, Voortrekker, Stormvogel. I personally know two Dutch small one's - Zeeslang (which heave only 7 ft of beam for a 30 ft long hull) and Waarschip 1010 (Loa=10.10m Beam=2.50m). Both of them are sailing as rockets. (They both heave very small overhangs at the stem and none at the stern). "…It's too easy to think of narrow as having minimum resistance , which it does, while forgetting that a sailboat needs some stability to carry sail…" Narrow boats do heave less form stability but because of much smaller wave making resistance, they also need less sail. There is much to do to get needed sail area and sail caring ability a side from the beam increase. Some of the most important factors to consider are weight aloft, weights distribution, hull form, height of centre of effort of the sails… "…With smaller boats, reduced beam would make them sail on their ear and reefing would have to start in around 12 knots of wind. I've seen this in boats with narrow waterline beam…" Bigger heel angle could be part of the package for racing boats, because they need a lot of sail area for a light airs performance and a high aspect ratio sailplane for a windward sailing. They balance that with a deep fins which becomes effective just after hull is already substantially heeled. However, cruising boats are other story. They don't need to excel on the windward legs as racing boats do. Average windward abilities are good enough. Most of the cruising is reaching and running => high aspect ratio sails with corresponding high heeling forces are not needed, area is what counts. Lower aspect ratio sail plans should be used. One way would be high teach fully battened, big roach main sail. If that is too expensive, then lengthening of the sail base (longer boom and foot of the foresails) will do. Or fit two masts. Lower aspect sailplane allows upright sailing, even with a moderate draft. "…The plumb bow traditional boats claimed to be super seaworthy tended to hobby horse like hell in a headsea, due to the lack of reserve buoyancy in the ends …" Hobby horsing doesn't heave anything to do with plumb bows. It is question of weight distribution, longitudinal stability, prismatic coef. and enterance angle. Longitudinal stability grows exponentially with a waterline length. If everything else stays the same, dryer boat with generous overhangs will do much more hobby horsing then a wetter plumb bow cousin with a longer waterline. For best results, careful balance is needed between dryness and hobby horsing. "…Any boat which has trouble getting off a lee shore in strong winds is not seaworthy…" I can't agree more. Strong wind - lee shore is exactly one of the situations where narrow boats excel. Their sharp bows and low resistance hulls slice effortlessly trough the same chop in which wider boat would sail very slowly and hobbyhorse terribly. "..While there are all kinds of mathmatical theories about bigger boats being cheaper, they are so far just theories and wishful thinking…" The only scenario, which I can think of where longer (not bigger) boat could be cheaper to build, is if built by professional custom builder because he can possibly wrap hull material faster on the gentle curves of the long hull (less expensive work hours) end because of more stretched less cramped interior simplifies fitting out. For amateur builder it won't be cheaper - as the longer hull needs more material, she will be slightly more expensive. Maintenance of the longer boat should only costs a little bit more for the paint, rest is the same. With bilge kills and skeg easy beaching configuration, yearly upkeep budget should be very moderate. In the end, don't get me wrong, my suggestions were not criticism of your design work, I like your boats and methods. Origami method is genial. I like many different types of boats, but somehow, I always had this particular liking of the low drag hulls, from kayaks and canoes all the way to the Ticonderoga and Ragtime. Milan --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" wrote: > As boats get larger their ability to carry sail increases > exponentially, enabling them to get by with less beam. With smaller > boats , reduced beam would make them sail on their ear and reefing > would have to start in around 12 knots of wind. I've seen this in > boats with narrow waterline beam.A beam to length ratio which works > fine for a 60 footer would be a disaster for a 40 footer.Most > attempts at such narrow boats have been failures . One round the > world racer tried taking this to extremes lately and it was a > disaster, abandoned early in the game.It's too easy to think of > narrow as having minimum resistance , which it does, while forgetting > that a sailboat needs some stability to carry sail.Moderation is the > best solution for cruising boats, avoiding extremes.This is also true > of overhangs as it is with many aspects of design.The plumb bow > traditional boats claimed to be super seaworthy tended to hobby horse > like hell in a headsea, due to the lack of reserve buoyancy in the > ends . Any boat which has trouble getting off a lee shore in strong > winds is not seaworthy. > While there are all kinds of mathmatical theories about bigger > boats being cheaper, they are so far just theories and wishful > thinking. I don't know anyone who has pulled it off in practise . > Many boats over 40 ft I've seen built by backyard builders seem to > change hands several times before they hit the water.Claims that > bigger boats can be cheaper and that a limited income builder should > go for the bigger boat, has often resulted in the destruction of > cruising dreams for many people who got sucked into believing such > nonsense , people who would have made it out cruising if the had > stuck to something smaller.I've seen that happen far too often. > Narrow hulls in the smaller sizes aren't commonly built for a good > reason.They don't work out anywhere near as well as claimed by their > advocates. > Brent Swain > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "dreemer1962" > wrote: > > Brent, > > > > Steve Dashew's design work is indeed oriented toward wealthy > > customers, but in his books, he gives, a lot of down to earth > advises > > for people with a little cash as well. His main advise is to > simplify > > and go now with what you can afford (second hand Contesa 26 for > > example or similar), rather then waste time dreaming about "ideal" > > luxury yacht waiting for that elusive lottery ticket or what ever. > > > > I find "his" design ideas very interesting and worth experimenting > on > > the smaller scale then he does. The essence of his style is > > maximising the hull/waterline length, to the length/beam factor of > > about 1:4 to 1:5 in the place of the most common of around 1:3. As > > practically all "new" ideas in a boat design, these proportions are > > nothing new. They are just not used very often for a variety of > > reasons. I personally think that most cost effective design > > improvement of most boat designs is to simply make them longer. > > That's what's Steve Dashew basically does. He takes conventional 43 > > to 50 ft long boats and stretch them out to 60 - 80 ft. His boats > do > > indeed costs a fortune, but, conventional 43 to 50 footers would > > require about same pile of bucks if custom built and equipped to > same > > standards. > > > > What could be much more interesting for us is to look what could we > > achieve taking same principle to much smaller (and cheaper) scale. > > Take for example your 31 footer and stretch it to 40 ft leaving > same > > breadth, freeboard and depth. For a just a little bit more steel > > plate you get much more waterline length, longitudinal stability, > > directional stability, waterline length/displacement ratio of the > > very light boat despite using heavy material, sharper enterence > angle > > and roomier boat, resulting in a much higher maximum and average > > speed, less pitching and better windward abilities in the choppy > > conditions. You could even widen a stern without sacrificing > > directional stability if desired. All of that for just a little > more > > money for a bit more still plate, as expensive stuff as engine, > mast, > > rigging, sails… stays the same. Forward overhang could stay the > same > > or built plumb without flare if desired. If plumb bow is chosen, I > > think that it wouldn't make boat wetter then original 31 footer. As > > the crew sits in the cockpit most of the time by putting a bow 10 > ft > > further from them (adding much more volume in the bow), you most > > probably provide them with a drier ride. Any flare may actually > bring > > more spray to the back of the boat were the crew is. Many > traditional > > boats, including some considered ultimate in the seaworthiness, had > > plumb bows and seamed to work fine. Heaving sad that, don't get me > > wrong, I'm not some kind of the fanatical supporter of the plumb > > bows. I don't like very long overhangs but don't heave nothing > > against moderate ones as for example on your designs. > > > > The only downside of the stretched boat compered to original one is > > more underwater hull area = lower speed in a very light wind. > > Considering the size of the diesels everyone is putting in sailing > > boats these days, relatively poor light winds sailing performance > > shouldn't be a problem. Longer hull would actually go faster and > burn > > less fuel then shorter boat with a same engine. Fanatical sailors > > among us could prefer playing with big Genoa's, spinnakers end > such, > > instead of engines. > > > > Despite that there where many traditional boats with a beam/ length > > factor of 4:1 to 5:1 and some classic designs as for example L. F. > > Hereshoff with proportions very similar to modern narrow designs. > > they where/are minority. Considering all the benefits of the long > > hulls I'm wondering why are they so rarely built. I think that in > the > > past main reasons where constructional limits of traditional wood > > construction, (extensive length made a hulls weaker and prone to > > hogging), economic factors - it used to be that labour was > relatively > > cheap and materials relatively expensive (just opposite from our > > present day economics) and for many trades was more advantageous to > > heave bigger loading capacity then speed, maybe some length based > > taxing rules and a such. > > > > In more modern times the most important reason were tradition, > > fashion, racing class rules which penalised length, storage costs > > based on length and similar. > > > > All of this reasons should be of little concern for modern cruising > > boats whose designs parameters should be optimised for the given > > budget and not for the length. Compering boats according to length > is > > very misleading. Costs are much more related to the displacement. > > > > With a best wishes, > > Milan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > | 3461|3459|2004-04-15 09:00:06|Henri Naths|Re: Crimes in Iraq|there is more oil in Alberta than in Iraq. ----- Original Message ----- From: sae140 To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: 15 April, 2004 3:01 AM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Crimes in Iraq > Uhh, what's this got to do with steel boats!? Although it must be irksome to have political commentary posted to a boat-building group, it might be useful to bear in mind *why* people are resorting to taking this action. There is quite clearly a Judeo-American (or more correctly a Zionist- American) alliance who are attempting to take control of the Middle- East and their vast supplies of oil, on which much of the developed world imprudently relies. Zionists effectively control the American military, and large swathes of the American political system, including their foreign policy-makers. Evidence is unfolding that Zionists (specifically Israli Mossad agents) may have been ultimately responsible for 9/11, which was orchestrated as a "false-flag" operation to de-stabilise the Middle- East. If this is true, then they have certainly succeeded. By invading Iraq the US military have effectively neutralised Israel's most dangerous enemy - without cost to Israel - but have stirred up a hornet's nest in the process. But - as Zionists control much of the world's media, disenfranchised and silenced individuals are now resorting to alternative methods of alerting the world to their situation, as annoying as this might be to those who would rather not become aware of their plight. Apart from these humanistic considerations, the integrity of oil supplies from the Middle-East affects just almost *everything* in the developed West - the price of steel manufacture, epoxy paints, electronics, synthetic sailcloth, rope, engines, even the cost of the paper on which origami plans are printed. To say nothing of road transport, food supplies, satellites in the sky etc - the list is endless. Indirectly, the Iraq situation has - or will have, unless a solution is found to the underlying Israeli-Palestinian conflict - *everything* to do with steel boat-building. As uncomfortable as it might be to recognise this, the effects of American foreign policy directly affects us all, wherever in the world we may happen to live. Colin To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3462|3459|2004-04-15 10:37:19|Michael Casling|Re: Crimes in Iraq|Colin, although you may have well researched what you have said, I can not agree with you. Living next to the Yankees and communicating with them on a daily basis I draw a different conclusion. It occurs to me that there might be more unrest in the middle East if they did not have the profits from their oil sales. The West is not far away from being able to reduce its oil consumption quite dramatically. There was a point in time when the US was the only power that was still intact with its military might, all others having suffered major damage, they could have easilly inflicted their power on others yet they did not. It is easy to bash them, I do it often and I would love to see the day when we to do need to resolve conflicts with war. Unfortunately that day has not come for some parts of the world. Even as a pacifist I think we need to deal with idiots like Hussein in the manner we have. Michael and this will be my last post on the subject, I chose to ignore all previous posts on this but my US tractor buddies would want me to respond to Colin. ----- Original Message ----- From: sae140 To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2004 2:01 AM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Crimes in Iraq > Uhh, what's this got to do with steel boats!? Although it must be irksome to have political commentary posted to a boat-building group, it might be useful to bear in mind *why* people are resorting to taking this action. There is quite clearly a Judeo-American (or more correctly a Zionist- American) alliance who are attempting to take control of the Middle- East and their vast supplies of oil, on which much of the developed world imprudently relies. Zionists effectively control the American military, and large swathes of the American political system, including their foreign policy-makers. Evidence is unfolding that Zionists (specifically Israli Mossad agents) may have been ultimately responsible for 9/11, which was orchestrated as a "false-flag" operation to de-stabilise the Middle- East. If this is true, then they have certainly succeeded. By invading Iraq the US military have effectively neutralised Israel's most dangerous enemy - without cost to Israel - but have stirred up a hornet's nest in the process. But - as Zionists control much of the world's media, disenfranchised and silenced individuals are now resorting to alternative methods of alerting the world to their situation, as annoying as this might be to those who would rather not become aware of their plight. Apart from these humanistic considerations, the integrity of oil supplies from the Middle-East affects just almost *everything* in the developed West - the price of steel manufacture, epoxy paints, electronics, synthetic sailcloth, rope, engines, even the cost of the paper on which origami plans are printed. To say nothing of road transport, food supplies, satellites in the sky etc - the list is endless. Indirectly, the Iraq situation has - or will have, unless a solution is found to the underlying Israeli-Palestinian conflict - *everything* to do with steel boat-building. As uncomfortable as it might be to recognise this, the effects of American foreign policy directly affects us all, wherever in the world we may happen to live. Colin To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3463|3459|2004-04-15 10:50:47|Steven E. Rhodes, D.V.M.|Re: Crimes in Iraq|Yes, it is "irksome to have political commentary" and no, it is not "useful" and yes, "foreign policy directly effects us all". Very profound. It is unconscionable that you would air your political commentary on this website. Please stop. Steven e. Rhodes, D.V.M. ----Original Message----- From: sae140 [mailto:colinpowell@...] Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2004 5:01 AM To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Crimes in Iraq > Uhh, what's this got to do with steel boats!? Although it must be irksome to have political commentary posted to a boat-building group, it might be useful to bear in mind *why* people are resorting to taking this action. There is quite clearly a Judeo-American (or more correctly a Zionist- American) alliance who are attempting to take control of the Middle- East and their vast supplies of oil, on which much of the developed world imprudently relies. Zionists effectively control the American military, and large swathes of the American political system, including their foreign policy-makers. Evidence is unfolding that Zionists (specifically Israli Mossad agents) may have been ultimately responsible for 9/11, which was orchestrated as a "false-flag" operation to de-stabilise the Middle- East. If this is true, then they have certainly succeeded. By invading Iraq the US military have effectively neutralised Israel's most dangerous enemy - without cost to Israel - but have stirred up a hornet's nest in the process. But - as Zionists control much of the world's media, disenfranchised and silenced individuals are now resorting to alternative methods of alerting the world to their situation, as annoying as this might be to those who would rather not become aware of their plight. Apart from these humanistic considerations, the integrity of oil supplies from the Middle-East affects just almost *everything* in the developed West - the price of steel manufacture, epoxy paints, electronics, synthetic sailcloth, rope, engines, even the cost of the paper on which origami plans are printed. To say nothing of road transport, food supplies, satellites in the sky etc - the list is endless. Indirectly, the Iraq situation has - or will have, unless a solution is found to the underlying Israeli-Palestinian conflict - *everything* to do with steel boat-building. As uncomfortable as it might be to recognise this, the effects of American foreign policy directly affects us all, wherever in the world we may happen to live. Colin To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3464|3459|2004-04-15 16:32:45|audeojude|Re: Crimes in Iraq|I also would like to see the list go back to what it is for. Discusion on sailing and boat building. I avoid many other lists because of this type of off topic political or religious prosetilizing (sp). I have nothing against it in general but it doesnt belong here. This is the first list I read every day because of the pertinate and usefull content. I hope that it stays this way. Scott Carle aka Audeojude| 3465|3465|2004-04-15 17:14:36|prairiemaidca|Steel Mast|Hi All: I agree lets stay on topic or move to a more appropriate forum. Does anyone have any comments on the idea of using some plastic conduit and water tight fittings to provide a way to allow wire up the inside of the steel mast. Also I was thinking of the possiblity of a good cleaning job and then dumping one of the rust type paints into the mast and coating it's insides that way. Martin Forster (Prairie Maid)| 3466|3370|2004-04-15 19:01:08|brentswain38|Re: new 37' design|Using deep draft to get back the stability lost to narrow beam would be a huge handicap for a cruising boat, not worth the price.Most narrow boats have extrwemely deep draft for their length, to make up for their lack of form stability. Twin keels are chosen partly for their shallow draft for a given sized hull, shallow draft which is incompatible with a narrow hull. I just did a couple of trips home from Tonga in the last 4 years, most of the 10,000 miles to windward, so the arguement that cruising boats only sail mostly downwind is not true, unless you want to be forced to sail around the world every time you do a bit of downwind sailing, an unreasonable alternative . A client I met in Fanning Island tried full length battens for the first time. I asked him what he thought of them. He said " battens suck." After he had sailed to New Zealand and back I asked him again and he said ' Battens still suck" I had sold him my last boat which had no battens and he loved the arrangement. I believe cruisers who still use battens have never tried sailing without them.Another cruiser doing the same trip told me the same thing. Long narrow boats which don't hobby horse tend to bury their bows like submarines and take a lot of green water over the bows. If getting there a day sooner is that important ,and you hate being at sea that much , catch a plane.I don't consider an extra half a knot of speed worth giving up all that extra interior space and comfort for. With origami construction, there is absolutely no time saving in longer narrower hulls, so even with a commercial builder there is no saving. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "dreemer1962" wrote: > Brent, > > Thank you for the reaction on my suggestions. I'm sorry that I didn't > heave a time to answer, I was very busy at the office last two weeks > and as English is not my native language it takes me quite a lot of > time to write more or less understandable letter. > > I agree with this: > > "…As boats get larger their ability to carry sail increases > exponentially, enabling them to get by with less beam…" > > Indeed, with increase in size, stability grows much faster then > heeling forces from the sails, so bigger boats are proportionally > narrower then smaller boats. There are different formulas to figure > this out, but for most people practical examples are far more telling > then dry math. So, here is one: If you take 7 meters long and 2.33 > meter wide boat with a length / beam = 1/3 and double the size, then > length / beam of only = 1 / 3.75 is sufficient to get enough > stability. So, scaled up boat would be 14 m long and 3.73 m wide. > > "…Most attempts at such narrow boats have been failures…" > > It can be that there are failures, but there are also many very > successful narrow sailing boats, big and small, racing and cruising, > old and new. To name just a few - Spencer's Ragtime, Lee's Merlin, > Gardner's Oceanus, hole bunch of L.F. Herreshof boats as Rozantine, > Didikai, Tioga, Marco Polo…, few early Van de Stadt's Zeeslang (Black > Soo), Zeevalk, Voortrekker, Stormvogel. > > I personally know two Dutch small one's - Zeeslang (which heave only > 7 ft of beam for a 30 ft long hull) and Waarschip 1010 (Loa=10.10m > Beam=2.50m). Both of them are sailing as rockets. (They both heave > very small overhangs at the stem and none at the stern). > > "…It's too easy to think of narrow as having minimum resistance , > which it does, while forgetting that a sailboat needs some stability > to carry sail…" > > Narrow boats do heave less form stability but because of much smaller > wave making resistance, they also need less sail. There is much to do > to get needed sail area and sail caring ability a side from the beam > increase. Some of the most important factors to consider are weight > aloft, weights distribution, hull form, height of centre of effort of > the sails… > > "…With smaller boats, reduced beam would make them sail on their ear > and reefing > would have to start in around 12 knots of wind. I've seen this in > boats with narrow waterline beam…" > > Bigger heel angle could be part of the package for racing boats, > because they need a lot of sail area for a light airs performance and > a high aspect ratio sailplane for a windward sailing. They balance > that with a deep fins which becomes effective just after hull is > already substantially heeled. However, cruising boats are other > story. They don't need to excel on the windward legs as racing boats > do. Average windward abilities are good enough. Most of the cruising > is reaching and running => high aspect ratio sails with corresponding > high heeling forces are not needed, area is what counts. Lower aspect > ratio sail plans should be used. One way would be high teach fully > battened, big roach main sail. If that is too expensive, then > lengthening of the sail base (longer boom and foot of the foresails) > will do. Or fit two masts. Lower aspect sailplane allows upright > sailing, even with a moderate draft. > > "…The plumb bow traditional boats claimed to be super seaworthy > tended to hobby horse > like hell in a headsea, due to the lack of reserve buoyancy in the > ends …" > > Hobby horsing doesn't heave anything to do with plumb bows. It is > question of weight distribution, longitudinal stability, prismatic > coef. and enterance angle. Longitudinal stability grows exponentially > with a waterline length. If everything else stays the same, dryer > boat with generous overhangs will do much more hobby horsing then a > wetter plumb bow cousin with a longer waterline. For best results, > careful balance is needed between dryness and hobby horsing. > > "…Any boat which has trouble getting off a lee shore in strong winds > is not seaworthy…" > > I can't agree more. Strong wind - lee shore is exactly one of the > situations where narrow boats excel. Their sharp bows and low > resistance hulls slice effortlessly trough the same chop in which > wider boat would sail very slowly and hobbyhorse terribly. > > "..While there are all kinds of mathmatical theories about bigger > boats being cheaper, they are so far just theories and wishful > thinking…" > > The only scenario, which I can think of where longer (not bigger) > boat could be cheaper to build, is if built by professional custom > builder because he can possibly wrap hull material faster on the > gentle curves of the long hull (less expensive work hours) end > because of more stretched less cramped interior simplifies fitting > out. For amateur builder it won't be cheaper - as the longer hull > needs more material, she will be slightly more expensive. Maintenance > of the longer boat should only costs a little bit more for the paint, > rest is the same. With bilge kills and skeg easy beaching > configuration, yearly upkeep budget should be very moderate. > > In the end, don't get me wrong, my suggestions were not criticism of > your design work, I like your boats and methods. Origami method is > genial. I like many different types of boats, but somehow, I always > had this particular liking of the low drag hulls, from kayaks and > canoes all the way to the Ticonderoga and Ragtime. > > Milan > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" > wrote: > > As boats get larger their ability to carry sail increases > > exponentially, enabling them to get by with less beam. With smaller > > boats , reduced beam would make them sail on their ear and reefing > > would have to start in around 12 knots of wind. I've seen this in > > boats with narrow waterline beam.A beam to length ratio which works > > fine for a 60 footer would be a disaster for a 40 footer.Most > > attempts at such narrow boats have been failures . One round the > > world racer tried taking this to extremes lately and it was a > > disaster, abandoned early in the game.It's too easy to think of > > narrow as having minimum resistance , which it does, while > forgetting > > that a sailboat needs some stability to carry sail.Moderation is > the > > best solution for cruising boats, avoiding extremes.This is also > true > > of overhangs as it is with many aspects of design.The plumb bow > > traditional boats claimed to be super seaworthy tended to hobby > horse > > like hell in a headsea, due to the lack of reserve buoyancy in the > > ends . Any boat which has trouble getting off a lee shore in strong > > winds is not seaworthy. > > While there are all kinds of mathmatical theories about bigger > > boats being cheaper, they are so far just theories and wishful > > thinking. I don't know anyone who has pulled it off in practise . > > Many boats over 40 ft I've seen built by backyard builders seem to > > change hands several times before they hit the water.Claims that > > bigger boats can be cheaper and that a limited income builder > should > > go for the bigger boat, has often resulted in the destruction of > > cruising dreams for many people who got sucked into believing such > > nonsense , people who would have made it out cruising if the had > > stuck to something smaller.I've seen that happen far too often. > > Narrow hulls in the smaller sizes aren't commonly built for a > good > > reason.They don't work out anywhere near as well as claimed by > their > > advocates. > > Brent Swain > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "dreemer1962" > > wrote: > > > Brent, > > > > > > Steve Dashew's design work is indeed oriented toward wealthy > > > customers, but in his books, he gives, a lot of down to earth > > advises > > > for people with a little cash as well. His main advise is to > > simplify > > > and go now with what you can afford (second hand Contesa 26 for > > > example or similar), rather then waste time dreaming > about "ideal" > > > luxury yacht waiting for that elusive lottery ticket or what > ever. > > > > > > I find "his" design ideas very interesting and worth > experimenting > > on > > > the smaller scale then he does. The essence of his style is > > > maximising the hull/waterline length, to the length/beam factor > of > > > about 1:4 to 1:5 in the place of the most common of around 1:3. > As > > > practically all "new" ideas in a boat design, these proportions > are > > > nothing new. They are just not used very often for a variety of > > > reasons. I personally think that most cost effective design > > > improvement of most boat designs is to simply make them longer. > > > That's what's Steve Dashew basically does. He takes conventional > 43 > > > to 50 ft long boats and stretch them out to 60 - 80 ft. His boats > > do > > > indeed costs a fortune, but, conventional 43 to 50 footers would > > > require about same pile of bucks if custom built and equipped to > > same > > > standards. > > > > > > What could be much more interesting for us is to look what could > we > > > achieve taking same principle to much smaller (and cheaper) > scale. > > > Take for example your 31 footer and stretch it to 40 ft leaving > > same > > > breadth, freeboard and depth. For a just a little bit more steel > > > plate you get much more waterline length, longitudinal stability, > > > directional stability, waterline length/displacement ratio of the > > > very light boat despite using heavy material, sharper enterence > > angle > > > and roomier boat, resulting in a much higher maximum and average > > > speed, less pitching and better windward abilities in the choppy > > > conditions. You could even widen a stern without sacrificing > > > directional stability if desired. All of that for just a little > > more > > > money for a bit more still plate, as expensive stuff as engine, > > mast, > > > rigging, sails… stays the same. Forward overhang could stay the > > same > > > or built plumb without flare if desired. If plumb bow is chosen, > I > > > think that it wouldn't make boat wetter then original 31 footer. > As > > > the crew sits in the cockpit most of the time by putting a bow 10 > > ft > > > further from them (adding much more volume in the bow), you most > > > probably provide them with a drier ride. Any flare may actually > > bring > > > more spray to the back of the boat were the crew is. Many > > traditional > > > boats, including some considered ultimate in the seaworthiness, > had > > > plumb bows and seamed to work fine. Heaving sad that, don't get > me > > > wrong, I'm not some kind of the fanatical supporter of the plumb > > > bows. I don't like very long overhangs but don't heave nothing > > > against moderate ones as for example on your designs. > > > > > > The only downside of the stretched boat compered to original one > is > > > more underwater hull area = lower speed in a very light wind. > > > Considering the size of the diesels everyone is putting in > sailing > > > boats these days, relatively poor light winds sailing performance > > > shouldn't be a problem. Longer hull would actually go faster and > > burn > > > less fuel then shorter boat with a same engine. Fanatical sailors > > > among us could prefer playing with big Genoa's, spinnakers end > > such, > > > instead of engines. > > > > > > Despite that there where many traditional boats with a beam/ > length > > > factor of 4:1 to 5:1 and some classic designs as for example L. > F. > > > Hereshoff with proportions very similar to modern narrow designs. > > > they where/are minority. Considering all the benefits of the long > > > hulls I'm wondering why are they so rarely built. I think that in > > the > > > past main reasons where constructional limits of traditional wood > > > construction, (extensive length made a hulls weaker and prone to > > > hogging), economic factors - it used to be that labour was > > relatively > > > cheap and materials relatively expensive (just opposite from our > > > present day economics) and for many trades was more advantageous > to > > > heave bigger loading capacity then speed, maybe some length based > > > taxing rules and a such. > > > > > > In more modern times the most important reason were tradition, > > > fashion, racing class rules which penalised length, storage costs > > > based on length and similar. > > > > > > All of this reasons should be of little concern for modern > cruising > > > boats whose designs parameters should be optimised for the given > > > budget and not for the length. Compering boats according to > length > > is > > > very misleading. Costs are much more related to the displacement. > > > > > > With a best wishes, > > > Milan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > | 3467|3465|2004-04-15 19:09:21|edward_stoneuk|Re: Steel Mast|Martin, A problem in using plastic conduit or, say, IP66 cable glands to keep the inside of a steel mast dry is that it is very difficult to seal them due to the change in internal air pressure as the mast heats up and cools. Any moisture around the entry will tend to be sucked in as the mast cools. This was noticeable when I lived in the tropics where fuel was stored in 45 gallon barrels. If left upright where rain could collect around the bung then the fuel would become contaminated with water as each night or during a rain storm when the barrel cooled it would suck in a little moisture. The barrels were usually left cocked over on a rock or piece of wood so that rain would drain off. Regards, Ted| 3468|3465|2004-04-15 19:29:29|put_to_sea|Re: Steel Mast|I was planning on filling the mast with foam. Do you think that would make a difference? I was considering running the wires loose in the mast and filling the mast with foam and fastening a sealed access plate over the fill hole. I am still not sure of how I would get the foam in there. Maybe it could be filled by making a fairly airtight container except for a plastic tube out the bottom that runs down the mast, a lid that could be quickly dogged down, and an inlet for compressed air to push it down the tube. I would imagine you would have to mix the foam, pour it into the container and blow it down the tube pretty fast or you would have an absolute mess. I don't think I could set the mast on end and drop cups of foam down inside like Brent suggested unless it was done after the mast was stepped. Amos > A problem in using plastic conduit or, say, IP66 cable glands to > keep the inside of a steel mast dry is that it is very difficult to > seal them due to the change in internal air pressure as the mast > heats up and cools. | 3469|3465|2004-04-15 22:35:56|brentswain38|Re: Steel Mast|I have used plastic this way with no problems yet, but I worry about the ability of plastic to absorb water. Where you are , stainless boiler tubing should be readily available in scrapyards for cheap. Being thin walled , it's tricky to weld, but once welded it will stay watertight for several lifetimes , and you can weld it watertight top and bottom. You have to jamb a lot of foam around it to keep it quiet. Once you have sealed all the oxygen out there isn't enough left inside to cause any measurable corrosion. Brent sWain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "prairiemaidca" wrote: > Hi All: I agree lets stay on topic or move to a more appropriate > forum. Does anyone have any comments on the idea of using some > plastic conduit and water tight fittings to provide a way to allow > wire up the inside of the steel mast. Also I was thinking of the > possiblity of a good cleaning job and then dumping one of the rust > type paints into the mast and coating it's insides that way. > Martin Forster (Prairie Maid) | 3470|3465|2004-04-15 22:40:31|brentswain38|Re: Steel Mast|The only way they were able to get pour in place foam into an aluminium mast was to prop the mast vertically , then mix the foam in dixie cups and drop each one before they began to react.Otherwise it would hit the side of the mast and there they would stay.Squirting it thru the sailtrach holes works, but it takes a lot of spray cans. Foam absorbs water and wouldn't keep water away from steel. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "put_to_sea" wrote: > I was planning on filling the mast with foam. Do you think that > would make a difference? > > I was considering running the wires loose in the mast and filling > the mast with foam and fastening a sealed access plate over the fill > hole. I am still not sure of how I would get the foam in there. > Maybe it could be filled by making a fairly airtight container > except for a plastic tube out the bottom that runs down the mast, a > lid that could be quickly dogged down, and an inlet for compressed > air to push it down the tube. I would imagine you would have to mix > the foam, pour it into the container and blow it down the tube > pretty fast or you would have an absolute mess. I don't think I > could set the mast on end and drop cups of foam down inside like > Brent suggested unless it was done after the mast was stepped. > > Amos > > > > A problem in using plastic conduit or, say, IP66 cable glands to > > keep the inside of a steel mast dry is that it is very difficult > to > > seal them due to the change in internal air pressure as the mast > > heats up and cools. | 3471|3370|2004-04-16 04:34:09|bubblede|Re: new 37' design - battens|I have sailed boats with battened mains, and can give you my - anecdotical - experience: I occisionally sailed on a friend's 9m with battens, and on another 8 m ply-cat, both equipped with lower priced slides and battens. I delivered a Dynamique 47 from the bay of Biscay around Portugal and Spain to Majorca. In that case there were Harken travellers on a proper rail. When it works it's great, actually delivers on the promise of the junk but with a mouch more powerful rig: - reef easily with lazyjack, on all points of sail it will come down, just let go of the halyard - sets perfect if done right, in all weather, full or reefed - no flapping, no wear, no noise - LOTS of power in all conditions compared to a traditional sail, due to controlled profile at all times - sail area can be increased con siderably The downsides are - expensive sail, has to be made by best sailmaker you can afford, difficult to repair yourself - a lot more mechanical points of stress and bits and pieces, and each one can fail - slides tend to jam, you need top-quality track and travellers - quite a bit mor weight aloft - although this is compensated by a proper profile that gives a lot less heeling moment and more lift for the same airpressure on the rig So, I think if I wanted a rig for holidays and long coastal cruising, and had the money I would go for battens. If on the other hand I plan to drop out and cruise year round far away from sailmakers and shipchandlers I should not install battens - but it's a pity really ;-) Gerd nttp://www.justmueller.com/boats/| 3472|3472|2004-04-16 09:11:22|prairiemaidca|Steel Masts|Hi All: Some great feedback. I had also thought about the foam and it's problem of placing it in such a long container. One trick I have used is to purchase a length of cheap plastic hose that just fits over the end of the supplied tube of the spray can and then apply the foam and slowly extract the hose as I'm laying in the foam. This works very well over 3 or 4ft. 1m. but I've never used this method over half a mast(20odd feet) Martin Forster(Prairie Maid)| 3473|3473|2004-04-16 13:06:48|willmarsh3|Steel masts|Sorry if I sound a bit ignorant, but why use a steel mast. Aluminum seems the better choice to me. My boat that I bought used was custom built from plans but it has aluminum masts, with no worries about corrosion eating the inside. Also the top hamper is reduced a bit since aluminum is lighter than steel. I guess my question is why would a naval architect choose a steel mast in a boat design? Will.| 3474|3473|2004-04-16 13:32:18|bubblede|Re: Steel masts|Will, check out the very extensive discussion on this subject over the last couple of weeks - I guess everything we were able to bring forward on this subject was said more than once already ;-) Gerd http://www.justmueller.com/boats/ --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "willmarsh3" wrote: > Sorry if I sound a bit ignorant, but why use a steel mast. | 3475|3473|2004-04-16 14:04:08|brentswain38|Re: Steel masts|Will A piece of steel tubing is around $350 an aluminium extrusion costs thousands of dollars. Aluminium pipe is cheaper, but most steel boatbuilders aren't equipped to weld fittings on themselves and the logistics of having it done are expensive and complex.I can build a steel mast with all the fittings , labour included , for the price of an aluminium pipe before you do anything to it. An aluminium extrusion makes a better mast, no doubt, but given the choice between going cruising now, or having to wait until I can afford the best, I'd rather do what the boat is for, cruising. The cost of a boat is an accumulation of many smaller costs and taking the logic of "whats a few more bucks for this or that' carried throughout the project can add up to a lot of money and can add years to getting ones self free. Once you are cruising, you have time to find a super deal on a used mast, while having fun in the meantime, altho most people are happy enough with a steel mast that they don't consider it worth the effort of changing things.I've seen boats with steel masts sailing alongside identical boats with aluminium masts in 15 knots of wind ,and the difference in angle of heel was barely noticable Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "willmarsh3" wrote: > Sorry if I sound a bit ignorant, but why use a steel mast. Aluminum > seems the better choice to me. My boat that I bought used was custom > built from plans but it has aluminum masts, with no worries about > corrosion eating the inside. Also the top hamper is reduced a bit > since aluminum is lighter than steel. > > I guess my question is why would a naval architect choose a steel > mast in a boat design? > > > Will. | 3476|3476|2004-04-16 14:13:45|edward_stoneuk|Trim Tab Steering.|Brent and all I have a few questions about trim tab operation. When manoeuvring in a dock or reversing etc does one have to lock the trim tab? When remote steering from the pilothouse how is the connection made to avoid oversteering or does one get used to the required technique? What power autopilot is required for the BS 36'? Regards, Ted| 3477|3459|2004-04-16 15:47:16|fmichael graham|Re: Crimes in Iraq|I opened the bentboat sailor group for the purpose of allowing origamiboat members to posture on all topics that are not about the building of the steel boat. Unfortunately, "Wendy", et al, did not get the point. I am leaving for the great forests of northern British Columbia, tomorrow, but am leaving the bentboat sailor group open so that members of this group have the opportunity to air their political ideologies & differences in a separate forum. That's why I wouldn't dare to suggest - on this web site - that I am going to chop down "a whole bunch of trees"... Have a good summer, y'all. Mike audeojude wrote: I also would like to see the list go back to what it is for. Discusion on sailing and boat building. I avoid many other lists because of this type of off topic political or religious prosetilizing (sp). I have nothing against it in general but it doesnt belong here. This is the first list I read every day because of the pertinate and usefull content. I hope that it stays this way. Scott Carle aka Audeojude To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links --------------------------------- Post your free ad now! Yahoo! Canada Personals [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3478|3473|2004-04-16 16:36:23|info@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: Steel masts|The light weight of alloy makes sense for hatches and it can make sense for masts. We should consider how best to make an alloy mast economically. For my money I would go with an alloy tube, and bolt/rivet on all fittings. It is stronger by far than welding. Roll a piece of foam up into a tube, and slide it inside, with the wiring trapped against the mast, and the halyards led down the center. You are done. The mast will be quite, strong, with positive floatation and maintenance free. The economics of alloy are not as simple as it might first seem, because every pound saved aloft allows you to save 10lbs of ballast. This cuts the weight and cost of ballast, allowing you to carry more cruising gear or fuel/water. In effect, by saving weight in a critical area, you can increase your capacity to match a bigger boat. Lets try an example to see how this might effect the cost of cruising: Assume total cost to build less mast $30,000. steel tube - 300 lbs @ $.50/lb = $150 x 2 overhead = $300 alloy tube - 200 lbs @ $3/lb = $600 x 2 overhead = $1200 Cost to build with a steel mast - $30,300 + 100 blast and paint = 30,400 Cost to build with an alloy mast - $31,200 -= less 1000lbs ballast @ $.50 lb = 30,700. Capacity with steel 4000 lbs, Capacity with alloy 4000lbs + 1000 lbs saved as ballast + 100 lbs saved in the mast = 5100 Cost per pound cruising capacity: steel mast: 30,400/4000 = $7.6/lb alloy mast: 30,700/5100 = $6.0/lb Assume for safety reasons you only cut 500 lbs of ballast: alloy mast: 30,950/4600 = $6.7/lb How about if you didn't cut any ballast: alloy mast: 31,200/4100 = $7.6/lb This is only meant as an example, to show that depending on your circumstances, you can calculate whether an alloy or steel mast might be the better choice. Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3479|3465|2004-04-17 10:57:12|tsuhaung@aol.com|Re: Steel Mast|Why fill the whole mast with foam? I like the idea of tie wraps every few feet to stop the cables from knocking around all night. If you were to run all your cables then inflate a balloon a foot up inside before your sprayed in the foam, it could act as a plug It would also be easier to dig out if you ever had to replace or run more wires for some unforeseen reason. As to painting the inside it seems a lot of work that is not needed but those with more experience could comment on this. But to paint the inside what I have done on similar projects was to fashion a "pig". Stand the mast upright drop a rope through to the bottom and with the pig about 6" down fill the mast with your favourite rust paint. Have your friend slowly pull the rope down pulling the pig down also. You keep adding paint. The idea is to keep a small reservoir of paint not fill the thing. The inside will need to wire brushed, a similar process. A little messy but the inside will have a smooth painted surface all the way around. If I was to do my mast this way I think I might weld on flat rings that removable plates top and bottom would bolt to. This would make future work easier and accessible. In some location where welding and grinding tools were not be available repairs could still be done. Ken [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3480|3465|2004-04-17 13:46:07|prairiemaidca|Steel Mast|HI All: That's basically what I had in mind except to paint the inside I thought that after all the welding and fitting and a good cleaning an appropriate amount of rust paint could be placed into the mast while it is laying flat with a plug in one end. Then by lifting one end and slowly rotating the mast you could place the paint throughout the entire unit. Remove the plug and allow to air dry with a small fan at one end. One thing I'm not quite sure of is the attachment of the sail track. Is the most common method to drill holes and screw the aluminum track to the steel mast? As far as the cost goes of aluminum vrs. steel I would love a nice aluminum pole but the cost of obtaining one and then shipping it out here to the Prairies is not worth it. I got 90% of my balast free from a local hospital so the the analogy of balast cost savings etc. doesn't really apply in our case. Martin Forster (Prairie Maid)| 3481|3476|2004-04-17 15:15:03|brentswain38|Re: Trim Tab Steering.|When manouvering, I prefer to be in the cockpit anyway in order to be able to jump out onto the dock quickly, so I steer with the tiller. I have a piece of 1/2 inch ID tubing welded to the midddle of the top of the tiller pipe which I drop a 1/2 inch pin thru the trimtab loop into to lock the trimtab. As long as the attachement of the inside steering to the trimtab loop is 1 inch behind the rudder axis, you have a slight negative feedback and there is no tendency to oversteer. As you are only turning the balanced trimtab there are only very tiny loads on the auto pilot and you can use the tiniest one available. an Autohelm 800 is adequate. This is one of the huge advantages of trimtab steering over steering with the main rudder. --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "edward_stoneuk" wrote: > Brent and all > I have a few questions about trim tab operation. When manoeuvring > in a dock or reversing etc does one have to lock the trim tab? When > remote steering from the pilothouse how is the connection made to > avoid oversteering or does one get used to the required technique? > What power autopilot is required for the BS 36'? > Regards, > Ted | 3482|3465|2004-04-17 16:09:40|Paul J. Thompson|Re: Steel Mast|Hi, Just a note. I have had a steel mast on my gaff rigged Tahitiana for 14 years now. The mast was sand blasted and epoxy coated on the outside and the painted with a two part poly, it is not galvanized. The tube was welded closed on each end and electrical and instrument cables run up a shroud on the outside. It was given to more coats of two part polly about six years ago but apart from that has received no maintained. Rust has never been a problem in any way, not even where the gaff jaws contact the mast (jaws are protected with polly propylene). I am now converting to a junk rig (also steel masts). To satisfy my curiosity I cut open my old mast. It was like new inside. A little light (very light) rusting not even enough to stain the approximately 1/2 litre of water that ran out. The water was fresh (I tasted it) and is most likely condensation. In conclusion I can say that with three South Atlantic crossing and 12 years of live aboard and extensive cruising, I am more than happy with a steel mast. Prove of that, the new junk rig has steel masts. These are tapered sixteen sided poles (could not get tapered round pole in NZ) made up for me by the locale street light pole manufacture. The new masts are Galvanized, not because I really feel that it is necessary but it simply cost me no more so I had it done. Cost for both masts was NZ$2 700.00. I can supplier a photo if any one wants one. Regards, Paul --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.656 / Virus Database: 421 - Release Date: 09/04/2004| 3483|3483|2004-04-18 02:15:50|John Jones|Pull Lugs|Okay Brent, I'm at the stage where I PULL the hull into shape.... So where should I place the lugs to make the hull pull together properly, and is there something I should be looking for while or before doing this? John| 3484|3483|2004-04-18 03:17:52|bubblede|Re: Pull Lugs|John - as I'll be there next month - will you provide some pictures of the process? Gerd http://www.justmueller.com/boats/ --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "John Jones" wrote: > Okay Brent, > I'm at the stage where I PULL the hull into shape.... So where > should I place the lugs to make the hull pull together properly, > and is there something I should be looking for while or before > doing this? John | 3485|3459|2004-04-18 14:05:44|moby_duck_2004|Re: Crimes in Iraq|Misplaced postings are annoying. However, inside every cloud there is a silver lining: Most married men have one person that they fear more than god, and that is their wives. Thus, instead of spending their money on sensible things like building a boat so they can go fishing with their buddies, they are subject to the mindless tedium of endless home redecoration and mall shopping. They lurk in the background on this and other groups, wishing they too could build a boat, fearing it will forever be beyond their reach. For those men I say salvation may be at hand. There is of course a world conspiracy, centered on the prophecy at Fatima. The first two of these prophesied the First and Second world wars. The third Prophecy is the most closely held secret in Christendom; the Third world war leading to Armageddon as foretold in Revelations. Central to this is the destructions of Satan's armies in Babylon. Now, it doesn't take much imagination to make the case that Babylon is Iraq, and except for a typo, Saddam would be Satan. After all these year who can be sure? Thus, without too much work it should be possible for many husbands to make the case that there is no reason to be saving money for a rainy day, because the rain has arrived. And, what better place to be when the big one goes off than on a sailboat on some desert island in the South Pacific? So, for those husbands still waiting to get started on a boat, carpe diem. :) TGWD ps: in case there was any doubt, this article is a work of fiction, and has nothing to do with religion.| 3486|3483|2004-04-18 22:35:56|John Jones|Re: Pull Lugs|If I get that far, yes....... "God I hope I have'nt skrewed up anything" John -- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "bubblede" wrote: > John - as I'll be there next month - will you provide some pictures > of the process? > > Gerd > > http://www.justmueller.com/boats/ > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "John Jones" > wrote: > > Okay Brent, > > I'm at the stage where I PULL the hull into shape.... So where > > should I place the lugs to make the hull pull together properly, > > and is there something I should be looking for while or before > > doing this? John | 3488|3370|2004-04-19 12:19:05|dreemer1962|Re: new 37' design|"…Using deep draft to get back the stability lost to narrow beam would be a huge handicap for a cruising boat, not worth the price…" Sailing in the Dutch waters full of shallows, I learned to appreciate advan= tages of the shallow draft, so, I agree with you on this point - very deep draft should be reserved for the racers. "…Twin keels are chosen partly for their shallow draft for a given sized hu= ll, shallow draft which is incompatible with a narrow hull…" No, it isn't incompatible if you keep heeling forces in balance with availa= ble stability. I made some preliminary calculations. I took your 31 footer for a base model (approximately, taking measures from the illustr= ations in your book) and lengthened her to 40 ft, leaving same beam, height, draft, stem rake, e.c.t. and then compered the two. Long= er boat would heave about 30% more righting moment. That provides enough sail caring ability for slightly increased sail area w= ithout a need for deeper fin. "…I just did a couple of trips home from Tonga in the last 4 years, most of= the 10,000 miles to windward, so the arguement that cruising boats only sail mostly downwind is not true, unless you want to be= forced to sail around the world every time you do a bit of downwind sailing, an unreasonable alternative …" I didn't say that cruising boats doesn't sail upwind at all. I sad consider= ing the fact that most of long distant passages are sailed in prevailing wind directions, average windward ability is good enough. By ave= rage I meant typical modern cruising boats. As a meter of fact, boat types which I proposed would actually would be very good for tha= t type of long distance windward passages which you are being sailing. That, to 40 ft stretched 31 footer, would be faster up wind = and would heave more comfortable motion. (Thanks to 10 ft longer waterline, finer enterance angle, more volume on the front placed fu= rther forward, with much more longitudinal stability). Pointing ability would be the same. "…Long narrow boats which don't hobby horse tend to bury their bows like su= bmarines and take a lot of green water over the bows…" Like everything in a boat design, it's meter of balance. Goal is to minimis= e hobby horsing but not to the extent of the nose diving. I heave a filling that proportions of LOA of 40ft and beam of 10ft can heave = enough slenderness, fine bow, but still enough volume forward to give very satisfactory ride. "…If getting there a day sooner is that important ,and you hate being at se= a that much , catch a plane.I don't consider an extra half a knot of speed…" For me, it is not question off being in a hurry, it is just a pure pleasure= of seeing a clean wake, and feeling effortless moves and fast sailing with minimum fuss in the water, of the low drag hull. All of that o= n the easy to handle boat with a lot of directional stability and relatively small sails. I think that difference in speed on passages would = be substantially higher then half knot. Longer hull would be much faster in the stronger winds and slightly slower in very light winds. = I think it's realistic to expect 2 knots faster average speed on long passages. "…worth giving up all that extra interior space and comfort for…" It depends how you look at it. I suppose that you look at the 40ft long 10f= t wide boat as narrowed 40ft long 13ft wide boat. I see her as a lengthened 30ft long 10ft wide boat. So, in my optics, there is no sacri= ficed space, on the contrary, there is more space. The lengthened boat (LOA=40ft; Beam=10ft) would cost just a fraction more then = 10ft shorter boat (LOA=30ft; Beam=10ft) (A little bit more steel plate, same engine and rig). Conventional 40 footer (LOA=40ft; Beam=1= 3ft) is different class all together, she would cost much more. Milan --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" wro= te: > Using deep draft to get back the stability lost to narrow beam would > be a huge handicap for a cruising boat, not worth the price.Most > narrow boats have extrwemely deep draft for their length, to make up > for their lack of form stability. Twin keels are chosen partly for > their shallow draft for a given sized hull, shallow draft which is > incompatible with a narrow hull. > I just did a couple of trips home from Tonga in the last 4 years, > most of the 10,000 miles to windward, so the arguement that cruising > boats only sail mostly downwind is not true, unless you want to be > forced to sail around the world every time you do a bit of downwind > sailing, an unreasonable alternative . > A client I met in Fanning Island tried full length battens for the > first time. I asked him what he thought of them. He said " battens > suck." After he had sailed to New Zealand and back I asked him again > and he said ' Battens still suck" I had sold him my last boat which > had no battens and he loved the arrangement. I believe cruisers who > still use battens have never tried sailing without them.Another > cruiser doing the same trip told me the same thing. > Long narrow boats which don't hobby horse tend to bury their bows > like submarines and take a lot of green water over the bows. > If getting there a day sooner is that important ,and you hate being > at sea that much , catch a plane.I don't consider an extra half a > knot of speed worth giving up all that extra interior space and > comfort for. > With origami construction, there is absolutely no time saving in > longer narrower hulls, so even with a commercial builder there is no > saving. > Brent Swain | 3489|3489|2004-04-19 15:42:15|sharadsharma@setarnet.aw|message posts|Hi guys, i do not know i i am something wrong. but the wish list is please remove the arrows for old messages just change the color it can make message reading very easy. Thnks in advance SS| 3490|3483|2004-04-19 16:17:22|brentswain38|Re: Pull Lugs|The photos in the beginning of the hull construction photos shows where the first lugs go, near the centreline on either side of the bottom tranverse seams. Lifting and blocking the ends up and the sheer a bit makes cranking these comealongs much easier.As you crank, lifting the ends further makes cranking easier. It gets easier as the weight of the plate is more and more carried by the comealongs which get greater leverage as you go. Usually you have to put a comealong from the centreline edge of the plate to a lug on the topsides , just above the chine, at several points, but somtimes you get away without them.Prying up with a crowbar under the chines helps a lot. Scoring the plate for 6 inches , about halfway thru beyond the end of the chine,in line with the chines , then tapping this area with the sledge hammer while cranking on the comealong makes the first part of the chine seam go together easier.Be careful not to make hammer marks.Sometimes you have to overcrank the first comealong to get started , then back her off later. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "John Jones" wrote: > Okay Brent, > I'm at the stage where I PULL the hull into shape.... So where > should I place the lugs to make the hull pull together properly, > and is there something I should be looking for while or before > doing this? John | 3491|3370|2004-04-19 16:29:34|brentswain38|Re: new 37' design|I've yet to see any one build a 40 footer for less than a 31 footer. My 31 footer cost me $6,000 to get sailing. Try build a 40 footer for that price. They always cost many times more.Mathematical therories tend to crash rather bluntly when they encounter reality. The difference between the cost of my boat and that of a 40 footer gave me a headstart that all the speed on the world won't make up for. If,when I started my boat, you'd started a 40 footer on the same income, I'd be thousands of miles and years of freedom ahead ,distance and time you'd never make up for in a lifetime Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "dreemer1962" wrote: > "…Using deep draft to get back the stability lost to narrow beam would > be a huge handicap for a cruising boat, not worth the price…" > > Sailing in the Dutch waters full of shallows, I learned to appreciate advan= > tages of the shallow draft, so, I agree with you on this point - > very deep draft should be reserved for the racers. > > "…Twin keels are chosen partly for their shallow draft for a given sized hu= > ll, shallow draft which is incompatible with a narrow hull…" > > No, it isn't incompatible if you keep heeling forces in balance with availa= > ble stability. I made some preliminary calculations. I took your > 31 footer for a base model (approximately, taking measures from the illustr= > ations in your book) and lengthened her to 40 ft, leaving > same beam, height, draft, stem rake, e.c.t. and then compered the two. Long= > er boat would heave about 30% more righting moment. > That provides enough sail caring ability for slightly increased sail area w= > ithout a need for deeper fin. > > "…I just did a couple of trips home from Tonga in the last 4 years, most of= > the 10,000 miles to windward, so the arguement that > cruising boats only sail mostly downwind is not true, unless you want to be= > forced to sail around the world every time you do a bit of > downwind sailing, an unreasonable alternative …" > > I didn't say that cruising boats doesn't sail upwind at all. I sad consider= > ing the fact that most of long distant passages are sailed in > prevailing wind directions, average windward ability is good enough. By ave= > rage I meant typical modern cruising boats. As a meter of > fact, boat types which I proposed would actually would be very good for tha= > t type of long distance windward passages which you are > being sailing. That, to 40 ft stretched 31 footer, would be faster up wind = > and would heave more comfortable motion. (Thanks to 10 ft > longer waterline, finer enterance angle, more volume on the front placed fu= > rther forward, with much more longitudinal stability). Pointing > ability would be the same. > > "…Long narrow boats which don't hobby horse tend to bury their bows like su= > bmarines and take a lot of green water over the bows…" > > Like everything in a boat design, it's meter of balance. Goal is to minimis= > e hobby horsing but not to the extent of the nose diving. I > heave a filling that proportions of LOA of 40ft and beam of 10ft can heave = > enough slenderness, fine bow, but still enough volume > forward to give very satisfactory ride. > > "…If getting there a day sooner is that important ,and you hate being at se= > a that much , catch a plane.I don't consider an extra half a > knot of speed…" > > For me, it is not question off being in a hurry, it is just a pure pleasure= > of seeing a clean wake, and feeling effortless moves and fast > sailing with minimum fuss in the water, of the low drag hull. All of that o= > n the easy to handle boat with a lot of directional stability and > relatively small sails. I think that difference in speed on passages would = > be substantially higher then half knot. Longer hull would be > much faster in the stronger winds and slightly slower in very light winds. = > I think it's realistic to expect 2 knots faster average speed on > long passages. > > "…worth giving up all that extra interior space and comfort for…" > > It depends how you look at it. I suppose that you look at the 40ft long 10f= > t wide boat as narrowed 40ft long 13ft wide boat. I see her as > a lengthened 30ft long 10ft wide boat. So, in my optics, there is no sacri= > ficed space, on the contrary, there is more space. The > lengthened boat (LOA=40ft; Beam=10ft) would cost just a fraction more then = > 10ft shorter boat (LOA=30ft; Beam=10ft) (A little bit more > steel plate, same engine and rig). Conventional 40 footer (LOA=40ft; Beam=1= > 3ft) is different class all together, she would cost much > more. > > Milan > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" wro= > te: > > Using deep draft to get back the stability lost to narrow beam would > > be a huge handicap for a cruising boat, not worth the price.Most > > narrow boats have extrwemely deep draft for their length, to make up > > for their lack of form stability. Twin keels are chosen partly for > > their shallow draft for a given sized hull, shallow draft which is > > incompatible with a narrow hull. > > I just did a couple of trips home from Tonga in the last 4 years, > > most of the 10,000 miles to windward, so the arguement that cruising > > boats only sail mostly downwind is not true, unless you want to be > > forced to sail around the world every time you do a bit of downwind > > sailing, an unreasonable alternative . > > A client I met in Fanning Island tried full length battens for the > > first time. I asked him what he thought of them. He said " battens > > suck." After he had sailed to New Zealand and back I asked him again > > and he said ' Battens still suck" I had sold him my last boat which > > had no battens and he loved the arrangement. I believe cruisers who > > still use battens have never tried sailing without them.Another > > cruiser doing the same trip told me the same thing. > > Long narrow boats which don't hobby horse tend to bury their bows > > like submarines and take a lot of green water over the bows. > > If getting there a day sooner is that important ,and you hate being > > at sea that much , catch a plane.I don't consider an extra half a > > knot of speed worth giving up all that extra interior space and > > comfort for. > > With origami construction, there is absolutely no time saving in > > longer narrower hulls, so even with a commercial builder there is no > > saving. > > Brent Swain | 3492|3492|2004-04-19 17:41:21|denis buggy|Re: hull design|Hello all . I have enjoyed the discussions on hull design and the emails following my comment on boat design , I gather from the remarks re catamarans that an interest in same is a form of nautical leprosy however I press on and I have read your discussions on long slim hulls and twin keels and the puzzle making a hull do its job with the weight of a house under its keel to keep it up right and big displacement to keep it from sinking and I wonder at the omission of two hulls long and slim with a higher hull speed and room to cook the steak and chill the wine for the guests who are snoozing horizontally in their bed rooms while the long wave allows the world to pass calmly 12 knots ish outside. did I hear something lately about somebody cutting 26 days off the solo round the world event I wonder what kind of hull did he use . thank you Mr Swain for the reply it was very helpful .regards denis buggy ----- Original Message ----- From: brentswain38 To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, April 19, 2004 9:25 PM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: new 37' design I've yet to see any one build a 40 footer for less than a 31 footer. My 31 footer cost me $6,000 to get sailing. Try build a 40 footer for that price. They always cost many times more.Mathematical therories tend to crash rather bluntly when they encounter reality. The difference between the cost of my boat and that of a 40 footer gave me a headstart that all the speed on the world won't make up for. If,when I started my boat, you'd started a 40 footer on the same income, I'd be thousands of miles and years of freedom ahead ,distance and time you'd never make up for in a lifetime Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "dreemer1962" wrote: > ".Using deep draft to get back the stability lost to narrow beam would > be a huge handicap for a cruising boat, not worth the price." > > Sailing in the Dutch waters full of shallows, I learned to appreciate advan= > tages of the shallow draft, so, I agree with you on this point - > very deep draft should be reserved for the racers. > > ".Twin keels are chosen partly for their shallow draft for a given sized hu= > ll, shallow draft which is incompatible with a narrow hull." > > No, it isn't incompatible if you keep heeling forces in balance with availa= > ble stability. I made some preliminary calculations. I took your > 31 footer for a base model (approximately, taking measures from the illustr= > ations in your book) and lengthened her to 40 ft, leaving > same beam, height, draft, stem rake, e.c.t. and then compered the two. Long= > er boat would heave about 30% more righting moment. > That provides enough sail caring ability for slightly increased sail area w= > ithout a need for deeper fin. > > ".I just did a couple of trips home from Tonga in the last 4 years, most of= > the 10,000 miles to windward, so the arguement that > cruising boats only sail mostly downwind is not true, unless you want to be= > forced to sail around the world every time you do a bit of > downwind sailing, an unreasonable alternative ." > > I didn't say that cruising boats doesn't sail upwind at all. I sad consider= > ing the fact that most of long distant passages are sailed in > prevailing wind directions, average windward ability is good enough. By ave= > rage I meant typical modern cruising boats. As a meter of > fact, boat types which I proposed would actually would be very good for tha= > t type of long distance windward passages which you are > being sailing. That, to 40 ft stretched 31 footer, would be faster up wind = > and would heave more comfortable motion. (Thanks to 10 ft > longer waterline, finer enterance angle, more volume on the front placed fu= > rther forward, with much more longitudinal stability). Pointing > ability would be the same. > > ".Long narrow boats which don't hobby horse tend to bury their bows like su= > bmarines and take a lot of green water over the bows." > > Like everything in a boat design, it's meter of balance. Goal is to minimis= > e hobby horsing but not to the extent of the nose diving. I > heave a filling that proportions of LOA of 40ft and beam of 10ft can heave = > enough slenderness, fine bow, but still enough volume > forward to give very satisfactory ride. > > ".If getting there a day sooner is that important ,and you hate being at se= > a that much , catch a plane.I don't consider an extra half a > knot of speed." > > For me, it is not question off being in a hurry, it is just a pure pleasure= > of seeing a clean wake, and feeling effortless moves and fast > sailing with minimum fuss in the water, of the low drag hull. All of that o= > n the easy to handle boat with a lot of directional stability and > relatively small sails. I think that difference in speed on passages would = > be substantially higher then half knot. Longer hull would be > much faster in the stronger winds and slightly slower in very light winds. = > I think it's realistic to expect 2 knots faster average speed on > long passages. > > ".worth giving up all that extra interior space and comfort for." > > It depends how you look at it. I suppose that you look at the 40ft long 10f= > t wide boat as narrowed 40ft long 13ft wide boat. I see her as > a lengthened 30ft long 10ft wide boat. So, in my optics, there is no sacri= > ficed space, on the contrary, there is more space. The > lengthened boat (LOA=40ft; Beam=10ft) would cost just a fraction more then = > 10ft shorter boat (LOA=30ft; Beam=10ft) (A little bit more > steel plate, same engine and rig). Conventional 40 footer (LOA=40ft; Beam=1= > 3ft) is different class all together, she would cost much > more. > > Milan > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" wro= > te: > > Using deep draft to get back the stability lost to narrow beam would > > be a huge handicap for a cruising boat, not worth the price.Most > > narrow boats have extrwemely deep draft for their length, to make up > > for their lack of form stability. Twin keels are chosen partly for > > their shallow draft for a given sized hull, shallow draft which is > > incompatible with a narrow hull. > > I just did a couple of trips home from Tonga in the last 4 years, > > most of the 10,000 miles to windward, so the arguement that cruising > > boats only sail mostly downwind is not true, unless you want to be > > forced to sail around the world every time you do a bit of downwind > > sailing, an unreasonable alternative . > > A client I met in Fanning Island tried full length battens for the > > first time. I asked him what he thought of them. He said " battens > > suck." After he had sailed to New Zealand and back I asked him again > > and he said ' Battens still suck" I had sold him my last boat which > > had no battens and he loved the arrangement. I believe cruisers who > > still use battens have never tried sailing without them.Another > > cruiser doing the same trip told me the same thing. > > Long narrow boats which don't hobby horse tend to bury their bows > > like submarines and take a lot of green water over the bows. > > If getting there a day sooner is that important ,and you hate being > > at sea that much , catch a plane.I don't consider an extra half a > > knot of speed worth giving up all that extra interior space and > > comfort for. > > With origami construction, there is absolutely no time saving in > > longer narrower hulls, so even with a commercial builder there is no > > saving. > > Brent Swain To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3493|3493|2004-04-19 18:18:09|Hall,Clarrie|Nautical Leprosy (was hull design)|Hilarious Multi hull followers are not the only nautical lepers. In the power boat realm jet boaters are lepers according to the propeller heads. It would be a boring world if everyone thought the same. Celebrate diversity, think freely, do what is right for you. Clarrie Hall -----Original Message----- From: denis buggy [mailto:buggy@...] Sent: Tuesday, 20 April 2004 9:41 a.m. To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: hull design Hello all . I have enjoyed the discussions on hull design and the emails following my comment on boat design , I gather from the remarks re catamarans that an interest in same is a form of nautical leprosy however I press on and I have read your discussions on long slim hulls and twin keels and the puzzle making a hull do its job with the weight of a house under its keel to keep it up right and big displacement to keep it from sinking and I wonder at the omission of two hulls long and slim with a higher hull speed and room to cook the steak and chill the wine for the guests who are snoozing horizontally in their bed rooms while the long wave allows the world to pass calmly 12 knots ish outside. did I hear something lately about somebody cutting 26 days off the solo round the world event I wonder what kind of hull did he use . thank you Mr Swain for the reply it was very helpful .regards denis buggy ------------------------------------------------------------------------ CAUTION - This message may contain privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the addressee(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient of this message you are notified that any use, dissemination, distribution or reproduction of this message is prohibited; If you have received this message in error please notify the sender immediately via return email and erase all copies of this message and attachments. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of Rotorua District Council. ------------------------------------------------------------------------| 3494|3494|2004-04-19 19:02:06|franzmarc|Steel suppliers|I have been researching possible suppliers of large (8' X 40') steel sheeting. I didn't find anything in the archives about where to get it, only that its not as good to weld sheets together (which makes sense). Does anyone know of any links? Thanks!| 3495|3465|2004-04-19 20:09:14|Gerald Niffenegger|Re: Steel Mast|I just returned from the boat show in Rio. What a great city! However, it is great to be back down here where there are cooler temperatures. I only visited with one supplier that could proved a standing rig. The mast would be aluminum and is made here in Brazil. The official quote will arrive later this week. It looks like the mast will cost less than you fellas are spending for a steel mast? I saw a number of steel hull sail boats. Most of them looked home made. I think that is like saying to a lady "did you make that dress?" I am sure they all function and one was manned by my boats designer. I think that I learned something very important from the show and that is resale appeal. My plan is to use this 36' as a springboard. After using it for a while, sell it and start on a 40'+. I am concerned about not having a homemade look to the boat. Not that I am picky but when someone is spending many thousands of dollars for a boat that potential buyer might be picky. Just a thought but I would still like to see a set of how to build a steel mast pictures. Gerald Niffenegger Florianopolis, SC Brasil| 3496|3496|2004-04-20 12:09:14|prairiemaidca|steel Masts|Hi all: I'm sure there are some real deals on masts all over the world, but the cost of shipping one a long way would probably cost as much as the mast. As for the great debate over boats,materials etc. I would think that the bottom line will always be how much you have to spend and how much you are willing to part with. The beauty of a 36ft Swain is, that it is within my ablility to make it happen and allow me to own an open ocean capable vessel. Plus enjoy the hobby of building it. Martin Forster (Prairie Maid)| 3497|3492|2004-04-20 13:51:02|brentswain38|Re: hull design|In rough weather I wouldn't sleep too well knowing that a capsize would be permanent. In 1973 ,in the Marquesas ,I met a trimaran which had made a 21 day passage from San Diego to Nuku Hiva. The two very experienced crew members said they would never go to sea in a multihull again. While they were making 200 mile days , the motion of the light hull was so bad that they had to wire the pots and kettle to the stove to stop them from jumping the 3 inch fiddles , and could only go to the foredeck on their hands and knees .While sitting on a multihull in harbour I notice that the tiniest waves move her, and can immagine how rough that would be at sea.It takes flimsey construction, too flimsey to survive a collision with a container , to get the most out of a multihull.Multihulls when fully loaded with all the gear and supplies needed for safe long distance cruising , tend to be far heavier than their designers intended and don't do any better passage times than monohulls , at least in the remote areas of the Pacific.In these areas , staying afloat in a holed or capsized multihull just means an invitable slow death . If you hate being at sea that much, take a plane .I'll take the comfort and security of a heavier monohull and sleep well knowing I have all that ballast to keep her the right way up. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "denis buggy" wrote: > Hello all . I have enjoyed the discussions on hull design and the emails following my comment on boat design , I gather from the remarks re catamarans that an interest in same is a form of nautical leprosy however I press on and I have read your discussions on long slim hulls and twin keels and the puzzle making a hull do its job with the weight of a house under its keel to keep it up right and big displacement to keep it from sinking and I wonder at the omission of two hulls long and slim with a higher hull speed and room to cook the steak and chill the wine for the guests who are snoozing horizontally in their bed rooms while the long wave allows the world to pass calmly 12 knots ish outside. did I hear something lately about somebody cutting 26 days off the solo round the world event I wonder what kind of hull did he use . > thank you Mr Swain for the reply it was very helpful .regards denis buggy > ----- Original Message ----- > From: brentswain38 > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Monday, April 19, 2004 9:25 PM > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: new 37' design > > > I've yet to see any one build a 40 footer for less than a 31 footer. > My 31 footer cost me $6,000 to get sailing. Try build a 40 footer > for that price. They always cost many times more.Mathematical > therories tend to crash rather bluntly when they encounter reality. > The difference between the cost of my boat and that of a 40 footer > gave me a headstart that all the speed on the world won't make up for. > If,when I started my boat, you'd started a 40 footer on the same > income, I'd be thousands of miles and years of freedom > ahead ,distance and time you'd never make up for in a lifetime > Brent Swain > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "dreemer1962" > wrote: > > ".Using deep draft to get back the stability lost to narrow beam > would > > be a huge handicap for a cruising boat, not worth the price." > > > > Sailing in the Dutch waters full of shallows, I learned to > appreciate advan= > > tages of the shallow draft, so, I agree with you on this point - > > very deep draft should be reserved for the racers. > > > > ".Twin keels are chosen partly for their shallow draft for a given > sized hu= > > ll, shallow draft which is incompatible with a narrow hull." > > > > No, it isn't incompatible if you keep heeling forces in balance > with availa= > > ble stability. I made some preliminary calculations. I took your > > 31 footer for a base model (approximately, taking measures from the > illustr= > > ations in your book) and lengthened her to 40 ft, leaving > > same beam, height, draft, stem rake, e.c.t. and then compered the > two. Long= > > er boat would heave about 30% more righting moment. > > That provides enough sail caring ability for slightly increased > sail area w= > > ithout a need for deeper fin. > > > > ".I just did a couple of trips home from Tonga in the last 4 years, > most of= > > the 10,000 miles to windward, so the arguement that > > cruising boats only sail mostly downwind is not true, unless you > want to be= > > forced to sail around the world every time you do a bit of > > downwind sailing, an unreasonable alternative ." > > > > I didn't say that cruising boats doesn't sail upwind at all. I sad > consider= > > ing the fact that most of long distant passages are sailed in > > prevailing wind directions, average windward ability is good > enough. By ave= > > rage I meant typical modern cruising boats. As a meter of > > fact, boat types which I proposed would actually would be very good > for tha= > > t type of long distance windward passages which you are > > being sailing. That, to 40 ft stretched 31 footer, would be faster > up wind = > > and would heave more comfortable motion. (Thanks to 10 ft > > longer waterline, finer enterance angle, more volume on the front > placed fu= > > rther forward, with much more longitudinal stability). Pointing > > ability would be the same. > > > > ".Long narrow boats which don't hobby horse tend to bury their bows > like su= > > bmarines and take a lot of green water over the bows." > > > > Like everything in a boat design, it's meter of balance. Goal is to > minimis= > > e hobby horsing but not to the extent of the nose diving. I > > heave a filling that proportions of LOA of 40ft and beam of 10ft > can heave = > > enough slenderness, fine bow, but still enough volume > > forward to give very satisfactory ride. > > > > ".If getting there a day sooner is that important ,and you hate > being at se= > > a that much , catch a plane.I don't consider an extra half a > > knot of speed." > > > > For me, it is not question off being in a hurry, it is just a pure > pleasure= > > of seeing a clean wake, and feeling effortless moves and fast > > sailing with minimum fuss in the water, of the low drag hull. All > of that o= > > n the easy to handle boat with a lot of directional stability and > > relatively small sails. I think that difference in speed on > passages would = > > be substantially higher then half knot. Longer hull would be > > much faster in the stronger winds and slightly slower in very light > winds. = > > I think it's realistic to expect 2 knots faster average speed on > > long passages. > > > > ".worth giving up all that extra interior space and comfort for." > > > > It depends how you look at it. I suppose that you look at the 40ft > long 10f= > > t wide boat as narrowed 40ft long 13ft wide boat. I see her as > > a lengthened 30ft long 10ft wide boat. So, in my optics, there is > no sacri= > > ficed space, on the contrary, there is more space. The > > lengthened boat (LOA=40ft; Beam=10ft) would cost just a fraction > more then = > > 10ft shorter boat (LOA=30ft; Beam=10ft) (A little bit more > > steel plate, same engine and rig). Conventional 40 footer > (LOA=40ft; Beam=1= > > 3ft) is different class all together, she would cost much > > more. > > > > Milan > > > > > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" > wro= > > te: > > > Using deep draft to get back the stability lost to narrow beam > would > > > be a huge handicap for a cruising boat, not worth the price.Most > > > narrow boats have extrwemely deep draft for their length, to make > up > > > for their lack of form stability. Twin keels are chosen partly > for > > > their shallow draft for a given sized hull, shallow draft which > is > > > incompatible with a narrow hull. > > > I just did a couple of trips home from Tonga in the last 4 > years, > > > most of the 10,000 miles to windward, so the arguement that > cruising > > > boats only sail mostly downwind is not true, unless you want to > be > > > forced to sail around the world every time you do a bit of > downwind > > > sailing, an unreasonable alternative . > > > A client I met in Fanning Island tried full length battens for > the > > > first time. I asked him what he thought of them. He said " > battens > > > suck." After he had sailed to New Zealand and back I asked him > again > > > and he said ' Battens still suck" I had sold him my last boat > which > > > had no battens and he loved the arrangement. I believe cruisers > who > > > still use battens have never tried sailing without them.Another > > > cruiser doing the same trip told me the same thing. > > > Long narrow boats which don't hobby horse tend to bury their > bows > > > like submarines and take a lot of green water over the bows. > > > If getting there a day sooner is that important ,and you hate > being > > > at sea that much , catch a plane.I don't consider an extra half a > > > knot of speed worth giving up all that extra interior space and > > > comfort for. > > > With origami construction, there is absolutely no time saving > in > > > longer narrower hulls, so even with a commercial builder there is > no > > > saving. > > > Brent Swain > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- > Yahoo! Groups Links > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3498|3494|2004-04-20 13:55:30|brentswain38|Re: Steel suppliers|Most steel suppliers can supply the big sheets . It comes from the mill in coils of 150 feet long or more ,8ft wide , rolled up like toilet paper. When it gets to it's destination , it's rolled flat and they can cut it wherever they want. You just have to bug them a bit for the bigger sheets.They can be very lazy when it comes to changing their routine. A 40 ft flatdeck truck can haul them so 40 ft should be no problem with shipping. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "franzmarc" wrote: > I have been researching possible suppliers of large (8' X 40') steel > sheeting. I didn't find anything in the archives about where to get > it, only that its not as good to weld sheets together (which makes > sense). Does anyone know of any links? Thanks! | 3499|3494|2004-04-20 15:04:53|Alex|Re: Steel suppliers|My steel supplier, A.J. Forsyth on Vancouver Island, BC (at www.ajforsyth.ca) just cuts whatever length you need off of a big rolled up coil which is 8 feet wide and weighs 30,000 lbs. I am getting 36 foot lengths, but 40 is easily possible. Alex| 3500|3465|2004-04-20 19:08:50|franzmarc|Re: Steel Mast|Hi All -I think one could install 1/2" Schedule 40 or 80 electrical PVC conduit into the pipe BEFORE the end plugs are welded in. This type of PVC can be bent using a heatgun or propane torch into a 4 - 5" 90 degree bend at both ends. When it cools it will retain the form you bent it to hot. Starting at the top with the pipe horizontal, a foam plug cut to the diameter of the pipe could be glued at 6.5' intervals along the conduit to support the conduit inside the pipe (mast). Each joint is permanently joined with PVC cement and the foam also so it doesn't slide from vibration. Wires then could be pulled into the conduit using a fish tape. According to the National Electrical Code 2002, Table C9 pg 70-660, this conduit could hold 4 #10 AWG Thhn conductors or 6 # 12 Thhn conductors. Of course you can go to larger 3/4" or 1" conduit if you need larger conductors to make up for voltage drop. Water proof fittings are made for the ends (male adapters) which can be sealed with teflon tape and rubber seals made for that purpose. This is just one idea I got while looking at the "steel mast" posts. I like the cost aspects of the steel mast idea. I saw a picture of a boat with a tri-tower mast that looked like a ham radio tower. Anyone looked at these for weight / resistance factors? I'm an electrician and a sailing neophyte, not a marine engineer so I don't know. I am planning to purchase plans soon for a 36'. Thanks! --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "prairiemaidca" wrote: > Hi All: I agree lets stay on topic or move to a more appropriate > forum. Does anyone have any comments on the idea of using some > plastic conduit and water tight fittings to provide a way to allow > wire up the inside of the steel mast. Also I was thinking of the > possiblity of a good cleaning job and then dumping one of the rust > type paints into the mast and coating it's insides that way. > Martin Forster (Prairie Maid) | 3502|3370|2004-04-21 14:45:05|dreemer1962|Re: new 37' design|Yes, of course, 40 footer is more expensive. Costs for the 40 footer of conventional proportions would increase exponentially, so she should cost roughly two to three times as much as 31 footer. However, what I heave in mind, is very different. I will only add length to the hull, so costs will increase lineary. I heave yet to made detailed calculations, but I already heave reasonably good idea what is involved. As the hull will be lengthened for 33%, displacement, hull-shell area, wetted surface and righting moment will also grow for the same factor, about a third. That means I will heave 1/3 more steel plate to by, cut, weld, paint and insulate. I also need some more lead and 1/3 more sail area. Increased sail area is achievable on the mast of the same height as on 31 footer, by lengthening of the foot of the sails. Interior volume, and deck space would also increase 1/3. Additional deck space will provide storage for the rowing dinghy in front of the mast. Interior will be simple, basic and light, with about same accommodation as 31 footer. Additional 1/3 of the volume will be used for separate workshop with storage space for the tools, paints and all the junk, maybe even scuba diving equipment. Hull will cost 1/3 more. Mast and engine are the same as on 31 footer. Sails are bigger, but they will be second hand, so price is more or less same. Rigging will need few meters longer galvanised wires, which will be 1\3 more stressed, but as the rigging on 31 are oversized, I think about same strength will be enough on the 40 footer. (Not sure, need more calculations). Interior will cost same sum because costs for making storage/workshop are negligible. Rule of the thumb is that hull costs 1/3, sails and rigging 1/3 and interior and engine 1/3. As only hull would cost 1/3 more it means that total costs would be 1/6 to maybe 1/5 higher then 31 footer. As we can save a lot by visiting scrap yards and such, hull costs are bigger percentage of the whole boat. In that case, narrow 40 footer would cost around 1/3 more then 31 footer. Milan --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" wrote: > I've yet to see any one build a 40 footer for less than a 31 footer. > My 31 footer cost me $6,000 to get sailing. Try build a 40 footer > for that price. They always cost many times more.Mathematical > therories tend to crash rather bluntly when they encounter reality. > The difference between the cost of my boat and that of a 40 footer > gave me a headstart that all the speed on the world won't make up for. > If,when I started my boat, you'd started a 40 footer on the same > income, I'd be thousands of miles and years of freedom > ahead ,distance and time you'd never make up for in a lifetime > Brent Swain > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "dreemer1962" > wrote: > > "…Using deep draft to get back the stability lost to narrow beam > would > > be a huge handicap for a cruising boat, not worth the price…" > > > > Sailing in the Dutch waters full of shallows, I learned to > appreciate advan= > > tages of the shallow draft, so, I agree with you on this point - > > very deep draft should be reserved for the racers. > > > > "…Twin keels are chosen partly for their shallow draft for a given > sized hu= > > ll, shallow draft which is incompatible with a narrow hull…" > > > > No, it isn't incompatible if you keep heeling forces in balance > with availa= > > ble stability. I made some preliminary calculations. I took your > > 31 footer for a base model (approximately, taking measures from the > illustr= > > ations in your book) and lengthened her to 40 ft, leaving > > same beam, height, draft, stem rake, e.c.t. and then compered the > two. Long= > > er boat would heave about 30% more righting moment. > > That provides enough sail caring ability for slightly increased > sail area w= > > ithout a need for deeper fin. > > > > "…I just did a couple of trips home from Tonga in the last 4 years, > most of= > > the 10,000 miles to windward, so the arguement that > > cruising boats only sail mostly downwind is not true, unless you > want to be= > > forced to sail around the world every time you do a bit of > > downwind sailing, an unreasonable alternative …" > > > > I didn't say that cruising boats doesn't sail upwind at all. I sad > consider= > > ing the fact that most of long distant passages are sailed in > > prevailing wind directions, average windward ability is good > enough. By ave= > > rage I meant typical modern cruising boats. As a meter of > > fact, boat types which I proposed would actually would be very good > for tha= > > t type of long distance windward passages which you are > > being sailing. That, to 40 ft stretched 31 footer, would be faster > up wind = > > and would heave more comfortable motion. (Thanks to 10 ft > > longer waterline, finer enterance angle, more volume on the front > placed fu= > > rther forward, with much more longitudinal stability). Pointing > > ability would be the same. > > > > "…Long narrow boats which don't hobby horse tend to bury their bows > like su= > > bmarines and take a lot of green water over the bows…" > > > > Like everything in a boat design, it's meter of balance. Goal is to > minimis= > > e hobby horsing but not to the extent of the nose diving. I > > heave a filling that proportions of LOA of 40ft and beam of 10ft > can heave = > > enough slenderness, fine bow, but still enough volume > > forward to give very satisfactory ride. > > > > "…If getting there a day sooner is that important ,and you hate > being at se= > > a that much , catch a plane.I don't consider an extra half a > > knot of speed…" > > > > For me, it is not question off being in a hurry, it is just a pure > pleasure= > > of seeing a clean wake, and feeling effortless moves and fast > > sailing with minimum fuss in the water, of the low drag hull. All > of that o= > > n the easy to handle boat with a lot of directional stability and > > relatively small sails. I think that difference in speed on > passages would = > > be substantially higher then half knot. Longer hull would be > > much faster in the stronger winds and slightly slower in very light > winds. = > > I think it's realistic to expect 2 knots faster average speed on > > long passages. > > > > "…worth giving up all that extra interior space and comfort for…" > > > > It depends how you look at it. I suppose that you look at the 40ft > long 10f= > > t wide boat as narrowed 40ft long 13ft wide boat. I see her as > > a lengthened 30ft long 10ft wide boat. So, in my optics, there is > no sacri= > > ficed space, on the contrary, there is more space. The > > lengthened boat (LOA=40ft; Beam=10ft) would cost just a fraction > more then = > > 10ft shorter boat (LOA=30ft; Beam=10ft) (A little bit more > > steel plate, same engine and rig). Conventional 40 footer > (LOA=40ft; Beam=1= > > 3ft) is different class all together, she would cost much > > more. > > > > Milan | 3503|3492|2004-04-21 15:26:03|dreemer1962|Re: hull design|Good multihulls do heave much higher speed potential then monohulls. However, it's not easy to achieve high average speed in cruising context with a small crew on the open sea. First, they heave to be very light => very limited payload. Possibility of capsizing => sails reefed during the night, and stronger winds. In the stormy winds from the wrong direction they loose much more miles then mono. These factors contribute to oftenly very disappointing average speed on the passages. As they heave a lot of hull area, they are expensive and labour intensive to build for the payload they can carry. What Gerd once already posted for monohulls, is even more truth for multihulls: You can only heave combination of the 2 of three possible characteristics, performance, size and cost. Fast/seaworthy and cheap means minimum accommodation, cheap and comfortable = floating caravan which sails as a brick and better stays close to the shore, fast/seaworthy and comfortable = huge size, costs a fortune. (I think that this was originaly formulated by Dick Newick, multihull designer). All that sad, they do make sense for some areas and some types of cruising. I for example, contemplated coastal cruising along European coasts on the small open bridge cat with a lot of space for the tent on the platform, for the night. Milan --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "denis buggy" wrote: > Hello all . I have enjoyed the discussions on hull design and the emails following my comment on boat design , I gather from the remarks re catamarans that an interest in same is a form of nautical leprosy however I press on and I have read your discussions on long slim hulls and twin keels and the puzzle making a hull do its job with the weight of a house under its keel to keep it up right and big displacement to keep it from sinking and I wonder at the omission of two hulls long and slim with a higher hull speed and room to cook the steak and chill the wine for the guests who are snoozing horizontally in their bed rooms while the long wave allows the world to pass calmly 12 knots ish outside. did I hear something lately about somebody cutting 26 days off the solo round the world event I wonder what kind of hull did he use . > thank you Mr Swain for the reply it was very helpful .regards denis buggy > ----- Original Message ----- > From: brentswain38 > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Monday, April 19, 2004 9:25 PM > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: new 37' design > > > I've yet to see any one build a 40 footer for less than a 31 footer. > My 31 footer cost me $6,000 to get sailing. Try build a 40 footer > for that price. They always cost many times more.Mathematical > therories tend to crash rather bluntly when they encounter reality. > The difference between the cost of my boat and that of a 40 footer > gave me a headstart that all the speed on the world won't make up for. > If,when I started my boat, you'd started a 40 footer on the same > income, I'd be thousands of miles and years of freedom > ahead ,distance and time you'd never make up for in a lifetime > Brent Swain > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "dreemer1962" > wrote: > > ".Using deep draft to get back the stability lost to narrow beam > would > > be a huge handicap for a cruising boat, not worth the price." > > > > Sailing in the Dutch waters full of shallows, I learned to > appreciate advan= > > tages of the shallow draft, so, I agree with you on this point - > > very deep draft should be reserved for the racers. > > > > ".Twin keels are chosen partly for their shallow draft for a given > sized hu= > > ll, shallow draft which is incompatible with a narrow hull." > > > > No, it isn't incompatible if you keep heeling forces in balance > with availa= > > ble stability. I made some preliminary calculations. I took your > > 31 footer for a base model (approximately, taking measures from the > illustr= > > ations in your book) and lengthened her to 40 ft, leaving > > same beam, height, draft, stem rake, e.c.t. and then compered the > two. Long= > > er boat would heave about 30% more righting moment. > > That provides enough sail caring ability for slightly increased > sail area w= > > ithout a need for deeper fin. > > > > ".I just did a couple of trips home from Tonga in the last 4 years, > most of= > > the 10,000 miles to windward, so the arguement that > > cruising boats only sail mostly downwind is not true, unless you > want to be= > > forced to sail around the world every time you do a bit of > > downwind sailing, an unreasonable alternative ." > > > > I didn't say that cruising boats doesn't sail upwind at all. I sad > consider= > > ing the fact that most of long distant passages are sailed in > > prevailing wind directions, average windward ability is good > enough. By ave= > > rage I meant typical modern cruising boats. As a meter of > > fact, boat types which I proposed would actually would be very good > for tha= > > t type of long distance windward passages which you are > > being sailing. That, to 40 ft stretched 31 footer, would be faster > up wind = > > and would heave more comfortable motion. (Thanks to 10 ft > > longer waterline, finer enterance angle, more volume on the front > placed fu= > > rther forward, with much more longitudinal stability). Pointing > > ability would be the same. > > > > ".Long narrow boats which don't hobby horse tend to bury their bows > like su= > > bmarines and take a lot of green water over the bows." > > > > Like everything in a boat design, it's meter of balance. Goal is to > minimis= > > e hobby horsing but not to the extent of the nose diving. I > > heave a filling that proportions of LOA of 40ft and beam of 10ft > can heave = > > enough slenderness, fine bow, but still enough volume > > forward to give very satisfactory ride. > > > > ".If getting there a day sooner is that important ,and you hate > being at se= > > a that much , catch a plane.I don't consider an extra half a > > knot of speed." > > > > For me, it is not question off being in a hurry, it is just a pure > pleasure= > > of seeing a clean wake, and feeling effortless moves and fast > > sailing with minimum fuss in the water, of the low drag hull. All > of that o= > > n the easy to handle boat with a lot of directional stability and > > relatively small sails. I think that difference in speed on > passages would = > > be substantially higher then half knot. Longer hull would be > > much faster in the stronger winds and slightly slower in very light > winds. = > > I think it's realistic to expect 2 knots faster average speed on > > long passages. > > > > ".worth giving up all that extra interior space and comfort for." > > > > It depends how you look at it. I suppose that you look at the 40ft > long 10f= > > t wide boat as narrowed 40ft long 13ft wide boat. I see her as > > a lengthened 30ft long 10ft wide boat. So, in my optics, there is > no sacri= > > ficed space, on the contrary, there is more space. The > > lengthened boat (LOA=40ft; Beam=10ft) would cost just a fraction > more then = > > 10ft shorter boat (LOA=30ft; Beam=10ft) (A little bit more > > steel plate, same engine and rig). Conventional 40 footer > (LOA=40ft; Beam=1= > > 3ft) is different class all together, she would cost much > > more. > > > > Milan > > > > > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" > wro= > > te: > > > Using deep draft to get back the stability lost to narrow beam > would > > > be a huge handicap for a cruising boat, not worth the price.Most > > > narrow boats have extrwemely deep draft for their length, to make > up > > > for their lack of form stability. Twin keels are chosen partly > for > > > their shallow draft for a given sized hull, shallow draft which > is > > > incompatible with a narrow hull. > > > I just did a couple of trips home from Tonga in the last 4 > years, > > > most of the 10,000 miles to windward, so the arguement that > cruising > > > boats only sail mostly downwind is not true, unless you want to > be > > > forced to sail around the world every time you do a bit of > downwind > > > sailing, an unreasonable alternative . > > > A client I met in Fanning Island tried full length battens for > the > > > first time. I asked him what he thought of them. He said " > battens > > > suck." After he had sailed to New Zealand and back I asked him > again > > > and he said ' Battens still suck" I had sold him my last boat > which > > > had no battens and he loved the arrangement. I believe cruisers > who > > > still use battens have never tried sailing without them.Another > > > cruiser doing the same trip told me the same thing. > > > Long narrow boats which don't hobby horse tend to bury their > bows > > > like submarines and take a lot of green water over the bows. > > > If getting there a day sooner is that important ,and you hate > being > > > at sea that much , catch a plane.I don't consider an extra half a > > > knot of speed worth giving up all that extra interior space and > > > comfort for. > > > With origami construction, there is absolutely no time saving > in > > > longer narrower hulls, so even with a commercial builder there is > no > > > saving. > > > Brent Swain > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- > Yahoo! Groups Links > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3504|3492|2004-04-21 16:56:47|brentswain38|Re: hull design|For books or plans, please don't send Western Union or Money Mart cheques or money orders. They rip you off both at the sender's end and at the receiver's end. I've heard that their outlets are being bought up by Hell's Angels to help launder drug money. Not the kind of subhuman dogshit I like to do business with. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "dreemer1962" wrote: > Good multihulls do heave much higher speed potential then monohulls. > However, it's not easy to achieve high average speed in cruising > context with a small crew on the open sea. First, they heave to be > very light => very limited payload. Possibility of capsizing => sails > reefed during the night, and stronger winds. In the stormy winds from > the wrong direction they loose much more miles then mono. These > factors contribute to oftenly very disappointing average speed on the > passages. As they heave a lot of hull area, they are expensive and > labour intensive to build for the payload they can carry. What Gerd > once already posted for monohulls, is even more truth for multihulls: > You can only heave combination of the 2 of three possible > characteristics, performance, size and cost. Fast/seaworthy and cheap > means minimum accommodation, cheap and comfortable = floating caravan > which sails as a brick and better stays close to the shore, > fast/seaworthy and comfortable = huge size, costs a fortune. (I think > that this was originaly formulated by Dick Newick, multihull > designer). > > All that sad, they do make sense for some areas and some types of > cruising. I for example, contemplated coastal cruising along European > coasts on the small open bridge cat with a lot of space for the tent > on the platform, for the night. > > Milan > > > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "denis buggy" wrote: > > Hello all . I have enjoyed the discussions on hull design and the > emails following my comment on boat design , I gather from the > remarks re catamarans that an interest in same is a form of nautical > leprosy however I press on and I have read your discussions on long > slim hulls and twin keels and the puzzle making a hull do its job > with the weight of a house under its keel to keep it up right and big > displacement to keep it from sinking and I wonder at the omission > of two hulls long and slim with a higher hull speed and room to cook > the steak and chill the wine for the guests who are snoozing > horizontally in their bed rooms while the long wave allows the > world to pass calmly 12 knots ish outside. did I hear something > lately about somebody cutting 26 days off the solo round the world > event I wonder what kind of hull did he use . > > thank you Mr Swain for the reply it was very > helpful .regards denis buggy > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: brentswain38 > > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > Sent: Monday, April 19, 2004 9:25 PM > > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: new 37' design > > > > > > I've yet to see any one build a 40 footer for less than a 31 > footer. > > My 31 footer cost me $6,000 to get sailing. Try build a 40 > footer > > for that price. They always cost many times more.Mathematical > > therories tend to crash rather bluntly when they encounter > reality. > > The difference between the cost of my boat and that of a 40 > footer > > gave me a headstart that all the speed on the world won't make up > for. > > If,when I started my boat, you'd started a 40 footer on the > same > > income, I'd be thousands of miles and years of freedom > > ahead ,distance and time you'd never make up for in a lifetime > > Brent Swain > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "dreemer1962" > > wrote: > > > ".Using deep draft to get back the stability lost to narrow > beam > > would > > > be a huge handicap for a cruising boat, not worth the price." > > > > > > Sailing in the Dutch waters full of shallows, I learned to > > appreciate advan= > > > tages of the shallow draft, so, I agree with you on this point - > > > > very deep draft should be reserved for the racers. > > > > > > ".Twin keels are chosen partly for their shallow draft for a > given > > sized hu= > > > ll, shallow draft which is incompatible with a narrow hull." > > > > > > No, it isn't incompatible if you keep heeling forces in balance > > with availa= > > > ble stability. I made some preliminary calculations. I took > your > > > 31 footer for a base model (approximately, taking measures from > the > > illustr= > > > ations in your book) and lengthened her to 40 ft, leaving > > > same beam, height, draft, stem rake, e.c.t. and then compered > the > > two. Long= > > > er boat would heave about 30% more righting moment. > > > That provides enough sail caring ability for slightly increased > > sail area w= > > > ithout a need for deeper fin. > > > > > > ".I just did a couple of trips home from Tonga in the last 4 > years, > > most of= > > > the 10,000 miles to windward, so the arguement that > > > cruising boats only sail mostly downwind is not true, unless > you > > want to be= > > > forced to sail around the world every time you do a bit of > > > downwind sailing, an unreasonable alternative ." > > > > > > I didn't say that cruising boats doesn't sail upwind at all. I > sad > > consider= > > > ing the fact that most of long distant passages are sailed in > > > prevailing wind directions, average windward ability is good > > enough. By ave= > > > rage I meant typical modern cruising boats. As a meter of > > > fact, boat types which I proposed would actually would be very > good > > for tha= > > > t type of long distance windward passages which you are > > > being sailing. That, to 40 ft stretched 31 footer, would be > faster > > up wind = > > > and would heave more comfortable motion. (Thanks to 10 ft > > > longer waterline, finer enterance angle, more volume on the > front > > placed fu= > > > rther forward, with much more longitudinal stability). Pointing > > > ability would be the same. > > > > > > ".Long narrow boats which don't hobby horse tend to bury their > bows > > like su= > > > bmarines and take a lot of green water over the bows." > > > > > > Like everything in a boat design, it's meter of balance. Goal > is to > > minimis= > > > e hobby horsing but not to the extent of the nose diving. I > > > heave a filling that proportions of LOA of 40ft and beam of > 10ft > > can heave = > > > enough slenderness, fine bow, but still enough volume > > > forward to give very satisfactory ride. > > > > > > ".If getting there a day sooner is that important ,and you hate > > being at se= > > > a that much , catch a plane.I don't consider an extra half a > > > knot of speed." > > > > > > For me, it is not question off being in a hurry, it is just a > pure > > pleasure= > > > of seeing a clean wake, and feeling effortless moves and fast > > > sailing with minimum fuss in the water, of the low drag hull. > All > > of that o= > > > n the easy to handle boat with a lot of directional stability > and > > > relatively small sails. I think that difference in speed on > > passages would = > > > be substantially higher then half knot. Longer hull would be > > > much faster in the stronger winds and slightly slower in very > light > > winds. = > > > I think it's realistic to expect 2 knots faster average speed > on > > > long passages. > > > > > > ".worth giving up all that extra interior space and comfort > for." > > > > > > It depends how you look at it. I suppose that you look at the > 40ft > > long 10f= > > > t wide boat as narrowed 40ft long 13ft wide boat. I see her as > > > a lengthened 30ft long 10ft wide boat. So, in my optics, there > is > > no sacri= > > > ficed space, on the contrary, there is more space. The > > > lengthened boat (LOA=40ft; Beam=10ft) would cost just a > fraction > > more then = > > > 10ft shorter boat (LOA=30ft; Beam=10ft) (A little bit more > > > steel plate, same engine and rig). Conventional 40 footer > > (LOA=40ft; Beam=1= > > > 3ft) is different class all together, she would cost much > > > more. > > > > > > Milan > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" > > wro= > > > te: > > > > Using deep draft to get back the stability lost to narrow > beam > > would > > > > be a huge handicap for a cruising boat, not worth the > price.Most > > > > narrow boats have extrwemely deep draft for their length, to > make > > up > > > > for their lack of form stability. Twin keels are chosen > partly > > for > > > > their shallow draft for a given sized hull, shallow draft > which > > is > > > > incompatible with a narrow hull. > > > > I just did a couple of trips home from Tonga in the last 4 > > years, > > > > most of the 10,000 miles to windward, so the arguement that > > cruising > > > > boats only sail mostly downwind is not true, unless you want > to > > be > > > > forced to sail around the world every time you do a bit of > > downwind > > > > sailing, an unreasonable alternative . > > > > A client I met in Fanning Island tried full length battens > for > > the > > > > first time. I asked him what he thought of them. He said " > > battens > > > > suck." After he had sailed to New Zealand and back I asked > him > > again > > > > and he said ' Battens still suck" I had sold him my last boat > > which > > > > had no battens and he loved the arrangement. I believe > cruisers > > who > > > > still use battens have never tried sailing without > them.Another > > > > cruiser doing the same trip told me the same thing. > > > > Long narrow boats which don't hobby horse tend to bury > their > > bows > > > > like submarines and take a lot of green water over the bows. > > > > If getting there a day sooner is that important ,and you > hate > > being > > > > at sea that much , catch a plane.I don't consider an extra > half a > > > > knot of speed worth giving up all that extra interior space > and > > > > comfort for. > > > > With origami construction, there is absolutely no time > saving > > in > > > > longer narrower hulls, so even with a commercial builder > there is > > no > > > > saving. > > > > Brent Swain > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- > unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ -- > ---------- > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of > Service. > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3505|3465|2004-04-24 11:12:58|info@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: Steel Mast|Regardless of materials used, a "cheap" mast can raise the cost of construction, if it comes at the expense of weight aloft. Every pound you add aloft typically requires that you add 10 pounds of ballast. Thus, the money you save on a mast may end up having to be spend on extra ballast. Once the boat is built to carry a heavier mast, most of the benefit is lost by going to a lighter mast, because you have already paid for the ballast, and it is hard/expensive to remove. One of the important features in a cruising boat is the ability to carry weight. Every 1 pound of weight saved aloft is 10 pounds of ballast that can be saved, which in total allows for an extra 11 pounds of cruising equipment to be carried. Save 10 pounds aloft, and you can carry 110 pounds extra. Save 100 pounds aloft, and you can carry 1100 pounds extra. In a small boat, the ability to carry an extra 1100 pounds is a huge. Enough fresh water for 2 people for 2 months (4 liters/person/day). Saving weight aloft while you are building a boat allows you to carry more in a smaller boat. A 33' boat built with a light mast can end up with the same net capacity as a 36' boat built with a heavy mast. The cost difference between a 33' and 36' boat can pay for a lighter mast, with money left over to go cruising. Steel masts weight for weight are about as strong as alloy in column, however they are only about 1/2 as strong in sheer, and typically need some corrosion reserve, which can result in an overly heavy mast in a small boat. While 3/16" alloy sections are not uncommon, the equivalent weight 1/16" section in steel is typically too thin to be practical. A 1/8" steel section is equivalent in weight to a 3/8" alloy section, which is not common in small boats, except perhaps in unstayed rigs where fatigue resistance becomes a factor. For unstayed rigs in small boats, steel masts have the potential to deliver longer life over alloy, and may well be preferred. The same is not true for stayed rigs, where the fatigue is carried by the steel stays. Alloy is recognized as the preferred choice for furlers, and the figure of $80 has been put forward as the cost of construction, including welding and purchasing the section. Given that furlers are as long as a mast, while not as heavy in section, it seems only reasonable that there is a way to construct an alloy mast such that the overall cost (once you factor in ballast and net cruising capacity) is less than the cost of a steel mast. Alloy is not that expensive as compared to steel. Maybe 2-3 times the cost by weight, and by going to alloy your aim would be to reduce the weight. The Pangaea 50 mast was built with alloy tubing as an example of a low cost alloy mast. An alloy mast can be assembled from tubing in sections without welding, and is stronger when built this way. The corrosion resistance of alloy allows the mast track to be riveted (monel rivets) without concern over maintaining an air-tight seal. http://www.origamimagic.com/Design/Harvey50/Harvey50.htm There is no need to weld winch bases to the mast or boom. Better to lead all the lines aft to the cockpit, with blocks at the mast base. Install some cleats and a set of lazy jacks, and the halyards and reefing lines can be handled from the cockpit. The staysail winches can then double as halyard and reefing winches. What you save on winches alone can pay for the mast. Install a furler and all sail changes can be made from the cockpit. External halyards can be a true pain at anchor on a windy night, and having to lead all the halyards down the stays rather than the mast to prevent noise and chafe is not a great solution, and leaves the lines exposed to UV damage. In a very short time external halyards can chafe the paint right off a mast, and the noise will chafe you. With internal halyards you can flip the lines end for end and double their life. Factor in the cost of a good nights sleep, the cost of halyards (no small amount), and the cost of repainting as when costing your mast. Internal halyards should never be used in an alloy mast unless a foam sleeve is also installed, because the noise in a rolling anchorage will make sleep impossible, no matter how much you tighten the halyards. With a foam sleeve installed, an alloy mast with internal halyards is silent. Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3506|3465|2004-04-25 06:14:32|bubblede|Re: Steel Mast|Concerning useful weight: I just happened to watch a TV presentation of Motor Yachts, and on a dutch built 65 footer they boasted that the interior was so luxurious that they had crafted worktops, galley and bathrooms out of 4 tons of original Carrera marble ;-) Greg, I like your approach of "cruising capacity" as one way to measure a boat. Applies not only to rigs of course, same would go for hull matrial for example, and results seem more differentiated than just looking at displacment overall or just weight aloft for a given amount of cash - and then there is of course a not always easy relaitonship to performance. Brent is right of course, having little money is no excuse for not going to sail if that what you do it for, and it's really difficult to beat his boats overall in price/cruisng capacity. the danger is that taking a decision once, you will repeat it more and more easily throughout the design and building process. I think that for most amateur constructions it is true that we tend to build too strong to begin with and then very often add weight because a) the material used is "cheap" and simple and /or b) we say thatif we are already too heavy, a little bit more can't hurt.... and when we finished, we take all or junk and tools from the building site and pack it somewhere under the floors because we never know when we might need it. There is a lot of discussion here about boats having to be heavy to be good boats. I do not really agree, but one thing that I know is that of the hundered plus amateur boats I have seen over the last 25 years, there was not a single boat that was "too light" when hanging fully loaded from a crane. a lot of them were were quite happy with the boat floating on its lines, having drawn a pessimitic waterline to begin with ;-) If there is one single trap for the amateur, it is weight, too strong (usually in all the wrong places) and too heavy by design or for cost reasons and payload. Gerd http://www.justmueller.com/boats| 3507|3465|2004-04-25 11:32:16|info@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: Steel Mast|Hi Gerd, There is an old saying. Fishing lures are designed to catch fishermen, not fish. Many boats are designed the same way - to sell not to sail. I think it was in "Riddle of the Sands" that the owner of the boat, every time a new piece of gear came aboard, took great pleasure in throwing an old piece of gear over the side. Over the years I've met more than a few sailors with the same tale, including one sailor I knew very well that, becalmed and out of fuel, threw almost everything overboard - including the anchors - to lighten the boat and get moving. These stories always amazed me, as we slowly became heavier and heavier as we cruised, until one day in the Torres Straights I also was throwing gear - including the much treasured stainless, off the boat like mad to lighten us up. To me, a cruising boat is something to carry you and your gear, and the more the boat can carry, the more people that can live and travel on the boat, the more water and supplies you can carry, the more remote the places you can visit, and the longer you can stay. Having spent most of the last 20 years sailing with an all female crew, to me it only makes sense to save cost where it is least critical to the capacity of a boat, and to save weight where it is critical to capacity. Given the choice between saving weight by getting rid of some steel, or getting rid of some crew, I know what choice I would make. Over the years I've met plenty of people that have tried to "cheat" the weight budget on a boat. The water-maker being one of the most popular methods, thinking that you can turn diesel into water and save weight. Of all water-makers I've seen over the years, almost none were in regular use, because of the cost of keeping the units running over time. Our solution was to install bigger water tanks, and a permanently in-place water catcher, so that every time it rains we automatically fill the tanks. Very low cost, and virtually maintenance free. Did it work? If you can go 2 months without filling the tanks, and can re-fill them in 1-2 hours of rainfall - how likely is it that you will not get 1-2 hours of rainfall in 2 months, or not be near a source of fresh water? We never found it to be a problem. Install a split pipe rail on the outside edge of the cabin top to collect the rain instead of having run down the cabin sides, with collection pipes at the aft end of the cabin top leading to the tanks. Fill your shower water first. I've been reviewing some other sources on the net in the comparison of alloy versus steel, and I'm finding that for equivalent column strength, alloy is about 1/2 the weight of steel at about 2 times the cost. However, you save 10 times the cost of ballast by using a lighter mast, so if lead costs less than 20 times the cost of alloy, you can actually save money by using alloy in the mast. (20 times because you are also saving the cost of the steel mast - which is 1/2 the cost of the alloy - 10 / .5 = 20). Before building a steel mast, check local prices. If the cost of alloy by weight is less than 20 times the cost of lead, you can probably save $$ by using alloy for the mast. At the same time, adding hundreds of pounds to the effective cruising capacity of the boat. While using the heaviest and cheapest materials may appeal to the builder's pocketbook - when building a boat piece by piece - consider the boat as a whole. With all the tradeoffs between performance, comfort and price, you may just find you can actually save money by using lighter materials in weight critical areas, allowing you to carry appealing crew instead of ballast. We met few boats with steel masts offshore. Lots of wooden masts - lots. Some gaff and junk rigged boats with steel masts, but not one marconi style rig with a steel mast, except for a French boat in New Caledonia, with a radio tower style steel mast. Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com ----- Original Message ----- From: bubblede To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, April 25, 2004 3:14 AM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Steel Mast Concerning useful weight: I just happened to watch a TV presentation of Motor Yachts, and on a dutch built 65 footer they boasted that the interior was so luxurious that they had crafted worktops, galley and bathrooms out of 4 tons of original Carrera marble ;-) Greg, I like your approach of "cruising capacity" as one way to measure a boat. Applies not only to rigs of course, same would go for hull matrial for example, and results seem more differentiated than just looking at displacment overall or just weight aloft for a given amount of cash - and then there is of course a not always easy relaitonship to performance. Brent is right of course, having little money is no excuse for not going to sail if that what you do it for, and it's really difficult to beat his boats overall in price/cruisng capacity. the danger is that taking a decision once, you will repeat it more and more easily throughout the design and building process. I think that for most amateur constructions it is true that we tend to build too strong to begin with and then very often add weight because a) the material used is "cheap" and simple and /or b) we say thatif we are already too heavy, a little bit more can't hurt.... and when we finished, we take all or junk and tools from the building site and pack it somewhere under the floors because we never know when we might need it. There is a lot of discussion here about boats having to be heavy to be good boats. I do not really agree, but one thing that I know is that of the hundered plus amateur boats I have seen over the last 25 years, there was not a single boat that was "too light" when hanging fully loaded from a crane. a lot of them were were quite happy with the boat floating on its lines, having drawn a pessimitic waterline to begin with ;-) If there is one single trap for the amateur, it is weight, too strong (usually in all the wrong places) and too heavy by design or for cost reasons and payload. Gerd http://www.justmueller.com/boats To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3508|3465|2004-04-25 17:56:42|bubblede|Re: Steel Mast|> (cut) Given the choice between saving weight by getting rid of some steel, or getting rid of some crew, I know what choice I would make. ... I do remember some crew I had ... they were lucky I never felt I had a choice! :-((| 3509|3509|2004-04-26 14:24:41|info@easysoftwareinc.com|New 30' design|http://www.origamimagic.com/Design/LB30/LB30.htm The Bare Bones 30 is a single chine design specifically for amateur builders. These design is aimed at minimum time to completion, while providing a modern profile, performance and lots of space for the length. Initial design numbers show the design has positive righting moment at 170 degrees, with less that 2 degrees change in trim at 30 degrees of heel. Underwater appendages, sail plan, and cabin layout will all be customizable, with provision for a full width berth in the stern, and pilot house center cockpit. Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3511|3511|2004-04-27 05:05:04|wendy|Whom Must We Worship|Whom Must We Worship Prepared by Dr. Saleh As-Saleh The submission of man to His Creator is the essence of Islam. The name �Islam� is chosen by God (Allah) and not by man. It is the same unifying Message revealed to all the Prophets and Messengers by Allah and which they spread amongst their respective nations. In its Final form it was revealed to Muhammad (Peace & Mercy of Allah be upon him) as a complete Message to whole mankind. The Lord, Allah, is the True and Only Creator that deserves to be worshipped. No worship is worthy of being given to a stone, statue, a cross, a triangle, Khomeini, Farakhan, Eliajahs, Malcom�s X or Y, Ghandi, Krishna, Guru, Buddha, Mahatma, Emperor, Joseph Smith, Sun, Moon (not to that from Korea too!), Light, Fire, rivers, cows, Rama, Temples, Prophets, Messengers (Yes! Muslims do not worship Muhammad-peace be upon him), Saints, Priests, Monks, Movie Stars, Sheiks, etc.!!! All are created beings or things. ALLAH, is the Name of the One True God. His Name is not chosen by man and does not have a number or gender. It is known that Allah is the Name of God in Aramaic, the language of our beloved Prophet Jesus and a sister language of Arabic. The Name �Allah� has been used by all previous Prophets starting with Adam and by the last and final Prophet, Muhammad (Peace be upon them all). The Innate Nature in man recognizes what is good and bad, what is true and false. It recognizes that the Attributes of Allah must be True, Unique, and All-Perfect. It does not feel comfortable towards any kind of degradation of His Attributes not does it qualities to the Creator. Many who became �discontent with God� did so because of the practices of the Church in medieval Europe and because of the claims of �god dwelling in a son� and the concept of the �original sin�. However, they �escaped� into worshipping a new theory called �mother nature� as well as the �material� World. With the advancement of materialistic technology others from different religions adopted the concept of �forgetting about God� and �let us live this life and enjoy it!�, not realizing that they have chosen the worship of the �original god� of Rome: Desire!.As a result the �enjoyment� is turning to �suffering� from AIDS. NOW we can see that all of this materialistic and secular progress produced a spiritual vacuum that led to complex social, economical, political, and psychological problems. Many of those who �fled� their �religions� are in search again. Some try to �escape� the complexity of their daily lives via various means. Those who had the chance to examine the Qur�an and Islam, proceed with a complete way of life that relates man to establish a purpose for his presence on earth. This is well recognized in the Attributes of Allah and what does He require from man. He does not want man to be enslaved to any false deity: nature, drugs, lust, money, other man, desire, or sex. He provides man with the proofs that He is the One who can redeem so that man can free himself from the slavery to any form of creation and to turn to his Creator Alone. THIS Creator Has Perfect Attributes. He is the First, nothing is before Him, the Ever Living. To Him is the Final Return where everyone will be dealt with in the Most Perfect and Just way. He does not begot nor He is begotten. Those who attribute Divinity to Jesus forget or ignore the fact that Jesus was in a mother�s womb. He needed nutrition; he was born and grew up to be a man. He was trusted with the Gospel as a Message to the Children of Israel: �For there is One God, and one mediator (i.e. a messenger) between God and men (the Children of Israel), the man Christ Jesus) (I Timothy 2:5). A man-messenger calling his nation not to worship him: �But in vain they do worship me!� (Mathew 15:9). A man who needs to eat, walk, sleed, rest, etc.. cannot have Divine Attributes because he is in need and God (Allah) is Self-Sufficient. AS far as Buddhism, Hinduism, Zoroastrianism, Marxism, and Capitalism, there is the devotion of worshipping created being/things in one form or another. Jews had attributed a �Nationalistic� belonging to Allah. They labeled Him �The Tribal God� for the Children of Israel. Men and women following these �religions� were born with the natural inclination of submission to their Creator, Allah. It is their parents who had driven them into their respective traditions. However, once people are exposed to the Signs of Allah around them, or in the Qur�an or to someone who triggers thei Fitra (natural inclination to worship Allah Alone), the reverting process begins and that is why we see a universal spreading of Islam. In the West and despite tha many distortions of Islam in the Media, many admit that Islam may be the fastest growing Faith. No sense of fairness can be achieved without a genuine attempt to know the Word of Allah in the Qur�an and not on the 30-min-Evening News. This is the real challenge for those who seek the Truth. Man is created for a purpose: to live a life in accordance with Allah�s way. Why Not? Do we posses the air we breath? Did we create ourselves or others? Or were we ourselves the Creators? We are limited and weak. So is our right to ignore our Creator where we all need Him? ISLAM is the submission in worship to Allah Alone and it is the essence of all the Messages sent to all nations before us. Allah is All-Just and All-Wise. He does not intend confusion for His Creation. The religion accepted to Him is the one chosen by Him. Its essence must be One, because He is One. It is free from geographical, racist, and status oriented concepts. It is Perfect and it is the complete way of life. All these qualities are chosen by Allah in His Only Religion: Islam. Its details are in in the Qur�an, read it and come with an open heart because none can expose better than the World of Allah. The Qur�an was revealed to Prophet Muhammad. He did not author it. He was unlettered. Its translation is available in many languages in bookstores or in an Islamic Center close to you. Take the time to read it and come/call the Islamic Center, or speak to someone who re-verted and submitted to Allah Alone. The Decision is yours! http://www.geocities.com/fares457/1.html Contact me at islamq_a@... To Request Free Islamic Books & Resources: imanwayibaw@... Towards a better understanding of Islam ImanWay Formus is your Way....Join Now... http://en.imanway.com/index.php| 3512|3511|2004-04-27 10:25:47|PHULME|Re: Whom Must We Worship|Wendy, could you please get of this group as your topic frankly is not suitable to the purpose nor intent of this discussion group. This group is for the purpose of frank and open discussion concerning stel boat construction , specifically the origami technique. I am not sure that a dhow could be built in this method if so could you confine your input to the topic, not to one of your religious belief which frankly probably offends some 80% of the worlds population. Have a happy day, and please p... off ----- Original Message ----- From: "wendy" To: Sent: Tuesday, April 27, 2004 5:04 PM Subject: [origamiboats] Whom Must We Worship > Whom Must We Worship > > Prepared by > Dr. Saleh As-Saleh > The submission of man to His Creator is the essence of Islam. The name "Islam" is chosen by God (Allah) and not by man. It is the same unifying Message revealed to all the Prophets and Messengers by Allah and which they spread amongst their respective nations. In its Final form it was revealed to Muhammad (Peace & Mercy of Allah be upon him) as a complete Message to whole mankind. The Lord, Allah, is the True and Only Creator that deserves to be worshipped. No worship is worthy of being given to a stone, statue, a cross, a triangle, Khomeini, Farakhan, Eliajahs, Malcom's X or Y, Ghandi, Krishna, Guru, Buddha, Mahatma, Emperor, Joseph Smith, Sun, Moon (not to that from Korea too!), Light, Fire, rivers, cows, Rama, Temples, Prophets, Messengers (Yes! Muslims do not worship Muhammad-peace be upon him), Saints, Priests, Monks, Movie Stars, Sheiks, etc.!!! All are created beings or things. > ALLAH, is the Name of the One True God. His Name is not chosen by man and does not have a number or gender. It is known that Allah is the Name of God in Aramaic, the language of our beloved Prophet Jesus and a sister language of Arabic. The Name "Allah" has been used by all previous Prophets starting with Adam and by the last and final Prophet, Muhammad (Peace be upon them all). > The Innate Nature in man recognizes what is good and bad, what is true and false. It recognizes that the Attributes of Allah must be True, Unique, and All-Perfect. It does not feel comfortable towards any kind of degradation of His Attributes not does it qualities to the Creator. Many who became "discontent with God" did so because of the practices of the Church in medieval Europe and because of the claims of "god dwelling in a son" and the concept of the "original sin". However, they "escaped" into worshipping a new theory called "mother nature" as well as the "material" World. With the advancement of materialistic technology others from different religions adopted the concept of "forgetting about God" and "let us live this life and enjoy it!", not realizing that they have chosen the worship of the "original god" of Rome: Desire!.As a result the "enjoyment" is turning to "suffering" from AIDS. > > > NOW we can see that all of this materialistic and secular progress produced a spiritual vacuum that led to complex social, economical, political, and psychological problems. Many of those who "fled" their "religions" are in search again. Some try to "escape" the complexity of their daily lives via various means. Those who had the chance to examine the Qur'an and Islam, proceed with a complete way of life that relates man to establish a purpose for his presence on earth. This is well recognized in the Attributes of Allah and what does He require from man. He does not want man to be enslaved to any false deity: nature, drugs, lust, money, other man, desire, or sex. He provides man with the proofs that He is the One who can redeem so that man can free himself from the slavery to any form of creation and to turn to his Creator Alone. THIS Creator Has Perfect Attributes. He is the First, nothing is before Him, the Ever Living. To Him is the Final Return where everyone will be dealt with i > AS far as Buddhism, Hinduism, Zoroastrianism, Marxism, and Capitalism, there is the devotion of worshipping created being/things in one form or another. Jews had attributed a "Nationalistic" belonging to Allah. They labeled Him "The Tribal God" for the Children of Israel. Men and women following these "religions" were born with the natural inclination of submission to their Creator, Allah. It is their parents who had driven them into their respective traditions. However, once people are exposed to the Signs of Allah around them, or in the Qur'an or to someone who triggers thei Fitra (natural inclination to worship Allah Alone), the reverting process begins and that is why we see a universal spreading of Islam. In the West and despite tha many distortions of Islam in the Media, many admit that Islam may be the fastest growing Faith. No sense of fairness can be achieved without a genuine attempt to know the Word of Allah in the Qur'an and not on the 30-min-Evening News. This is the rea > ISLAM is the submission in worship to Allah Alone and it is the essence of all the Messages sent to all nations before us. Allah is All-Just and All-Wise. He does not intend confusion for His Creation. The religion accepted to Him is the one chosen by Him. Its essence must be One, because He is One. It is free from geographical, racist, and status oriented concepts. It is Perfect and it is the complete way of life. All these qualities are chosen by Allah in His Only Religion: Islam. Its details are in in the Qur'an, read it and come with an open heart because none can expose better than the World of Allah. The Qur'an was revealed to Prophet Muhammad. He did not author it. He was unlettered. Its translation is available in many languages in bookstores or in an Islamic Center close to you. Take the time to read it and come/call the Islamic Center, or speak to someone who re-verted and submitted to Allah Alone. > The Decision is yours! > > > http://www.geocities.com/fares457/1.html > > Contact me at > islamq_a@... > > To Request Free Islamic Books & Resources: > imanwayibaw@... > > Towards a better understanding of Islam > ImanWay Formus is your Way....Join Now... > > http://en.imanway.com/index.php > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > | 3513|3511|2004-04-27 11:05:02|Henri Naths|Re: Whom Must We Worship|sounds like alot of whinning! ----- Original Message ----- From: "wendy" To: Sent: 27 April, 2004 3:04 AM Subject: [origamiboats] Whom Must We Worship > Whom Must We Worship > > Prepared by > Dr. Saleh As-Saleh > The submission of man to His Creator is the essence of Islam. The name "Islam" is chosen by God (Allah) and not by man. It is the same unifying Message revealed to all the Prophets and Messengers by Allah and which they spread amongst their respective nations. In its Final form it was revealed to Muhammad (Peace & Mercy of Allah be upon him) as a complete Message to whole mankind. The Lord, Allah, is the True and Only Creator that deserves to be worshipped. No worship is worthy of being given to a stone, statue, a cross, a triangle, Khomeini, Farakhan, Eliajahs, Malcom's X or Y, Ghandi, Krishna, Guru, Buddha, Mahatma, Emperor, Joseph Smith, Sun, Moon (not to that from Korea too!), Light, Fire, rivers, cows, Rama, Temples, Prophets, Messengers (Yes! Muslims do not worship Muhammad-peace be upon him), Saints, Priests, Monks, Movie Stars, Sheiks, etc.!!! All are created beings or things. > ALLAH, is the Name of the One True God. His Name is not chosen by man and does not have a number or gender. It is known that Allah is the Name of God in Aramaic, the language of our beloved Prophet Jesus and a sister language of Arabic. The Name "Allah" has been used by all previous Prophets starting with Adam and by the last and final Prophet, Muhammad (Peace be upon them all). > The Innate Nature in man recognizes what is good and bad, what is true and false. It recognizes that the Attributes of Allah must be True, Unique, and All-Perfect. It does not feel comfortable towards any kind of degradation of His Attributes not does it qualities to the Creator. Many who became "discontent with God" did so because of the practices of the Church in medieval Europe and because of the claims of "god dwelling in a son" and the concept of the "original sin". However, they "escaped" into worshipping a new theory called "mother nature" as well as the "material" World. With the advancement of materialistic technology others from different religions adopted the concept of "forgetting about God" and "let us live this life and enjoy it!", not realizing that they have chosen the worship of the "original god" of Rome: Desire!.As a result the "enjoyment" is turning to "suffering" from AIDS. > > > NOW we can see that all of this materialistic and secular progress produced a spiritual vacuum that led to complex social, economical, political, and psychological problems. Many of those who "fled" their "religions" are in search again. Some try to "escape" the complexity of their daily lives via various means. Those who had the chance to examine the Qur'an and Islam, proceed with a complete way of life that relates man to establish a purpose for his presence on earth. This is well recognized in the Attributes of Allah and what does He require from man. He does not want man to be enslaved to any false deity: nature, drugs, lust, money, other man, desire, or sex. He provides man with the proofs that He is the One who can redeem so that man can free himself from the slavery to any form of creation and to turn to his Creator Alone. THIS Creator Has Perfect Attributes. He is the First, nothing is before Him, the Ever Living. To Him is the Final Return where everyone will be dealt with in the Most Perfect and Just way. He does not begot nor He is begotten. Those who attribute Divinity to Jesus forget or ignore the fact that Jesus was in a mother's womb. He needed nutrition; he was born and grew up to be a man. He was trusted with the Gospel as a Message to the Children of Israel: "For there is One God, and one mediator (i.e. a messenger) between God and men (the Children of Israel), the man Christ Jesus) (I Timothy 2:5). A man-messenger calling his nation not to worship him: "But in vain they do worship me!" (Mathew 15:9). A man who needs to eat, walk, sleed, rest, etc.. cannot have Divine Attributes because he is in need and God (Allah) is Self-Sufficient. > AS far as Buddhism, Hinduism, Zoroastrianism, Marxism, and Capitalism, there is the devotion of worshipping created being/things in one form or another. Jews had attributed a "Nationalistic" belonging to Allah. They labeled Him "The Tribal God" for the Children of Israel. Men and women following these "religions" were born with the natural inclination of submission to their Creator, Allah. It is their parents who had driven them into their respective traditions. However, once people are exposed to the Signs of Allah around them, or in the Qur'an or to someone who triggers thei Fitra (natural inclination to worship Allah Alone), the reverting process begins and that is why we see a universal spreading of Islam. In the West and despite tha many distortions of Islam in the Media, many admit that Islam may be the fastest growing Faith. No sense of fairness can be achieved without a genuine attempt to know the Word of Allah in the Qur'an and not on the 30-min-Evening News. This is the real challenge for those who seek the Truth. Man is created for a purpose: to live a life in accordance with Allah's way. Why Not? Do we posses the air we breath? Did we create ourselves or others? Or were we ourselves the Creators? We are limited and weak. So is our right to ignore our Creator where we all need Him? > ISLAM is the submission in worship to Allah Alone and it is the essence of all the Messages sent to all nations before us. Allah is All-Just and All-Wise. He does not intend confusion for His Creation. The religion accepted to Him is the one chosen by Him. Its essence must be One, because He is One. It is free from geographical, racist, and status oriented concepts. It is Perfect and it is the complete way of life. All these qualities are chosen by Allah in His Only Religion: Islam. Its details are in in the Qur'an, read it and come with an open heart because none can expose better than the World of Allah. The Qur'an was revealed to Prophet Muhammad. He did not author it. He was unlettered. Its translation is available in many languages in bookstores or in an Islamic Center close to you. Take the time to read it and come/call the Islamic Center, or speak to someone who re-verted and submitted to Allah Alone. > The Decision is yours! > > > http://www.geocities.com/fares457/1.html > > Contact me at > islamq_a@... > > To Request Free Islamic Books & Resources: > imanwayibaw@... > > Towards a better understanding of Islam > ImanWay Formus is your Way....Join Now... > > http://en.imanway.com/index.php > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > | 3514|3511|2004-04-27 12:41:32|moby_duck_2004|Re: Whom Must We Worship|Organized Religion has killed more people over the years than AIDS. Thus, by Wendy's logic, isn't Organized Religion, not AIDS the true curse? Where "Must Worship" was law, leaders were able to subvert religion to their own ends, organizing people to kill each other in the name of God. Eventually, this led to the separation of church and state, and the notion of "Freedom of Worship". However, this is far from universal. How is this relevant to this site? Cruising gives you the time to read the great works of religion, and the freedom to live in foreign lands and experience their religions and cultures first-hand. Get out there and see for yourself. Carpe Diem. Seize the Carp.| 3515|3511|2004-04-28 00:34:06|Dave|Re: Whom Must We Worship|This is what freaks me out about religion. This incessant obligation they feel to convert everyone. It amazes me that almost every religion feels the need to do this, and if they can't, then they label you an infidel or sinner or whatever. They all have their written text that says to love their fellow man, and yet from an observers point of view the opposite would seem to be true as we inch closer to distruction. One thing it does for me, gives me motivation to finish my boat asap and find a deserted island to hide behind! "Dear God, please save me from your followers" Dave --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "moby_duck_2004" wrote: > Organized Religion has killed more people over the years than AIDS. > Thus, by Wendy's logic, isn't Organized Religion, not AIDS the true > curse? Where "Must Worship" was law, leaders were able to subvert > religion to their own ends, organizing people to kill each other in > the name of God. Eventually, this led to the separation of church > and state, and the notion of "Freedom of Worship". However, this is > far from universal. > > How is this relevant to this site? Cruising gives you the time to > read the great works of religion, and the freedom to live in foreign > lands and experience their religions and cultures first-hand. Get > out there and see for yourself. Carpe Diem. Seize the Carp. | 3516|3511|2004-04-28 01:17:20|audeojude|Re: Whom Must We Worship|Could we go ahead and block people from the list that are repeat offenders with this stuff. I think asking once politely to stay on topic is fair. After that they are fair game to not be invited back. Maybe if they have to go to the trouble of getting a new ID to sign back up they will quit. Sorry if i sound irked by this. It's been a long day and I've been subjected to the like several other places both in netland and realland and my patience is thin at the moment for it. I want to relax and read about keels and cabins, wenches :) and winches, masts and sails. Oh yeah did i mention wenches? lol. scott ps is wenches off topic to sailing and building boats? --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "wendy" wrote: > Whom Must We Worship > > Prepared by > Dr. Saleh As-Saleh > The submission of man to His Creator is the essence of Islam. The name "Islam" is chosen by God (Allah) and not by man. It is the same unifying Message revealed to all the Prophets and Messengers by Allah and which they spread amongst their respective nations. In its Final form it was revealed to Muhammad (Peace & Mercy of Allah be upon him) as a complete Message to whole mankind. The Lord, Allah, is the True and Only Creator that deserves to be worshipped. No worship is worthy of being given to a stone, statue, a cross, a triangle, Khomeini, Farakhan, Eliajahs, Malcom's X or Y, Ghandi, Krishna, Guru, Buddha, Mahatma, Emperor, Joseph Smith, Sun, Moon (not to that from Korea too!), Light, Fire, rivers, cows, Rama, Temples, Prophets, Messengers (Yes! Muslims do not worship Muhammad-peace be upon him), Saints, Priests, Monks, Movie Stars, Sheiks, etc.!!! All are created beings or things. > ALLAH, is the Name of the One True God. His Name is not chosen by man and does not have a number or gender. It is known that Allah is the Name of God in Aramaic, the language of our beloved Prophet Jesus and a sister language of Arabic. The Name "Allah" has been used by all previous Prophets starting with Adam and by the last and final Prophet, Muhammad (Peace be upon them all). > The Innate Nature in man recognizes what is good and bad, what is true and false. It recognizes that the Attributes of Allah must be True, Unique, and All-Perfect. It does not feel comfortable towards any kind of degradation of His Attributes not does it qualities to the Creator. Many who became "discontent with God" did so because of the practices of the Church in medieval Europe and because of the claims of "god dwelling in a son" and the concept of the "original sin". However, they "escaped" into worshipping a new theory called "mother nature" as well as the "material" World. With the advancement of materialistic technology others from different religions adopted the concept of "forgetting about God" and "let us live this life and enjoy it!", not realizing that they have chosen the worship of the "original god" of Rome: Desire!.As a result the "enjoyment" is turning to "suffering" from AIDS. > > > NOW we can see that all of this materialistic and secular progress produced a spiritual vacuum that led to complex social, economical, political, and psychological problems. Many of those who "fled" their "religions" are in search again. Some try to "escape" the complexity of their daily lives via various means. Those who had the chance to examine the Qur'an and Islam, proceed with a complete way of life that relates man to establish a purpose for his presence on earth. This is well recognized in the Attributes of Allah and what does He require from man. He does not want man to be enslaved to any false deity: nature, drugs, lust, money, other man, desire, or sex. He provides man with the proofs that He is the One who can redeem so that man can free himself from the slavery to any form of creation and to turn to his Creator Alone. THIS Creator Has Perfect Attributes. He is the First, nothing is before Him, the Ever Living. To Him is the Final Return where everyone will be dealt with in the Most Perfect and Just way. He does not begot nor He is begotten. Those who attribute Divinity to Jesus forget or ignore the fact that Jesus was in a mother's womb. He needed nutrition; he was born and grew up to be a man. He was trusted with the Gospel as a Message to the Children of Israel: "For there is One God, and one mediator (i.e. a messenger) between God and men (the Children of Israel), the man Christ Jesus) (I Timothy 2:5). A man-messenger calling his nation not to worship him: "But in vain they do worship me!" (Mathew 15:9). A man who needs to eat, walk, sleed, rest, etc.. cannot have Divine Attributes because he is in need and God (Allah) is Self-Sufficient. > AS far as Buddhism, Hinduism, Zoroastrianism, Marxism, and Capitalism, there is the devotion of worshipping created being/things in one form or another. Jews had attributed a "Nationalistic" belonging to Allah. They labeled Him "The Tribal God" for the Children of Israel. Men and women following these "religions" were born with the natural inclination of submission to their Creator, Allah. It is their parents who had driven them into their respective traditions. However, once people are exposed to the Signs of Allah around them, or in the Qur'an or to someone who triggers thei Fitra (natural inclination to worship Allah Alone), the reverting process begins and that is why we see a universal spreading of Islam. In the West and despite tha many distortions of Islam in the Media, many admit that Islam may be the fastest growing Faith. No sense of fairness can be achieved without a genuine attempt to know the Word of Allah in the Qur'an and not on the 30-min-Evening News. This is the real challenge for those who seek the Truth. Man is created for a purpose: to live a life in accordance with Allah's way. Why Not? Do we posses the air we breath? Did we create ourselves or others? Or were we ourselves the Creators? We are limited and weak. So is our right to ignore our Creator where we all need Him? > ISLAM is the submission in worship to Allah Alone and it is the essence of all the Messages sent to all nations before us. Allah is All-Just and All-Wise. He does not intend confusion for His Creation. The religion accepted to Him is the one chosen by Him. Its essence must be One, because He is One. It is free from geographical, racist, and status oriented concepts. It is Perfect and it is the complete way of life. All these qualities are chosen by Allah in His Only Religion: Islam. Its details are in in the Qur'an, read it and come with an open heart because none can expose better than the World of Allah. The Qur'an was revealed to Prophet Muhammad. He did not author it. He was unlettered. Its translation is available in many languages in bookstores or in an Islamic Center close to you. Take the time to read it and come/call the Islamic Center, or speak to someone who re-verted and submitted to Allah Alone. > The Decision is yours! > > > http://www.geocities.com/fares457/1.html > > Contact me at > islamq_a@g... > > To Request Free Islamic Books & Resources: > imanwayibaw@g... > > Towards a better understanding of Islam > ImanWay Formus is your Way....Join Now... > > http://en.imanway.com/index.php | 3517|3511|2004-04-28 07:01:54|Gerald Niffenegger|Re: Whom Must We Worship|Wendy Since you seeming have a warm place in your heart for boats, might I suggest that you frequent the Wooden Boat Forum. http://media5.hypernet.com/cgi-bin/UBB/ultimatebb.cgi They have a special section where you can discuss non boat related items. BTW many of the knowledgeable old time contributors left the forum because or the kind of dribble you just posted. Gerald Niffenegger| 3518|3509|2004-04-28 11:39:49|info@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: New 30' design|I've posted a picture of the folded pattern, for comparison with the computer prediction for the hull. Not quite as round as what we achieved with the triple chine, but the computer was able to remove the knuckles. We might make the boat slightly narrower at the waterline in the final version. http://www.origamimagic.com/Design/LB30/LB30.htm Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com ----- Original Message ----- From: info@... To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, April 26, 2004 11:24 AM Subject: [origamiboats] New 30' design http://www.origamimagic.com/Design/LB30/LB30.htm The Bare Bones 30 is a single chine design specifically for amateur builders. These design is aimed at minimum time to completion, while providing a modern profile, performance and lots of space for the length. Initial design numbers show the design has positive righting moment at 170 degrees, with less that 2 degrees change in trim at 30 degrees of heel. Underwater appendages, sail plan, and cabin layout will all be customizable, with provision for a full width berth in the stern, and pilot house center cockpit. Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3519|3509|2004-04-28 16:19:34|brentswain38|Re: New 30' design|There is an excellent article in the latest Sail magazine showing the huge improvement in ultimate righting advantage of a sealed mast and it's buoyancy when submerged. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > http://www.origamimagic.com/Design/LB30/LB30.htm > > The Bare Bones 30 is a single chine design specifically for amateur builders. These design is aimed at minimum time to completion, while providing a modern profile, performance and lots of space for the length. Initial design numbers show the design has positive righting moment at 170 degrees, with less that 2 degrees change in trim at 30 degrees of heel. Underwater appendages, sail plan, and cabin layout will all be customizable, with provision for a full width berth in the stern, and pilot house center cockpit. > > Greg Elliott > http://www.origamimagic.com > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3520|3465|2004-04-28 16:33:49|brentswain38|Re: Steel Mast|Aluminium pipe in scrapyards can often be found quite cheap. If you find one,for a good price , by all means go aluminium. Retail aluminium is a different story. When it comes to hulls, the difference between paying $7,000 and $20,000 for materials and the extra cost of welding aluminium would pay for a lot of cruising.I've built and fully detailed a 36 footer in steel for less than the price of the neccessary aluminium laying on the ground, with no work done on it.The extra money in the bank is worth going a half a knot slower ,if indeed that is the case. Last year I left Tonga at the same time as a fin keeled Perry design of the same waterline length as me. I arrived on Vancouver Island 57 days later, while he took 99 days sailing the same route. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > Hi Gerd, > > There is an old saying. Fishing lures are designed to catch fishermen, not fish. Many boats are designed the same way - to sell not to sail. > > I think it was in "Riddle of the Sands" that the owner of the boat, every time a new piece of gear came aboard, took great pleasure in throwing an old piece of gear over the side. Over the years I've met more than a few sailors with the same tale, including one sailor I knew very well that, becalmed and out of fuel, threw almost everything overboard - including the anchors - to lighten the boat and get moving. These stories always amazed me, as we slowly became heavier and heavier as we cruised, until one day in the Torres Straights I also was throwing gear - including the much treasured stainless, off the boat like mad to lighten us up. > > To me, a cruising boat is something to carry you and your gear, and the more the boat can carry, the more people that can live and travel on the boat, the more water and supplies you can carry, the more remote the places you can visit, and the longer you can stay. Having spent most of the last 20 years sailing with an all female crew, to me it only makes sense to save cost where it is least critical to the capacity of a boat, and to save weight where it is critical to capacity. Given the choice between saving weight by getting rid of some steel, or getting rid of some crew, I know what choice I would make. > > Over the years I've met plenty of people that have tried to "cheat" the weight budget on a boat. The water-maker being one of the most popular methods, thinking that you can turn diesel into water and save weight. Of all water-makers I've seen over the years, almost none were in regular use, because of the cost of keeping the units running over time. Our solution was to install bigger water tanks, and a permanently in-place water catcher, so that every time it rains we automatically fill the tanks. Very low cost, and virtually maintenance free. > > Did it work? If you can go 2 months without filling the tanks, and can re-fill them in 1-2 hours of rainfall - how likely is it that you will not get 1-2 hours of rainfall in 2 months, or not be near a source of fresh water? We never found it to be a problem. Install a split pipe rail on the outside edge of the cabin top to collect the rain instead of having run down the cabin sides, with collection pipes at the aft end of the cabin top leading to the tanks. Fill your shower water first. > > I've been reviewing some other sources on the net in the comparison of alloy versus steel, and I'm finding that for equivalent column strength, alloy is about 1/2 the weight of steel at about 2 times the cost. However, you save 10 times the cost of ballast by using a lighter mast, so if lead costs less than 20 times the cost of alloy, you can actually save money by using alloy in the mast. (20 times because you are also saving the cost of the steel mast - which is 1/2 the cost of the alloy - 10 / .5 = 20). > > Before building a steel mast, check local prices. If the cost of alloy by weight is less than 20 times the cost of lead, you can probably save $$ by using alloy for the mast. At the same time, adding hundreds of pounds to the effective cruising capacity of the boat. > > While using the heaviest and cheapest materials may appeal to the builder's pocketbook - when building a boat piece by piece - consider the boat as a whole. With all the tradeoffs between performance, comfort and price, you may just find you can actually save money by using lighter materials in weight critical areas, allowing you to carry appealing crew instead of ballast. > > We met few boats with steel masts offshore. Lots of wooden masts - lots. Some gaff and junk rigged boats with steel masts, but not one marconi style rig with a steel mast, except for a French boat in New Caledonia, with a radio tower style steel mast. > > > Greg Elliott > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: bubblede > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Sunday, April 25, 2004 3:14 AM > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Steel Mast > > > Concerning useful weight: I just happened to watch a TV presentation > of Motor Yachts, and on a dutch built 65 footer they boasted that > the interior was so luxurious that they had crafted worktops, galley > and bathrooms out of 4 tons of original Carrera marble ;-) > > Greg, I like your approach of "cruising capacity" as one way to > measure a boat. Applies not only to rigs of course, same would go > for hull matrial for example, and results seem more differentiated > than just looking at displacment overall or just weight aloft for a > given amount of cash - and then there is of course a not always easy > relaitonship to performance. > > Brent is right of course, having little money is no excuse for not > going to sail if that what you do it for, and it's really difficult > to beat his boats overall in price/cruisng capacity. the danger is > that taking a decision once, you will repeat it more and more easily > throughout the design and building process. > > I think that for most amateur constructions it is true that we tend > to build too strong to begin with and then very often add weight > because a) the material used is "cheap" and simple and /or b) we say > thatif we are already too heavy, a little bit more can't hurt.... > and when we finished, we take all or junk and tools from the > building site and pack it somewhere under the floors because we > never know when we might need it. > > There is a lot of discussion here about boats having to be heavy to > be good boats. I do not really agree, but one thing that I know is > that of the hundered plus amateur boats I have seen over the last 25 > years, there was not a single boat that was "too light" when hanging > fully loaded from a crane. a lot of them were were quite happy with > the boat floating on its lines, having drawn a pessimitic waterline > to begin with ;-) > > If there is one single trap for the amateur, it is weight, too > strong (usually in all the wrong places) and too heavy by design or > for cost reasons and payload. > > > Gerd > http://www.justmueller.com/boats > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- > Yahoo! Groups Links > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3521|3511|2004-04-28 16:38:59|brentswain38|Re: Whom Must We Worship|I'm aboriginal. If I want to experience foreign religion, I'll put a harder seat on my bicycle( or take the seat off) Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "wendy" wrote: > Whom Must We Worship > > Prepared by > Dr. Saleh As-Saleh > The submission of man to His Creator is the essence of Islam. The name "Islam" is chosen by God (Allah) and not by man. It is the same unifying Message revealed to all the Prophets and Messengers by Allah and which they spread amongst their respective nations. In its Final form it was revealed to Muhammad (Peace & Mercy of Allah be upon him) as a complete Message to whole mankind. The Lord, Allah, is the True and Only Creator that deserves to be worshipped. No worship is worthy of being given to a stone, statue, a cross, a triangle, Khomeini, Farakhan, Eliajahs, Malcom's X or Y, Ghandi, Krishna, Guru, Buddha, Mahatma, Emperor, Joseph Smith, Sun, Moon (not to that from Korea too!), Light, Fire, rivers, cows, Rama, Temples, Prophets, Messengers (Yes! Muslims do not worship Muhammad-peace be upon him), Saints, Priests, Monks, Movie Stars, Sheiks, etc.!!! All are created beings or things. > ALLAH, is the Name of the One True God. His Name is not chosen by man and does not have a number or gender. It is known that Allah is the Name of God in Aramaic, the language of our beloved Prophet Jesus and a sister language of Arabic. The Name "Allah" has been used by all previous Prophets starting with Adam and by the last and final Prophet, Muhammad (Peace be upon them all). > The Innate Nature in man recognizes what is good and bad, what is true and false. It recognizes that the Attributes of Allah must be True, Unique, and All-Perfect. It does not feel comfortable towards any kind of degradation of His Attributes not does it qualities to the Creator. Many who became "discontent with God" did so because of the practices of the Church in medieval Europe and because of the claims of "god dwelling in a son" and the concept of the "original sin". However, they "escaped" into worshipping a new theory called "mother nature" as well as the "material" World. With the advancement of materialistic technology others from different religions adopted the concept of "forgetting about God" and "let us live this life and enjoy it!", not realizing that they have chosen the worship of the "original god" of Rome: Desire!.As a result the "enjoyment" is turning to "suffering" from AIDS. > > > NOW we can see that all of this materialistic and secular progress produced a spiritual vacuum that led to complex social, economical, political, and psychological problems. Many of those who "fled" their "religions" are in search again. Some try to "escape" the complexity of their daily lives via various means. Those who had the chance to examine the Qur'an and Islam, proceed with a complete way of life that relates man to establish a purpose for his presence on earth. This is well recognized in the Attributes of Allah and what does He require from man. He does not want man to be enslaved to any false deity: nature, drugs, lust, money, other man, desire, or sex. He provides man with the proofs that He is the One who can redeem so that man can free himself from the slavery to any form of creation and to turn to his Creator Alone. THIS Creator Has Perfect Attributes. He is the First, nothing is before Him, the Ever Living. To Him is the Final Return where everyone will be dealt with in the Most Perfect and Just way. He does not begot nor He is begotten. Those who attribute Divinity to Jesus forget or ignore the fact that Jesus was in a mother's womb. He needed nutrition; he was born and grew up to be a man. He was trusted with the Gospel as a Message to the Children of Israel: "For there is One God, and one mediator (i.e. a messenger) between God and men (the Children of Israel), the man Christ Jesus) (I Timothy 2:5). A man-messenger calling his nation not to worship him: "But in vain they do worship me!" (Mathew 15:9). A man who needs to eat, walk, sleed, rest, etc.. cannot have Divine Attributes because he is in need and God (Allah) is Self-Sufficient. > AS far as Buddhism, Hinduism, Zoroastrianism, Marxism, and Capitalism, there is the devotion of worshipping created being/things in one form or another. Jews had attributed a "Nationalistic" belonging to Allah. They labeled Him "The Tribal God" for the Children of Israel. Men and women following these "religions" were born with the natural inclination of submission to their Creator, Allah. It is their parents who had driven them into their respective traditions. However, once people are exposed to the Signs of Allah around them, or in the Qur'an or to someone who triggers thei Fitra (natural inclination to worship Allah Alone), the reverting process begins and that is why we see a universal spreading of Islam. In the West and despite tha many distortions of Islam in the Media, many admit that Islam may be the fastest growing Faith. No sense of fairness can be achieved without a genuine attempt to know the Word of Allah in the Qur'an and not on the 30-min-Evening News. This is the real challenge for those who seek the Truth. Man is created for a purpose: to live a life in accordance with Allah's way. Why Not? Do we posses the air we breath? Did we create ourselves or others? Or were we ourselves the Creators? We are limited and weak. So is our right to ignore our Creator where we all need Him? > ISLAM is the submission in worship to Allah Alone and it is the essence of all the Messages sent to all nations before us. Allah is All-Just and All-Wise. He does not intend confusion for His Creation. The religion accepted to Him is the one chosen by Him. Its essence must be One, because He is One. It is free from geographical, racist, and status oriented concepts. It is Perfect and it is the complete way of life. All these qualities are chosen by Allah in His Only Religion: Islam. Its details are in in the Qur'an, read it and come with an open heart because none can expose better than the World of Allah. The Qur'an was revealed to Prophet Muhammad. He did not author it. He was unlettered. Its translation is available in many languages in bookstores or in an Islamic Center close to you. Take the time to read it and come/call the Islamic Center, or speak to someone who re- verted and submitted to Allah Alone. > The Decision is yours! > > > http://www.geocities.com/fares457/1.html > > Contact me at > islamq_a@g... > > To Request Free Islamic Books & Resources: > imanwayibaw@g... > > Towards a better understanding of Islam > ImanWay Formus is your Way....Join Now... > > http://en.imanway.com/index.php | 3522|3509|2004-04-28 16:50:20|brentswain38|Re: New 30' design|I once knew a designer who was obsessed with narrow waterlines on the drawings and gave his hulls the flare of a dory. This resulted in boats which only had narrow waterlines on the drawings or at the dock, as the boats were so tender, that they were rarely upright in any but the lightest winds, and ,rail down , which they were most of the time, they had more waterline beam than most boats.The true waterline beam is the waterline beam at the angle of heel she spends most of her time sailing at.If you look at most round bilge fibreglass cruising boats , there is usually very little roundness or flare between the waterline and sheer amidships, so trying to get a hull to more closely resemble a round bilge hull by increasing the flare , or putting a chine in the topsides will usually have the opposite effect and make it look even less like a round bilge boat ,in the water. Don't delude yorself on assumptions without taking a good , critical look at what you are trying to imitate.Narrow waterlines make tender boats which have trouble carrying adequate sail in stronger winds. Designing a tender hull shape , then trying to increase stability by using expensive materials can have you shooting yourself in the foot over misconceptions. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > I've posted a picture of the folded pattern, for comparison with the computer prediction for the hull. Not quite as round as what we achieved with the triple chine, but the computer was able to remove the knuckles. We might make the boat slightly narrower at the waterline in the final version. > > http://www.origamimagic.com/Design/LB30/LB30.htm > > > Greg Elliott > http://www.origamimagic.com > ----- Original Message ----- > From: info@e... > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Monday, April 26, 2004 11:24 AM > Subject: [origamiboats] New 30' design > > > http://www.origamimagic.com/Design/LB30/LB30.htm > > The Bare Bones 30 is a single chine design specifically for amateur builders. These design is aimed at minimum time to completion, while providing a modern profile, performance and lots of space for the length. Initial design numbers show the design has positive righting moment at 170 degrees, with less that 2 degrees change in trim at 30 degrees of heel. Underwater appendages, sail plan, and cabin layout will all be customizable, with provision for a full width berth in the stern, and pilot house center cockpit. > > Greg Elliott > http://www.origamimagic.com > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- > Yahoo! Groups Links > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3523|3523|2004-04-28 18:09:02|jfpacuas|BS 26 steel/aluminum list|Hi folks, I found the steel list Brent put on the site for the 31 and 36 footers. Does anyone have the materials list for the 26 handy? I'd like to do some cost estimates prior to purchasing plans. I'm riding the fence on whether to build in steel or aluminum. I'll assume the steel list will be easier to find. I think I can make the conversions to aluminum (at least for estimating purposes). Thanks Paul| 3524|3465|2004-04-28 19:12:15|info@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: Steel Mast|Having sailed in our designs in both alloy and steel, I am keenly aware of the performance differences between the two materials. However, for cruising boats, speed is not the primary reason to use alloy. The light weight of alloy allows you to increase the net capacity of the boat at a faster rate than you increase the cost, thus achieving the capacity of a bigger boat, without the expense of a bigger boat. The important thing to remember is that a cruising boat is limited by its net capacity - its ability to carry weight, and it is not unusual to double or triple the effective capacity of a design by using alloy in place of steel. A boat that cost $10, but only carries 1 lb, is not as economical as a boat that costs $11 and carries 2 pounds, especially if you want to carry 2 pounds. Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3525|3509|2004-04-29 02:58:17|info@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: New 30' design|I've posted a revised hull to our site, with a number of views of the single chine hull, showing how the chine has been faired into the lines. http://www.origamimagic.com/Design/LB30/LB30.htm For many patterns, a narrow dart does not remove the knuckle. These patterns actually require a dart where the surfaces of the cut overlap before they open up, which is impossible to cut out of a single piece of material. Without this extra material, the chine runs flat at the ends, which the eye sees as a knuckle. We call it the "crossover" problem, because on the patterns it shows up as a crossover in the curves of the darts. Thus we have revision A, B, C, D to create a hull that has no knuckle, no crossover, and hydrostatic numbers to match the intended service. Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3526|3523|2004-04-29 11:20:08|info@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: BS 26 steel/aluminum list|Most materials, such a steel and wood have low scrap value. Thus, when you cut up $10,000 worth of new steel to build a boat, the value of the steel changes to about $2000, and you must add $8000 worth of workmanship to get back where you started. In effect, cutting the steel cost you $8000. As a result, unless your workmanship is good, if you use new steel, the value of the boat you build can end up being substantially less than the value of the steel that went into the boat. Alloy is unique in that it has very high scrap value, due to how it is manufactured When you cut up $20,000 worth of new alloy to build a boat, the value of the alloy changes to about $18,000. You need add only $2000 worth of workmanship to get back where you started. Even if your workmanship is moderate, the value of the boat is likely to exceed the value of the alloy that went into the boat. As a result, alloy boats typically have much better resale value than other boats. Much higher than the actual price difference between alloy and steel. How does this affect your choices when building? If you plan to get most of your materials as scrap, it makes no sense to build in alloy. Scrap alloy is worth almost as much as new alloy (in volume), and there is little benefit in searching for the occasional deal in scrap yards. If you are building from scrap, you should be building in steel. If you plan to build using new materials, then you should consider alloy, because the risk cost is typically lower. If you are not happy with the final product, you can likely sell the alloy boat for a much higher profit by percentage of your original investment. If you are happy with the alloy boat, you will have the added joy of sailing in a boat with better performance and capacity than the steel boat. When you eventually sell the alloy boat, you will likely get a better return for your efforts, either to build a bigger boat, or as money to move ashore. Alloy and steel are both fine building materials. I believe the non-corrosive nature of alloy, coupled with the light weight, and high scrap value give alloy an edge when building a boat using new materials. If you only have a fixed sum to spend, you can always build a smaller alloy boat for the price of a bigger steel boat, but for most builders, the price difference between the materials cancels out when other factors are considered. The better choice will depend on your skill level as a builders, and your intended service for the boat. If I was building for myself, and was building outside, I would still choose alloy. I would investigate using fluxed alloy rods and an arc welder to tack the alloy together. These rods do not need argon. They are not suitable for final welding, but for tacking they may prove acceptable. New formulations might prove suitable, if you have not had success in the past. As an alternative, a used MIG welder is simple to use for tacking, and can be resold for much of what it was bought for. A MIG welder is much easier to use than a rod (for both alloy and steel), and for tacking outside you only need cup your hand around the weld to protect it from the breeze. Weld contamination is not an issue, because the tacks are cut out during final welding. (When final welding alloy, you cut a "V" into the material at the point you want to weld, which provides a clean, oxide free surface for the weld). Working outside with alloy there is no need to worry about keeping the alloy painted as there is with pre-primed steel. Simply cut the alloy with a skill saw and tack it together. When the boat is fully tacked, hire a professional with a top quality welder to spend the 2-3 days it will take to do the final welding on the boat. Our single chine Bare Bones 30 is suitable for construction in steel or alloy, and any of our designs can be computer scaled to any length you might wish to build. With out 3-D computer design we can fully confirm the boat to any point in construction, so that problems can be caught before you build. When building smaller boats, such as 26', the benefits of alloy over steel are hard to beat. As a boat gets smaller, the weight of steel becomes a significant issue in the design, which typically means than small steel boats end up being overly heavy, which limits both performance and capacity. Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com I'm riding the fence on whether to build in steel or aluminum. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3527|3523|2004-04-29 13:01:21|richytill|Re: BS 26 steel/aluminum list|Stick welding alloy, It is worth mentioning that aluminum stick welding rods are very expensive. The challenge of positional stick welding alloy is far beyond the average home builder: even just tacking. Effectively removing the slag to prepare for follow up with a clean MIG weld would be frustrating. I have welded miles of aluminum pipe in all sorts of situations--welding aluminum outdoors is no fun. The home builder should be aware that aluminum weld and HAZ has 40%+/- less strength than the parent metal. Better to do it once and do it right. I like Aluminum. Aluminum must be the first choice for a deck if you can afford the initial cost, shelter and equipment. This material is fine--if you go MIG all the way and engineer for weakness in the weld zone. rt --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > Most materials, such a steel and wood have low scrap value. Thus, when you cut up $10,000 worth of new steel to build a boat, the value of the steel changes to about $2000, and you must add $8000 worth of workmanship to get back where you started. In effect, cutting the steel cost you $8000. As a result, unless your workmanship is good, if you use new steel, the value of the boat you build can end up being substantially less than the value of the steel that went into the boat. > > Alloy is unique in that it has very high scrap value, due to how it is manufactured When you cut up $20,000 worth of new alloy to build a boat, the value of the alloy changes to about $18,000. You need add only $2000 worth of workmanship to get back where you started. Even if your workmanship is moderate, the value of the boat is likely to exceed the value of the alloy that went into the boat. As a result, alloy boats typically have much better resale value than other boats. Much higher than the actual price difference between alloy and steel. > > How does this affect your choices when building? > > If you plan to get most of your materials as scrap, it makes no sense to build in alloy. Scrap alloy is worth almost as much as new alloy (in volume), and there is little benefit in searching for the occasional deal in scrap yards. If you are building from scrap, you should be building in steel. > > If you plan to build using new materials, then you should consider alloy, because the risk cost is typically lower. If you are not happy with the final product, you can likely sell the alloy boat for a much higher profit by percentage of your original investment. If you are happy with the alloy boat, you will have the added joy of sailing in a boat with better performance and capacity than the steel boat. When you eventually sell the alloy boat, you will likely get a better return for your efforts, either to build a bigger boat, or as money to move ashore. > > Alloy and steel are both fine building materials. I believe the non-corrosive nature of alloy, coupled with the light weight, and high scrap value give alloy an edge when building a boat using new materials. If you only have a fixed sum to spend, you can always build a smaller alloy boat for the price of a bigger steel boat, but for most builders, the price difference between the materials cancels out when other factors are considered. The better choice will depend on your skill level as a builders, and your intended service for the boat. > > If I was building for myself, and was building outside, I would still choose alloy. I would investigate using fluxed alloy rods and an arc welder to tack the alloy together. These rods do not need argon. They are not suitable for final welding, but for tacking they may prove acceptable. New formulations might prove suitable, if you have not had success in the past. > > As an alternative, a used MIG welder is simple to use for tacking, and can be resold for much of what it was bought for. A MIG welder is much easier to use than a rod (for both alloy and steel), and for tacking outside you only need cup your hand around the weld to protect it from the breeze. Weld contamination is not an issue, because the tacks are cut out during final welding. (When final welding alloy, you cut a "V" into the material at the point you want to weld, which provides a clean, oxide free surface for the weld). > > Working outside with alloy there is no need to worry about keeping the alloy painted as there is with pre-primed steel. Simply cut the alloy with a skill saw and tack it together. When the boat is fully tacked, hire a professional with a top quality welder to spend the 2- 3 days it will take to do the final welding on the boat. > > Our single chine Bare Bones 30 is suitable for construction in steel or alloy, and any of our designs can be computer scaled to any length you might wish to build. With out 3-D computer design we can fully confirm the boat to any point in construction, so that problems can be caught before you build. > > When building smaller boats, such as 26', the benefits of alloy over steel are hard to beat. As a boat gets smaller, the weight of steel becomes a significant issue in the design, which typically means than small steel boats end up being overly heavy, which limits both performance and capacity. > > Greg Elliott > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > > I'm riding the fence on whether to build in steel or aluminum. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3528|3523|2004-04-29 14:11:05|Joe Earsley|Re: BS 26 steel/aluminum list|It has my industrial experience that a beautiful looking aluminum weld can hide weakness, poor parent metal penetration and high stresses. The weld goes on too fast to reduce heat deformation and performs more like caulk than welding. Failure has always been brittle and complete. I will leave that welding process to experts. I want that keel to stay attached! I do have more confidence in a good looking steel weld with the telltale signs of good heat, no porosity and full penetration. Joe Earsley ________________________________ From: richytill [mailto:tillrc@...] Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2004 9:01 AM To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Subject: [origamiboats] Re: BS 26 steel/aluminum list Stick welding alloy, It is worth mentioning that aluminum stick welding rods are very expensive. The challenge of positional stick welding alloy is far beyond the average home builder: even just tacking. Effectively removing the slag to prepare for follow up with a clean MIG weld would be frustrating. I have welded miles of aluminum pipe in all sorts of situations--welding aluminum outdoors is no fun. The home builder should be aware that aluminum weld and HAZ has 40%+/- less strength than the parent metal. Better to do it once and do it right. I like Aluminum. Aluminum must be the first choice for a deck if you can afford the initial cost, shelter and equipment. This material is fine--if you go MIG all the way and engineer for weakness in the weld zone. rt --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > Most materials, such a steel and wood have low scrap value. Thus, when you cut up $10,000 worth of new steel to build a boat, the value of the steel changes to about $2000, and you must add $8000 worth of workmanship to get back where you started. In effect, cutting the steel cost you $8000. As a result, unless your workmanship is good, if you use new steel, the value of the boat you build can end up being substantially less than the value of the steel that went into the boat. > > Alloy is unique in that it has very high scrap value, due to how it is manufactured When you cut up $20,000 worth of new alloy to build a boat, the value of the alloy changes to about $18,000. You need add only $2000 worth of workmanship to get back where you started. Even if your workmanship is moderate, the value of the boat is likely to exceed the value of the alloy that went into the boat. As a result, alloy boats typically have much better resale value than other boats. Much higher than the actual price difference between alloy and steel. > > How does this affect your choices when building? > > If you plan to get most of your materials as scrap, it makes no sense to build in alloy. Scrap alloy is worth almost as much as new alloy (in volume), and there is little benefit in searching for the occasional deal in scrap yards. If you are building from scrap, you should be building in steel. > > If you plan to build using new materials, then you should consider alloy, because the risk cost is typically lower. If you are not happy with the final product, you can likely sell the alloy boat for a much higher profit by percentage of your original investment. If you are happy with the alloy boat, you will have the added joy of sailing in a boat with better performance and capacity than the steel boat. When you eventually sell the alloy boat, you will likely get a better return for your efforts, either to build a bigger boat, or as money to move ashore. > > Alloy and steel are both fine building materials. I believe the non-corrosive nature of alloy, coupled with the light weight, and high scrap value give alloy an edge when building a boat using new materials. If you only have a fixed sum to spend, you can always build a smaller alloy boat for the price of a bigger steel boat, but for most builders, the price difference between the materials cancels out when other factors are considered. The better choice will depend on your skill level as a builders, and your intended service for the boat. > > If I was building for myself, and was building outside, I would still choose alloy. I would investigate using fluxed alloy rods and an arc welder to tack the alloy together. These rods do not need argon. They are not suitable for final welding, but for tacking they may prove acceptable. New formulations might prove suitable, if you have not had success in the past. > > As an alternative, a used MIG welder is simple to use for tacking, and can be resold for much of what it was bought for. A MIG welder is much easier to use than a rod (for both alloy and steel), and for tacking outside you only need cup your hand around the weld to protect it from the breeze. Weld contamination is not an issue, because the tacks are cut out during final welding. (When final welding alloy, you cut a "V" into the material at the point you want to weld, which provides a clean, oxide free surface for the weld). > > Working outside with alloy there is no need to worry about keeping the alloy painted as there is with pre-primed steel. Simply cut the alloy with a skill saw and tack it together. When the boat is fully tacked, hire a professional with a top quality welder to spend the 2- 3 days it will take to do the final welding on the boat. > > Our single chine Bare Bones 30 is suitable for construction in steel or alloy, and any of our designs can be computer scaled to any length you might wish to build. With out 3-D computer design we can fully confirm the boat to any point in construction, so that problems can be caught before you build. > > When building smaller boats, such as 26', the benefits of alloy over steel are hard to beat. As a boat gets smaller, the weight of steel becomes a significant issue in the design, which typically means than small steel boats end up being overly heavy, which limits both performance and capacity. > > Greg Elliott > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > > I'm riding the fence on whether to build in steel or aluminum. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com ________________________________ Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service . [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3529|3509|2004-04-29 20:20:33|Gary H. Lucas|Re: New 30' design|I find looking at your pictures very frustrating. I use Rhino all the time and your pictures look like a Rhino viewport. Without even thinking about it, I keep trying to pan and tilt the image to look at the curves! Gary H. Lucas ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2004 2:56 AM Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: New 30' design > I've posted a revised hull to our site, with a number of views of the single chine hull, showing how the chine has been faired into the lines. > > > > http://www.origamimagic.com/Design/LB30/LB30.htm > > > > For many patterns, a narrow dart does not remove the knuckle. These patterns actually require a dart where the surfaces of the cut overlap before they open up, which is impossible to cut out of a single piece of material. Without this extra material, the chine runs flat at the ends, which the eye sees as a knuckle. > > > > We call it the "crossover" problem, because on the patterns it shows up as a crossover in the curves of the darts. Thus we have revision A, B, C, D to create a hull that has no knuckle, no crossover, and hydrostatic numbers to match the intended service. > > > > Greg Elliott > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > | 3530|3523|2004-04-29 20:46:19|Gary H. Lucas|Re: BS 26 steel/aluminum list|It has been my industrial experience that a beautiful looking Mig weld in steel can be horribly flawed! All the weld drawings I produce specify 0.045" welding wire ONLY on Hot Rolled steel in 1/8" thickness or greater. Lots of weld shops have argued with me on this one. All my parts got hot dipped galvanized. We experienced lots of weld failures in welds that were absolutely gorgeous before hot dipping. The problem surfaced with a simple little part. A piece of 1-1/4" flat bent into a ring clamp for a pipe with two tabs for a bolt to clamp it. These got welded to a piece of 1/8" thick angle, or a piece of flat plate 1/8" thick, or to another ring clamp. We did them in batches of 1000 pieces at a time, about 5 or 6 thousand a year. A customer said he was experiencing some of these hangers breaking right off. I went out in the shop and carefully inspected some of the parts, then put a pipe in the ring clamp and held the other part in a vice. I was totally shocked when I broke maybe 20% effortlessly! Tossed a couple of thousand parts that day. Then we moved our operation to the other coast. Customer calls up and complains about broken welds again. I find out the new welder went back to 0.035" welding wire! I show him how his 'perfect' welds snap right off and we toss a couple of thousand more. We start sending the parts out to be welded, with the note on the print about 0.045" weld wire. They show up having been welded with 0.035" wire. We break a couple just for laughs and the vendor eats the whole batch. 0.035" welding wire CAN produce a sound weld in 1/8" material IF the welding conditions are just right. Just right is very clean metal, and welded vertical UP for maximum penetration. Most parts however require one or more welds to be made in less than perfect conditions. Making pretty welds is harder with 0.045" welding wire though. On thinner materials you have to be careful not to burn right through. The good news. You get much more sound welds with 0.045" wire. The heat input and metal deposited is much higher, so for the same size weld bead you weld much faster. When you weld faster the structure gets LESS hot, so the distortion is less. If I build a steel boat I'm going to Mig weld it. You get less distortion and go so much faster it is well worth it. I'm a pretty good welder, but not a great welder and the Mig machine is so much easier it definitely improves the weld quality of most welders. The welding machine costs more, but buying an older industrial machine and reselling it when done will recover the whole cost if you shop carefully. The consumables actually cost less, when compared by the actual pounds of metal deposited in the weld. Gary H. Lucas ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joe Earsley" To: Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2004 2:10 PM Subject: RE: [origamiboats] Re: BS 26 steel/aluminum list > It has my industrial experience that a beautiful looking aluminum weld > can hide weakness, poor parent metal penetration and high stresses. The > weld goes on too fast to reduce heat deformation and performs more like > caulk than welding. Failure has always been brittle and complete. I > will leave that welding process to experts. I want that keel to stay > attached! I do have more confidence in a good looking steel weld with > the telltale signs of good heat, no porosity and full penetration. > > > > Joe Earsley > > > > ________________________________ > > From: richytill [mailto:tillrc@...] > Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2004 9:01 AM > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: BS 26 steel/aluminum list > > > > Stick welding alloy, > > It is worth mentioning that aluminum stick welding rods are very > expensive. The challenge of positional stick welding alloy is far > beyond the average home builder: even just tacking. Effectively > removing the slag to prepare for follow up with a clean MIG weld > would be frustrating. I have welded miles of aluminum pipe in all > sorts of situations--welding aluminum outdoors is no fun. The home > builder should be aware that aluminum weld and HAZ has 40%+/- less > strength than the parent metal. Better to do it once and do it > right. I like Aluminum. Aluminum must be the first choice for a > deck if you can afford the initial cost, shelter and equipment. This > material is fine--if you go MIG all the way and engineer for weakness > in the weld zone. rt > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > > Most materials, such a steel and wood have low scrap value. Thus, > when you cut up $10,000 worth of new steel to build a boat, the value > of the steel changes to about $2000, and you must add $8000 worth of > workmanship to get back where you started. In effect, cutting the > steel cost you $8000. As a result, unless your workmanship is good, > if you use new steel, the value of the boat you build can end up > being substantially less than the value of the steel that went into > the boat. > > > > Alloy is unique in that it has very high scrap value, due to how it > is manufactured When you cut up $20,000 worth of new alloy to build > a boat, the value of the alloy changes to about $18,000. You need > add only $2000 worth of workmanship to get back where you started. > Even if your workmanship is moderate, the value of the boat is likely > to exceed the value of the alloy that went into the boat. As a > result, alloy boats typically have much better resale value than > other boats. Much higher than the actual price difference between > alloy and steel. > > > > How does this affect your choices when building? > > > > If you plan to get most of your materials as scrap, it makes no > sense to build in alloy. Scrap alloy is worth almost as much as new > alloy (in volume), and there is little benefit in searching for the > occasional deal in scrap yards. If you are building from scrap, you > should be building in steel. > > > > If you plan to build using new materials, then you should consider > alloy, because the risk cost is typically lower. If you are not > happy with the final product, you can likely sell the alloy boat for > a much higher profit by percentage of your original investment. If > you are happy with the alloy boat, you will have the added joy of > sailing in a boat with better performance and capacity than the steel > boat. When you eventually sell the alloy boat, you will likely get a > better return for your efforts, either to build a bigger boat, or as > money to move ashore. > > > > Alloy and steel are both fine building materials. I believe the > non-corrosive nature of alloy, coupled with the light weight, and > high scrap value give alloy an edge when building a boat using new > materials. If you only have a fixed sum to spend, you can always > build a smaller alloy boat for the price of a bigger steel boat, but > for most builders, the price difference between the materials cancels > out when other factors are considered. The better choice will depend > on your skill level as a builders, and your intended service for the > boat. > > > > If I was building for myself, and was building outside, I would > still choose alloy. I would investigate using fluxed alloy rods and > an arc welder to tack the alloy together. These rods do not need > argon. They are not suitable for final welding, but for tacking they > may prove acceptable. New formulations might prove suitable, if you > have not had success in the past. > > > > As an alternative, a used MIG welder is simple to use for tacking, > and can be resold for much of what it was bought for. A MIG welder > is much easier to use than a rod (for both alloy and steel), and for > tacking outside you only need cup your hand around the weld to > protect it from the breeze. Weld contamination is not an issue, > because the tacks are cut out during final welding. (When final > welding alloy, you cut a "V" into the material at the point you want > to weld, which provides a clean, oxide free surface for the weld). > > > > Working outside with alloy there is no need to worry about keeping > the alloy painted as there is with pre-primed steel. Simply cut the > alloy with a skill saw and tack it together. When the boat is fully > tacked, hire a professional with a top quality welder to spend the 2- > 3 days it will take to do the final welding on the boat. > > > > Our single chine Bare Bones 30 is suitable for construction in > steel or alloy, and any of our designs can be computer scaled to any > length you might wish to build. With out 3-D computer design we can > fully confirm the boat to any point in construction, so that problems > can be caught before you build. > > > > When building smaller boats, such as 26', the benefits of alloy > over steel are hard to beat. As a boat gets smaller, the weight of > steel becomes a significant issue in the design, which typically > means than small steel boats end up being overly heavy, which limits > both performance and capacity. > > > > Greg Elliott > > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > > > > > > I'm riding the fence on whether to build in steel or aluminum. > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > > ________________________________ > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > * To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of > Service . > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > | 3531|3523|2004-04-29 23:53:11|Dave|Re: BS 26 steel/aluminum list|--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gary H. Lucas" wrote: > It has been my industrial experience that a beautiful looking Mig weld in > steel can be horribly flawed! All the weld drawings I produce specify > 0.045" welding wire ONLY on Hot Rolled steel in 1/8" thickness or greater. I am not very experienced in welding, even less on a mig. I am just getting started on my boat, and the keel is boxed sectioned steel. 3/8" sides and 1/2" on the bottom. I heard from several people and posts on boatbuilding sites that I would need to weld with .045 flux cored, dual shield wire to get the penetration to make a decent weld. At work I showed my plans for the keel to a pipe fitter who is an absolute ace welder and he showed me that I can weld it with .035 solid wire IF I make the right joint preperations. Grinding a bevel across the edge of the steel stoping about a 1/16 from the edge for both pieces and then leaving a small gap of about 1/32" between the pieces. Then make one pass on the inside of the keel and 5 or so passes on the outside to fill in the bevel. The trick as I understand it is to make sure that the inside weld penetrates enough so the root pass on the outside welds to the inside weld even if you need to grind to get to the first weld. I gave this a try on some scrap 3/8 and was amazed how strong that weld was! I only welded a piece 4 inches wide, and when I was done I put it in the vice and took the blunt end of a firewood splitting maul and beat the crap out of that weld trying to split it. I couldn't. I bent the 3/8 plate near 90 degrees but never got the weld to let go. Then I sawed the piece at 90 degrees to the weld so I could look inside. Where the weld was sawed it was as solid as the plate, no pits gaps or anything. I can't imagine any weld being any stronger, or needing it to be any stronger then that! Dave > > | 3532|3509|2004-04-30 01:22:37|info@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: New 30' design|I had the same experience one day looking at the curves in a well know men's magazine, and found myself tilting the magazine for a better view. Strangely, two other people I queried mentioned the same thing. The problem is that you are using the wrong controls. Take hold of the monitor and tilt it for a view from a different angle. Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com I find looking at your pictures very frustrating. I use Rhino all the time and your pictures look like a Rhino viewport. Without even thinking about it, I keep trying to pan and tilt the image to look at the curves! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3533|3523|2004-04-30 01:23:24|info@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: BS 26 steel/aluminum list|We found a similar result with alloy. Welding alloy with a MIG is so fast you must do it by reflex. The temptation when learning is to use thinner wire, and turn down the voltage and wire speed so that the weld goes slower, so you have the time to make a good looking weld without having the reflex. From our testing this produces a very weak weld in alloy. We consistently get the strongest welds using heavy wire, lots of voltage, and lots of speed. Typically way higher voltages and wire speeds than what is in the tables. The difference in strength can be staggering. The tables are no substitute for testing, over a wide range of settings to find the strongest welds for your equipment and technique.. Tacking alloy when building the boat with MIG is a different story. Simply hold the gun in place and squeeze off a 1/2 second, button sized weld, using heavy wire and lots of heat. No need to move the gun, and anyone can learn the technique in a couple of minutes. Cup a hand around the gun, and the technique works fine outside. Strong enough to hold, yet weak enough to move when pulling the boat together so everything stays fair. Hire a professional for the final welds, and make sure they can consistently produce 180 degree coupons for each position they will be welding, before you let them start on the boat. Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com It has been my industrial experience that a beautiful looking Mig weld in steel can be horribly flawed! All the weld drawings I produce specify 0.045" welding wire ONLY on Hot Rolled steel in 1/8" thickness or greater. Lots of weld shops have argued with me on this one. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3534|3534|2004-04-30 11:03:14|info@easysoftwareinc.com|Sugar Scoop and aft hung rudder|I'm receiving email from people, asking about the option for an aft hung rudder on the Bare Bones 30. All our designs have aft hung rudders. The sugar scoop (SS) simply protects the aft hung rudder from damage. The transom in a sugar scoop design is vertical, at the aft end of the deck. This is the water tight seal to the hull. The SS continues beyond that point. The rudder post come up through a bearing at the aft end of the transom, and continues up to the deck, where it can either be used as a tiller, or as an emergency steering. I recall a boat we met in Fiji, that has been mentioned on this site. They had a fire in the foam insulation that did considerable damage to the interior of the boat. The boat had a overhanging transom, with a more typical aft hung rudder. The owner was welding a curved pipe to the hull to extend outside the rudder to protect it when the foam caught fire. Rather than using a curved pipe to protect the rudder, we use a SS. The owners we have met over the years have reported to us that the advantages of a SS outweigh the disadvantages. The boating community also seems to agree, as the SS has become standard in most sailboats, and increasingly is standard in power boats. For those owners not wanting a SS, the pattern can simply be ended at the vertical transom, or we can supply patterns with the classic overhanging transom with under-slung rudder. Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3535|3534|2004-04-30 13:04:53|bubblede|Re: Sugar Scoop and aft hung rudder|> The owner was welding a curved pipe to the hull to extend outside the rudder to protect it when the foam caught fire. Same thing happened to a friend who had the sistership to my boat, about 15 years ago. He was welding threaded rods under the hull, to fix additional anodes. When he finally reacted to cars blasting their horns out on the street, he stepped back, took off the helmet to find that severeal meter high flames where shooting out of the place where the hatches had been.. total loss inside and most of the yachty deck-fittings, but the hull was ok, he sandblasted and started over again. > Rather than using a curved pipe to protect the rudder, we use a SS. loger overhang sure has a higher speed ptential once th boat gets going, also makes a nice platform for swimming. Only difference is that it's easier to take the rudder off if it's freely accesible, but then I never did that and wouldn't want to ;-) The curved pipe I designed for Yago is less for protecting the rudder but to act as a bumpkin for the mizzen and a support for bathin ladder, maybe small platform, still fiddling around with that. It's also a question of style, for a modern hull, deck and rig I would do the same. Or, maybe better in case of wide hulls, twin balanced spade rudders, but they would be a pain to take out ever. do you have any drawings of your keel/skeg/rudder configuration for your boats? All the best Gerd http://www.justmueller.com/boats/| 3536|3534|2004-04-30 14:25:36|brentswain38|Re: Sugar Scoop and aft hung rudder|Hanging the rudder outside the transom drastically simplifies the self steering , autopilot ,and inside steering ,and allows one that is incredibly strong compared to the highly complex and flimsey arrangements needed with inboard rudders.Thus an inboard rudder has no place on a boat designed for offshore cruising.You can run an outboard rudder thru a V shaped cut out in the sugar scoop, and with the right slope on the transom , a couple of fins on either side of the rudder will seal the V shaped hole in the sugar scoop.A bit of slope on the transom lets the trimtab run vertically , making it more efficient and improves the angles of the linkages to the self steering asd inside steering. Your 30 footer looks like the best hull you've done so far. Great looking midship section and profile. I'd be leery about the wide transom giving poor hull balance and poor directional stability. This can be offset somewhat by deepening the aft centreline sections , moving the weight and centre of buoyancy aft, thus reducing the tendency of the stern to lift and the bow to plunge when well heeled. I just crossed the Comox bar in a SE wind a week ago, alongside a friend in a stock fibreglass boat.He was constantly cranking on the wheel with the boat wandering all over the place, on a beam reach, the sort of thing you get with an unbalanced hull.No thanks. Been there , done that with the pipe dream, enough for one lifetime. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > I'm receiving email from people, asking about the option for an aft hung rudder on the Bare Bones 30. > > > > All our designs have aft hung rudders. The sugar scoop (SS) simply protects the aft hung rudder from damage. The transom in a sugar scoop design is vertical, at the aft end of the deck. This is the water tight seal to the hull. The SS continues beyond that point. The rudder post come up through a bearing at the aft end of the transom, and continues up to the deck, where it can either be used as a tiller, or as an emergency steering. > > > > I recall a boat we met in Fiji, that has been mentioned on this site. They had a fire in the foam insulation that did considerable damage to the interior of the boat. The boat had a overhanging transom, with a more typical aft hung rudder. The owner was welding a curved pipe to the hull to extend outside the rudder to protect it when the foam caught fire. > > > > Rather than using a curved pipe to protect the rudder, we use a SS. The owners we have met over the years have reported to us that the advantages of a SS outweigh the disadvantages. The boating community also seems to agree, as the SS has become standard in most sailboats, and increasingly is standard in power boats. > > > > For those owners not wanting a SS, the pattern can simply be ended at the vertical transom, or we can supply patterns with the classic overhanging transom with under-slung rudder. > > > > Greg Elliott > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3537|3534|2004-04-30 14:27:57|brentswain38|Re: Sugar Scoop and aft hung rudder|I used to weld such a pipe on , until I realised that a steel rudderhead hung on 1 inch to 1 1/4 inch stainless pins is much stronger than any such pipe , and extremely unlikely to ever get dammaged.Jack's boat caught fire when he asked Monica, who was below with the water hose, to come out on deck and give him a hand to fend the boat off. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "bubblede" wrote: > > > The owner was welding a curved pipe to the hull to extend outside > the rudder to protect it when the foam caught fire. > > Same thing happened to a friend who had the sistership to my boat, > about 15 years ago. He was welding threaded rods under the hull, to > fix additional anodes. When he finally reacted to cars blasting > their horns out on the street, he stepped back, took off the helmet > to find that severeal meter high flames where shooting out of the > place where the hatches had been.. total loss inside and most of the > yachty deck-fittings, but the hull was ok, he sandblasted and > started over again. > > > Rather than using a curved pipe to protect the rudder, we use a > SS. > loger overhang sure has a higher speed ptential once th boat gets > going, also makes a nice platform for swimming. Only difference is > that it's easier to take the rudder off if it's freely accesible, > but then I never did that and wouldn't want to ;-) > The curved pipe I designed for Yago is less for protecting the > rudder but to act as a bumpkin for the mizzen and a support for > bathin ladder, maybe small platform, still fiddling around with that. > > It's also a question of style, for a modern hull, deck and rig I > would do the same. Or, maybe better in case of wide hulls, twin > balanced spade rudders, but they would be a pain to take out ever. > > do you have any drawings of your keel/skeg/rudder configuration for > your boats? > > All the best > Gerd > > http://www.justmueller.com/boats/ | 3538|3523|2004-04-30 14:31:46|brentswain38|Re: BS 26 steel/aluminum list|This is why I prefer stick welding with 6011 where penetration is an issue. Very forgivving. I've never really trusted mig welding for this reason. Aluminium sticks are a pain in the ass, extremely hard to srike an arc with. --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Joe Earsley" wrote: > It has my industrial experience that a beautiful looking aluminum weld > can hide weakness, poor parent metal penetration and high stresses. The > weld goes on too fast to reduce heat deformation and performs more like > caulk than welding. Failure has always been brittle and complete. I > will leave that welding process to experts. I want that keel to stay > attached! I do have more confidence in a good looking steel weld with > the telltale signs of good heat, no porosity and full penetration. > > > > Joe Earsley > > > > ________________________________ > > From: richytill [mailto:tillrc@h...] > Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2004 9:01 AM > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: BS 26 steel/aluminum list > > > > Stick welding alloy, > > It is worth mentioning that aluminum stick welding rods are very > expensive. The challenge of positional stick welding alloy is far > beyond the average home builder: even just tacking. Effectively > removing the slag to prepare for follow up with a clean MIG weld > would be frustrating. I have welded miles of aluminum pipe in all > sorts of situations--welding aluminum outdoors is no fun. The home > builder should be aware that aluminum weld and HAZ has 40%+/- less > strength than the parent metal. Better to do it once and do it > right. I like Aluminum. Aluminum must be the first choice for a > deck if you can afford the initial cost, shelter and equipment. This > material is fine--if you go MIG all the way and engineer for weakness > in the weld zone. rt > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > > Most materials, such a steel and wood have low scrap value. Thus, > when you cut up $10,000 worth of new steel to build a boat, the value > of the steel changes to about $2000, and you must add $8000 worth of > workmanship to get back where you started. In effect, cutting the > steel cost you $8000. As a result, unless your workmanship is good, > if you use new steel, the value of the boat you build can end up > being substantially less than the value of the steel that went into > the boat. > > > > Alloy is unique in that it has very high scrap value, due to how it > is manufactured When you cut up $20,000 worth of new alloy to build > a boat, the value of the alloy changes to about $18,000. You need > add only $2000 worth of workmanship to get back where you started. > Even if your workmanship is moderate, the value of the boat is likely > to exceed the value of the alloy that went into the boat. As a > result, alloy boats typically have much better resale value than > other boats. Much higher than the actual price difference between > alloy and steel. > > > > How does this affect your choices when building? > > > > If you plan to get most of your materials as scrap, it makes no > sense to build in alloy. Scrap alloy is worth almost as much as new > alloy (in volume), and there is little benefit in searching for the > occasional deal in scrap yards. If you are building from scrap, you > should be building in steel. > > > > If you plan to build using new materials, then you should consider > alloy, because the risk cost is typically lower. If you are not > happy with the final product, you can likely sell the alloy boat for > a much higher profit by percentage of your original investment. If > you are happy with the alloy boat, you will have the added joy of > sailing in a boat with better performance and capacity than the steel > boat. When you eventually sell the alloy boat, you will likely get a > better return for your efforts, either to build a bigger boat, or as > money to move ashore. > > > > Alloy and steel are both fine building materials. I believe the > non-corrosive nature of alloy, coupled with the light weight, and > high scrap value give alloy an edge when building a boat using new > materials. If you only have a fixed sum to spend, you can always > build a smaller alloy boat for the price of a bigger steel boat, but > for most builders, the price difference between the materials cancels > out when other factors are considered. The better choice will depend > on your skill level as a builders, and your intended service for the > boat. > > > > If I was building for myself, and was building outside, I would > still choose alloy. I would investigate using fluxed alloy rods and > an arc welder to tack the alloy together. These rods do not need > argon. They are not suitable for final welding, but for tacking they > may prove acceptable. New formulations might prove suitable, if you > have not had success in the past. > > > > As an alternative, a used MIG welder is simple to use for tacking, > and can be resold for much of what it was bought for. A MIG welder > is much easier to use than a rod (for both alloy and steel), and for > tacking outside you only need cup your hand around the weld to > protect it from the breeze. Weld contamination is not an issue, > because the tacks are cut out during final welding. (When final > welding alloy, you cut a "V" into the material at the point you want > to weld, which provides a clean, oxide free surface for the weld). > > > > Working outside with alloy there is no need to worry about keeping > the alloy painted as there is with pre-primed steel. Simply cut the > alloy with a skill saw and tack it together. When the boat is fully > tacked, hire a professional with a top quality welder to spend the 2- > 3 days it will take to do the final welding on the boat. > > > > Our single chine Bare Bones 30 is suitable for construction in > steel or alloy, and any of our designs can be computer scaled to any > length you might wish to build. With out 3-D computer design we can > fully confirm the boat to any point in construction, so that problems > can be caught before you build. > > > > When building smaller boats, such as 26', the benefits of alloy > over steel are hard to beat. As a boat gets smaller, the weight of > steel becomes a significant issue in the design, which typically > means than small steel boats end up being overly heavy, which limits > both performance and capacity. > > > > Greg Elliott > > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > > > > > > I'm riding the fence on whether to build in steel or aluminum. > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > > ________________________________ > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > * To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of > Service . > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3539|3523|2004-04-30 14:41:24|brentswain38|Re: BS 26 steel/aluminum list|My last boat sold for over 5 times what she cost me. Several others have sold for many times what their owners have spent on them.I've never heard of that being the case with aluminium. My dinghy was built for $65 worth of scrap aluminium at $1 per pound ,17 years ago and is a good as the day I built her except for pitting where copper from a couple of nicopress sleeves has landed in the bottom( keep all copper of any kind away from aluminium, the tiniest traces will eat right thru it.) I've never heard of one of my boats being sold for scrap. The simplicity of origami methods make that kind of screwup extremely unlikely ,and easy to repair. Judging the value of a boat material by it's scrap prices is really grasping at straws. When arguements get that feeble , people who use such arguenments are more less admitting defeat. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > Most materials, such a steel and wood have low scrap value. Thus, when you cut up $10,000 worth of new steel to build a boat, the value of the steel changes to about $2000, and you must add $8000 worth of workmanship to get back where you started. In effect, cutting the steel cost you $8000. As a result, unless your workmanship is good, if you use new steel, the value of the boat you build can end up being substantially less than the value of the steel that went into the boat. > > Alloy is unique in that it has very high scrap value, due to how it is manufactured When you cut up $20,000 worth of new alloy to build a boat, the value of the alloy changes to about $18,000. You need add only $2000 worth of workmanship to get back where you started. Even if your workmanship is moderate, the value of the boat is likely to exceed the value of the alloy that went into the boat. As a result, alloy boats typically have much better resale value than other boats. Much higher than the actual price difference between alloy and steel. > > How does this affect your choices when building? > > If you plan to get most of your materials as scrap, it makes no sense to build in alloy. Scrap alloy is worth almost as much as new alloy (in volume), and there is little benefit in searching for the occasional deal in scrap yards. If you are building from scrap, you should be building in steel. > > If you plan to build using new materials, then you should consider alloy, because the risk cost is typically lower. If you are not happy with the final product, you can likely sell the alloy boat for a much higher profit by percentage of your original investment. If you are happy with the alloy boat, you will have the added joy of sailing in a boat with better performance and capacity than the steel boat. When you eventually sell the alloy boat, you will likely get a better return for your efforts, either to build a bigger boat, or as money to move ashore. > > Alloy and steel are both fine building materials. I believe the non-corrosive nature of alloy, coupled with the light weight, and high scrap value give alloy an edge when building a boat using new materials. If you only have a fixed sum to spend, you can always build a smaller alloy boat for the price of a bigger steel boat, but for most builders, the price difference between the materials cancels out when other factors are considered. The better choice will depend on your skill level as a builders, and your intended service for the boat. > > If I was building for myself, and was building outside, I would still choose alloy. I would investigate using fluxed alloy rods and an arc welder to tack the alloy together. These rods do not need argon. They are not suitable for final welding, but for tacking they may prove acceptable. New formulations might prove suitable, if you have not had success in the past. > > As an alternative, a used MIG welder is simple to use for tacking, and can be resold for much of what it was bought for. A MIG welder is much easier to use than a rod (for both alloy and steel), and for tacking outside you only need cup your hand around the weld to protect it from the breeze. Weld contamination is not an issue, because the tacks are cut out during final welding. (When final welding alloy, you cut a "V" into the material at the point you want to weld, which provides a clean, oxide free surface for the weld). > > Working outside with alloy there is no need to worry about keeping the alloy painted as there is with pre-primed steel. Simply cut the alloy with a skill saw and tack it together. When the boat is fully tacked, hire a professional with a top quality welder to spend the 2- 3 days it will take to do the final welding on the boat. > > Our single chine Bare Bones 30 is suitable for construction in steel or alloy, and any of our designs can be computer scaled to any length you might wish to build. With out 3-D computer design we can fully confirm the boat to any point in construction, so that problems can be caught before you build. > > When building smaller boats, such as 26', the benefits of alloy over steel are hard to beat. As a boat gets smaller, the weight of steel becomes a significant issue in the design, which typically means than small steel boats end up being overly heavy, which limits both performance and capacity. > > Greg Elliott > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > > I'm riding the fence on whether to build in steel or aluminum. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3540|3465|2004-04-30 14:53:28|brentswain38|Re: Steel Mast|On my last trip to Tonga and back. I caught all my water off my decks, and never had to take water from ashore.However , on my return trip home, having a watermaker aboard would have given me great peace of mind. While I was at Fanning Island in 1999-2000, we never had a drop of rain in three months and the local water was listed by the UN as some of the worst in the world.The same lack of rain is a problem in other parts of the world, like the Baja, where being totally self sufficient and able to stay out of town can save you a fortune in port fees, etc . The reason most watermakers have such problems is because they are too small and it takes an hour or more of use to make enough water to flush them out properly. For this reason they never get flushed out properly, and as a result tend to break down frequently. When you can build a 540 gallon a day watermaker for under $1,000 CDN, it doesn't make much sense to buy a commercially made 35 gallon a day one for thousands of dollars.Especially when the pumps they use are flimsey compared to a pressure washer pump. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > Hi Gerd, > > There is an old saying. Fishing lures are designed to catch fishermen, not fish. Many boats are designed the same way - to sell not to sail. > > I think it was in "Riddle of the Sands" that the owner of the boat, every time a new piece of gear came aboard, took great pleasure in throwing an old piece of gear over the side. Over the years I've met more than a few sailors with the same tale, including one sailor I knew very well that, becalmed and out of fuel, threw almost everything overboard - including the anchors - to lighten the boat and get moving. These stories always amazed me, as we slowly became heavier and heavier as we cruised, until one day in the Torres Straights I also was throwing gear - including the much treasured stainless, off the boat like mad to lighten us up. > > To me, a cruising boat is something to carry you and your gear, and the more the boat can carry, the more people that can live and travel on the boat, the more water and supplies you can carry, the more remote the places you can visit, and the longer you can stay. Having spent most of the last 20 years sailing with an all female crew, to me it only makes sense to save cost where it is least critical to the capacity of a boat, and to save weight where it is critical to capacity. Given the choice between saving weight by getting rid of some steel, or getting rid of some crew, I know what choice I would make. > > Over the years I've met plenty of people that have tried to "cheat" the weight budget on a boat. The water-maker being one of the most popular methods, thinking that you can turn diesel into water and save weight. Of all water-makers I've seen over the years, almost none were in regular use, because of the cost of keeping the units running over time. Our solution was to install bigger water tanks, and a permanently in-place water catcher, so that every time it rains we automatically fill the tanks. Very low cost, and virtually maintenance free. > > Did it work? If you can go 2 months without filling the tanks, and can re-fill them in 1-2 hours of rainfall - how likely is it that you will not get 1-2 hours of rainfall in 2 months, or not be near a source of fresh water? We never found it to be a problem. Install a split pipe rail on the outside edge of the cabin top to collect the rain instead of having run down the cabin sides, with collection pipes at the aft end of the cabin top leading to the tanks. Fill your shower water first. > > I've been reviewing some other sources on the net in the comparison of alloy versus steel, and I'm finding that for equivalent column strength, alloy is about 1/2 the weight of steel at about 2 times the cost. However, you save 10 times the cost of ballast by using a lighter mast, so if lead costs less than 20 times the cost of alloy, you can actually save money by using alloy in the mast. (20 times because you are also saving the cost of the steel mast - which is 1/2 the cost of the alloy - 10 / .5 = 20). > > Before building a steel mast, check local prices. If the cost of alloy by weight is less than 20 times the cost of lead, you can probably save $$ by using alloy for the mast. At the same time, adding hundreds of pounds to the effective cruising capacity of the boat. > > While using the heaviest and cheapest materials may appeal to the builder's pocketbook - when building a boat piece by piece - consider the boat as a whole. With all the tradeoffs between performance, comfort and price, you may just find you can actually save money by using lighter materials in weight critical areas, allowing you to carry appealing crew instead of ballast. > > We met few boats with steel masts offshore. Lots of wooden masts - lots. Some gaff and junk rigged boats with steel masts, but not one marconi style rig with a steel mast, except for a French boat in New Caledonia, with a radio tower style steel mast. > > > Greg Elliott > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: bubblede > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Sunday, April 25, 2004 3:14 AM > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Steel Mast > > > Concerning useful weight: I just happened to watch a TV presentation > of Motor Yachts, and on a dutch built 65 footer they boasted that > the interior was so luxurious that they had crafted worktops, galley > and bathrooms out of 4 tons of original Carrera marble ;-) > > Greg, I like your approach of "cruising capacity" as one way to > measure a boat. Applies not only to rigs of course, same would go > for hull matrial for example, and results seem more differentiated > than just looking at displacment overall or just weight aloft for a > given amount of cash - and then there is of course a not always easy > relaitonship to performance. > > Brent is right of course, having little money is no excuse for not > going to sail if that what you do it for, and it's really difficult > to beat his boats overall in price/cruisng capacity. the danger is > that taking a decision once, you will repeat it more and more easily > throughout the design and building process. > > I think that for most amateur constructions it is true that we tend > to build too strong to begin with and then very often add weight > because a) the material used is "cheap" and simple and /or b) we say > thatif we are already too heavy, a little bit more can't hurt.... > and when we finished, we take all or junk and tools from the > building site and pack it somewhere under the floors because we > never know when we might need it. > > There is a lot of discussion here about boats having to be heavy to > be good boats. I do not really agree, but one thing that I know is > that of the hundered plus amateur boats I have seen over the last 25 > years, there was not a single boat that was "too light" when hanging > fully loaded from a crane. a lot of them were were quite happy with > the boat floating on its lines, having drawn a pessimitic waterline > to begin with ;-) > > If there is one single trap for the amateur, it is weight, too > strong (usually in all the wrong places) and too heavy by design or > for cost reasons and payload. > > > Gerd > http://www.justmueller.com/boats > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- > Yahoo! Groups Links > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3541|3534|2004-04-30 15:03:15|info@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: Sugar Scoop and aft hung rudder|Hi Gerd, Bolt on bearings can be used to allow the rudder to be removed without jacking the boat. Alternatively, the rudder shaft can be ended at the middle bearing, with an extension up to the tiller head. The second option allows you to use a solid rudder stock to carry the rudder, and a pipe extension to cut weight and cost. I've added some design ideas to the Bare Bones 30 on the web. http://www.origamimagic.com/Design/LB30/LB30.htm We have other rudders, keels, pilot houses, etc. available. Typically we just cut and paste features from other boats and scale to suit. We find that everyone wants something a little different, so rather than draw a stock plan, and have the builder try and draw up their own modifications, we find that the end results are much better if we customize the plans in 3-D for each builder to suit. There is nothing worse than building a boat, only to discover the sheets don't run fair, or bumping a head, elbow, toe, etc, etc, every time you walk past something. For those unsure what the problem is: when you are laying out the deck and interior of a boat, unless you build mock-ups it is very hard to get a boat right the first time. 2-D drawings do not show you problems that exist on the diagonals. As a result, people end up building and rebuilding, all of which takes time and costs money. It is not unusual to hear of people that have built and rebuilt 2, 3, 4 times, and still are not happy with the result. We do the mock-ups on the computer in 3-D. It is quicker than building real mock-up, more accurate, faster, and costs less. By rotating the drawings on to the diagonals, you can see the problems before you build them. Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com do you have any drawings of your keel/skeg/rudder configuration for your boats? All the best Gerd [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3542|3465|2004-04-30 19:26:10|Gerald Niffenegger|water maker|When pressure washer pump was mentioned I looked on ebay for the price. A 4,000 psi at 4 gallon per min. is less than $300. Don't know if it would stand up to salt water? Looks like a brass pump with ceramic works? Would that be enough pressure for a water maker? Gerald --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" wrote: > On my last trip to Tonga and back. I caught all my water off my > decks, and never had to take water from ashore.However , on my return > trip home, having a watermaker aboard would have given me great peace > of mind. > While I was at Fanning Island in 1999-2000, we never had a drop of > rain in three months and the local water was listed by the UN as some > of the worst in the world.The same lack of rain is a problem in other > parts of the world, like the Baja, where being totally self > sufficient and able to stay out of town can save you a fortune in > port fees, etc . > The reason most watermakers have such problems is because they are > too small and it takes an hour or more of use to make enough water to > flush them out properly. For this reason they never get flushed out > properly, and as a result tend to break down frequently. > When you can build a 540 gallon a day watermaker for under $1,000 > CDN, it doesn't make much sense to buy a commercially made 35 gallon > a day one for thousands of dollars.Especially when the pumps they use > are flimsey compared to a pressure washer pump. > Brent Swain > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > > Hi Gerd, > > > > There is an old saying. Fishing lures are designed to catch > fishermen, not fish. Many boats are designed the same way - to sell > not to sail. > > > > I think it was in "Riddle of the Sands" that the owner of the boat, > every time a new piece of gear came aboard, took great pleasure in > throwing an old piece of gear over the side. Over the years I've met > more than a few sailors with the same tale, including one sailor I > knew very well that, becalmed and out of fuel, threw almost > everything overboard - including the anchors - to lighten the boat > and get moving. These stories always amazed me, as we slowly became > heavier and heavier as we cruised, until one day in the Torres > Straights I also was throwing gear - including the much treasured > stainless, off the boat like mad to lighten us up. > > > > To me, a cruising boat is something to carry you and your gear, and > the more the boat can carry, the more people that can live and travel > on the boat, the more water and supplies you can carry, the more > remote the places you can visit, and the longer you can stay. Having > spent most of the last 20 years sailing with an all female crew, to > me it only makes sense to save cost where it is least critical to the > capacity of a boat, and to save weight where it is critical to > capacity. Given the choice between saving weight by getting rid of > some steel, or getting rid of some crew, I know what choice I would > make. > > > > Over the years I've met plenty of people that have tried to "cheat" > the weight budget on a boat. The water-maker being one of the most > popular methods, thinking that you can turn diesel into water and > save weight. Of all water-makers I've seen over the years, almost > none were in regular use, because of the cost of keeping the units > running over time. Our solution was to install bigger water tanks, > and a permanently in-place water catcher, so that every time it rains > we automatically fill the tanks. Very low cost, and virtually > maintenance free. > > > > Did it work? If you can go 2 months without filling the tanks, and > can re-fill them in 1-2 hours of rainfall - how likely is it that you > will not get 1-2 hours of rainfall in 2 months, or not be near a > source of fresh water? We never found it to be a problem. Install a > split pipe rail on the outside edge of the cabin top to collect the > rain instead of having run down the cabin sides, with collection > pipes at the aft end of the cabin top leading to the tanks. Fill > your shower water first. > > > > I've been reviewing some other sources on the net in the comparison > of alloy versus steel, and I'm finding that for equivalent column > strength, alloy is about 1/2 the weight of steel at about 2 times the > cost. However, you save 10 times the cost of ballast by using a > lighter mast, so if lead costs less than 20 times the cost of alloy, > you can actually save money by using alloy in the mast. (20 times > because you are also saving the cost of the steel mast - which is 1/2 > the cost of the alloy - 10 / .5 = 20). > > > > Before building a steel mast, check local prices. If the cost of > alloy by weight is less than 20 times the cost of lead, you can > probably save $$ by using alloy for the mast. At the same time, > adding hundreds of pounds to the effective cruising capacity of the > boat. > > > > While using the heaviest and cheapest materials may appeal to the > builder's pocketbook - when building a boat piece by piece - consider > the boat as a whole. With all the tradeoffs between performance, > comfort and price, you may just find you can actually save money by > using lighter materials in weight critical areas, allowing you to > carry appealing crew instead of ballast. > > > > We met few boats with steel masts offshore. Lots of wooden masts - > lots. Some gaff and junk rigged boats with steel masts, but not one > marconi style rig with a steel mast, except for a French boat in New > Caledonia, with a radio tower style steel mast. > > > > > > Greg Elliott > > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: bubblede > > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > Sent: Sunday, April 25, 2004 3:14 AM > > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Steel Mast > > > > > > Concerning useful weight: I just happened to watch a TV > presentation > > of Motor Yachts, and on a dutch built 65 footer they boasted that > > the interior was so luxurious that they had crafted worktops, > galley > > and bathrooms out of 4 tons of original Carrera marble ;-) > > > > Greg, I like your approach of "cruising capacity" as one way to > > measure a boat. Applies not only to rigs of course, same would go > > for hull matrial for example, and results seem more > differentiated > > than just looking at displacment overall or just weight aloft for > a > > given amount of cash - and then there is of course a not always > easy > > relaitonship to performance. > > > > Brent is right of course, having little money is no excuse for > not > > going to sail if that what you do it for, and it's really > difficult > > to beat his boats overall in price/cruisng capacity. the danger > is > > that taking a decision once, you will repeat it more and more > easily > > throughout the design and building process. > > > > I think that for most amateur constructions it is true that we > tend > > to build too strong to begin with and then very often add weight > > because a) the material used is "cheap" and simple and /or b) we > say > > thatif we are already too heavy, a little bit more can't hurt.... > > and when we finished, we take all or junk and tools from the > > building site and pack it somewhere under the floors because we > > never know when we might need it. > > > > There is a lot of discussion here about boats having to be heavy > to > > be good boats. I do not really agree, but one thing that I know > is > > that of the hundered plus amateur boats I have seen over the last > 25 > > years, there was not a single boat that was "too light" when > hanging > > fully loaded from a crane. a lot of them were were quite happy > with > > the boat floating on its lines, having drawn a pessimitic > waterline > > to begin with ;-) > > > > If there is one single trap for the amateur, it is weight, too > > strong (usually in all the wrong places) and too heavy by design > or > > for cost reasons and payload. > > > > > > Gerd > > http://www.justmueller.com/boats > > > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- > unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > ---------- > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of > Service. > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3543|3465|2004-04-30 19:43:53|Gerald Niffenegger|sailboat gearbox|This seems to be the sight were the folks that like to tinker congregate. Has anyone adapted a standard car transmission for use in a sailboat. Would probably need to be run in second or third? Wonder if a clutch would be required since there really isn't much that keeps the shaft from turning? Gerald| 3544|3465|2004-04-30 19:57:33|Michael Casling|Re: sailboat gearbox|You could use an automatic gearbox, I have seen that done. Might need an oil cooler if a lot of power was being used. The one I saw was behind a 427 Ford gas motor making a few hundred horsepower and turning 7500 rpm. Boat went on to a plane real quick and shifted gears with a top speed of 75, which was pretty good for a 21 foot V bottom cuddy cabin. Probably would not have to shift gears on a sail boat. Top gear for forward. If the OMC leg does not work behind the diesel in my fishing boat I think I will move the engine forward and use an auto gearbox. That involves a lot more work so I am going to marry it to the OMC leg for now. Michael in Kelowna. ----- Original Message ----- From: Gerald Niffenegger To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, April 30, 2004 4:43 PM Subject: [origamiboats] sailboat gearbox This seems to be the sight were the folks that like to tinker congregate. Has anyone adapted a standard car transmission for use in a sailboat. Would probably need to be run in second or third? Wonder if a clutch would be required since there really isn't much that keeps the shaft from turning? Gerald To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3545|3465|2004-04-30 20:06:56|Gerald Niffenegger|Re: sailboat gearbox|My first thought was an automatic transmission. I have an automatic in my little Chevy. However, it is one of the few automatic transmissions on this island. Automatic transmissions are scarce as hens teeth in this part of the world. Then again ....... if I can get that steel hull to plane and run 75 mph, with that 1.9 VW, I'll find an automatic!!!!!!! (: Gerald --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Michael Casling wrote: > You could use an automatic gearbox, I have seen that done. Might need an oil cooler if a lot of power was being used. The one I saw was behind a 427 Ford gas motor making a few hundred horsepower and turning 7500 rpm. Boat went on to a plane real quick and shifted gears with a top speed of 75, which was pretty good for a 21 foot V bottom cuddy cabin. Probably would not have to shift gears on a sail boat. Top gear for forward. If the OMC leg does not work behind the diesel in my fishing boat I think I will move the engine forward and use an auto gearbox. That involves a lot more work so I am going to marry it to the OMC leg for now. Michael in Kelowna. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Gerald Niffenegger > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Friday, April 30, 2004 4:43 PM > Subject: [origamiboats] sailboat gearbox > > > This seems to be the sight were the folks that like to tinker > congregate. Has anyone adapted a standard car transmission for use in > a sailboat. Would probably need to be run in second or third? Wonder > if a clutch would be required since there really isn't much that keeps > the shaft from turning? > Gerald > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Yahoo! Groups Links > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3546|3523|2004-04-30 21:07:33|Gary H. Lucas|Re: BS 26 steel/aluminum list|Dave, As I said, it can be done. However you have to ask, why bother? All that close fitting and grinding, I thought the idea is to 'save' work? Gary H. Lucas ----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave" To: Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2004 11:53 PM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: BS 26 steel/aluminum list . > > I am not very experienced in welding, even less on a mig. > I am just getting started on my boat, and the keel is boxed > sectioned steel. 3/8" sides and 1/2" on the bottom. I heard from > several people and posts on boatbuilding sites that I would need to > weld with .045 flux cored, dual shield wire to get the penetration > to make a decent weld. At work I showed my plans for the keel to a > pipe fitter who is an absolute ace welder and he showed me that I > can weld it with .035 solid wire IF I make the right joint > preperations. Grinding a bevel across the edge of the steel stoping > about a 1/16 from the edge for both pieces and then leaving a small > gap of about 1/32" between the pieces. Then make one pass on the > inside of the keel and 5 or so passes on the outside to fill in the > bevel. The trick as I understand it is to make sure that the inside > weld penetrates enough so the root pass on the outside welds to the > inside weld even if you need to grind to get to the first weld. I > gave this a try on some scrap 3/8 and was amazed how strong that > weld was! I only welded a piece 4 inches wide, and when I was done I > put it in the vice and took the blunt end of a firewood splitting > maul and beat the crap out of that weld trying to split it. I > couldn't. I bent the 3/8 plate near 90 degrees but never got the > weld to let go. Then I sawed the piece at 90 degrees to the weld so > I could look inside. Where the weld was sawed it was as solid as the > plate, no pits gaps or anything. I can't imagine any weld being any > stronger, or needing it to be any stronger then that! > Dave > > > | 3547|3523|2004-04-30 21:24:40|Gary H. Lucas|Re: BS 26 steel/aluminum list|The big problem with aluminum welding is using the wrong mode of transfer. Steel is welded using what is called 'short arc' or 'dip' transfer. The crackling sound comes from the wire repeatedly shorting out in the weld puddle and burning back. Aluminum welding, except on VERY thin material must be done in spray transfer mode. How do you know you are using spray transfer? The clues. When you stop welding the weld wire has a sharp point on the end, NOT a round ball. When you stop welding there is very little sign of smoke on the bead and the weld is almost shiny. Short arc produces a smoky weld. While you are welding there are almost NO sparks. Short arc produces lots of white hot sparks showering down. While you are welding the arc sounds like air spraying, not crackling. The bead with spray transfer will have gentle smooth ripples while short arc produces sharp closely spaced ripples. To get to spray arc turn up the voltage and increase the wire feed speed. If you don't see the above clues turn it up some more. When you reach spray arc transfer the change in the welding will be sudden and dramatic. Most people are very surprised how much they have to turn up the heat to get it to occur. Many never get there because they keep turning it up and they can't believe you'd want to go any hotter so they stop. Aluminum is a very good conductor of heat. If you don't have lots of heat you get a cold weld. Spray arc is a thing of joy. You can make pass after pass to build up a joint and it all just smoothly flows together. About ten years ago a greenhouse customer of mine was having 1500 new aluminum benches welded together by a contractor who does this for a living. I looked at the welding and told the customer it could be much better if the welding machine were adjusted differently. He told the contractor to let me try. The guy was pissed because he got paid piece work and my fooling around was costing him money. I don't weld very often so it took me about an hour to get the machine adjusted right. A week later the customer told me the welder had forgiven me. My adjustments had cut his welding time per bench in half, so he was making much better money! A year later the customer also reported that the welds on the new benches stay together much better than the old benches. Gary H. Lucas ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Friday, April 30, 2004 1:22 AM Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: BS 26 steel/aluminum list > We found a similar result with alloy. Welding alloy with a MIG is so fast you must do it by reflex. The temptation when learning is to use thinner wire, and turn down the voltage and wire speed so that the weld goes slower, so you have the time to make a good looking weld without having the reflex. From our testing this produces a very weak weld in alloy. > > We consistently get the strongest welds using heavy wire, lots of voltage, and lots of speed. Typically way higher voltages and wire speeds than what is in the tables. The difference in strength can be staggering. The tables are no substitute for testing, over a wide range of settings to find the strongest welds for your equipment and technique.. > > Tacking alloy when building the boat with MIG is a different story. Simply hold the gun in place and squeeze off a 1/2 second, button sized weld, using heavy wire and lots of heat. No need to move the gun, and anyone can learn the technique in a couple of minutes. Cup a hand around the gun, and the technique works fine outside. Strong enough to hold, yet weak enough to move when pulling the boat together so everything stays fair. > > Hire a professional for the final welds, and make sure they can consistently produce 180 degree coupons for each position they will be welding, before you let them start on the boat. > > Greg Elliott > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > > > It has been my industrial experience that a beautiful looking Mig weld in > steel can be horribly flawed! All the weld drawings I produce specify > 0.045" welding wire ONLY on Hot Rolled steel in 1/8" thickness or greater. > Lots of weld shops have argued with me on this one. > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > | 3548|3523|2004-04-30 23:21:38|info@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: BS 26 steel/aluminum list|Thanks Gary, I have repeatedly asked welders for an explanation of what the alternatives are to spray transfer - and none could offer an explanation. They consistently told me that all alloy MIG welding was spray transfer. Your explanation is the first I have seen to explain the dramatic increase in weld strength we found when we turned up the voltage and wire speed. Any tips on how to control the weld bead when moving so quickly? Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com ----- Original Message ----- From: Gary H. Lucas To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, April 30, 2004 6:24 PM Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: BS 26 steel/aluminum list The big problem with aluminum welding is using the wrong mode of transfer. Steel is welded using what is called 'short arc' or 'dip' transfer. The crackling sound comes from the wire repeatedly shorting out in the weld puddle and burning back. Aluminum welding, except on VERY thin material must be done in spray transfer mode. How do you know you are using spray transfer? The clues. When you stop welding the weld wire has a sharp point on the end, NOT a round ball. When you stop welding there is very little sign of smoke on the bead and the weld is almost shiny. Short arc produces a smoky weld. While you are welding there are almost NO sparks. Short arc produces lots of white hot sparks showering down. While you are welding the arc sounds like air spraying, not crackling. The bead with spray transfer will have gentle smooth ripples while short arc produces sharp closely spaced ripples. To get to spray arc turn up the voltage and increase the wire feed speed. If you don't see the above clues turn it up some more. When you reach spray arc transfer the change in the welding will be sudden and dramatic. Most people are very surprised how much they have to turn up the heat to get it to occur. Many never get there because they keep turning it up and they can't believe you'd want to go any hotter so they stop. Aluminum is a very good conductor of heat. If you don't have lots of heat you get a cold weld. Spray arc is a thing of joy. You can make pass after pass to build up a joint and it all just smoothly flows together. About ten years ago a greenhouse customer of mine was having 1500 new aluminum benches welded together by a contractor who does this for a living. I looked at the welding and told the customer it could be much better if the welding machine were adjusted differently. He told the contractor to let me try. The guy was pissed because he got paid piece work and my fooling around was costing him money. I don't weld very often so it took me about an hour to get the machine adjusted right. A week later the customer told me the welder had forgiven me. My adjustments had cut his welding time per bench in half, so he was making much better money! A year later the customer also reported that the welds on the new benches stay together much better than the old benches. Gary H. Lucas ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Friday, April 30, 2004 1:22 AM Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: BS 26 steel/aluminum list > We found a similar result with alloy. Welding alloy with a MIG is so fast you must do it by reflex. The temptation when learning is to use thinner wire, and turn down the voltage and wire speed so that the weld goes slower, so you have the time to make a good looking weld without having the reflex. >From our testing this produces a very weak weld in alloy. > > We consistently get the strongest welds using heavy wire, lots of voltage, and lots of speed. Typically way higher voltages and wire speeds than what is in the tables. The difference in strength can be staggering. The tables are no substitute for testing, over a wide range of settings to find the strongest welds for your equipment and technique.. > > Tacking alloy when building the boat with MIG is a different story. Simply hold the gun in place and squeeze off a 1/2 second, button sized weld, using heavy wire and lots of heat. No need to move the gun, and anyone can learn the technique in a couple of minutes. Cup a hand around the gun, and the technique works fine outside. Strong enough to hold, yet weak enough to move when pulling the boat together so everything stays fair. > > Hire a professional for the final welds, and make sure they can consistently produce 180 degree coupons for each position they will be welding, before you let them start on the boat. > > Greg Elliott > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > > > It has been my industrial experience that a beautiful looking Mig weld in > steel can be horribly flawed! All the weld drawings I produce specify > 0.045" welding wire ONLY on Hot Rolled steel in 1/8" thickness or greater. > Lots of weld shops have argued with me on this one. > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3549|3465|2004-04-30 23:29:20|Graeme|Re: sailboat gearbox|Hi all One of the problem with using a vehicle trans is that the design does not take in to account of the thrust pushing on the internals of the transmission . In a vehicle the thrust goes on to the springs etc via the wheels, in a boat it is via the prop shaft on too the trans hull engine mounts.so if you can mount some sort of thrust bearing before the trans it would be ok. But hell if it,s free and it sounds like fun........ 75 mph and 427 fire breathing ford sounds like fun if you can keep the fuel up to it. Graeme -----Original Message----- From: Gerald Niffenegger [mailto:niffeneggerniff@...] Sent: Saturday, 1 May 2004 8:07 AM To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Subject: [origamiboats] Re: sailboat gearbox My first thought was an automatic transmission. I have an automatic in my little Chevy. However, it is one of the few automatic transmissions on this island. Automatic transmissions are scarce as hens teeth in this part of the world. Then again ....... if I can get that steel hull to plane and run 75 mph, with that 1.9 VW, I'll find an automatic!!!!!!! (: Gerald --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Michael Casling wrote: > You could use an automatic gearbox, I have seen that done. Might need an oil cooler if a lot of power was being used. The one I saw was behind a 427 Ford gas motor making a few hundred horsepower and turning 7500 rpm. Boat went on to a plane real quick and shifted gears with a top speed of 75, which was pretty good for a 21 foot V bottom cuddy cabin. Probably would not have to shift gears on a sail boat. Top gear for forward. If the OMC leg does not work behind the diesel in my fishing boat I think I will move the engine forward and use an auto gearbox. That involves a lot more work so I am going to marry it to the OMC leg for now. Michael in Kelowna. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Gerald Niffenegger > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Friday, April 30, 2004 4:43 PM > Subject: [origamiboats] sailboat gearbox > > > This seems to be the sight were the folks that like to tinker > congregate. Has anyone adapted a standard car transmission for use in > a sailboat. Would probably need to be run in second or third? Wonder > if a clutch would be required since there really isn't much that keeps > the shaft from turning? > Gerald > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------ > Yahoo! Groups Links > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links| 3550|3465|2004-05-01 00:13:44|Michael Casling|Re: sailboat gearbox|This was my old friend Lenny who worked in an engine shop with his dad. He had the motor in a flat bottom Hondo hull with dry exhaust at it did 98 mph but the noise police shut him down so he went with the more sophisticated boat and mufflers. That is a good point about the thrust from the prop, something to talk to the machine shop about. My fishing boat is flat along the keel so it had problems with shaft angle as well, and that is why I hope the stern drive leg works. Michael ----- Original Message ----- From: Graeme To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, April 30, 2004 8:29 PM Subject: RE: [origamiboats] Re: sailboat gearbox Hi all One of the problem with using a vehicle trans is that the design does not take in to account of the thrust pushing on the internals of the transmission . In a vehicle the thrust goes on to the springs etc via the wheels, in a boat it is via the prop shaft on too the trans hull engine mounts.so if you can mount some sort of thrust bearing before the trans it would be ok. But hell if it,s free and it sounds like fun........ 75 mph and 427 fire breathing ford sounds like fun if you can keep the fuel up to it. Graeme -----Original Message----- From: Gerald Niffenegger [mailto:niffeneggerniff@...] Sent: Saturday, 1 May 2004 8:07 AM To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Subject: [origamiboats] Re: sailboat gearbox My first thought was an automatic transmission. I have an automatic in my little Chevy. However, it is one of the few automatic transmissions on this island. Automatic transmissions are scarce as hens teeth in this part of the world. Then again ....... if I can get that steel hull to plane and run 75 mph, with that 1.9 VW, I'll find an automatic!!!!!!! (: Gerald --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Michael Casling wrote: > You could use an automatic gearbox, I have seen that done. Might need an oil cooler if a lot of power was being used. The one I saw was behind a 427 Ford gas motor making a few hundred horsepower and turning 7500 rpm. Boat went on to a plane real quick and shifted gears with a top speed of 75, which was pretty good for a 21 foot V bottom cuddy cabin. Probably would not have to shift gears on a sail boat. Top gear for forward. If the OMC leg does not work behind the diesel in my fishing boat I think I will move the engine forward and use an auto gearbox. That involves a lot more work so I am going to marry it to the OMC leg for now. Michael in Kelowna. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Gerald Niffenegger > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Friday, April 30, 2004 4:43 PM > Subject: [origamiboats] sailboat gearbox > > > This seems to be the sight were the folks that like to tinker > congregate. Has anyone adapted a standard car transmission for use in > a sailboat. Would probably need to be run in second or third? Wonder > if a clutch would be required since there really isn't much that keeps > the shaft from turning? > Gerald > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------ > Yahoo! Groups Links > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3551|3523|2004-05-01 14:07:22|Henri Naths|Re: BS 26 steel/aluminum list|Gary, Take a welding course. ----- Original Message ----- From: Gary H. Lucas To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: 29 April, 2004 6:46 PM Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: BS 26 steel/aluminum list It has been my industrial experience that a beautiful looking Mig weld in steel can be horribly flawed! All the weld drawings I produce specify 0.045" welding wire ONLY on Hot Rolled steel in 1/8" thickness or greater. Lots of weld shops have argued with me on this one. All my parts got hot dipped galvanized. We experienced lots of weld failures in welds that were absolutely gorgeous before hot dipping. The problem surfaced with a simple little part. A piece of 1-1/4" flat bent into a ring clamp for a pipe with two tabs for a bolt to clamp it. These got welded to a piece of 1/8" thick angle, or a piece of flat plate 1/8" thick, or to another ring clamp. We did them in batches of 1000 pieces at a time, about 5 or 6 thousand a year. A customer said he was experiencing some of these hangers breaking right off. I went out in the shop and carefully inspected some of the parts, then put a pipe in the ring clamp and held the other part in a vice. I was totally shocked when I broke maybe 20% effortlessly! Tossed a couple of thousand parts that day. Then we moved our operation to the other coast. Customer calls up and complains about broken welds again. I find out the new welder went back to 0.035" welding wire! I show him how his 'perfect' welds snap right off and we toss a couple of thousand more. We start sending the parts out to be welded, with the note on the print about 0.045" weld wire. They show up having been welded with 0.035" wire. We break a couple just for laughs and the vendor eats the whole batch. 0.035" welding wire CAN produce a sound weld in 1/8" material IF the welding conditions are just right. Just right is very clean metal, and welded vertical UP for maximum penetration. Most parts however require one or more welds to be made in less than perfect conditions. Making pretty welds is harder with 0.045" welding wire though. On thinner materials you have to be careful not to burn right through. The good news. You get much more sound welds with 0.045" wire. The heat input and metal deposited is much higher, so for the same size weld bead you weld much faster. When you weld faster the structure gets LESS hot, so the distortion is less. If I build a steel boat I'm going to Mig weld it. You get less distortion and go so much faster it is well worth it. I'm a pretty good welder, but not a great welder and the Mig machine is so much easier it definitely improves the weld quality of most welders. The welding machine costs more, but buying an older industrial machine and reselling it when done will recover the whole cost if you shop carefully. The consumables actually cost less, when compared by the actual pounds of metal deposited in the weld. Gary H. Lucas ----- Original Message ----- From: "Joe Earsley" To: Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2004 2:10 PM Subject: RE: [origamiboats] Re: BS 26 steel/aluminum list > It has my industrial experience that a beautiful looking aluminum weld > can hide weakness, poor parent metal penetration and high stresses. The > weld goes on too fast to reduce heat deformation and performs more like > caulk than welding. Failure has always been brittle and complete. I > will leave that welding process to experts. I want that keel to stay > attached! I do have more confidence in a good looking steel weld with > the telltale signs of good heat, no porosity and full penetration. > > > > Joe Earsley > > > > ________________________________ > > From: richytill [mailto:tillrc@...] > Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2004 9:01 AM > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: BS 26 steel/aluminum list > > > > Stick welding alloy, > > It is worth mentioning that aluminum stick welding rods are very > expensive. The challenge of positional stick welding alloy is far > beyond the average home builder: even just tacking. Effectively > removing the slag to prepare for follow up with a clean MIG weld > would be frustrating. I have welded miles of aluminum pipe in all > sorts of situations--welding aluminum outdoors is no fun. The home > builder should be aware that aluminum weld and HAZ has 40%+/- less > strength than the parent metal. Better to do it once and do it > right. I like Aluminum. Aluminum must be the first choice for a > deck if you can afford the initial cost, shelter and equipment. This > material is fine--if you go MIG all the way and engineer for weakness > in the weld zone. rt > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > > Most materials, such a steel and wood have low scrap value. Thus, > when you cut up $10,000 worth of new steel to build a boat, the value > of the steel changes to about $2000, and you must add $8000 worth of > workmanship to get back where you started. In effect, cutting the > steel cost you $8000. As a result, unless your workmanship is good, > if you use new steel, the value of the boat you build can end up > being substantially less than the value of the steel that went into > the boat. > > > > Alloy is unique in that it has very high scrap value, due to how it > is manufactured When you cut up $20,000 worth of new alloy to build > a boat, the value of the alloy changes to about $18,000. You need > add only $2000 worth of workmanship to get back where you started. > Even if your workmanship is moderate, the value of the boat is likely > to exceed the value of the alloy that went into the boat. As a > result, alloy boats typically have much better resale value than > other boats. Much higher than the actual price difference between > alloy and steel. > > > > How does this affect your choices when building? > > > > If you plan to get most of your materials as scrap, it makes no > sense to build in alloy. Scrap alloy is worth almost as much as new > alloy (in volume), and there is little benefit in searching for the > occasional deal in scrap yards. If you are building from scrap, you > should be building in steel. > > > > If you plan to build using new materials, then you should consider > alloy, because the risk cost is typically lower. If you are not > happy with the final product, you can likely sell the alloy boat for > a much higher profit by percentage of your original investment. If > you are happy with the alloy boat, you will have the added joy of > sailing in a boat with better performance and capacity than the steel > boat. When you eventually sell the alloy boat, you will likely get a > better return for your efforts, either to build a bigger boat, or as > money to move ashore. > > > > Alloy and steel are both fine building materials. I believe the > non-corrosive nature of alloy, coupled with the light weight, and > high scrap value give alloy an edge when building a boat using new > materials. If you only have a fixed sum to spend, you can always > build a smaller alloy boat for the price of a bigger steel boat, but > for most builders, the price difference between the materials cancels > out when other factors are considered. The better choice will depend > on your skill level as a builders, and your intended service for the > boat. > > > > If I was building for myself, and was building outside, I would > still choose alloy. I would investigate using fluxed alloy rods and > an arc welder to tack the alloy together. These rods do not need > argon. They are not suitable for final welding, but for tacking they > may prove acceptable. New formulations might prove suitable, if you > have not had success in the past. > > > > As an alternative, a used MIG welder is simple to use for tacking, > and can be resold for much of what it was bought for. A MIG welder > is much easier to use than a rod (for both alloy and steel), and for > tacking outside you only need cup your hand around the weld to > protect it from the breeze. Weld contamination is not an issue, > because the tacks are cut out during final welding. (When final > welding alloy, you cut a "V" into the material at the point you want > to weld, which provides a clean, oxide free surface for the weld). > > > > Working outside with alloy there is no need to worry about keeping > the alloy painted as there is with pre-primed steel. Simply cut the > alloy with a skill saw and tack it together. When the boat is fully > tacked, hire a professional with a top quality welder to spend the 2- > 3 days it will take to do the final welding on the boat. > > > > Our single chine Bare Bones 30 is suitable for construction in > steel or alloy, and any of our designs can be computer scaled to any > length you might wish to build. With out 3-D computer design we can > fully confirm the boat to any point in construction, so that problems > can be caught before you build. > > > > When building smaller boats, such as 26', the benefits of alloy > over steel are hard to beat. As a boat gets smaller, the weight of > steel becomes a significant issue in the design, which typically > means than small steel boats end up being overly heavy, which limits > both performance and capacity. > > > > Greg Elliott > > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > > > > > > I'm riding the fence on whether to build in steel or aluminum. > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > > ________________________________ > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > * To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of > Service . > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3552|3465|2004-05-01 19:47:53|brentswain38|Re: sailboat gearbox|There is a book called "Marine Conversions " which tells you how to do the conversion from some automotive trannys to marine use. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gerald Niffenegger" wrote: > My first thought was an automatic transmission. I have an automatic in > my little Chevy. However, it is one of the few automatic transmissions > on this island. Automatic transmissions are scarce as hens teeth in > this part of the world. Then again ....... if I can get that steel > hull to plane and run 75 mph, with that 1.9 VW, I'll find an > automatic!!!!!!! (: > Gerald > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Michael Casling wrote: > > You could use an automatic gearbox, I have seen that done. Might > need an oil cooler if a lot of power was being used. The one I saw was > behind a 427 Ford gas motor making a few hundred horsepower and > turning 7500 rpm. Boat went on to a plane real quick and shifted gears > with a top speed of 75, which was pretty good for a 21 foot V bottom > cuddy cabin. Probably would not have to shift gears on a sail boat. > Top gear for forward. If the OMC leg does not work behind the diesel > in my fishing boat I think I will move the engine forward and use an > auto gearbox. That involves a lot more work so I am going to marry it > to the OMC leg for now. Michael in Kelowna. > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Gerald Niffenegger > > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > Sent: Friday, April 30, 2004 4:43 PM > > Subject: [origamiboats] sailboat gearbox > > > > > > This seems to be the sight were the folks that like to tinker > > congregate. Has anyone adapted a standard car transmission for use in > > a sailboat. Would probably need to be run in second or third? Wonder > > if a clutch would be required since there really isn't much that keeps > > the shaft from turning? > > Gerald > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of > Service. > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3553|3465|2004-05-01 19:50:10|brentswain38|Re: water maker|That would work well. The ceramic parts are important. As long as you flush it properly with fresh water after use the brass would stand up well. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gerald Niffenegger" wrote: > When pressure washer pump was mentioned I looked on ebay for the > price. A 4,000 psi at 4 gallon per min. is less than $300. Don't know > if it would stand up to salt water? Looks like a brass pump with > ceramic works? > Would that be enough pressure for a water maker? > Gerald > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" > wrote: > > On my last trip to Tonga and back. I caught all my water off my > > decks, and never had to take water from ashore.However , on my return > > trip home, having a watermaker aboard would have given me great peace > > of mind. > > While I was at Fanning Island in 1999-2000, we never had a drop of > > rain in three months and the local water was listed by the UN as some > > of the worst in the world.The same lack of rain is a problem in other > > parts of the world, like the Baja, where being totally self > > sufficient and able to stay out of town can save you a fortune in > > port fees, etc . > > The reason most watermakers have such problems is because they are > > too small and it takes an hour or more of use to make enough water to > > flush them out properly. For this reason they never get flushed out > > properly, and as a result tend to break down frequently. > > When you can build a 540 gallon a day watermaker for under $1,000 > > CDN, it doesn't make much sense to buy a commercially made 35 gallon > > a day one for thousands of dollars.Especially when the pumps they use > > are flimsey compared to a pressure washer pump. > > Brent Swain > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > > > Hi Gerd, > > > > > > There is an old saying. Fishing lures are designed to catch > > fishermen, not fish. Many boats are designed the same way - to sell > > not to sail. > > > > > > I think it was in "Riddle of the Sands" that the owner of the boat, > > every time a new piece of gear came aboard, took great pleasure in > > throwing an old piece of gear over the side. Over the years I've met > > more than a few sailors with the same tale, including one sailor I > > knew very well that, becalmed and out of fuel, threw almost > > everything overboard - including the anchors - to lighten the boat > > and get moving. These stories always amazed me, as we slowly became > > heavier and heavier as we cruised, until one day in the Torres > > Straights I also was throwing gear - including the much treasured > > stainless, off the boat like mad to lighten us up. > > > > > > To me, a cruising boat is something to carry you and your gear, and > > the more the boat can carry, the more people that can live and travel > > on the boat, the more water and supplies you can carry, the more > > remote the places you can visit, and the longer you can stay. Having > > spent most of the last 20 years sailing with an all female crew, to > > me it only makes sense to save cost where it is least critical to the > > capacity of a boat, and to save weight where it is critical to > > capacity. Given the choice between saving weight by getting rid of > > some steel, or getting rid of some crew, I know what choice I would > > make. > > > > > > Over the years I've met plenty of people that have tried to "cheat" > > the weight budget on a boat. The water-maker being one of the most > > popular methods, thinking that you can turn diesel into water and > > save weight. Of all water-makers I've seen over the years, almost > > none were in regular use, because of the cost of keeping the units > > running over time. Our solution was to install bigger water tanks, > > and a permanently in-place water catcher, so that every time it rains > > we automatically fill the tanks. Very low cost, and virtually > > maintenance free. > > > > > > Did it work? If you can go 2 months without filling the tanks, and > > can re-fill them in 1-2 hours of rainfall - how likely is it that you > > will not get 1-2 hours of rainfall in 2 months, or not be near a > > source of fresh water? We never found it to be a problem. Install a > > split pipe rail on the outside edge of the cabin top to collect the > > rain instead of having run down the cabin sides, with collection > > pipes at the aft end of the cabin top leading to the tanks. Fill > > your shower water first. > > > > > > I've been reviewing some other sources on the net in the comparison > > of alloy versus steel, and I'm finding that for equivalent column > > strength, alloy is about 1/2 the weight of steel at about 2 times the > > cost. However, you save 10 times the cost of ballast by using a > > lighter mast, so if lead costs less than 20 times the cost of alloy, > > you can actually save money by using alloy in the mast. (20 times > > because you are also saving the cost of the steel mast - which is 1/2 > > the cost of the alloy - 10 / .5 = 20). > > > > > > Before building a steel mast, check local prices. If the cost of > > alloy by weight is less than 20 times the cost of lead, you can > > probably save $$ by using alloy for the mast. At the same time, > > adding hundreds of pounds to the effective cruising capacity of the > > boat. > > > > > > While using the heaviest and cheapest materials may appeal to the > > builder's pocketbook - when building a boat piece by piece - consider > > the boat as a whole. With all the tradeoffs between performance, > > comfort and price, you may just find you can actually save money by > > using lighter materials in weight critical areas, allowing you to > > carry appealing crew instead of ballast. > > > > > > We met few boats with steel masts offshore. Lots of wooden masts - > > lots. Some gaff and junk rigged boats with steel masts, but not one > > marconi style rig with a steel mast, except for a French boat in New > > Caledonia, with a radio tower style steel mast. > > > > > > > > > Greg Elliott > > > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: bubblede > > > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > > Sent: Sunday, April 25, 2004 3:14 AM > > > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Steel Mast > > > > > > > > > Concerning useful weight: I just happened to watch a TV > > presentation > > > of Motor Yachts, and on a dutch built 65 footer they boasted that > > > the interior was so luxurious that they had crafted worktops, > > galley > > > and bathrooms out of 4 tons of original Carrera marble ;-) > > > > > > Greg, I like your approach of "cruising capacity" as one way to > > > measure a boat. Applies not only to rigs of course, same would go > > > for hull matrial for example, and results seem more > > differentiated > > > than just looking at displacment overall or just weight aloft for > > a > > > given amount of cash - and then there is of course a not always > > easy > > > relaitonship to performance. > > > > > > Brent is right of course, having little money is no excuse for > > not > > > going to sail if that what you do it for, and it's really > > difficult > > > to beat his boats overall in price/cruisng capacity. the danger > > is > > > that taking a decision once, you will repeat it more and more > > easily > > > throughout the design and building process. > > > > > > I think that for most amateur constructions it is true that we > > tend > > > to build too strong to begin with and then very often add weight > > > because a) the material used is "cheap" and simple and /or b) we > > say > > > thatif we are already too heavy, a little bit more can't hurt.... > > > and when we finished, we take all or junk and tools from the > > > building site and pack it somewhere under the floors because we > > > never know when we might need it. > > > > > > There is a lot of discussion here about boats having to be heavy > > to > > > be good boats. I do not really agree, but one thing that I know > > is > > > that of the hundered plus amateur boats I have seen over the last > > 25 > > > years, there was not a single boat that was "too light" when > > hanging > > > fully loaded from a crane. a lot of them were were quite happy > > with > > > the boat floating on its lines, having drawn a pessimitic > > waterline > > > to begin with ;-) > > > > > > If there is one single trap for the amateur, it is weight, too > > > strong (usually in all the wrong places) and too heavy by design > > or > > > for cost reasons and payload. > > > > > > > > > Gerd > > > http://www.justmueller.com/boats > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- > > unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- ---- > > ---------- > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > > > > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of > > Service. > > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3554|3534|2004-05-01 19:53:04|brentswain38|Re: Sugar Scoop and aft hung rudder|A friend mocked up his interior with cardboard funiture boxes and said he was sure glad he did.A lot of ideas he had originally wouldn't work and he got some beter ideas once he saw it full sized and had a chance to walk thru it. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > Hi Gerd, > > Bolt on bearings can be used to allow the rudder to be removed without jacking the boat. Alternatively, the rudder shaft can be ended at the middle bearing, with an extension up to the tiller head. The second option allows you to use a solid rudder stock to carry the rudder, and a pipe extension to cut weight and cost. > > I've added some design ideas to the Bare Bones 30 on the web. > > http://www.origamimagic.com/Design/LB30/LB30.htm > > We have other rudders, keels, pilot houses, etc. available. Typically we just cut and paste features from other boats and scale to suit. > > We find that everyone wants something a little different, so rather than draw a stock plan, and have the builder try and draw up their own modifications, we find that the end results are much better if we customize the plans in 3-D for each builder to suit. There is nothing worse than building a boat, only to discover the sheets don't run fair, or bumping a head, elbow, toe, etc, etc, every time you walk past something. > > For those unsure what the problem is: when you are laying out the deck and interior of a boat, unless you build mock-ups it is very hard to get a boat right the first time. 2-D drawings do not show you problems that exist on the diagonals. As a result, people end up building and rebuilding, all of which takes time and costs money. It is not unusual to hear of people that have built and rebuilt 2, 3, 4 times, and still are not happy with the result. > > We do the mock-ups on the computer in 3-D. It is quicker than building real mock-up, more accurate, faster, and costs less. By rotating the drawings on to the diagonals, you can see the problems before you build them. > > Greg Elliott > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > > > do you have any drawings of your keel/skeg/rudder configuration for > your boats? > > All the best > Gerd > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3555|3523|2004-05-01 20:33:54|Gerald Niffenegger|Re: BS 26 steel/aluminum list|{{0.035" welding wire CAN produce a sound weld in 1/8" material IF the welding conditions are just right.}} .035 wire can also produce a good weld on 8" material. It would just take a little longer than using .045. I agree with Henri. A welding course at your junior collage is worth the time and effort. Plug "pushing MIG weld" into google. There is some good information there. I have burned a few miles of duel shield and MIG wire. In a large factory you might weld on a different machine every day or the previous operator changed the setting to suit him or her. The standards department dictates the machine setting but the bottom line is that the good operators set the machine by ear. You can tell by the sound and when the bacon is frying just right you can pretty much be assured of a good weld. Well ...... that and the x-ray machine that keeps pooping up to check your quality. Gerald| 3556|3465|2004-05-02 13:24:37|johnkupris@aol.com|Re: sailboat gearbox|If the drive shaft had a thrust bering, it seems like a 4 speed trans with a tower shift and a clutch should work, or would it? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3557|3465|2004-05-02 20:19:54|Graeme|Re: sailboat gearbox|Manual vehicle transmissions not fitted with overdrive are usually 1:1 ratio (straight drive) as long it is not tired when you fit it up and you take care of the thrust problem, Should give a reasonable service life. Automatic trans would be easier to fit as you only need a cable to change gears and no clutch mechanism needed, but you will need a oil cooler of some sort and a thrust problem. Brent mentioned a book on the subject in his last post but not the author ? -----Original Message----- From: johnkupris@... [mailto:johnkupris@...] Sent: Monday, 3 May 2004 1:24 AM To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: sailboat gearbox If the drive shaft had a thrust bering, it seems like a 4 speed trans with a tower shift and a clutch should work, or would it? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links| 3558|3558|2004-05-02 20:29:04|Gary|Anchors|I checked out the typical anchor brand names such as CQR and Delta. They are pricey. Anybody else looked into anchors? I hear there is one made in Canda. I believe the name is Kingston. I did a search for "anchor" for this forum but did not find any postings. Thanks... Gary| 3559|3465|2004-05-02 22:00:52|Gerald Niffenegger|Re: sailboat gearbox|Looks like the car transmission thing might not be so easy in my case. I have a 1.9 VW and it looks like the motor only hooks up to rear engine or front wheel drives. Not the simple old transmission / bell housing of yesteryear. Also looks like the differential is between the motor and the transmission. I'll take a look at the junk yard and see it any of the stuff they have will work? Gerald --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Graeme" wrote: > > > > Manual vehicle transmissions not fitted with overdrive are usually 1:1 > ratio (straight drive) as long it is not tired when you fit it up and > you take care of the thrust problem, Should give a reasonable service > life. > > Automatic trans would be easier to fit as you only need a cable to > change gears and no clutch mechanism needed, but you will need a oil > cooler of some sort and a thrust problem. > > Brent mentioned a book on the subject in his last post but not the > author ? > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: johnkupris@a... [mailto:johnkupris@a...] > Sent: Monday, 3 May 2004 1:24 AM > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: sailboat gearbox > > If the drive shaft had a thrust bering, it seems like a 4 speed trans > with a > tower shift and a clutch should work, or would it? > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links | 3560|3465|2004-05-03 08:44:15|stevemcfadden2003|Re: sailboat gearbox|--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Graeme" wrote: > > Marine conversions : vehicle engine conversions for boats / Nigel Warren Older versions of the book used the word car instead of vehicle A interesting book, covers a couple of "english" gearboxs in particuliar if my memory serves me right but has enough information to allow use of other gearboxs with a little research Steve > > Manual vehicle transmissions not fitted with overdrive are usually 1:1 > ratio (straight drive) as long it is not tired when you fit it up and > you take care of the thrust problem, Should give a reasonable service > life. > > Automatic trans would be easier to fit as you only need a cable to > change gears and no clutch mechanism needed, but you will need a oil > cooler of some sort and a thrust problem. > > Brent mentioned a book on the subject in his last post but not the > author ? > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: johnkupris@a... [mailto:johnkupris@a...] > Sent: Monday, 3 May 2004 1:24 AM > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: sailboat gearbox > > If the drive shaft had a thrust bering, it seems like a 4 speed trans > with a > tower shift and a clutch should work, or would it? > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links | 3561|3561|2004-05-03 13:23:51|vega1944|Aluminum pipe for sale|Hi, For those interested in aluminum pipe for a homebuilt mast I have40', (2 20' sections) of schedule 40, 6" 6061-T6 industrial pipe forsale on Vancouver Island, near Parksville.$400.00 canadian funds.Also several pages of an article from Pacific Yachting detailing theuse of aluminum pipe in building your own mast by Phil Friedman, theBackyard boatbuilder, including an interesting section on how to joinsections together by epoxy and bolting.Phone 250-468-7208 f0r furthurinfo or write vknight@...| 3562|3562|2004-05-03 16:57:25|brentswain38|26 footer materials list|Thge materials list I've used for the 26 footer is as follows. Cabin sides 2-4ft by 8 ft by 1/8th plate Cabintop 1-5x10x1/8th plate Cockpit 1-4X8X1/8th plate Decks 2-4X8X1/8th Keels 1-4X8X3/16th Hull 2-6ftX28ftX1/8th plate Lifelines and bulwark caps 125ft of 3/4 inch ID sch 40 galv or stainless pipe Deck stringers and beams 80 ft 1 inch X 1/4 inch FB Hull stringers 6-1inch X 1inch X 3/16th inch angle X 20 ft lengths Brent Swain| 3563|3558|2004-05-03 17:01:40|brentswain38|Re: Anchors|Anchors are extremely simple to build. Anyone who can build a boat can build an anchor. The Spade anchor looks like one of the best anchors yet designed , is quite simple and can be disassembled for easy storage. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gary" wrote: > I checked out the typical anchor brand names such as CQR and Delta. > They are pricey. Anybody else looked into anchors? I hear there is > one made in Canda. I believe the name is Kingston. I did a search > for "anchor" for this forum but did not find any postings. > > Thanks... Gary | 3564|3564|2004-05-03 17:42:21|put_to_sea|Mast step|When stepping the mast on the cabin top as is done on the Swain hulls with the strong support structure, why not weld a flange to the bottom of the mast and bolt it down instead of pinning it like is usually done? Wouldn't bolting it down would give a stiffer mast? Since the mast cannot be stepped by hand anyway, it does not seem like stepping would be any more difficult. Amos| 3565|3565|2004-05-03 21:49:12|blueiceicle|26ft beam|Hello everyone Just wondering if anyone knows the beam of the 26ft swain? Id be great to get in touch with anyone building in and around Edmonton, suggesions on good sources of materials, scrap/new. or just to hear how your projects are going would be excellent. I remember brent mentioning someone in Alberta had a trailer they used to haul a Swain boat, any info on that would be excellent as well. I cant seem to find the post today. Anyhow... Thanks All. Happy sailing, I hope to join you soon Sincerly, Jesse| 3566|3558|2004-05-03 23:49:18|John Jones|Re: Anchors|What about the "Bruce" anchor.... it's a Canadian design and it has really great holding power, particularly in sand. --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" wrote: > Anchors are extremely simple to build. Anyone who can build a boat > can build an anchor. > The Spade anchor looks like one of the best anchors yet designed , > is quite simple and can be disassembled for easy storage. > Brent Swain > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gary" wrote: > > I checked out the typical anchor brand names such as CQR and > Delta. > > They are pricey. Anybody else looked into anchors? I hear there > is > > one made in Canda. I believe the name is Kingston. I did a search > > for "anchor" for this forum but did not find any postings. > > > > Thanks... Gary | 3567|3564|2004-05-04 14:42:01|brentswain38|Re: Mast step|You could do that, but the structure under the mast is made for compression , not fore and aft strength. You could get a bit more athwartship stiffness , by tying large bolts in well to the transverse web, and you could add more fore and aft stiffness under the deck , but with the trmendous leverage of a full length of the mast and its weight against the short base of the mast, the forces would be huge. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "put_to_sea" wrote: > When stepping the mast on the cabin top as is done on the Swain > hulls with the strong support structure, why not weld a flange to > the bottom of the mast and bolt it down instead of pinning it like > is usually done? Wouldn't bolting it down would give a stiffer > mast? Since the mast cannot be stepped by hand anyway, it does not > seem like stepping would be any more difficult. > > Amos | 3568|3565|2004-05-04 14:43:29|brentswain38|Re: 26ft beam|The beam of the 26 footer is 8 ft. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "blueiceicle" wrote: > Hello everyone > > Just wondering if anyone knows the beam of the 26ft swain? > > Id be great to get in touch with anyone building in and around > Edmonton, suggesions on good sources of materials, scrap/new. or > just to hear how your projects are going would be excellent. > > I remember brent mentioning someone in Alberta had a trailer they > used to haul a Swain boat, any info on that would be excellent as > well. I cant seem to find the post today. Anyhow... > > Thanks All. > > Happy sailing, I hope to join you soon > > Sincerly, Jesse | 3569|3558|2004-05-04 14:52:43|brentswain38|Re: Anchors|Both the British and the Germans found in tests ,that for a given weight the bruce has roughly half the holding power of a plough or danforth. The bruce fouls easily.Just wrap the rode around the head of a bruce and watch it drag backwards indefinitly without freeing itself . Friends were trying their new boat with a new bruce anchor in Nanaimo harbour. They dropped the bruce and threw their 18HP Saab diesel in reverse and dragged the bruce the full length of the harbour. After doing the same thing several more times they dropped the CQR, gave it full reverse and couldn't budge it.They then set the bruce on the pulpit with a "for sale" sign on it. If a bruce has sunk to the level of the shank without finding hard bottom, it won't go any deeper. a delta or spade will keep going deeper until it hits hard bottom.Ther is a thing called the "Bruce Rock" which is the perfect size to jamb into the bruce , and will stay there and stop it from setting. With a plow, any such rock will usually fall off to one side. A bruce needs perfect , hard sand bottom to work well. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "John Jones" wrote: > What about the "Bruce" anchor.... it's a Canadian design and it > has really great holding power, particularly in sand. > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" > wrote: > > Anchors are extremely simple to build. Anyone who can build a > boat > > can build an anchor. > > The Spade anchor looks like one of the best anchors yet > designed , > > is quite simple and can be disassembled for easy storage. > > Brent Swain > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gary" > wrote: > > > I checked out the typical anchor brand names such as CQR > and > > Delta. > > > They are pricey. Anybody else looked into anchors? I hear > there > > is > > > one made in Canda. I believe the name is Kingston. I did a > search > > > for "anchor" for this forum but did not find any postings. > > > > > > Thanks... Gary | 3570|3534|2004-05-04 15:34:26|info@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: Sugar Scoop and aft hung rudder|Origami permits a wide range of beautiful and efficient hull shapes. Rather than limit our work to a single hull form, our designs make possible a wide range of boats to suit different needs, backed by extensive computer analysis to ensure they will have great stability. Previously this style of analysis has been prohibitively expensive, even for many commercial designs, which has resulted in some less than optimum production boats. For most of the last 20 years I've been offshore cruising with my wife and children. My personal boat is our original triple chine prototype - the Lazy Bones. Launched in 1983 in steel. http://www.origamimagic.com/Design/Cruising/LB_Yard.htm I started with nothing more than an education, a willingness to work, and a desire to combine family and travel. We didn't pay for this with some windfall in the tech boom. We were cruising long before that. We financed our travels using a combination of work and conservative financial strategies. We went from $100,000 in debt, and after 20 years of cruising we are debt free, with a boat, house, motor-home, and money in the bank. In Vancouver you cannot buy an average house for less than 1/2 million, so you will have some idea of how well we did by going cruising. It is a simple matter of supply and demand. Where you are born, there are probably lots of people just like you competing for the same work, so it is almost impossible to get ahead. Travel takes you places where people like you are rare, where scarce supply allows you to make high demands. Offshore, there is little opportunity for other people to put their hand in your pocket, so you keep more of what you earn. Over time, you come out ahead. My point is not to blow my own horn, rather simply to say that you, the reader, can do the same. Our designs are created for people that want to live the same sort of adventures as we did. Combine family and travel, while building for the future. It has been said that a man without family is incomplete, a pauper beyond dollars. Not all will agree, and for those people there is the opportunity to trade risk for cost. However, with family you have a responsibility to minimize risk and to provide for their future. As a result, successful cruising for most people requires a more complete strategy. I recall it was once said on this site to take a good look at the person giving the advice - see what it has done for them. For me, my advice allowed me to go cruising when I was 31 and spend 20 years traveling with my children as they were growing up, all the while building for the future. Circumstances permitting, I will be taking people sailing this year aboard the Bones, where I will teach cruising firsthand. If anyone is interested in trading winter weather for tropical Thailand and the experience of a lifetime, please email me directly for details. Couples welcome. No experience is necessary, and we cruise in one of the safest, friendliest, and most exotic locations on earth. Air-fare into Thailand is always reasonable and there is something to appeal to everyone, both afloat and ashore. With some knowledgeable shopping your vacation can pay for itself and the constant land breeze ensures motion sickness is never an issue. Greg Elliott greg@... http://www.origamimagic.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3571|3571|2004-05-04 19:01:05|blueiceicle|steel in alberta?|hello all. Im trying to price out some steel in edmonton alberta, and seem to be getting the run around. Ive so far contacted Russel steel, Samuel and Sons, Wilkonsons, Maple Leaf Metal Industries, Intergirs Metals and Corus Coil Products. None seem to know where one can get wheel abraided pre primed zinc plate. Do i need to order this in from B.C. ? Or is this galvanized plate, and Im asking for the wrong product? Any tips would be appreciated. Thanks Jesse| 3572|3558|2004-05-04 19:26:41|richytill|Re: Anchors|Brent, that's good information. I was going to buy a Bruce--will think CQR instead. Have problems with Danforth on most of the BC coast so far. A storm hit Copeland Islands one fall and we were the only boat that did't drag that night: 5 out of 7 boats went on the rocks. We were the only boat that used a grapple on the rocky bottom, most of the others had Danforths. The grapple held firm. One power boat hung off our stern with bungie cords until dawn. Found a used Hillier (?) made in California for sea-planes. The whole thing is SS and folds up neatly. Thought it would make a good spare anchor so I bought it on the spot. Then a local fisherman told me he had one and it was the best all round anchor he ever had; until someone stole it right off his bow. What size (dia.) galv' anchor cable are most people using on the winch drum of a 36'? Thanks again, rt --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" wrote: > Both the British and the Germans found in tests ,that for a given > weight the bruce has roughly half the holding power of a plough or > danforth. The bruce fouls easily.Just wrap the rode around the head > of a bruce and watch it drag backwards indefinitly without freeing > itself . Friends were trying their new boat with a new bruce anchor > in Nanaimo harbour. They dropped the bruce and threw their 18HP Saab > diesel in reverse and dragged the bruce the full length of the > harbour. After doing the same thing several more times they dropped > the CQR, gave it full reverse and couldn't budge it.They then set the > bruce on the pulpit with a "for sale" sign on it. > If a bruce has sunk to the level of the shank without finding hard > bottom, it won't go any deeper. a delta or spade will keep going > deeper until it hits hard bottom.Ther is a thing called the "Bruce > Rock" which is the perfect size to jamb into the bruce , and will > stay there and stop it from setting. With a plow, any such rock will > usually fall off to one side. > A bruce needs perfect , hard sand bottom to work well. > Brent Swain > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "John Jones" > wrote: > > What about the "Bruce" anchor.... it's a Canadian design and it > > has really great holding power, particularly in sand. > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" > > wrote: > > > Anchors are extremely simple to build. Anyone who can build a > > boat > > > can build an anchor. > > > The Spade anchor looks like one of the best anchors yet > > designed , > > > is quite simple and can be disassembled for easy storage. > > > Brent Swain > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gary" > > wrote: > > > > I checked out the typical anchor brand names such as CQR > > and > > > Delta. > > > > They are pricey. Anybody else looked into anchors? I hear > > there > > > is > > > > one made in Canda. I believe the name is Kingston. I did a > > search > > > > for "anchor" for this forum but did not find any postings. > > > > > > > > Thanks... Gary | 3573|3558|2004-05-04 20:12:59|brentswain38|Re: Anchors|Gary I use 1/4 inch ss 7X19 cable, but would go for 5/16th for the 36. There is often a lot of such cable available in second hand marine stores, sometimes quite cheap. Evan has patterns for good anchors and can weld a few up for you easily. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "richytill" wrote: > Brent, that's good information. I was going to buy a Bruce--will > think CQR instead. Have problems with Danforth on most of the BC > coast so far. A storm hit Copeland Islands one fall and we were the > only boat that did't drag that night: 5 out of 7 boats went on the > rocks. We were the only boat that used a grapple on the rocky > bottom, most of the others had Danforths. The grapple held firm. > One power boat hung off our stern with bungie cords until dawn. > Found a used Hillier (?) made in California for sea-planes. The > whole thing is SS and folds up neatly. Thought it would make a good > spare anchor so I bought it on the spot. Then a local fisherman told > me he had one and it was the best all round anchor he ever had; until > someone stole it right off his bow. What size (dia.) galv' anchor > cable are most people using on the winch drum of a 36'? Thanks > again, rt > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" > wrote: > > Both the British and the Germans found in tests ,that for a given > > weight the bruce has roughly half the holding power of a plough or > > danforth. The bruce fouls easily.Just wrap the rode around the head > > of a bruce and watch it drag backwards indefinitly without freeing > > itself . Friends were trying their new boat with a new bruce anchor > > in Nanaimo harbour. They dropped the bruce and threw their 18HP > Saab > > diesel in reverse and dragged the bruce the full length of the > > harbour. After doing the same thing several more times they dropped > > the CQR, gave it full reverse and couldn't budge it.They then set > the > > bruce on the pulpit with a "for sale" sign on it. > > If a bruce has sunk to the level of the shank without finding > hard > > bottom, it won't go any deeper. a delta or spade will keep going > > deeper until it hits hard bottom.Ther is a thing called the "Bruce > > Rock" which is the perfect size to jamb into the bruce , and will > > stay there and stop it from setting. With a plow, any such rock > will > > usually fall off to one side. > > A bruce needs perfect , hard sand bottom to work well. > > Brent Swain > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "John Jones" > > wrote: > > > What about the "Bruce" anchor.... it's a Canadian design and it > > > has really great holding power, particularly in sand. > > > > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" > > > wrote: > > > > Anchors are extremely simple to build. Anyone who can build a > > > boat > > > > can build an anchor. > > > > The Spade anchor looks like one of the best anchors yet > > > designed , > > > > is quite simple and can be disassembled for easy storage. > > > > Brent Swain > > > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gary" > > > wrote: > > > > > I checked out the typical anchor brand names such as CQR > > > and > > > > Delta. > > > > > They are pricey. Anybody else looked into anchors? I hear > > > there > > > > is > > > > > one made in Canda. I believe the name is Kingston. I did a > > > search > > > > > for "anchor" for this forum but did not find any postings. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks... Gary | 3574|3558|2004-05-04 20:41:28|Steven Schofield|Re: Anchors|Why buy an expensive anchor? If you're building in steel you already have everything you need to build your own. Use the scrap pieces that are left over and build your own. If you get it galvanized that should be your only expense and that doesn't cost much. Unless you stay in the same area all the time you are going to need different anchors for different bottom conditions and weather conditions. Build your own and save big bucks. Just copy whatever style anchor you need, it ain't rocket science. Most of my anchors have been homemade and have worked fine. Plus, you're not likely you'll cry too much when you lose a homemade anchor. You do occasionally lose them. >From: "Gary" >Reply-To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com >To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com >Subject: [origamiboats] Anchors >Date: Mon, 03 May 2004 00:28:54 -0000 >MIME-Version: 1.0 >X-Originating-IP: 24.146.26.235 >X-Sender: greenguy2ca@... >Received: from n38.grp.scd.yahoo.com ([66.218.66.106]) by >mc12-f32.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6824); Tue, 4 May 2004 >17:06:59 -0700 >Received: from [66.218.66.29] by n38.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 03 May >2004 00:29:05 -0000 >Received: (qmail 25456 invoked from network); 3 May 2004 00:29:03 -0000 >Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m23.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; >3 May 2004 00:29:03 -0000 >Received: from unknown (HELO n15.grp.scd.yahoo.com) (66.218.66.70) by >mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 3 May 2004 00:29:02 -0000 >Received: from [66.218.67.140] by n15.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 03 May >2004 00:28:59 -0000 >X-Message-Info: JGTYoYF78jEunr4RbmafRZBAduIM2ZBS >X-eGroups-Return: >sentto-1579488-3559-1083544144-cpt6pk=hotmail.com@... >X-Apparently-To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com >Message-ID: >User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 >X-Mailer: Yahoo Groups Message Poster >X-eGroups-Remote-IP: 66.218.66.70 >X-Yahoo-Profile: greenguy2ca >Mailing-List: list origamiboats@yahoogroups.com; contact >origamiboats-owner@yahoogroups.com >Delivered-To: mailing list origamiboats@yahoogroups.com >Precedence: bulk >List-Unsubscribe: >Return-Path: >sentto-1579488-3559-1083544144-cpt6pk=hotmail.com@... >X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 May 2004 00:07:00.0108 (UTC) >FILETIME=[E2FC24C0:01C43234] > >I checked out the typical anchor brand names such as CQR and Delta. >They are pricey. Anybody else looked into anchors? I hear there is >one made in Canda. I believe the name is Kingston. I did a search >for "anchor" for this forum but did not find any postings. > >Thanks... Gary > _________________________________________________________________ Add photos to your e-mail with MSN Premium. Get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines| 3575|3564|2004-05-04 20:53:45|put_to_sea|Re: Mast step|So I guess everything would end up so heavy due to the reinforcement that it would not be very practical. Maybe if it was stepped on deck instead of the cabin top it would work better. Darn, every time I try to improve on something you guys that know what you are talking about mess me up! ;) Amos --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" wrote: > You could do that, but the structure under the mast is made for > compression , not fore and aft strength. You could get a bit more > athwartship stiffness , by tying large bolts in well to the > transverse web, and you could add more fore and aft stiffness under > the deck , but with the trmendous leverage of a full length of the > mast and its weight against the short base of the mast, the forces > would be huge. > Brent Swain | 3576|3558|2004-05-05 00:25:12|David K McComber|Re: Anchors|The Bulwagga Anchor rates number 2 but I think it may be number1. Check it out at. http://www.azuremarine.com/e1en/groups/Bulwagga/bulwagga.asp * The 16.5 lb. aluminum Spade anchor tested is much larger in surface area and overall size than the 17.0 pound galvanized steel Bulwagga it is compared with. A comparably sized Spade in steel would weigh almost double the weight of the Bull in the test. * The far more compact Bull held up to 88% of 1000 lb. test load limit achieved by the larger anchor in the sand bottom tests and decisively outperformed it in the mud bottom tests. * The American made Bull tested is HALF the cost of the French import. David McComber d.mccomber@... -----Original Message----- From: brentswain38 [mailto:brentswain38@...] Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 2:52 PM To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Anchors Both the British and the Germans found in tests ,that for a given weight the bruce has roughly half the holding power of a plough or danforth. The bruce fouls easily.Just wrap the rode around the head of a bruce and watch it drag backwards indefinitly without freeing itself . Friends were trying their new boat with a new bruce anchor in Nanaimo harbour. They dropped the bruce and threw their 18HP Saab diesel in reverse and dragged the bruce the full length of the harbour. After doing the same thing several more times they dropped the CQR, gave it full reverse and couldn't budge it.They then set the bruce on the pulpit with a "for sale" sign on it. If a bruce has sunk to the level of the shank without finding hard bottom, it won't go any deeper. a delta or spade will keep going deeper until it hits hard bottom.Ther is a thing called the "Bruce Rock" which is the perfect size to jamb into the bruce , and will stay there and stop it from setting. With a plow, any such rock will usually fall off to one side. A bruce needs perfect , hard sand bottom to work well. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "John Jones" wrote: > What about the "Bruce" anchor.... it's a Canadian design and it > has really great holding power, particularly in sand. > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" > wrote: > > Anchors are extremely simple to build. Anyone who can build a > boat > > can build an anchor. > > The Spade anchor looks like one of the best anchors yet > designed , > > is quite simple and can be disassembled for easy storage. > > Brent Swain > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gary" > wrote: > > > I checked out the typical anchor brand names such as CQR > and > > Delta. > > > They are pricey. Anybody else looked into anchors? I hear > there > > is > > > one made in Canda. I believe the name is Kingston. I did a > search > > > for "anchor" for this forum but did not find any postings. > > > > > > Thanks... Gary To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT click here _____ Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3577|3558|2004-05-05 11:51:42|John Jones|Re: Anchors|Well shit Brent I mean ... feces.... I've used the bruth anchor with much more success than that but I failed to note just what it was I was hooked in . . . . can one anchor in Vancouver? --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "David K McComber" wrote: > The Bulwagga Anchor rates number 2 but I think it may be number1. Check it > out at. > > http://www.azuremarine.com/e1en/groups/Bulwagga/bulwagga.a sp > > * The 16.5 lb. aluminum Spade anchor tested is much larger in surface > area and overall size than the 17.0 pound galvanized steel Bulwagga > it is compared with. A comparably sized Spade in steel would weigh almost > double the weight of the Bull in the test. > * The far more compact Bull held up to 88% of 1000 lb. test load limit > achieved by the larger anchor in the sand bottom tests and decisively > outperformed it in the mud bottom tests. > * The American made Bull tested is HALF the cost of the French import. > > > > > David McComber > > d.mccomber@c... > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: brentswain38 [mailto:brentswain38@h...] > Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 2:52 PM > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Anchors > > > > Both the British and the Germans found in tests ,that for a given > weight the bruce has roughly half the holding power of a plough or > danforth. The bruce fouls easily.Just wrap the rode around the head > of a bruce and watch it drag backwards indefinitly without freeing > itself . Friends were trying their new boat with a new bruce anchor > in Nanaimo harbour. They dropped the bruce and threw their 18HP Saab > diesel in reverse and dragged the bruce the full length of the > harbour. After doing the same thing several more times they dropped > the CQR, gave it full reverse and couldn't budge it.They then set the > bruce on the pulpit with a "for sale" sign on it. > If a bruce has sunk to the level of the shank without finding hard > bottom, it won't go any deeper. a delta or spade will keep going > deeper until it hits hard bottom.Ther is a thing called the "Bruce > Rock" which is the perfect size to jamb into the bruce , and will > stay there and stop it from setting. With a plow, any such rock will > usually fall off to one side. > A bruce needs perfect , hard sand bottom to work well. > Brent Swain > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "John Jones" > wrote: > > What about the "Bruce" anchor.... it's a Canadian design and it > > has really great holding power, particularly in sand. > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" > > wrote: > > > Anchors are extremely simple to build. Anyone who can build a > > boat > > > can build an anchor. > > > The Spade anchor looks like one of the best anchors yet > > designed , > > > is quite simple and can be disassembled for easy storage. > > > Brent Swain > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gary" > > wrote: > > > > I checked out the typical anchor brand names such as CQR > > and > > > Delta. > > > > They are pricey. Anybody else looked into anchors? I hear > > there > > > is > > > > one made in Canda. I believe the name is Kingston. I did a > > search > > > > for "anchor" for this forum but did not find any postings. > > > > > > > > Thanks... Gary > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > > > ADVERTISEMENT > > /S=1705150872:HM/EXP=1083783164/A=2128215/R=0/SIG=10 se96mf6/*http:/companion > .yahoo.com> click here > > > > :HM/A=2128215/rand=578415906> > > > > _____ > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > * To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of > Service. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3578|3523|2004-05-05 12:02:39|info@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: BS 26 steel/aluminum list|Having designed and built boats in both alloy and steel, we consider them both fine materials. The scantlings for alloy are different than steel, so the materials list for one cannot be used for the other. We are happy to work with anyone considering building in alloy or steel, or any combination of the two. Ron, my partner at Origami Magic prefers steel. I prefer alloy, so between the two of us you are sure to get an answer. My degree is in mathematics, which is how I have been able to solve many of the shape limitations in origami. When not working as engineers, mathematicians typically work in finance, because if you want to make money, it helps to go where the money is. Having served as the senior analyst responsible for the design of two of the largest financial systems in BC, as well as having designed financial systems for multi-nationals such and Coca-Cola, Angco and Lego, I've got more than a fair knowledge of economics and accounting. Accounting is only meaningful when people follow the rules. Shoddy accounting can make anything look good, ala Enron and Nortel. The generally accepted accounting principles for manufacturing require reporting of average costs, using current figures and require that all labor and overhead be included. Best case numbers, incomplete costs and out of date examples paint at best a misleading picture, leading to false conclusions. I am reminded of a previous posting: ----- Original Message ----- From: narwhale36 To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, February 23, 2004 9:17 PM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Mast weights --In reply to the cost of building the BS 31 and the 36, I would like to have some imput from other owners on their experience re:costs . the local BS owners have all suggested I would be looking at a minimum of 35-40,000 Canadian using used engine,sails and doing alot of the work myself. I spoke with one 36 owner who has over 80 grand in his boat. This is not a cheap boat and for the years of putting it together (that hidden cost factor) I would suggest that it would be nice to have alittle more upfront reality as to the final price. I keep hearing from Brent on this site that one can be cranked out in a "couple of weeks" using dumpster parts for cheap, but that is not the general trend it appears. Like any boat project of any material, quality craftmanship takes time. .... Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3579|3558|2004-05-05 12:19:35|info@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: Anchors|You should carry a selection of anchors on board, as you are unlikely to find one anchor that suits all conditions. I usually carry a plow (cqr) and a bruce on the bow, and a danforth on the stern rail. I have a big 3 piece, 150 lb hurricane anchor in the bilge, plus a couple of spares I've found over the years. We have a dive compressor aboard and coral routinely steals anchors. What the sea takes, a scuba tank restores (sometimes). When you are unsure it can pay to put out two different anchors, rather than one big one. In storm conditions I often put out both bow anchors in a "V" to limit swinging, and to ensure the boat will not be lost if one anchor fails. My 25 lb bruce holds about the same as my 45 lb plow, but is more susceptible to fouling. The old fisherman style anchor often works best over the widest range of conditions, but it is rarely seen on sailboats because of the difficulty in stowing. Virtually every workboat in SE Asia uses these anchors, fashioned out of re-bar. My plow failed after being returned from galvanizing, and it took a while to figure out what was wrong. The lead in the point had melted out, leaving the anchor head too light to set in coral sand. More than a couple of times in squalls I've had to let an anchor go rather than bring it aboard. Tropical squalls often pack hurricane force winds, and can turn a quiet anchorage into a death trap if you delay getting underway. Put a buoy and a line on the anchor rode, and let the works go over the side. When the squall passes, come back and retrieve your gear. Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3580|3558|2004-05-05 13:08:10|richytill|Re: Anchors|This anchor information is a productive thread. The used Stainless folding anchor I picked up is a Northill. rt --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > You should carry a selection of anchors on board, as you are unlikely to find one anchor that suits all conditions. I usually carry a plow (cqr) and a bruce on the bow, and a danforth on the stern rail. I have a big 3 piece, 150 lb hurricane anchor in the bilge, plus a couple of spares I've found over the years. We have a dive compressor aboard and coral routinely steals anchors. What the sea takes, a scuba tank restores (sometimes). > > When you are unsure it can pay to put out two different anchors, rather than one big one. In storm conditions I often put out both bow anchors in a "V" to limit swinging, and to ensure the boat will not be lost if one anchor fails. My 25 lb bruce holds about the same as my 45 lb plow, but is more susceptible to fouling. The old fisherman style anchor often works best over the widest range of conditions, but it is rarely seen on sailboats because of the difficulty in stowing. Virtually every workboat in SE Asia uses these anchors, fashioned out of re-bar. My plow failed after being returned from galvanizing, and it took a while to figure out what was wrong. The lead in the point had melted out, leaving the anchor head too light to set in coral sand. > > More than a couple of times in squalls I've had to let an anchor go rather than bring it aboard. Tropical squalls often pack hurricane force winds, and can turn a quiet anchorage into a death trap if you delay getting underway. Put a buoy and a line on the anchor rode, and let the works go over the side. When the squall passes, come back and retrieve your gear. > > Greg Elliott > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3581|3558|2004-05-05 14:29:43|info@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: Anchors|Originally for flying boats? g The used Stainless folding anchor I picked up is a Northill. rt [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3582|3558|2004-05-05 14:35:27|brentswain38|Re: Anchors|Try storing a bullawaga on a bow roller.Good luck.About as intelligent as invading Iraq. Aluminium anchors are OK for occcasional use, but for full time immersion , corrosion may be a problem. They also tend to bend their shanks more easily. We use AR or T1 plate for high tensile shanks, but I've been told that an alloy called QT100 is common and less affected by galvanising. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "David K McComber" wrote: > The Bulwagga Anchor rates number 2 but I think it may be number1. Check it > out at. > > http://www.azuremarine.com/e1en/groups/Bulwagga/bulwagga.asp > > * The 16.5 lb. aluminum Spade anchor tested is much larger in surface > area and overall size than the 17.0 pound galvanized steel Bulwagga > it is compared with. A comparably sized Spade in steel would weigh almost > double the weight of the Bull in the test. > * The far more compact Bull held up to 88% of 1000 lb. test load limit > achieved by the larger anchor in the sand bottom tests and decisively > outperformed it in the mud bottom tests. > * The American made Bull tested is HALF the cost of the French import. > > > > > David McComber > > d.mccomber@c... > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: brentswain38 [mailto:brentswain38@h...] > Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 2:52 PM > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Anchors > > > > Both the British and the Germans found in tests ,that for a given > weight the bruce has roughly half the holding power of a plough or > danforth. The bruce fouls easily.Just wrap the rode around the head > of a bruce and watch it drag backwards indefinitly without freeing > itself . Friends were trying their new boat with a new bruce anchor > in Nanaimo harbour. They dropped the bruce and threw their 18HP Saab > diesel in reverse and dragged the bruce the full length of the > harbour. After doing the same thing several more times they dropped > the CQR, gave it full reverse and couldn't budge it.They then set the > bruce on the pulpit with a "for sale" sign on it. > If a bruce has sunk to the level of the shank without finding hard > bottom, it won't go any deeper. a delta or spade will keep going > deeper until it hits hard bottom.Ther is a thing called the "Bruce > Rock" which is the perfect size to jamb into the bruce , and will > stay there and stop it from setting. With a plow, any such rock will > usually fall off to one side. > A bruce needs perfect , hard sand bottom to work well. > Brent Swain > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "John Jones" > wrote: > > What about the "Bruce" anchor.... it's a Canadian design and it > > has really great holding power, particularly in sand. > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" > > wrote: > > > Anchors are extremely simple to build. Anyone who can build a > > boat > > > can build an anchor. > > > The Spade anchor looks like one of the best anchors yet > > designed , > > > is quite simple and can be disassembled for easy storage. > > > Brent Swain > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gary" > > wrote: > > > > I checked out the typical anchor brand names such as CQR > > and > > > Delta. > > > > They are pricey. Anybody else looked into anchors? I hear > > there > > > is > > > > one made in Canda. I believe the name is Kingston. I did a > > search > > > > for "anchor" for this forum but did not find any postings. > > > > > > > > Thanks... Gary > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > > > ADVERTISEMENT > > /S=1705150872:HM/EXP=1083783164/A=2128215/R=0/SIG=10se96mf6/*http:/c ompanion > .yahoo.com> click here > > > > :HM/A=2128215/rand=578415906> > > > > _____ > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > * To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of > Service. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3583|3523|2004-05-05 14:44:31|brentswain38|Re: BS 26 steel/aluminum list|Three people were having a debate over the formula 2 plus 2 equals 4. The mathematician said " Absolutely true, 100%of the time. The lawyer said "Well, it would depend on the circumstances. The accountant locked the door, ran to the window and pulled down the blind, then turned around and asked "What would you like it to be?" Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > Having designed and built boats in both alloy and steel, we consider them both fine materials. The scantlings for alloy are different than steel, so the materials list for one cannot be used for the other. We are happy to work with anyone considering building in alloy or steel, or any combination of the two. Ron, my partner at Origami Magic prefers steel. I prefer alloy, so between the two of us you are sure to get an answer. > > My degree is in mathematics, which is how I have been able to solve many of the shape limitations in origami. When not working as engineers, mathematicians typically work in finance, because if you want to make money, it helps to go where the money is. Having served as the senior analyst responsible for the design of two of the largest financial systems in BC, as well as having designed financial systems for multi-nationals such and Coca-Cola, Angco and Lego, I've got more than a fair knowledge of economics and accounting. > > Accounting is only meaningful when people follow the rules. Shoddy accounting can make anything look good, ala Enron and Nortel. The generally accepted accounting principles for manufacturing require reporting of average costs, using current figures and require that all labor and overhead be included. Best case numbers, incomplete costs and out of date examples paint at best a misleading picture, leading to false conclusions. I am reminded of a previous posting: > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: narwhale36 > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Monday, February 23, 2004 9:17 PM > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Mast weights > > > --In reply to the cost of building the BS 31 and the 36, I would like > to have some imput from other owners on their experience re:costs . > the local BS owners have all suggested I would be looking at a > minimum of 35-40,000 Canadian using used engine,sails and doing alot > of the work myself. I spoke with one 36 owner who has over 80 grand > in his boat. This is not a cheap boat and for the years of putting it > together (that hidden cost factor) I would suggest that it would be > nice to have alittle more upfront reality as to the final price. > I keep hearing from Brent on this site that one can be cranked out in > a "couple of weeks" using dumpster parts for cheap, but that is not > the general trend it appears. Like any boat project of any material, > quality craftmanship takes time. > .... > > > Greg Elliott > http://www.origamimagic.com > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3584|3558|2004-05-05 14:49:47|brentswain38|Re: Anchors|I carry a wide variety of anchors, but the delta and spade work in a much wider variety of bottoms than any of the older designs, making this less important. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > You should carry a selection of anchors on board, as you are unlikely to find one anchor that suits all conditions. I usually carry a plow (cqr) and a bruce on the bow, and a danforth on the stern rail. I have a big 3 piece, 150 lb hurricane anchor in the bilge, plus a couple of spares I've found over the years. We have a dive compressor aboard and coral routinely steals anchors. What the sea takes, a scuba tank restores (sometimes). > > When you are unsure it can pay to put out two different anchors, rather than one big one. In storm conditions I often put out both bow anchors in a "V" to limit swinging, and to ensure the boat will not be lost if one anchor fails. My 25 lb bruce holds about the same as my 45 lb plow, but is more susceptible to fouling. The old fisherman style anchor often works best over the widest range of conditions, but it is rarely seen on sailboats because of the difficulty in stowing. Virtually every workboat in SE Asia uses these anchors, fashioned out of re-bar. My plow failed after being returned from galvanizing, and it took a while to figure out what was wrong. The lead in the point had melted out, leaving the anchor head too light to set in coral sand. > > More than a couple of times in squalls I've had to let an anchor go rather than bring it aboard. Tropical squalls often pack hurricane force winds, and can turn a quiet anchorage into a death trap if you delay getting underway. Put a buoy and a line on the anchor rode, and let the works go over the side. When the squall passes, come back and retrieve your gear. > > Greg Elliott > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3585|22|2004-05-05 14:53:15|origamiboats@yahoogroups.com|New file uploaded to origamiboats |Hello, This email message is a notification to let you know that a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the origamiboats group. File : /Interior plan.doc Uploaded by : jalborey Description : Interior Plan 13 m You can access this file at the URL http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/files/Interior%20plan.doc To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/files Regards, jalborey | 3586|3558|2004-05-05 16:29:26|David K McComber|Re: Anchors|Obviously you didn't look at the sight in my post. It shows a number of ways of storing a bullawaga on a bow roller. The holding test run by practical sailor and Powerboat reports show this anchor to hold better than any thing else but the Spade, in a wide verity of bottoms. David McComber d.mccomber@... -----Original Message----- From: brentswain38 [mailto:brentswain38@...] Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2004 2:35 PM To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Anchors Try storing a bullawaga on a bow roller.Good luck. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "David K McComber" wrote: > The Bulwagga Anchor rates number 2 but I think it may be number1. Check it > out at. > > http://www.azuremarine.com/e1en/groups/Bulwagga/bulwagga.asp > > * The 16.5 lb. aluminum Spade anchor tested is much larger in surface > area and overall size than the 17.0 pound galvanized steel Bulwagga > it is compared with. A comparably sized Spade in steel would weigh almost > double the weight of the Bull in the test. > * The far more compact Bull held up to 88% of 1000 lb. test load limit > achieved by the larger anchor in the sand bottom tests and decisively > outperformed it in the mud bottom tests. > * The American made Bull tested is HALF the cost of the French import. > > > > > David McComber > > d.mccomber@c... > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: brentswain38 [mailto:brentswain38@h...] > Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2004 2:52 PM > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Anchors > > > > Both the British and the Germans found in tests ,that for a given > weight the bruce has roughly half the holding power of a plough or > danforth. The bruce fouls easily.Just wrap the rode around the head > of a bruce and watch it drag backwards indefinitly without freeing > itself . Friends were trying their new boat with a new bruce anchor > in Nanaimo harbour. They dropped the bruce and threw their 18HP Saab > diesel in reverse and dragged the bruce the full length of the > harbour. After doing the same thing several more times they dropped > the CQR, gave it full reverse and couldn't budge it.They then set the > bruce on the pulpit with a "for sale" sign on it. > If a bruce has sunk to the level of the shank without finding hard > bottom, it won't go any deeper. a delta or spade will keep going > deeper until it hits hard bottom.Ther is a thing called the "Bruce > Rock" which is the perfect size to jamb into the bruce , and will > stay there and stop it from setting. With a plow, any such rock will > usually fall off to one side. > A bruce needs perfect , hard sand bottom to work well. > Brent Swain > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "John Jones" > wrote: > > What about the "Bruce" anchor.... it's a Canadian design and it > > has really great holding power, particularly in sand. > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" > > wrote: > > > Anchors are extremely simple to build. Anyone who can build a > > boat > > > can build an anchor. > > > The Spade anchor looks like one of the best anchors yet > > designed , > > > is quite simple and can be disassembled for easy storage. > > > Brent Swain > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gary" > > wrote: > > > > I checked out the typical anchor brand names such as CQR > > and > > > Delta. > > > > They are pricey. Anybody else looked into anchors? I hear > > there > > > is > > > > one made in Canda. I believe the name is Kingston. I did a > > search > > > > for "anchor" for this forum but did not find any postings. > > > > > > > > Thanks... Gary > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > > > ADVERTISEMENT > > /S=1705150872:HM/EXP=1083783164/A=2128215/R=0/SIG=10se96mf6/*http:/c ompanion > .yahoo.com> click here > > > > :HM/A=2128215/rand=578415906> > > > > _____ > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > * To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of > Service. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT click here _____ Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3587|3523|2004-05-05 18:43:40|Gary H. Lucas|Re: BS 26 steel/aluminum list|I've invented sunglasses for accountants. They look like those mirrored aviator glasses, except you can only see behind you. Accountants aren't interested in where you are going, they want to know about where you've been! I met a really interesting accounting professor once. He specialized in working with VCs to startups. After I worked with him for a while I told him he wasn't like other accountants. Most other accountants are like coroners. After you are dead they slice you up and tell you why you died! Gary H. Lucas ----- Original Message ----- From: "brentswain38" To: Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2004 2:43 PM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: BS 26 steel/aluminum list > Three people were having a debate over the formula 2 plus 2 equals 4. > The mathematician said " Absolutely true, 100%of the time. The lawyer > said "Well, it would depend on the circumstances. The accountant > locked the door, ran to the window and pulled down the blind, then > turned around and asked "What would you like it to be?" > Brent Swain > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > > Having designed and built boats in both alloy and steel, we > consider them both fine materials. The scantlings for alloy are > different than steel, so the materials list for one cannot be used > for the other. We are happy to work with anyone considering building > in alloy or steel, or any combination of the two. Ron, my partner at > Origami Magic prefers steel. I prefer alloy, so between the two of > us you are sure to get an answer. > > > > My degree is in mathematics, which is how I have been able to solve > many of the shape limitations in origami. When not working as > engineers, mathematicians typically work in finance, because if you > want to make money, it helps to go where the money is. Having served > as the senior analyst responsible for the design of two of the > largest financial systems in BC, as well as having designed financial > systems for multi-nationals such and Coca-Cola, Angco and Lego, I've > got more than a fair knowledge of economics and accounting. > > > > Accounting is only meaningful when people follow the rules. Shoddy > accounting can make anything look good, ala Enron and Nortel. The > generally accepted accounting principles for manufacturing require > reporting of average costs, using current figures and require that > all labor and overhead be included. Best case numbers, incomplete > costs and out of date examples paint at best a misleading picture, > leading to false conclusions. I am reminded of a previous posting: > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: narwhale36 > > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > Sent: Monday, February 23, 2004 9:17 PM > > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Mast weights > > > > > > --In reply to the cost of building the BS 31 and the 36, I would > like > > to have some imput from other owners on their experience re:costs . > > the local BS owners have all suggested I would be looking at a > > minimum of 35-40,000 Canadian using used engine,sails and doing > alot > > of the work myself. I spoke with one 36 owner who has over 80 grand > > in his boat. This is not a cheap boat and for the years of putting > it > > together (that hidden cost factor) I would suggest that it would be > > nice to have alittle more upfront reality as to the final price. > > I keep hearing from Brent on this site that one can be cranked out > in > > a "couple of weeks" using dumpster parts for cheap, but that is not > > the general trend it appears. Like any boat project of any > material, > > quality craftmanship takes time. > > .... > > > > > > Greg Elliott > > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > | 3588|3523|2004-05-05 19:13:57|put_to_sea|Re: BS 26 steel/aluminum list|A good accountant is supposed to help you with planning but a GOOD accountant is mighty hard to find. Virtually all my experience has been with the coroners. Amos > > I met a really interesting accounting professor once. He specialized in > working with VCs to startups. After I worked with him for a while I told > him he wasn't like other accountants. Most other accountants are like > coroners. After you are dead they slice you up and tell you why you died!| 3589|3523|2004-05-05 20:55:05|jumpaltair|Re: BS 26 steel/aluminum list|A good accountant may be hard to find, but as a Chartered Accountant I can tell you that good clients are even harder to find. Most people say they want help and planning, but in reality they go and do things without consulting their accountant and then expect us to fix the problem. Peter --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "put_to_sea" wrote: > A good accountant is supposed to help you with planning but a GOOD > accountant is mighty hard to find. Virtually all my experience has > been with the coroners. > > Amos > | 3590|3523|2004-05-06 09:12:08|moby_duck_2004|Re: BS 26 steel/aluminum list|There was an accountant, lawyer, and mathematician all rolled into one. His numbers didn't add up and you couldn't get a straight answer, proving 2 + 2 = BS. --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" wrote: > Three people were having a debate over the formula 2 plus 2 equals 4. > The mathematician said " Absolutely true, 100%of the time. The lawyer > said "Well, it would depend on the circumstances. The accountant > locked the door, ran to the window and pulled down the blind, then > turned around and asked "What would you like it to be?" > Brent Swain > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > > Having designed and built boats in both alloy and steel, we > consider them both fine materials. The scantlings for alloy are > different than steel, so the materials list for one cannot be used > for the other. We are happy to work with anyone considering building > in alloy or steel, or any combination of the two. Ron, my partner at > Origami Magic prefers steel. I prefer alloy, so between the two of > us you are sure to get an answer. > > > > My degree is in mathematics, which is how I have been able to solve > many of the shape limitations in origami. When not working as > engineers, mathematicians typically work in finance, because if you > want to make money, it helps to go where the money is. Having served > as the senior analyst responsible for the design of two of the > largest financial systems in BC, as well as having designed financial > systems for multi-nationals such and Coca-Cola, Angco and Lego, I've > got more than a fair knowledge of economics and accounting. > > > > Accounting is only meaningful when people follow the rules. Shoddy > accounting can make anything look good, ala Enron and Nortel. The > generally accepted accounting principles for manufacturing require > reporting of average costs, using current figures and require that > all labor and overhead be included. Best case numbers, incomplete > costs and out of date examples paint at best a misleading picture, > leading to false conclusions. I am reminded of a previous posting: > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: narwhale36 > > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > Sent: Monday, February 23, 2004 9:17 PM > > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Mast weights > > > > > > --In reply to the cost of building the BS 31 and the 36, I would > like > > to have some imput from other owners on their experience re:costs . > > the local BS owners have all suggested I would be looking at a > > minimum of 35-40,000 Canadian using used engine,sails and doing > alot > > of the work myself. I spoke with one 36 owner who has over 80 grand > > in his boat. This is not a cheap boat and for the years of putting > it > > together (that hidden cost factor) I would suggest that it would be > > nice to have alittle more upfront reality as to the final price. > > I keep hearing from Brent on this site that one can be cranked out > in > > a "couple of weeks" using dumpster parts for cheap, but that is not > > the general trend it appears. Like any boat project of any > material, > > quality craftmanship takes time. > > .... > > > > > > Greg Elliott > > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3591|3523|2004-05-06 15:25:35|put_to_sea|Re: BS 26 steel/aluminum list|Where are you located? --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "jumpaltair" wrote: > A good accountant may be hard to find, but as a Chartered Accountant > I can tell you that good clients are even harder to find. Most > people say they want help and planning, but in reality they go and do > things without consulting their accountant and then expect us to fix > the problem. > > Peter > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "put_to_sea" > wrote: > > A good accountant is supposed to help you with planning but a GOOD > > accountant is mighty hard to find. Virtually all my experience has > > been with the coroners. > > > > Amos > > | 3592|3523|2004-05-06 15:34:12|brentswain38|Re: BS 26 steel/aluminum list|I design steel boats. If you wan to build one of my designs in aluminium, go ahead. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "moby_duck_2004" wrote: > There was an accountant, lawyer, and mathematician all rolled into > one. His numbers didn't add up and you couldn't get a straight > answer, proving 2 + 2 = BS. > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" > wrote: > > Three people were having a debate over the formula 2 plus 2 equals > 4. > > The mathematician said " Absolutely true, 100%of the time. The > lawyer > > said "Well, it would depend on the circumstances. The accountant > > locked the door, ran to the window and pulled down the blind, then > > turned around and asked "What would you like it to be?" > > Brent Swain > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > > > Having designed and built boats in both alloy and steel, we > > consider them both fine materials. The scantlings for alloy are > > different than steel, so the materials list for one cannot be used > > for the other. We are happy to work with anyone considering > building > > in alloy or steel, or any combination of the two. Ron, my partner > at > > Origami Magic prefers steel. I prefer alloy, so between the two of > > us you are sure to get an answer. > > > > > > My degree is in mathematics, which is how I have been able to > solve > > many of the shape limitations in origami. When not working as > > engineers, mathematicians typically work in finance, because if you > > want to make money, it helps to go where the money is. Having > served > > as the senior analyst responsible for the design of two of the > > largest financial systems in BC, as well as having designed > financial > > systems for multi-nationals such and Coca-Cola, Angco and Lego, > I've > > got more than a fair knowledge of economics and accounting. > > > > > > Accounting is only meaningful when people follow the rules. > Shoddy > > accounting can make anything look good, ala Enron and Nortel. The > > generally accepted accounting principles for manufacturing require > > reporting of average costs, using current figures and require that > > all labor and overhead be included. Best case numbers, incomplete > > costs and out of date examples paint at best a misleading picture, > > leading to false conclusions. I am reminded of a previous posting: > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: narwhale36 > > > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > > Sent: Monday, February 23, 2004 9:17 PM > > > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Mast weights > > > > > > > > > --In reply to the cost of building the BS 31 and the 36, I would > > like > > > to have some imput from other owners on their experience > re:costs . > > > the local BS owners have all suggested I would be looking at a > > > minimum of 35-40,000 Canadian using used engine,sails and doing > > alot > > > of the work myself. I spoke with one 36 owner who has over 80 > grand > > > in his boat. This is not a cheap boat and for the years of > putting > > it > > > together (that hidden cost factor) I would suggest that it would > be > > > nice to have alittle more upfront reality as to the final price. > > > I keep hearing from Brent on this site that one can be cranked > out > > in > > > a "couple of weeks" using dumpster parts for cheap, but that is > not > > > the general trend it appears. Like any boat project of any > > material, > > > quality craftmanship takes time. > > > .... > > > > > > > > > Greg Elliott > > > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3593|3593|2004-05-06 15:42:04|brentswain38|Water generators|A friend told me that altho he got a lot of power out of a water generator, there was a problem when he went too fast , with the prop of the towing generator skipping out of the water , jumping ahead and cutting the line. While discussing this with another friend, we came to the conclusion that this problem could be largely solved by putting a small stuffing box in the transom, 8 inches above the waterline, with a shaft running thru it to connect a below decks generator with the prop outside, via an eye in the shaft. This could be connected to a 7ft length of pipe with the prop on the end ,via a short length of chain to act as a universal joint. When not in use the pipe and prop can be stored vertically alongside the pushpit.The pipe could be ballasted as needed. Even if it were used with a braided line, putting the stuffing box close to the water would greatly reduce the prop's tendency to skip out. Brent Swain| 3594|3523|2004-05-06 16:13:40|jumpaltair|Re: BS 26 steel/aluminum list|Vancouver, BC Peter --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "put_to_sea" wrote: > Where are you located? > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "jumpaltair" > wrote: > > A good accountant may be hard to find, but as a Chartered > Accountant > > I can tell you that good clients are even harder to find. Most > > people say they want help and planning, but in reality they go and > do > > things without consulting their accountant and then expect us to > fix > > the problem. > > > > Peter > > > > > | 3595|3593|2004-05-06 18:12:22|edward_stoneuk|Re: Water generators|The instructions for a Walker trailed log recomend that a sinker be fixed to the line ahead of the rotator. At higher speeds and if there is any tendency for the spinner to porpoise then another sinker is fitted. This might be applicable to towed generators. Regards, Ted| 3596|3558|2004-05-06 18:58:00|richytill|Re: Anchors|G, apperently, rt --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > Originally for flying boats? g > > > The used Stainless > folding anchor I picked up is a Northill. rt > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3597|3597|2004-05-06 20:07:38|Michael Casling|Fridge|Is there a member close to Popeyes in North Vancouver, they have a Norcold AC DC fridge for about $50- that I would like to purchase but I can not get there to look at it to see if it runs. Thanks, Michael in Kelowna BC| 3598|3593|2004-05-06 23:41:47|John Jones|Re: Water generators|Why drag an anchor behind? Put a clutch and a pulley on your shaft and drive your generator " or alternator" with your auxhillary's prop whie sailing or motoring. Just an idea.... John --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" wrote: > A friend told me that altho he got a lot of power out of a water > generator, there was a problem when he went too fast , with the prop > of the towing generator skipping out of the water , jumping ahead and > cutting the line. > While discussing this with another friend, we came to the > conclusion that this problem could be largely solved by putting a > small stuffing box in the transom, 8 inches above the waterline, with > a shaft running thru it to connect a below decks generator with the > prop outside, via an eye in the shaft. This could be connected to a > 7ft length of pipe with the prop on the end ,via a short length of > chain to act as a universal joint. When not in use the pipe and prop > can be stored vertically alongside the pushpit.The pipe could be > ballasted as needed. > Even if it were used with a braided line, putting the stuffing box > close to the water would greatly reduce the prop's tendency to skip > out. > Brent Swain | 3599|3597|2004-05-07 01:15:18|jumpaltair|Re: Fridge|Michael, I might be able to make it out to popeye's this weekend. But I'm not really sure what I could do for you. I know they say that this fridge actually is in "good working order", and popeye's is apparently pretty good at taking things back if they don't work as stated, not that this helps much when you're in kelowna. If I go out this weekend what should I check for you? Peter --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Michael Casling" wrote: > Is there a member close to Popeyes in North Vancouver, they have a > Norcold AC DC fridge for about $50- that I would like to purchase > but I can not get there to look at it to see if it runs. Thanks, > Michael in Kelowna BC | 3600|3600|2004-05-07 05:32:26|sae140|Accountants, etc.|I hope no-one will take what I say here personally, but in my view the primary objective of ALL the so-called professions - accountancy, law, religion, architecture, medicine - plus those who try to emulate these: estate agents (realtors), surveyors, financial advisers etc - is to first convince you that their services are absolutely essential to your well-being and success. Whereas this may certainly be true in some cases, for much of the time you can survive without such parasites sucking at your blood. This, imho, is particulary true of the new breed of leisure boat designers which have sprung up in the wake of our new computerised age. People have been building boats for centuries with a reasonable degree of success, and I'd much rather rely on tried and tested designs, even if the original hull forms and rigging were at one time handed down from illiterate father to son in some tidal backwater, than finance someone's expensive computerised experimental learning curve. What matters (imo) is whether the design is proven or not - and whether or not the designer has confidence in his own work. In my view no better advertisement exists for any boat designer or builder than whether they have sufficient trust in their product to risk their own lives at sea by sailing the products of their own workmanship. I can't comment on Bruce Roberts (for example), but certainly Nick Skeates, Brent Swain and Tom Colvin all fall into this category. I live in rural England and know my way around the various sheep breeds, and whilst visiting a local farm recently was suprised to see some Scottish mules penned-off separately from the main flock (being mules, these wouldn't be breeding rams) - and assuming there was some problem with these animals I made enquiries. I learned that the penned-off sheep were being fed organically and were destined for the farmer's table and those of his friends, whereas the main flock were simply being fattened-up as cheaply as possible with the usual profit motives in mind. So - my advice is to eat what the farmer eats, not what he sells. Colin| 3601|3593|2004-05-07 09:26:06|Courtney Thomas|Re: Water generators|Has anyone actually successfully done this ? Where are some specs for doin' this, please ? Appreciatively, Courtney John Jones wrote: > Why drag an anchor behind? Put a clutch and a pulley on your > shaft and drive your generator " or alternator" with your > auxhillary's prop whie sailing or motoring. > Just an idea.... John > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" > wrote: > >>A friend told me that altho he got a lot of power out of a water >>generator, there was a problem when he went too fast , with >> > the prop > >>of the towing generator skipping out of the water , jumping >> > ahead and > >>cutting the line. >> While discussing this with another friend, we came to the >>conclusion that this problem could be largely solved by putting >> > a > >>small stuffing box in the transom, 8 inches above the waterline, >> > with > >>a shaft running thru it to connect a below decks generator with >> > the > >>prop outside, via an eye in the shaft. This could be connected >> > to a > >>7ft length of pipe with the prop on the end ,via a short length of >>chain to act as a universal joint. When not in use the pipe and >> > prop > >>can be stored vertically alongside the pushpit.The pipe could >> > be > >>ballasted as needed. >> Even if it were used with a braided line, putting the stuffing box >>close to the water would greatly reduce the prop's tendency to >> > skip > >>out. >> Brent Swain >> > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > -- s/v Mutiny Rhodes Bounty II lying Oriental, NC WDB5619| 3602|3523|2004-05-07 11:13:28|info@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: BS 26 steel/aluminum list|We would not consider charging any customer 5 times what it cost us to build a boat. Our customers would have every right to feel our profits were excessive and unreasonable if we did. You are unlikely to find any reputable boat builder making 5 times their costs, regardless if they build in steel, wood, alloy, or FG. Most businesses operate on margins of 20 to 30 percent, and many charge less. Sure we could flash up a boat using scrap steel and used parts, and make a fast dollar. A good deal for us, but a bad deal for the person that buys the boat. We don't do business like that. There are lots of ways to save costs in boats, without sacrificing quality. We pass those along to the buyer, rather than put them in our pockets. Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com My last boat sold for over 5 times what she cost me. Several others have sold for many times what their owners have spent on them.I've never heard of that being the case with aluminium. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3603|3600|2004-05-07 11:13:49|info@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: Accountants, etc.|I've spent much of the last 20 years sailing our triple chine prototype, the Lazy Bones, offshore with my wife and 2 children. We have visited dozen of countries during that time. Both children were raised afloat. The eldest moved aboard in Hawaii when she was 6 months old. The youngest was born along the way in Fiji. As anyone with children will tell you, it is a simple matter to put your own life at risk, compared to putting your own children at risk. I have such confident in our designs and workmanship that I put my children aboard, raised them afloat, and crossed oceans with them. This is our proof to everyone of the quality of the products we produce. When you want a proven design. Truly proven. You need look no further than Origami Magic. Our Lazy Bones 39 is a low-cost, high reliability, steel design. It combines a mix of household, automotive, RV, fishing and marine industry parts to maximize safety afloat, while minimizing cost. It has performed beautifully for the 20 years since launch, providing long term price/performance second to none. We can scale the boat to any size, to suit every need. Keep in mind that for most of the last 20 years we have been offshore sailing. As a result, few people have heard of our work. Plainly said, rather than talk about we have done, we have been out there doing it. Few designers have cruised extensively with their children aboard. I hope you will take the opportunity to move us to the head of your list of proven designs. Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com What matters (imo) is whether the design is proven or not - and whether or not the designer has confidence in his own work. In my view no better advertisement exists for any boat designer or builder than whether they have sufficient trust in their product to risk their own lives at sea by sailing the products of their own workmanship. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3604|3523|2004-05-07 13:56:13|brentswain38|Re: BS 26 steel/aluminum list|I charge $28 per hour , plus expenses ,working witht he owner , not an unreasonable rate.What are your hourly rates. Charging the cost of materials only means working for free, or less . Is that what you do? How do you stay in business? Volume? Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > We would not consider charging any customer 5 times what it cost us to build a boat. Our customers would have every right to feel our profits were excessive and unreasonable if we did. You are unlikely to find any reputable boat builder making 5 times their costs, regardless if they build in steel, wood, alloy, or FG. Most businesses operate on margins of 20 to 30 percent, and many charge less. > > Sure we could flash up a boat using scrap steel and used parts, and make a fast dollar. A good deal for us, but a bad deal for the person that buys the boat. We don't do business like that. There are lots of ways to save costs in boats, without sacrificing quality. We pass those along to the buyer, rather than put them in our pockets. > > Greg Elliott > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > My last boat sold for over 5 times what she cost me. Several others > have sold for many times what their owners have spent on them.I've > never heard of that being the case with aluminium. > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3605|3534|2004-05-07 14:29:45|Michael Casling|Re: Sugar Scoop and aft hung rudder|We are in agreement on this. My current plastic boat has a transom hung rudder. I have started to build a mould for a lollie scoop. It will also serve as a boarding platform as there is no easy way to get back on board. I have made a paper model with wings on the rudder to close the V in the lollie scoop. This is a lot less complex than using a stainless tube for the above water part of the rudder. With a pintle set up it is easy to build a spare rudder or try different shapes. On the lightweight boats with a shallow run aft the water does not rise up into the V. I am going to make the angle a bit less steep with the lollie scoop to flatten the stern wave. That will require more work on the mould. Michael in Kelowna BC ----- Original Message ----- From: brentswain38 To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, April 30, 2004 11:24 AM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Sugar Scoop and aft hung rudder Hanging the rudder outside the transom drastically simplifies the self steering , autopilot ,and inside steering ,and allows one that is incredibly strong compared to the highly complex and flimsey arrangements needed with inboard rudders.Thus an inboard rudder has no place on a boat designed for offshore cruising.You can run an outboard rudder thru a V shaped cut out in the sugar scoop, and with the right slope on the transom , a couple of fins on either side of the rudder will seal the V shaped hole in the sugar scoop.A bit of slope on the transom lets the trimtab run vertically , making it more efficient and improves the angles of the linkages to the self steering asd inside steering. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3606|3600|2004-05-07 15:13:32|brentswain38|Re: Accountants, etc.|Good points. There are far to many metal boats designed by people who have never cruised extensively and have never got their hands dirty building a metal boat. If this were not the case , metal boats would be a lot more popular, and better designed.In Jimmy Cornell's book Ocean Cruising Survey,or Modern Ocean Cruising , he mentions ten circumnavigators , eight of which plan to switch to metal boats, two of which had already started them.The Sleavin family most of whom were killed by a collision with a freighter off new Zealand would probably all still be alive if they had been in a steel boat. The first step in choosing a design should be to determine the designer's experience in doing the kind of cruising you plan on within the budget you plan to cruise on, and their building experience. Some world reknown designers have virtually no such experience. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > I've spent much of the last 20 years sailing our triple chine prototype, the Lazy Bones, offshore with my wife and 2 children. We have visited dozen of countries during that time. Both children were raised afloat. The eldest moved aboard in Hawaii when she was 6 months old. The youngest was born along the way in Fiji. > > As anyone with children will tell you, it is a simple matter to put your own life at risk, compared to putting your own children at risk. I have such confident in our designs and workmanship that I put my children aboard, raised them afloat, and crossed oceans with them. This is our proof to everyone of the quality of the products we produce. > > When you want a proven design. Truly proven. You need look no further than Origami Magic. > > Our Lazy Bones 39 is a low-cost, high reliability, steel design. It combines a mix of household, automotive, RV, fishing and marine industry parts to maximize safety afloat, while minimizing cost. It has performed beautifully for the 20 years since launch, providing long term price/performance second to none. We can scale the boat to any size, to suit every need. > > Keep in mind that for most of the last 20 years we have been offshore sailing. As a result, few people have heard of our work. Plainly said, rather than talk about we have done, we have been out there doing it. > > Few designers have cruised extensively with their children aboard. I hope you will take the opportunity to move us to the head of your list of proven designs. > > Greg Elliott > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > > What matters (imo) is whether the design is proven or not - and > whether or not the designer has confidence in his own work. In my > view no better advertisement exists for any boat designer or builder > than whether they have sufficient trust in their product to risk > their own lives at sea by sailing the products of their own > workmanship. > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3607|22|2004-05-07 15:27:04|jalborey|Interior plan|Hello all, A friend is tinkering with some ideas for the interior design of a boat, 43' overall length, 13' beam. I've uploaded a draft of his design, "Interior plan.doc" at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/files/Interior%20plan.doc in the files folder. The boat is intended to sleep 4 persons comfortably, with ample room for storage, 2 good sized heads and pilothouse saloon. The draft is intended only as a guide for the interior plan. Any comments about it would be very wellcome. Thanks in advance, Jesús| 3608|22|2004-05-07 17:18:26|Gerald Niffenegger|Re: Interior plan|Is it just me or are others having trouble downloading the interior plan? Gerald --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "jalborey" wrote: > Hello all, > A friend is tinkering with some ideas for the interior design of a > boat, 43' overall length, 13' beam. I've uploaded a draft of his > design, "Interior plan.doc" at > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/files/Interior%20plan.doc > > in the files folder. The boat is intended to sleep 4 persons > comfortably, with ample room for storage, > 2 good sized heads and pilothouse saloon. The draft is intended only > as a guide for the interior plan. Any comments about it would be very > wellcome. > Thanks in advance, > Jesús | 3609|3562|2004-05-07 18:26:08|Paul A. Cotter|Re: 26 footer materials list|Thanks for posting the materials list for the 26. I'll start scoping prices, etc. Paul brentswain38 wrote: > > Thge materials list I've used for the 26 footer is as follows. > Cabin sides > 2-4ft by 8 ft by 1/8th plate > Cabintop > 1-5x10x1/8th plate > Cockpit > 1-4X8X1/8th plate > Decks > 2-4X8X1/8th > Keels > 1-4X8X3/16th > Hull > 2-6ftX28ftX1/8th plate > Lifelines and bulwark caps > 125ft of 3/4 inch ID sch 40 galv or stainless pipe > Deck stringers and beams > 80 ft 1 inch X 1/4 inch FB > Hull stringers > 6-1inch X 1inch X 3/16th inch angle X 20 ft lengths > > Brent Swain > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ADVERTISEMENT > [click here] > > > --------------------------------------------------------------- > Yahoo! Groups Links > > * To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of > Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3610|3610|2004-05-07 19:58:17|summer_89fvi@yahoo.com|lazy member enlargement|No pumps, exercises or pills. Made especially for lazy guys. Sit around and make your member larger. (seriously, check it out) http://www.opejsn.com| 3611|22|2004-05-08 05:37:43|edward_stoneuk|Re: Interior plan|Jesús, Is there good vision from the pilot house, especially looking aft? Regards, Ted| 3612|3612|2004-05-08 06:12:58|bubblede|Steel versus alloy, file upload|the recent discussion about masts made me do some caculations and I finally have to admit that for a cruising design the result seems to be that the real issue is not the added weight but the fact that a mast should be watertight and provide floatation - the stability curve & AVS is dramatically improved with a sealed mast, whereas the added weight (maswt and ballast) results in a heavier boat but has much less negative influence on stability. (This presumes that the mast withstands a bad, deep knockdown or a 360.... if it doesn't, all things including stabilty curves become completely different) While I agree with Greg that all weight topsides has to be avoided, and would personally always go for the lighter solutions anyway, I now come to the point that any sealed mast, steel or alloy, would be largely superior to a standard, not watertight production mast with passages for halyards and so on. Unless the knockdown is very fast and dynamic, it would fill up if submersed for any length of time - and I have not even yet calculated what it means to have a mast full of water when the boat comes back up abot 90 degr... For a gaff or junk rig, where the off the shelf extrusion and fittings make no sense anway, choosing between wood and steel, I have to finally agree that steel is a viable anlternative. If you can find and pay for an alloy tube, so much the better, and it might be worth looking into composite masts but I have no experience there. Gregs calculation of cruising capacity though seems to be of practical importance only if consequently applied to the entire project, meaning building a boat with very light material throughout. You would need to look at every single item and in the end you would have a bigger (cruising cap.) and faster and in my opinion better boat, but then it sure would be a lot more expensive overall. Also it would be more expensive to GET STARTED, and whatever the final calcualtions of relationships between investment and resale, or price and days worked or sailed earlier and so on are, for many of us the decision between steeel and alloy is still made by 2 main factors: - steel SEEMS easier to us and can be done outside all year round - steel is A LOT cheaper to get started and see where the money will come from later. No, this is NOT very responsible or serious and your should NOT start to build a boat like that, but if you have to do it anyway, go for steel! ;-) For me alloy is not an option, due to lack of cash, lack of covered space, lack of time to learn how to weld it, lack of experience and knowlegde and to the fact that I know that in the future I will not have the cash to detail and finish the boat with the all the other light materials that would really make me profit from this first choice. All caculations only seem to prove the point that you live a lot cheaper and better if you have a lot of money ;-) File upload: For caculating my VCG I have knocked together a quick and dirty excel sheet and uploaded to a new "maths & calculations" folder. There are 2 tables, one you can use to enter your masses and distances and one that shows some sample values for a fictive boat. Maybe somebody here could have a look at it, and a) check it out, if possible improve it b) put the proper english names to the formula and c) make a non-metric version for those old geezers in the more backwards countries ;-) (the yellow fields contain the simple formulas, don't type into them) Even if you are not designing a boat, this can help estimate what it means to fix a 10 kg windgenerator or radar on top of your mast for example, or to place your water, fuel, books or dinghy. Also helpful to imagine what happens to your negative stability if all your batteries, tanks and other unfixed junk will be piled up on your ceiling after a 180 degree ;-) I am not very good at that, and wondered if our design-, maths- and general discussion specialists here could share & pool their wisdom and give us all some more calculation sheets in excel, where we can test our hairbrained theories before we start ventilating nonsense in public ;-) How about: center of volumes and masses, dynamic stability, sail areas, cost/displacement/cruising capacity, performance related calculations and so on and so on ... just an idea - all the best from Budapest Gerd htto://www.justmueller.com/boats| 3613|3523|2004-05-08 11:24:59|info@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: BS 26 steel/aluminum list|Our rate is $25 hr plus expenses. Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3614|3612|2004-05-08 11:24:59|info@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: Steel versus alloy, file upload|Most accounts of monohull capsize/pitchpoling that I have heard of were accompanied with dismasting. The density of water almost guarantees it. An offshore boat should be self-righting without a mast. The alloy mast on the Lazy Bones has positive floatation, and it is not sealed, but I would never count it in a capsize. Hull shape and ballast has everything to do with making a boat self-righting, and it is guaranteed. What looks good in a center-boarder is very different when applied to a keel boat. Better to build a boat to avoid capsize/knock-down to start with. In all our miles offshore, in some really horrific conditions, the Lazy Bones has never come close to putting the mast in the water. Yet, in the past on this site there have been accounts of boats being knocked-down, pilots houses stove-in, in what from our experiences is very tame conditions. If boats are being knocked-down, there is a more fundamental problem than can be solved by installing a sealed mast. I would never take any boat offshore that has suffered a knockdown, until I was very sure of the cause. Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3615|3610|2004-05-08 11:28:42|info@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: lazy member enlargement|Our Bones are lazy, not our members. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3616|3612|2004-05-08 13:40:56|bubblede|Re: Steel versus alloy, file upload|> Better to build a boat to avoid capsize/knock-down to start with. In all our miles offshore, in some really horrific conditions, the Lazy Bones has never come close to putting the mast in the water. I fully agree with you, but any stability curve will take in account the situation well past 90 degrees and does not stop there because a given boat has never done the sommersault before... Sure you will define a boat that has positve stability from hull and ballast only - but if you look at the range of say 100 to 120 degrees, meaning nasty knowdown without the complete roll, having the floatation of the mast should help a lot to actually prevent the roll. Once rolled, or worse pitchpoled over the bows, what happenes to the mast is anyones guess, but then the lack of the mast also decreases negative stability and should indeed help to get back up ;- )| 3617|3612|2004-05-08 20:24:00|brentswain38|Re: Steel versus alloy, file upload|According to the fastnet experience and tank tests , the heavier the mast to a point, the less the chance of a knockdown. The inertia of the mast slows the roll to the point that the wave passes before the roll of the boat accelerates enough to be knocked down. Boats without a mast roll over much more easily. I once read of a 60's Sparkman and Stephens sloop which was rolled over in the Atlantic.When she righted herself, a great gush of water lifted her floorboards, causing a bit of a pannick in the crew who thought they were holed. After they had pumped the biges dry , they stayed that way. It turned out that the keel stepped hollow aluminium mast had filed up with water , and drained out thru the bottom . I've heard of other boats being rolled thru 360 degrees without losing the rig, so , with a marginal increase in strength it is possible to keep the rig in thru a rollover. The shape of deck structures has a major efect on a boats ultimate stability. The volume of air in a wheelhouse adds tremendously to a boats ultimate stability and as long as the wheelhouse is properly built of metal, it's extremely unlikely to be stove in. Stove in cabinsides and wheelhouses are problems of the days of building them out of fibreglass and dead vegitation. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > Most accounts of monohull capsize/pitchpoling that I have heard of were accompanied with dismasting. The density of water almost guarantees it. An offshore boat should be self-righting without a mast. The alloy mast on the Lazy Bones has positive floatation, and it is not sealed, but I would never count it in a capsize. Hull shape and ballast has everything to do with making a boat self- righting, and it is guaranteed. What looks good in a center-boarder is very different when applied to a keel boat. > > Better to build a boat to avoid capsize/knock-down to start with. In all our miles offshore, in some really horrific conditions, the Lazy Bones has never come close to putting the mast in the water. Yet, in the past on this site there have been accounts of boats being knocked-down, pilots houses stove-in, in what from our experiences is very tame conditions. > > If boats are being knocked-down, there is a more fundamental problem than can be solved by installing a sealed mast. I would never take any boat offshore that has suffered a knockdown, until I was very sure of the cause. > > Greg Elliott > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3618|3612|2004-05-09 01:01:08|ge@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: Steel versus alloy, file upload|Hi Gerd, Certainly there is no reason not to include floatation in a mast. In a boat designed for costal cruising, mast floatation can be used in combination with form stability, to reduce ballast, to increases capacity and performance, as is done in multi-hulls and trailerable sail boats. Given your dual daggerboard design, I believe it would be a good feature in the Yago 31. Certainly a sealed steel mast on a gaff rig is a good compromise, because the low aspect ratio of the gaff rig imposes a smaller penalty for weight aloft, and the steel mast is well suited to the use of relatively low tech rigging more typical of gaff rigs. The spreaderless configuration makes it simple to lead external halyards. Standard naval engineering via computers provides a pretty good check of stability through 180. The LB37 for example, shows positive stability to about 160, and neutral beyond that. The Yago 31 will be different, because of the different hull form and ballast. With your calculation for CG, Rhino/Phaser will do a pretty good job. Email me with your results and I'll review. Typically masts are designed for sailing loads, and as the wind speed increases, even boats with bare poles eventually lose their masts. Because of the density of water, this happens at much slower speeds in water. If the knockdown is slow enough, the mast will survive. However, the sort of sea state that results in a mono-hull capsize under bare poles would suggest to me that the capsize could be fast and result in a mast failure. You can imagine that if a 20+ knot breaking wave rolls a boat, the mast head could be accelerated to 100 knots, the equivalent of maybe 3000 mph winds, which no mast will survive. By my calculations, a mast moving through the water at 7 knots has about the same force as 200 knot winds. regards, Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com ----- Original Message ----- From: bubblede To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, May 08, 2004 10:39 AM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Steel versus alloy, file upload > Better to build a boat to avoid capsize/knock-down to start with. In all our miles offshore, in some really horrific conditions, the Lazy Bones has never come close to putting the mast in the water. I fully agree with you, but any stability curve will take in account the situation well past 90 degrees and does not stop there because a given boat has never done the sommersault before... Sure you will define a boat that has positve stability from hull and ballast only - but if you look at the range of say 100 to 120 degrees, meaning nasty knowdown without the complete roll, having the floatation of the mast should help a lot to actually prevent the roll. Once rolled, or worse pitchpoled over the bows, what happenes to the mast is anyones guess, but then the lack of the mast also decreases negative stability and should indeed help to get back up ;- ) To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3619|3612|2004-05-09 01:58:30|easysoftware98|Re: Steel versus alloy, file upload|I can't see how the fastnet results can be correct. Take any boat, and make the mast a little heavier. This boat would have less chance of a knockdown. Make this modified boat your starting point, as though it was a second boat, and again make the mast a little heavier. This boat also would have less chance of a knockdown. Continue this process often enough and the boat will be stable, mast down, keel up. Making the mast heavier could only have made a certain class of boats more stable, with (likely) very light masts and rigs as typical of race boats, and thus cannot be applied as a general observation. I believe the point was already made on this site previously, that the fastnet findings were later shown to be wrong. I believe the failure in the pilot house was a steel boat. A window failed. The posting was about a year ago on this site as I recall. Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com note: Proof by recursion as demonstrated here, is a valid technique, and is commonly used in math and logic to determine if statements are true of false. --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" wrote: > According to the fastnet experience and tank tests , the heavier the > mast to a point, the less the chance of a knockdown. The inertia of > the mast slows the roll to the point that the wave passes before the > roll of the boat accelerates enough to be knocked down. Boats without > a mast roll over much more easily. > I once read of a 60's Sparkman and Stephens sloop which was rolled > over in the Atlantic.When she righted herself, a great gush of water > lifted her floorboards, causing a bit of a pannick in the crew who > thought they were holed. After they had pumped the biges dry , they > stayed that way. It turned out that the keel stepped hollow aluminium > mast had filed up with water , and drained out thru the bottom . > I've heard of other boats being rolled thru 360 degrees without > losing the rig, so , with a marginal increase in strength it is > possible to keep the rig in thru a rollover. > The shape of deck structures has a major efect on a boats ultimate > stability. The volume of air in a wheelhouse adds tremendously to a > boats ultimate stability and as long as the wheelhouse is properly > built of metal, it's extremely unlikely to be stove in. Stove in > cabinsides and wheelhouses are problems of the days of building them > out of fibreglass and dead vegitation. > Brent Swain > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > > Most accounts of monohull capsize/pitchpoling that I have heard of > were accompanied with dismasting. The density of water almost > guarantees it. An offshore boat should be self-righting without a > mast. The alloy mast on the Lazy Bones has positive floatation, and > it is not sealed, but I would never count it in a capsize. Hull > shape and ballast has everything to do with making a boat self- > righting, and it is guaranteed. What looks good in a center- boarder > is very different when applied to a keel boat. > > > > Better to build a boat to avoid capsize/knock-down to start with. > In all our miles offshore, in some really horrific conditions, the > Lazy Bones has never come close to putting the mast in the water. > Yet, in the past on this site there have been accounts of boats being > knocked-down, pilots houses stove-in, in what from our experiences is > very tame conditions. > > > > If boats are being knocked-down, there is a more fundamental > problem than can be solved by installing a sealed mast. I would > never take any boat offshore that has suffered a knockdown, until I > was very sure of the cause. > > > > Greg Elliott > > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3620|3612|2004-05-09 04:42:45|jim_both|Re: Steel versus alloy, file upload|There seems to be a consensus that a steel mast is satisfactory for a gaff rig. Why not add an alloy extension to a steel mast to increase the mast height while still keeping the weight aloft low? jim_both| 3621|3621|2004-05-09 05:13:12|bubblede|Centerboards|Hi Greg - My point was simply that, having done and reviewed my stability curves for different configurations, including for a keel version for yago, the positive effect off a strong sealed steel mast far outweighs for me the negative effect of the added topweight in a boat that is designed for cruising rather than flat out performance. In that I had to revise my position, that people like Brent,Dix and others are right and wanted to say so. As for the centerboard, that is an entirely different discussion, so I will start a different thread here. - the fact that YAGO is a centerboarder does not mean that it is a dinghi that needs a beachball tied to the top of the mast ;-) YAGO can have a fixed keel, but the design was laid out originally for a centerboard version. That does not make it a "coastal cruiser". We have a lot of experience with that here in Europe, especially in France. The main difference is really overall displacement that goes up when the center your ballast moves up as you then have to add more of it, the keel version has less ballast and more of your "cruising capacity" with unchanged DWL. It is true that a centerboarder usually has a lower Angle of Vanishing Stability because there are obvious limits as how much you are willing to increase your ballast while moving it up. On YAGO the difference between the keel and the centerboard version would be about 600 + kg, and the keel version would have a draft of about 1.4 m and a better stability curve. Still, after first ccaculations it looks as if the centerboard version has a higher AVS than required by any national standard I am aware of, including iso, stix etc we have in Europe - for whatever that is worth ;-) Right now I am busy getting started for real, but as soon as the I have the time I will of course add all this to the web. In my very personal view, based on my own observations sailig on boats like that, the fact that a boat with high form-stability and - board up - nothing to trip over, makes the centerboarder safer and more "seaworthy" than the keel version of the same boat, even if it has a higher AVS, but I really would not try to convince anybody else of that, I am not a missionary ;-) If somebody else wants to join this discussion, here are a couple of interesting links: http://www.sailtrain.co.uk/stability/introduction.htm http://www.radford-yacht.com/stablty1.html On ISO and STIX: http://www.rya.org.uk/images/uploaded/3352ce73-ea82- 4eb8-a0a6-865dfa94e88a/Stability_Intro.pdf and article on stability in Yachtingworld: http://www.yachtingworld.com/yw/stability/stability97.pdf and if a centerboarder is not enough, how about canting keels ? ;-) http://www.yachting.org.au/site/yachting/ayf/downloads/Technical/Agen das/Stability-Appendices%20to%20the%20submission/Appendix%206% 20Reichel%20Pu~0008.pdf Gerd http://www.justmueller.com/boats/| 3622|22|2004-05-09 13:34:44|Steven Schofield|Re: Interior plan|I can't access it either. Message says I have "committed an illegal action". I feel so guilty........ >From: "Gerald Niffenegger" >Reply-To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com >To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com >Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Interior plan >Date: Fri, 07 May 2004 21:18:12 -0000 >MIME-Version: 1.0 >X-Originating-IP: 172.204.48.144 >X-Sender: niffeneggerniff@... >Received: from n42.grp.scd.yahoo.com ([66.218.67.17]) by >mc12-f4.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6824); Sat, 8 May 2004 >11:32:10 -0700 >Received: from [66.218.66.29] by n42.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 07 May >2004 21:18:28 -0000 >Received: (qmail 21041 invoked from network); 7 May 2004 21:18:25 -0000 >Received: from unknown (66.218.66.217) by m23.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; >7 May 2004 21:18:25 -0000 >Received: from unknown (HELO n3.grp.scd.yahoo.com) (66.218.66.86) by >mta2.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 7 May 2004 21:18:25 -0000 >Received: from [66.218.67.179] by n3.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 07 May >2004 21:18:12 -0000 >X-Message-Info: JGTYoYF78jENgzzjnteTh8YmAFv4ZFIE >X-eGroups-Return: >sentto-1579488-3609-1083964707-cpt6pk=hotmail.com@... >X-Apparently-To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com >Message-ID: >In-Reply-To: >User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 >X-Mailer: Yahoo Groups Message Poster >X-eGroups-Remote-IP: 66.218.66.86 >X-Yahoo-Profile: jerryniff >Mailing-List: list origamiboats@yahoogroups.com; contact >origamiboats-owner@yahoogroups.com >Delivered-To: mailing list origamiboats@yahoogroups.com >Precedence: bulk >List-Unsubscribe: >Return-Path: >sentto-1579488-3609-1083964707-cpt6pk=hotmail.com@... >X-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 May 2004 18:32:11.0023 (UTC) >FILETIME=[C69C09F0:01C4352A] > >Is it just me or are others having trouble downloading the interior plan? >Gerald > > > >--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "jalborey" wrote: > > Hello all, > > A friend is tinkering with some ideas for the interior design of a > > boat, 43' overall length, 13' beam. I've uploaded a draft of his > > design, "Interior plan.doc" at > > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/files/Interior%20plan.doc > > > > in the files folder. The boat is intended to sleep 4 persons > > comfortably, with ample room for storage, > > 2 good sized heads and pilothouse saloon. The draft is intended only > > as a guide for the interior plan. Any comments about it would be very > > wellcome. > > Thanks in advance, > > Jes�s > _________________________________________________________________ MSN Premium: Up to 11 personalized e-mail addresses and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines| 3623|3612|2004-05-09 13:36:48|bubblede|Re: Steel versus alloy, file upload|Greg, Brent wrote: "...to a point", meaning proof by recursing is unfair. As for the fastnet, this is just as anecdotic - albeit on a much larger and much better documented scale - as your own reference to LB keeping the mast dry in "horrific" conditions. Some very light and modern as well as some very "classic" boats survived and came out unscathed. If my recollection is right, hatches were a much bigger general problem than the _weight_ of the masts. There are - thanks God - by now very few boats that have a fundamentally flawed design from about 30 feet up. In the end I guess it's 4 parts mathematics and one part common sense and your own feeling about what is right. Gerd --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "easysoftware98" wrote: > I can't see how the fastnet results can be correct. > > Take any boat, and make the mast a little heavier. This boat would > have less chance of a knockdown. > > Make this modified boat your starting point, as though it was a > second boat, and again make the mast a little heavier. This boat > also would have less chance of a knockdown. > > Continue this process often enough and the boat will be stable, mast > down, keel up. > > Making the mast heavier could only have made a certain class of boats > more stable, with (likely) very light masts and rigs as typical of > race boats, and thus cannot be applied as a general observation. > > I believe the point was already made on this site previously, that > the fastnet findings were later shown to be wrong. > > I believe the failure in the pilot house was a steel boat. A window > failed. The posting was about a year ago on this site as I recall. > > Greg Elliott > http://www.origamimagic.com > > note: Proof by recursion as demonstrated here, is a valid technique, > and is commonly used in math and logic to determine if statements are > true of false. > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" > wrote: > > According to the fastnet experience and tank tests , the heavier > the > > mast to a point, the less the chance of a knockdown. The inertia of > > the mast slows the roll to the point that the wave passes before > the > > roll of the boat accelerates enough to be knocked down. Boats > without > > a mast roll over much more easily. > > I once read of a 60's Sparkman and Stephens sloop which was > rolled > > over in the Atlantic.When she righted herself, a great gush of > water > > lifted her floorboards, causing a bit of a pannick in the crew who > > thought they were holed. After they had pumped the biges dry , > they > > stayed that way. It turned out that the keel stepped hollow > aluminium > > mast had filed up with water , and drained out thru the bottom . > > I've heard of other boats being rolled thru 360 degrees without > > losing the rig, so , with a marginal increase in strength it is > > possible to keep the rig in thru a rollover. > > The shape of deck structures has a major efect on a boats > ultimate > > stability. The volume of air in a wheelhouse adds tremendously to a > > boats ultimate stability and as long as the wheelhouse is properly > > built of metal, it's extremely unlikely to be stove in. Stove in > > cabinsides and wheelhouses are problems of the days of building > them > > out of fibreglass and dead vegitation. > > Brent Swain > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > > > Most accounts of monohull capsize/pitchpoling that I have heard > of > > were accompanied with dismasting. The density of water almost > > guarantees it. An offshore boat should be self-righting without a > > mast. The alloy mast on the Lazy Bones has positive floatation, > and > > it is not sealed, but I would never count it in a capsize. Hull > > shape and ballast has everything to do with making a boat self- > > righting, and it is guaranteed. What looks good in a center- > boarder > > is very different when applied to a keel boat. > > > > > > Better to build a boat to avoid capsize/knock-down to start > with. > > In all our miles offshore, in some really horrific conditions, the > > Lazy Bones has never come close to putting the mast in the water. > > Yet, in the past on this site there have been accounts of boats > being > > knocked-down, pilots houses stove-in, in what from our experiences > is > > very tame conditions. > > > > > > If boats are being knocked-down, there is a more fundamental > > problem than can be solved by installing a sealed mast. I would > > never take any boat offshore that has suffered a knockdown, until I > > was very sure of the cause. > > > > > > Greg Elliott > > > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3624|3624|2004-05-09 14:07:28|vega1944|BS 36 fin keel hull for sale|Available to view June. Swain 36 fin keel bare hull,raisedPH,Vancouver Island. $10,000.00 canadian funds.Pse. address anyinquiries to swain4sale@...| 3625|3600|2004-05-09 17:16:11|jimkassa|Re: Accountants, etc.|--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "sae140" wrote: > I hope no-one will take what I say here personally, but in my view > the primary objective of ALL the so-called professions - accountancy, > law, religion, architecture, medicine - plus those who try to emulate > these: estate agents (realtors), surveyors, financial advisers etc - > is to first convince you that their services are absolutely essential > to your well-being and success. > Whereas this may certainly be true in some cases, for much of the > time you can survive without such parasites sucking at your blood. I would reply to this comment since I am in one of these groups. I spent many years in university and then working as a student (for low wages) in a firm in order to qualify for a "so-called profession". My own attitude is that if someone comes to me then I do my utmost to provide the best service to my client that I am capable of. I think that most of my clients are happy with my services because they come back to me year after year. If people want to do the work on their own then this is fine since it encourages these individuals to think for themselves. To me it is abhorrent that anyone would advertise themself as indispensable. One of my clients is a real estate appraiser and he works very hard and for long hours to support his wife and two young children. I don't believe he is a "blood sucking parasite" since his work attitude and philosphical outlook is very admirable. Sometimes though he has done the work and cannot collect any payment for it. I recently finished one job last year and the person expected me to be either clairvoyant or divinely perfect. No doubt this person considers me to be a "blood sucking parasite", but then maybe anyone that does work for pay is in that category!| 3626|3600|2004-05-10 00:53:33|ge@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: Accountants, etc.|The problem that most accountants (and other professionals) face is that contrary to what common sense might tell us, the future is poorly predicted by the past. While this is well understood mathematically, customer demand ensures that there is no end of work for fortune tellers, whether they rely on crystal balls, the zodiac, financial reports, or stock tickers. We expect financial planners to be able to tell us where to put our money, but anyone that really knew the answer to that questions would not need to work as a financial planner. Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com I recently finished one job last year and the person expected me to be either clairvoyant or divinely perfect. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3627|3612|2004-05-10 00:53:33|ge@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: Steel versus alloy, file upload|The statement "...to a point" can be read in two ways: 1. Any boat can be made safer by adding weight to the mast, as long as the amount added is small . 2. Some boats can be made safer by adding weight to the mast, as long as the resulting mast weight is less than some unspecified point. For those that read it as #1, this could lead them into mishap, because recursion proves that #1 cannot be true. Some boats have heavy masts, and adding weight to the mast on those boats makes them more prone to knockdown. Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com ----- Original Message ----- From: bubblede To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, May 09, 2004 10:36 AM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Steel versus alloy, file upload Greg, Brent wrote: "...to a point", meaning proof by recursing is unfair. As for the fastnet, this is just as anecdotic - albeit on a much larger and much better documented scale - as your own reference to LB keeping the mast dry in "horrific" conditions. Some very light and modern as well as some very "classic" boats survived and came out unscathed. If my recollection is right, hatches were a much bigger general problem than the _weight_ of the masts. There are - thanks God - by now very few boats that have a fundamentally flawed design from about 30 feet up. In the end I guess it's 4 parts mathematics and one part common sense and your own feeling about what is right. Gerd --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "easysoftware98" wrote: > I can't see how the fastnet results can be correct. > > Take any boat, and make the mast a little heavier. This boat would > have less chance of a knockdown. > > Make this modified boat your starting point, as though it was a > second boat, and again make the mast a little heavier. This boat > also would have less chance of a knockdown. > > Continue this process often enough and the boat will be stable, mast > down, keel up. > > Making the mast heavier could only have made a certain class of boats > more stable, with (likely) very light masts and rigs as typical of > race boats, and thus cannot be applied as a general observation. > > I believe the point was already made on this site previously, that > the fastnet findings were later shown to be wrong. > > I believe the failure in the pilot house was a steel boat. A window > failed. The posting was about a year ago on this site as I recall. > > Greg Elliott > http://www.origamimagic.com > > note: Proof by recursion as demonstrated here, is a valid technique, > and is commonly used in math and logic to determine if statements are > true of false. > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" > wrote: > > According to the fastnet experience and tank tests , the heavier > the > > mast to a point, the less the chance of a knockdown. The inertia of > > the mast slows the roll to the point that the wave passes before > the > > roll of the boat accelerates enough to be knocked down. Boats > without > > a mast roll over much more easily. > > I once read of a 60's Sparkman and Stephens sloop which was > rolled > > over in the Atlantic.When she righted herself, a great gush of > water > > lifted her floorboards, causing a bit of a pannick in the crew who > > thought they were holed. After they had pumped the biges dry , > they > > stayed that way. It turned out that the keel stepped hollow > aluminium > > mast had filed up with water , and drained out thru the bottom . > > I've heard of other boats being rolled thru 360 degrees without > > losing the rig, so , with a marginal increase in strength it is > > possible to keep the rig in thru a rollover. > > The shape of deck structures has a major efect on a boats > ultimate > > stability. The volume of air in a wheelhouse adds tremendously to a > > boats ultimate stability and as long as the wheelhouse is properly > > built of metal, it's extremely unlikely to be stove in. Stove in > > cabinsides and wheelhouses are problems of the days of building > them > > out of fibreglass and dead vegitation. > > Brent Swain > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > > > Most accounts of monohull capsize/pitchpoling that I have heard > of > > were accompanied with dismasting. The density of water almost > > guarantees it. An offshore boat should be self-righting without a > > mast. The alloy mast on the Lazy Bones has positive floatation, > and > > it is not sealed, but I would never count it in a capsize. Hull > > shape and ballast has everything to do with making a boat self- > > righting, and it is guaranteed. What looks good in a center- > boarder > > is very different when applied to a keel boat. > > > > > > Better to build a boat to avoid capsize/knock-down to start > with. > > In all our miles offshore, in some really horrific conditions, the > > Lazy Bones has never come close to putting the mast in the water. > > Yet, in the past on this site there have been accounts of boats > being > > knocked-down, pilots houses stove-in, in what from our experiences > is > > very tame conditions. > > > > > > If boats are being knocked-down, there is a more fundamental > > problem than can be solved by installing a sealed mast. I would > > never take any boat offshore that has suffered a knockdown, until I > > was very sure of the cause. > > > > > > Greg Elliott > > > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3628|3628|2004-05-10 06:19:04|Ben Tucker|mast loses due to capsize|Hello I am interested to see what your thoughts are on masts being lost due to capsize and whether we can design them to be more capsize proof. it seems that some boats loose them and others keep them, what are the factors? pitchpoling seems to place the highest stress on the masts and as far as ive heard only two boats have survived a pitchpole and kept their masts, Standefjord A Colin archer redinskote, with a stout pole masted Gaff rig (she lost her Poorly stayed Mizzen) and the unstayed carbon fibre masts on Lady Peperal in an early BOC (loosened her keel however). Some of my thoughts, Spreaders seem a weak point, They are not designed for the odd side loadings of a mast moving through the water at high speeds with slack rigging, swinging spreader bases and discontinous rigging might help, Or no spreaders? Ie Gaff I wonder if the loads on the boom in a rollover can take out a mast at gooseneck height? Would Deck struts like the B&R rig help? Obvously a roller reefing HS will add considerably to the load. And the Taller the mast the higher the Mast top speed will be. Mast flex Might absorb shock loadings but cause loss of coloum (Mind you the side loadings will garantee this anyway). On the gaff rig does the increased panel length of the mast compensate against the lower mast hight and lack of speaders? Which storm Tactic is more likely to result in keeping a mast in the boat? By the way had a good Trip across the tasman, 11 days to eden from nelson, no dammage to the boat and only 2 days Of Gale force Headwinds. Have a question about heaving to on a sloop? How do you keep her head up, The S&S Lay with a 3 reefed main At 55-85 degrees and cronic lee helm, Not the safest position, would rather have been around 45 degrees, Setting the storn jib On the inner forestay only made things worse. A try sail would have had a CE futher aft. She had a big furler that may have hurt in this case. Cheers Ben| 3629|3600|2004-05-10 06:29:56|T.H. & V.D. Cain|Re: Accountants, etc.|An appropriate and nicely worded post. Judge not, unless ye too be judged (or something of the sort!) Terry -----Original Message----- From: jimkassa [mailto:bkorskol@...] Sent: Monday, 10 May 2004 6:46 To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Accountants, etc. --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "sae140" wrote: > I hope no-one will take what I say here personally, but in my view > the primary objective of ALL the so-called professions - accountancy, > law, religion, architecture, medicine - plus those who try to emulate > these: estate agents (realtors), surveyors, financial advisers etc - > is to first convince you that their services are absolutely essential > to your well-being and success. > Whereas this may certainly be true in some cases, for much of the > time you can survive without such parasites sucking at your blood. I would reply to this comment since I am in one of these groups. I spent many years in university and then working as a student (for low wages) in a firm in order to qualify for a "so-called profession". My own attitude is that if someone comes to me then I do my utmost to provide the best service to my client that I am capable of. I think that most of my clients are happy with my services because they come back to me year after year. If people want to do the work on their own then this is fine since it encourages these individuals to think for themselves. To me it is abhorrent that anyone would advertise themself as indispensable. One of my clients is a real estate appraiser and he works very hard and for long hours to support his wife and two young children. I don't believe he is a "blood sucking parasite" since his work attitude and philosphical outlook is very admirable. Sometimes though he has done the work and cannot collect any payment for it. I recently finished one job last year and the person expected me to be either clairvoyant or divinely perfect. No doubt this person considers me to be a "blood sucking parasite", but then maybe anyone that does work for pay is in that category! To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links| 3630|3628|2004-05-10 07:57:29|Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr|Re: mast loses due to capsize|Actually, boats rolling through 360 or 180 degrees and retraining their masts are a lot more common than you would think. A very large percent of the boats that survived the ill-fated Sydney Hobart were rolled with their masts in the water and still kept thier masts. Spreaders did not seem to play a role in whether the mast survived or not. The current use of fractional rigs with small amounts of raked back spreaders allow the disbursement of the energy through flexure and greatly reduces the concentrated loads implied by a roll over. The spreader bases with a swept back spreader needs to be very robust and frankly the loads on the spreaders passing through the water may be considerably less than the sailing loads. What usually damages the rig is the enormous side loads of the sail passing through the considerable denser medium of water. Regarding your heaving to question, historically, most boats hove to roughly beam to. Thier slick to windward was supposed to minimize the chance of being hit by breaking water. Modern boats tend to hove to slightly above a beam to. One thing that you rarely hear in popular points of view but which seem clear from the literature is that you need to strip the sail off of the furler in extreme conditions as the weight and windage of the rolled up sail aloft can really add to heeling and reduce the heavy weather options for the boat. It is one of my gripes with the current trend towards using cutter rigs with furlers as a heavy weather rig. Jeff ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ben Tucker" To: Sent: Monday, May 10, 2004 6:18 AM Subject: [origamiboats] mast loses due to capsize > Hello > > I am interested to see what your thoughts are on masts being lost due > to capsize and whether we can design them to be more capsize proof. > > it seems that some boats loose them and others keep them, what are > the factors? > > pitchpoling seems to place the highest stress on the masts and as far > as ive heard only two boats have survived a pitchpole and kept their > masts, Standefjord A Colin archer redinskote, with a stout pole > masted Gaff rig (she lost her Poorly stayed Mizzen) and the unstayed > carbon fibre masts on Lady Peperal in an early BOC (loosened her keel > however). > > Some of my thoughts, Spreaders seem a weak point, They are not > designed for the odd side loadings of a mast moving through the water > at high speeds with slack rigging, swinging spreader bases and > discontinous rigging might help, Or no spreaders? Ie Gaff > > I wonder if the loads on the boom in a rollover can take out a mast > at gooseneck height? Would Deck struts like the B&R rig help? > > Obvously a roller reefing HS will add considerably to the load. And > the Taller the mast the higher the Mast top speed will be. > > Mast flex Might absorb shock loadings but cause loss of coloum (Mind > you the side loadings will garantee this anyway). > > On the gaff rig does the increased panel length of the mast > compensate against the lower mast hight and lack of speaders? > > Which storm Tactic is more likely to result in keeping a mast in the > boat? > > By the way had a good Trip across the tasman, 11 days to eden from > nelson, no dammage to the boat and only 2 days Of Gale force > Headwinds. > > Have a question about heaving to on a sloop? How do you keep her > head up, The S&S Lay with a 3 reefed main At 55-85 degrees and cronic > lee helm, Not the safest position, would rather have been around 45 > degrees, Setting the storn jib On the inner forestay only made things > worse. A try sail would have had a CE futher aft. She had a big > furler that may have hurt in this case. > > Cheers > > Ben > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > | 3631|3628|2004-05-10 09:01:53|bubblede|Re: mast loses due to capsize|For the 360, I think it was Moitessier with his phone-poles on Josua, who swore on spreaders that would be able to move or turn relative to the mast. I always felt that that would add another element of uncertainty to a rig that tries to survive in violent and chaotic conditions in a high-desity fluid. I think that the solution is probably more in a combination of controlled elasticity, reduced resistance to movement through the water with smaller diameters for mast and rigging and increased strength - meaning expensive, high tech and composite unfortunately. I might be interesting to see comparisons of modern composite racing rigs for these conditions, all masses rigs calculations equal, with a wooden mast/galvanised and an alloy extrusion with SS rigging. That would of course not take into account the life span of each...and I would not be able to pay for it anyway ;-) A friend sailed a 10 m wooden boat with alloy mast into heavy groundswell north of the Isle de Re, and was broached, knocked down and then pushed down the wave with the mast first, full sails up and all the rig in the water. The mast was down when he rightened the boat, trailing alongside. They recovered it and got towed to harbour by a motor launch. What was interesting was that we found dozens of small pieces of the mast on the deck, most of them about the size of a small coin. It was as if the bottom part had simply crumbled away...but these pieces had irregular edges, like shrapnell from an explosion, and most of them were turned inside-out, the anodized side was now on the _inside_ of the curve. Our explanation was that this was done by the compression during the slide down the wave. Maybe helped by the fact that it was a wooden boat, and he had been playing around with lots of different tensions on the rig, from all slack to tightend up so much that he sprang the seams under the shrouds, and altogether over the years the mast may have had more than his share of fatigue. What happenes to a rig - and to the topsides, hatches, pilothouses etc - on a hull that is pitchpoling fast with any sort of speed and dynamic energy is anyones guess, I do not believe that it is possible to calculate a mast for that, just count on your luck. I simply hope I will never go though that. Gerd| 3632|3612|2004-05-10 09:05:53|Courtney Thomas|Re: Steel versus alloy, file upload|Is there any empirical/theoretical numerical basis, i.e. formula, ratio, etc., that relates proper mast dimensions, e.g. CG, weight, etc., to "other" boat dimensions, e.g. displacement, ballast, etc. ? This query comes from the fact that my boat originally came with a sitka spruce mast specified by a reputable naval architect but was subsequently replaced with an aluminum one by an unknown party. Hence I am uncertain as to it's appropriateness, safety, etc...... Appreciatively, Courtney Thomas ge@... wrote: > The statement "...to a point" can be read in two ways: > > 1. Any boat can be made safer by adding weight to the mast, as long as the amount added is small . > 2. Some boats can be made safer by adding weight to the mast, as long as the resulting mast weight is less than some unspecified point. > > For those that read it as #1, this could lead them into mishap, because recursion proves that #1 cannot be true. Some boats have heavy masts, and adding weight to the mast on those boats makes them more prone to knockdown. > > Greg Elliott > http://www.origamimagic.com > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: bubblede > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Sunday, May 09, 2004 10:36 AM > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Steel versus alloy, file upload > > > Greg, Brent wrote: "...to a point", meaning proof by recursing is > unfair. > > As for the fastnet, this is just as anecdotic - albeit on a much > larger and much better documented scale - as your own reference to > LB keeping the mast dry in "horrific" conditions. Some very light > and modern as well as some very "classic" boats survived and came > out unscathed. If my recollection is right, hatches were a much > bigger general problem than the _weight_ of the masts. > > There are - thanks God - by now very few boats that have a > fundamentally flawed design from about 30 feet up. In the end I > guess it's 4 parts mathematics and one part common sense and your > own feeling about what is right. > > Gerd > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "easysoftware98" > wrote: > > I can't see how the fastnet results can be correct. > > > > Take any boat, and make the mast a little heavier. This boat > would > > have less chance of a knockdown. > > > > Make this modified boat your starting point, as though it was a > > second boat, and again make the mast a little heavier. This boat > > also would have less chance of a knockdown. > > > > Continue this process often enough and the boat will be stable, > mast > > down, keel up. > > > > Making the mast heavier could only have made a certain class of > boats > > more stable, with (likely) very light masts and rigs as typical of > > race boats, and thus cannot be applied as a general observation. > > > > I believe the point was already made on this site previously, that > > the fastnet findings were later shown to be wrong. > > > > I believe the failure in the pilot house was a steel boat. A > window > > failed. The posting was about a year ago on this site as I recall. > > > > Greg Elliott > > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > > note: Proof by recursion as demonstrated here, is a valid > technique, > > and is commonly used in math and logic to determine if statements > are > > true of false. > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" > > wrote: > > > According to the fastnet experience and tank tests , the heavier > > the > > > mast to a point, the less the chance of a knockdown. The inertia > of > > > the mast slows the roll to the point that the wave passes before > > the > > > roll of the boat accelerates enough to be knocked down. Boats > > without > > > a mast roll over much more easily. > > > I once read of a 60's Sparkman and Stephens sloop which was > > rolled > > > over in the Atlantic.When she righted herself, a great gush of > > water > > > lifted her floorboards, causing a bit of a pannick in the crew > who > > > thought they were holed. After they had pumped the biges dry , > > they > > > stayed that way. It turned out that the keel stepped hollow > > aluminium > > > mast had filed up with water , and drained out thru the bottom . > > > I've heard of other boats being rolled thru 360 degrees > without > > > losing the rig, so , with a marginal increase in strength it is > > > possible to keep the rig in thru a rollover. > > > The shape of deck structures has a major efect on a boats > > ultimate > > > stability. The volume of air in a wheelhouse adds tremendously > to a > > > boats ultimate stability and as long as the wheelhouse is > properly > > > built of metal, it's extremely unlikely to be stove in. Stove in > > > cabinsides and wheelhouses are problems of the days of building > > them > > > out of fibreglass and dead vegitation. > > > Brent Swain > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > > > > Most accounts of monohull capsize/pitchpoling that I have > heard > > of > > > were accompanied with dismasting. The density of water almost > > > guarantees it. An offshore boat should be self-righting without > a > > > mast. The alloy mast on the Lazy Bones has positive floatation, > > and > > > it is not sealed, but I would never count it in a capsize. Hull > > > shape and ballast has everything to do with making a boat self- > > > righting, and it is guaranteed. What looks good in a center- > > boarder > > > is very different when applied to a keel boat. > > > > > > > > Better to build a boat to avoid capsize/knock-down to start > > with. > > > In all our miles offshore, in some really horrific conditions, > the > > > Lazy Bones has never come close to putting the mast in the > water. > > > Yet, in the past on this site there have been accounts of boats > > being > > > knocked-down, pilots houses stove-in, in what from our > experiences > > is > > > very tame conditions. > > > > > > > > If boats are being knocked-down, there is a more fundamental > > > problem than can be solved by installing a sealed mast. I would > > > never take any boat offshore that has suffered a knockdown, > until I > > > was very sure of the cause. > > > > > > > > Greg Elliott > > > > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ADVERTISEMENT > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Yahoo! Groups Links > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > -- s/v Mutiny Rhodes Bounty II lying Oriental, NC WDB5619| 3633|3600|2004-05-10 10:30:53|Michael Casling|Re: Accountants, etc.|Usually when a person goes to a lawyer it is not the lawyer that has committed a crime. The accountant is not the one that did not keep track of the income and expenses and it was not the financial planner who was not putting $$ aside on a monthly basis. I think all of these folks would give you advice similar to what is said on this board. Caution and care will get you there if you have a sensible plan. It is too easy to pick on another profession if we do not understand it.Michael Casling ----- Original Message ----- From: ge@... To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, May 09, 2004 8:05 PM Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: Accountants, etc. The problem that most accountants (and other professionals) face is that contrary to what common sense might tell us, the future is poorly predicted by the past. While this is well understood mathematically, customer demand ensures that there is no end of work for fortune tellers, whether they rely on crystal balls, the zodiac, financial reports, or stock tickers. We expect financial planners to be able to tell us where to put our money, but anyone that really knew the answer to that questions would not need to work as a financial planner. Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com I recently finished one job last year and the person expected me to be either clairvoyant or divinely perfect. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3634|3600|2004-05-10 11:51:14|jumpaltair|Re: Accountants, etc.|I believe that you are very incorrect. The problem that most accountants face today is that the client wants us to go back in time and fix something that they did, whereas they could have come to us before doing the transaction, which would have saved time and money. Perhaps you can go and cut out a piece of aluminum and change the design after you've completed some work, but I cannot go back in time and change how or when someone paid for something. Peter --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > The problem that most accountants (and other professionals) face is that contrary to what common sense might tell us, the future is poorly predicted by the past. While this is well understood mathematically, customer demand ensures that there is no end of work for fortune tellers, whether they rely on crystal balls, the zodiac, financial reports, or stock tickers. We expect financial planners to be able to tell us where to put our money, but anyone that really knew the answer to that questions would not need to work as a financial planner. > > Greg Elliott > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > | 3635|3635|2004-05-10 15:40:32|bubblede|Global Weather & long-term plans|I just came across a nifty litle program: Digiwave's Visual Passage Planning, demo at http://www.digwave.com It is not a charting software, but contains all the pilot charts, optimizes routes and passages, interface GPS and so on. Lots of fun to play with ;-) That reminded me of a question that I wanted to ask you for some time already: Given that very few people by now seem to think that global warming is just an invention of some nutty environmentalists - that took some time - what does that mean for YOU with regards to medium to long term cruising plans? Are we not among the first to notice and suffer from irregular weather-patterns in our little boats? We may build our boats to get away from a lot of things that civilization produces, but certainly not from the weather... What does it mean to our preferred cruising areas? Do you think that freak conditions will occur more frequently in all areas? If the sea level rises ever so slightly - which it seems to do - what does that mean to the pacific atolls for example? For other low coastal areas you might want to visit in 10 years or so? Did you hear about the theory that cold water from the north might divert or even stop the atlantik gulf-stream within our life- and sailing time? What are estimates & predictions on your side of the globe? What does all that mean to you personally? Gerd http://www.justmueller.com/boats/| 3636|3635|2004-05-10 16:14:02|Dave|Re: Global Weather & long-term plans|> Did you hear about the theory that cold water from the north might > divert or even stop the atlantik gulf-stream within our life- > Gerd > http://www.justmueller.com/boats/ This is an interesting subject. I have heard about studies conducted that say the amount of salt in the oceans is declining rather dramatically due to global warming and the resultant melting of glaciers which dilutes the salt water, and its the salt content that actually drives the convection that moves the warm waters north and cool waters south. Without these currents the waters of the north (and south in the southern hemisphere) cool off (we are not at that stage yet) which is what is thought to produce an ice age. Wouldn't it be ironic that what we think of as global warming would be a prelude to the dawn of an ice age! I think if memory serves that the ice ages last much longer time wise then the times between and thus is a more normal condition on the earth.. I guess this isn't really a subject for steel boats as no one alive today will ever live long enough to see the next ice age..| 3637|3635|2004-05-10 16:58:48|kendall|Re: Global Weather & long-term plans|--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "bubblede" wrote: > I just came across a nifty litle program: Digiwave's Visual Passage > Planning, demo at http://www.digwave.com > It is not a charting software, but contains all the pilot charts, > optimizes routes and passages, interface GPS and so on. Lots of fun > to play with ;-) > > That reminded me of a question that I wanted to ask you for some > time already: > > Given that very few people by now seem to think that global warming > is just an invention of some nutty environmentalists - that took > some time - what does that mean for YOU with regards to medium to > long term cruising plans? Are we not among the first to notice and > suffer from irregular weather-patterns in our little boats? > > We may build our boats to get away from a lot of things that > civilization produces, but certainly not from the weather... > > What does it mean to our preferred cruising areas? > Do you think that freak conditions will occur more frequently in all > areas? > If the sea level rises ever so slightly - which it seems to do - > what does that mean to the pacific atolls for example? For other low > coastal areas you might want to visit in 10 years or so? > Did you hear about the theory that cold water from the north might > divert or even stop the atlantik gulf-stream within our life- and > sailing time? > What are estimates & predictions on your side of the globe? > What does all that mean to you personally? > > Gerd > http://www.justmueller.com/boats/ I agree that the weather is turning warmer, I disagree that the pollution alone is at fault,simply because too many aspects of history argue for a 'warmer' cycle every thousand or more years, fact: viking history (along with many other histories) tells of living and farming on many islands, and other lands for very long times that are too cold now to grow more than thin grasses, almost too cold to even live on now, many other aspects of history argue for the same point. also a fact, one volcano,on average spews forth more pollution in single eruption than mankind has produced over the entire industrial age. there are quite a few pages on the web that argue both sides of the issue, many of the environmentalist sites, argue that everything from hving the water heater too high, driving too much, to flatulance are the sole reason, no mention of any past histories, or of any recorded warm cycles, the iindustrialist sites, bring up all the natural sources, factor in pretty much all the sources. personally, I remember reading in grade school that the earth went through cycles of cold and warm, major ice ages every 10-12000 years, with milder warm/cold cycles dispersed between, Not to mention great grandpa's 'in my day' stories. funniest thing I ever saw was at an environmentalist meating,where they were argueing about 'save the trees' thier arguement was that we have plenty of alternatives, concrete, brick, steel, vynal, and other materials, for building homes, and therefore didn't need wood as a building material. Right after they finished that speach, they started into a discussion of cutting down on the use of steel, brick, and concrete due to the damage caused by mining the materials, and that we should use renewable resources like WOOD. advocating the use of treated lumber for basement construction, and a few other uses. this was the same person speaking, all in the same 20 minutes time. I started laughing and was asked to leave since I obviously didn't take the matter seriously enough. also, why do environmentalists, push for limits on 'degrading' pollutants, but have no limits, and actually PUSH for laws that will add to the global warming, catalytic converters, are used to turn gasses that would otherwise break down into harmless components, and churn out co2 by the tons, which is one of the main targets regarding industry? back on subject though, I don't realy see a great deal of difference, other than a possible ability to winter farther north, and a longer cruising season in the areas that are no shut down for winter. I can see some areas that are now inaccessable becoming nice harbors, and a few that are going to become isolated because of shallow beaches becoming flooded and making it neccessary to anchor out too far, actual weather patterns would be difficult to predict because all we have to go by is the present basically, we have no data on different temperature extremes. The estimated rise is not that great, areas like new york, SF and la will be almost unaffected, may make getting over the bars a bit easier with some slight changes here and there nothing more, some shallow areas will be nice anchorages, but as for weather, my opinion is that most weather comes about from temperature extremes, so overall I see the weather as being pretty much the same, I believe that the cold water to the north is what contributes to the gulf stream as it is,I don't see it stopping, the temperature difference will still be there, just moved slightly higher on the scale. no expert, but have done some digging into it, especially after reading an article stating that there have been NO recorded temperature changes in history, and that for all time the global temps have been stable. it brought to mind a few questions like: what about the histories of a huge number of tribes that tell of thier people moving south because it was becoming too cold to farm in the old lands, or exploring north because it was becoming warmer there? and somewhat recent (geologically speaking) buriel sites in warm areas where the people are dressed in cold weather gear? ken.| 3638|3600|2004-05-10 17:01:46|audeojude|Re: Accountants, etc.|Lawyers and accountants what a interesting subject :) I have both as clients and they mostly seem like people just like you and me. There are ethical ones and unethical ones. I find that the ethical ones tend to be poorer though. Don't misunderstand me though even the ones i would classify as unethical still to the best of my knowledge operate within the bounds of the law. We get so angry at them when they are but a symptom of the problem. The problem is a system that we perpetuate as members of our society in which we have allowed ourselves to be taxed by our governments in such a way (I'm not against all taxes. just some types and methods of taxation.) that it costs us incredible amounts of time and resources just to pay the taxes much less the amount paid. In the US if we did away with income tax and went to a flat sale tax on the purchase of goods at a state level it would simplify the system tremendously. States then submit a portion to the federal government for the functions it provides for the nation as a whole. 99% of the federal bureaucracy would go away as involved with collection of and tracking of taxes. The federal government would now only need to deal with the 52 states as apposed to the entire member population. The need for accountants at a personal level would go away, a need that is driven by federal and state laws. Sadly in my personal experience i have not gotten much or good preemptive advice from my accountant and he is one of the areas most recommended accountants. But how do I try to navigate the profusion of laws and requirements for reporting what and how i am making money on a business and personal level without his help. I could do it but then I have to spend many hours learning a field and profession that is not what I do and that changes every year. So I pay a fee that is a percentage of my annual earnings (which aren't much to start with) to an accountant to help me wade thru this minefield. I admit that lawyers make my blood pressure boil higher even though I have several friends that are lawyers. They are both symptoms of and problems of the system. I don't really have much in the way of positive fixes for this situation though. However I am deeply bitter over a system that because of my relative lack of wealth it is hard from me to find justice in civil affairs. ( I have no experience of the criminal side where you are assigned a lawyer courtesy of the state) I have had experience in two civil cases that have been settled by the parties involved out of court because they could not afford to defend themselves even when clearly innocent. It was cheaper to settle than to defend. Only the wealthy have the means to defend themselves in our society and even they often don't as it is again cheaper to settle a nuisance lawsuit than to pay the lawyers their really obscenely high fees to navigate you thru a legal system that is seemingly designed to provide a forum for obfuscation and slowness in the interests of dragging out legal matters to the benefit of the lawyers fees and no one else. Again I can attest second hand in two divorces where the lawyers in both cases drug stuff out deliberately to maximize their fees and in one case known to (though not provable) consult with their opposing counsel to keep it going. The second case was one in which there were no claims they just wanted to get documents signed to get divorced. 2500 dollars for a totally uncontested divorce. the entirety of the lawyers effort was about 5 pages of a standard form they filled out and filed and two meetings with the clients. One to start it and the other in front of the judge for 10 min. This is the stuff our bitterness is made of. But be angry at the problem not the symptoms. Our neglect and lack of care for the system we live under collectively is what has allowed this to come to pass. I mourn many of the ideals our country was founded under and dread the direction it is heading. (even so it is still at this moment better than many of the nations on earth of which I have visited many and know people from many more. even now there is more opportunity and freedom here than in many places. I just fear that that opportunity and freedom is slowly or not so slowly fading away) sigh, this whole topic is definitely off topic and I apologize for my rant even though I am sending it. Beyond my love of sailing and desire to go and see beyond the horizon is also a desire to escape what this rant is about. So it is another fundamental motive to do the escape from as much of the demands of our modern society as possible. Maybe I will succeed by combining my love of the water with escape from many (though I know not all) of these problems. So here I lurhq on the origamiboats group and many others groups looking for ways to opt out and go sailing. Audeojude -- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "jumpaltair" wrote: > I believe that you are very incorrect. The problem that most > accountants face today is that the client wants us to go back in > time and fix something that they did, whereas they could have come > to us before doing the transaction, which would have saved time and > money. > > Perhaps you can go and cut out a piece of aluminum and change the > design after you've completed some work, but I cannot go back in > time and change how or when someone paid for something. > > Peter > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > > The problem that most accountants (and other professionals) face > is that contrary to what common sense might tell us, the future is > poorly predicted by the past. While this is well understood > mathematically, customer demand ensures that there is no end of work > for fortune tellers, whether they rely on crystal balls, the zodiac, > financial reports, or stock tickers. We expect financial planners > to be able to tell us where to put our money, but anyone that really > knew the answer to that questions would not need to work as a > financial planner. > > > > Greg Elliott > > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > > > > | 3639|3639|2004-05-10 17:02:47|noqualms29|need info|have a few questions. 1. leads on the best suppliers of marine alum in or around florida? 2. anyone know of designers of origami sailboats other than swain and origami magic? not to discount their designs but i´m looking for something 28'/ 9.5'/4.5'. thanks| 3640|22|2004-05-10 17:02:49|origamiboats@yahoogroups.com|New file uploaded to origamiboats |Hello, This email message is a notification to let you know that a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the origamiboats group. File : /Interiorplan.JPG Uploaded by : jalborey Description : Draft of a 13 m Interior Plan You can access this file at the URL http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/files/Interiorplan.JPG To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/files Regards, jalborey | 3641|22|2004-05-10 17:12:37|jalborey|Re: Interior plan|Hi all Gerald, Ted & Steven, thanks for your interest. I've uploaded another file, http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/files/Interiorplan.JPG which I hope will be accessed without problems. Ted, the point about the vision looking aft is a good one and the problem troubles us, but we haven't been able yet to come up with a solution. I think it isn't easy to get a good vision aft from the inside of a pilot salon. Any ideas? Thans again, Jesús| 3642|22|2004-05-10 17:14:11|jalborey|Re: Interior plan|Hi all Gerald, Ted & Steven, thanks for your interest. I've uploaded another file, http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/files/Interiorplan.JPG which I hope will be accessed without problems. Ted, the point about the vision looking aft is a good one and the problem troubles us, but we haven't been able yet to come up with a solution. I think it isn't easy to get a good vision aft from the inside of a pilot salon. Any ideas? Thans again, Jesús| 3643|3635|2004-05-10 17:24:06|Gary|Re: Global Weather & long-term plans|David Suzuki said on a radio talk-show yesterday that he just came from a meeting of east coast US and Canadian officials about climate change concerns. Coastal constituents are worried about flooding and therefore erosion of their properties due to global warming. Suzuki said that cold winters in Europe were unlikely but that warming is for real. Climate change is actually heating ocean waters causing the water to expand which is responsible for flooding. They do predict the loss of South Seas atolls. In addition perma frost is melting off in chunks from river banks in the arctic - more evidence of warming temps. The heating process may accelerate. Imagine an ice cube on your counter. It appears not to melt for a while. When it does start the melting is rapid. How to back off from excessive consumption particularly as the 3rd world industrializes and wants western lifestyle...makes you wonder. To answer your question about the effect is something I have often thought about as I am about ready to cut the lines. Regards... Gary --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "bubblede" wrote: > I just came across a nifty litle program: Digiwave's Visual Passage > Planning, demo at http://www.digwave.com > It is not a charting software, but contains all the pilot charts, > optimizes routes and passages, interface GPS and so on. Lots of fun > to play with ;-) > > That reminded me of a question that I wanted to ask you for some > time already: > > Given that very few people by now seem to thinkhat global warming > is just an invention of some nutty environmentalists - that took > some time - what does that mean for YOU with regards to medium to > long term cruising plans? Are we not among the first to notice and > suffer from irregular weather-patterns in our little boats? > > We may build our boats to get away from a lot of things that > civilization produces, but certainly not from the weather... > > What does it mean to our preferred cruising areas? > Do you think that freak conditions will occur more frequently in all > areas? > If the sea level rises ever so slightly - which it seems to do - > what does that mean to the pacific atolls for example? For other low > coastal areas you might want to visit in 10 years or so? > Did you hear about the theory that cold water from the north might > divert or even stop the atlantik gulf-stream within our life- and > sailing time? > What are estimates & predictions on your side of the globe? > What does all that mean to you personally? > > Gerd > http://www.justmueller.com/boats/ | 3644|3612|2004-05-10 19:49:32|nelstomlinson|Re: Steel versus alloy, file upload|Greg, I've recently read Marchaj's ``Seaworthiness, the Forgotten Factor''. He expounds on this at great length in there, so it must have been a while since you've read it. The idea is that the heavier mast makes for a greater moment of inertia, thus the big seas can't accelerate the boat sufficiently to get it over before they've moved on. Once your roll moment of inertia is enough that a single big sea can't roll you, there is nothing more to be gained by increasing it (and nothing to lose!). I think that provides a natural stopping point to your ``recursion'' (it looks more like mathematical induction to me). Marchaj says that his tank tests and anecdotal evidence from Fastnet confirm the theory. Sailboats which were dismasted were rolled repeatedly afterwards. In the tank, a model which could not be rolled by a single sea was rolled repeatedly by the same sea after the mast was removed. As you've pointed out many times, an extra pound aloft could require an extra 10 pounds of ballast[1], to maintain the same static stability. Marchaj's book points out that static stability is not the only thing to consider. You need to have both static _and_ dynamic stability, and it can make sense to give up a bit of the one to get some of the other, if you're short on it. As for the Fastnet findings being ``proven wrong'', I hadn't heard anything like that. I've certainly seen quite a few assertions to that effect, but never seen anything that really stood up to close scrutiny. I've seen folks say that the design problems have been fixed by new materials, new hull shapes, and so on, but I've never seen anyone demonstrate that the investigation was all hooey and the boats simply had too much weight aloft, or too much dynamic stability. As an aside, the most seaworthy boat is the one you can't afford: it will never capsize, never sink, never break down, never go to sea, because you can't afford it. [1] The other possibility, of course, is to get the ballast deeper. Either way, you're increasing the roll moment of inertia, and perhaps losing carrying capacity. That could be a really good tradeoff, for some uses. Nels --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "easysoftware98" wrote: > I can't see how the fastnet results can be correct. > > Take any boat, and make the mast a little heavier. This boat would > have less chance of a knockdown. > > Make this modified boat your starting point, as though it was a > second boat, and again make the mast a little heavier. This boat > also would have less chance of a knockdown. > > Continue this process often enough and the boat will be stable, mast > down, keel up. > > Making the mast heavier could only have made a certain class of boats > more stable, with (likely) very light masts and rigs as typical of > race boats, and thus cannot be applied as a general observation. > > I believe the point was already made on this site previously, that > the fastnet findings were later shown to be wrong. > > I believe the failure in the pilot house was a steel boat. A window > failed. The posting was about a year ago on this site as I recall. > > Greg Elliott > http://www.origamimagic.com > > note: Proof by recursion as demonstrated here, is a valid technique, > and is commonly used in math and logic to determine if statements are > true of false. > | 3645|22|2004-05-10 22:29:48|Gerald Niffenegger|Re: Interior plan|If I am a guest on the boat and we are on a day trip. I need to use a bathroom. Which bedroom do I pass thru to use a bathroom? Gerald --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "jalborey" wrote: > Hi all > > Gerald, Ted & Steven, thanks for your interest. I've uploaded another > file, > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/files/Interiorplan.JPG > > which I hope will be accessed without problems. > Ted, the point about the vision looking aft is a good one and the > problem troubles us, but we haven't been able yet to come up with a > solution. I think it isn't easy to get a good vision aft from the > inside of a pilot salon. Any ideas? > Thans again, > Jesús | 3646|3646|2004-05-11 05:28:03|cutesail2000|Sell your boat & buy your boat!!|Go!Go!Go! Have your own boating day! There. Sure,you also can find a new owner for your boat there. http://www.geocities.com/sailyourboat/| 3647|22|2004-05-11 09:48:19|Dennis H. Rutledal|Re: Interior plan|Hi It should not be a problem to make the forward bathrom accessible from the corridor as well as from the bedroom. As far as I can see there should be enough width between the forward wall and the sink. Dennis (weee! My first post!) -----Opprinnelig melding----- Fra: Gerald Niffenegger [mailto:niffeneggerniff@...] Sendt: 11. mai 2004 04:30 Til: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Emne: [origamiboats] Re: Interior plan If I am a guest on the boat and we are on a day trip. I need to use a bathroom. Which bedroom do I pass thru to use a bathroom? Gerald --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "jalborey" wrote: > Hi all > > Gerald, Ted & Steven, thanks for your interest. I've uploaded another > file, > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/files/Interiorplan.JPG > > which I hope will be accessed without problems. > Ted, the point about the vision looking aft is a good one and the > problem troubles us, but we haven't been able yet to come up with a > solution. I think it isn't easy to get a good vision aft from the > inside of a pilot salon. Any ideas? > Thans again, > Jesús To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT click here _____ Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service . [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3648|22|2004-05-11 11:17:50|Steven Schofield|Re: Interior plan|Low tech solution - mirrors High tech solution - web cam >From: "jalborey" >Reply-To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com >To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com >Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Interior plan >Date: Mon, 10 May 2004 21:13:05 -0000 >MIME-Version: 1.0 >X-Originating-IP: 217.11.118.4 >X-Sender: jalborey@... >Received: from n46.grp.scd.yahoo.com ([66.218.67.23]) by >mc5-f36.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6824); Mon, 10 May 2004 >19:41:55 -0700 >Received: from [66.218.66.29] by n46.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 10 May >2004 21:16:51 -0000 >Received: (qmail 41486 invoked from network); 10 May 2004 21:14:11 -0000 >Received: from unknown (66.218.66.166) by m23.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; >10 May 2004 21:14:11 -0000 >Received: from unknown (HELO n16.grp.scd.yahoo.com) (66.218.66.71) by >mta5.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 10 May 2004 21:14:10 -0000 >Received: from [66.218.66.116] by n16.grp.scd.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 10 May >2004 21:13:06 -0000 >X-Message-Info: JGTYoYF78jH3DPOgDBvk6zJrMIXyGNFY >X-eGroups-Return: >sentto-1579488-3643-1084223652-cpt6pk=hotmail.com@... >X-Apparently-To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com >Message-ID: >In-Reply-To: >User-Agent: eGroups-EW/0.82 >X-Mailer: Yahoo Groups Message Poster >X-eGroups-Remote-IP: 66.218.66.71 >X-Yahoo-Profile: jalborey >Mailing-List: list origamiboats@yahoogroups.com; contact >origamiboats-owner@yahoogroups.com >Delivered-To: mailing list origamiboats@yahoogroups.com >Precedence: bulk >List-Unsubscribe: >Return-Path: >sentto-1579488-3643-1084223652-cpt6pk=hotmail.com@... >X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 May 2004 02:41:56.0311 (UTC) >FILETIME=[866EA670:01C43701] > >Hi all > >Gerald, Ted & Steven, thanks for your interest. I've uploaded another >file, > >http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/files/Interiorplan.JPG > >which I hope will be accessed without problems. >Ted, the point about the vision looking aft is a good one and the >problem troubles us, but we haven't been able yet to come up with a >solution. I think it isn't easy to get a good vision aft from the >inside of a pilot salon. Any ideas? >Thans again, >Jes�s > > _________________________________________________________________ MSN Premium: Up to 11 personalized e-mail addresses and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines| 3649|22|2004-05-11 11:34:49|Gerald Niffenegger|Re: Interior plan|Seems that the front bathroom could be entered from the corridor with only one entrance. The night crew could use the bathroom and it ain't far for the persons in the front bedroom. In the bow of the boat is the sail (vela) locker, Throw a wet balloon down the front hatch and by current plan you throw it on top of the bed. The beds could be moved to the sides. You would then have access to the sail locker, would not be throwing wet items on top of the bed, and guests wouldn't need to sleep with each other in the same bed. Gerald --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "jalborey" wrote: > Hi all > > Gerald, Ted & Steven, thanks for your interest. I've uploaded another > file, > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/files/Interiorplan.JPG > > which I hope will be accessed without problems. > Ted, the point about the vision looking aft is a good one and the > problem troubles us, but we haven't been able yet to come up with a > solution. I think it isn't easy to get a good vision aft from the > inside of a pilot salon. Any ideas? > Thans again, > Jesús | 3650|3635|2004-05-11 14:07:17|bubblede|Re: Global Weather & long-term plans|here's what I think it means for me: My main cruising project will be starting in about five tos even years when I will hopefully stop working, and then I hope I will be able to move around for about ten years. Nothing extreme, but maybe some more unusual routes, I like northern countries, would like to cross the atlantic and go up the st laurent, then maybe down, chile also is one of my dream and of course the pacific... after that, if I get that far, I don't really know. Anyway, I always take a lot of time to stay and usually get stuck somwhere for years. I believe that the first nasty effects of global warming will come, its not a question of IF but WHEN, and from what I have read over the last couple of years, this may well become noticable and disturbing during this period. - That global warming and higher sea levels will means better weather and new harbours further inland seems a bit optimistic to put it midly.. ;-) - Western Europe enjoys quite a moderate climate due to the gulf stream, and it looks as if there is a high probability for the gulfstream being disturbed, deflected, temporarily or permanently interrupted. This could result in considably colder weather in this area. There is a lot of talk about a european new "ice age", and estimates in most articles I have read go from 5 to 70 years to get it started. - Ice caps and glaciers ARE melting, there is a lot of photographic evidence of that for example in the alps on old postcards and so on. - Sea levels ARE rising, have not got the mumbers, but have seen them often quoted. - Global temparature averages ARE rising, I think I have seen something like 1 over the last 100 years. Seems like nothing, but its going up, and remember the butterfly effect... - there seems to be more and more "freak" phenomena. for example, in the last 5 years there have been a number of smaller tornados reported in in-land Germany, which was completely unheard of. Of course these freak reports have to be taken very carefully, because a) modern communication & press report more things than in the old days, and this gives a biased impression when comparing with the past, and b) there would need to be a very sinificant rise over a relatively long time before you could deduct a tendancy with any soft of scientific prrof - although, by the time you collect enough evidence to convince the sceptics It's going to be to late. - Lack of water in many areas, rising sea levels, and irregular developments everywhere and so on should create quite a lot of political and social changes. - finally, I cant see any large scale approach anywhere that is going to curve this development, not politically not technically. So even if I am not really a doomsday prophet or a pessimist by nature, I believe that cruising projects situated in a timespan of 10 to 20 years from now _could_ be quite different from what we are used to today. I'll go anyway, but I have serious doubts if my kids will be able to do the same in 50 years. Gerd| 3651|3612|2004-05-11 14:32:43|ge@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: Steel versus alloy, file upload|The question looks to me like one of apples and oranges. Taking data from boats with high ballast ratios, low inertia hulls, and light rigs, and then assuming that what works for those boats will also work for boats that more typically have low ballast ratios, high inertia hulls, and heavy rigs. Steel boats have fantastic inertia as compared to most other materials, and often have poor ballast ratios. Adding weight aloft in those boats, without regard for adequate ballasting, can result in loss. Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com Once your roll moment of inertia is enough that a single big sea can't roll you, there is nothing more to be gained by increasing it (and nothing to lose!). [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3652|3639|2004-05-11 15:11:50|brentswain38|Re: need info|Graeme Shannon has some origami designs in aluminium, but as far as I know they are all huge. He may have smaller ones. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "noqualms29" wrote: > have a few questions. > > 1. leads on the best suppliers of marine alum in or around florida? > > 2. anyone know of designers of origami sailboats other than swain > and origami magic? not to discount their designs but i´m looking for > something 28'/ 9.5'/4.5'. > > thanks | 3653|3600|2004-05-11 15:17:55|brentswain38|Re: Accountants, etc.|Read the book " Dances with Lawyers " by Nicholas Carroll, and learn to do your own legal research.Lawyers are the final bulwark against erosion of civil rights. There is a contradiction between calling for a flat tax , which would have the filthy rich paying a much tinier oportion of their income in taxes and the poor paying a much larger portion of their total income in taxes, and complaining about the gap between rich and poor. The ratio of good folks to assholes is relatively constant accross all professions, nationalities races, etc., etc. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "audeojude" wrote: > Lawyers and accountants what a interesting subject :) > > I have both as clients and they mostly seem like people just like you > and me. There are ethical ones and unethical ones. I find that the > ethical ones tend to be poorer though. Don't misunderstand me though > even the ones i would classify as unethical still to the best of my > knowledge operate within the bounds of the law. > > We get so angry at them when they are but a symptom of the problem. > The problem is a system that we perpetuate as members of our society > in which we have allowed ourselves to be taxed by our governments in > such a way (I'm not against all taxes. just some types and methods of > taxation.) that it costs us incredible amounts of time and resources > just to pay the taxes much less the amount paid. In the US if we did > away with income tax and went to a flat sale tax on the purchase of > goods at a state level it would simplify the system tremendously. > States then submit a portion to the federal government for the > functions it provides for the nation as a whole. 99% of the federal > bureaucracy would go away as involved with collection of and tracking > of taxes. The federal government would now only need to deal with the > 52 states as apposed to the entire member population. The need for > accountants at a personal level would go away, a need that is driven > by federal and state laws. Sadly in my personal experience i have not > gotten much or good preemptive advice from my accountant and he is one > of the areas most recommended accountants. But how do I try to > navigate the profusion of laws and requirements for reporting what and > how i am making money on a business and personal level without his > help. I could do it but then I have to spend many hours learning a > field and profession that is not what I do and that changes every > year. So I pay a fee that is a percentage of my annual earnings (which > aren't much to start with) to an accountant to help me wade thru this > minefield. > > I admit that lawyers make my blood pressure boil higher even though I > have several friends that are lawyers. They are both symptoms of and > problems of the system. I don't really have much in the way of > positive fixes for this situation though. However I am deeply bitter > over a system that because of my relative lack of wealth it is hard > from me to find justice in civil affairs. ( I have no experience of > the criminal side where you are assigned a lawyer courtesy of the > state) I have had experience in two civil cases that have been > settled by the parties involved out of court because they could not > afford to defend themselves even when clearly innocent. It was cheaper > to settle than to defend. Only the wealthy have the means to defend > themselves in our society and even they often don't as it is again > cheaper to settle a nuisance lawsuit than to pay the lawyers their > really obscenely high fees to navigate you thru a legal system that is > seemingly designed to provide a forum for obfuscation and slowness in > the interests of dragging out legal matters to the benefit of the > lawyers fees and no one else. Again I can attest second hand in two > divorces where the lawyers in both cases drug stuff out deliberately > to maximize their fees and in one case known to (though not provable) > consult with their opposing counsel to keep it going. The second case > was one in which there were no claims they just wanted to get > documents signed to get divorced. 2500 dollars for a totally > uncontested divorce. the entirety of the lawyers effort was about 5 > pages of a standard form they filled out and filed and two meetings > with the clients. One to start it and the other in front of the judge > for 10 min. > > This is the stuff our bitterness is made of. But be angry at the > problem not the symptoms. Our neglect and lack of care for the system > we live under collectively is what has allowed this to come to pass. > > I mourn many of the ideals our country was founded under and dread the > direction it is heading. (even so it is still at this moment better > than many of the nations on earth of which I have visited many and > know people from many more. even now there is more opportunity and > freedom here than in many places. I just fear that that opportunity > and freedom is slowly or not so slowly fading away) > > sigh, this whole topic is definitely off topic and I apologize for my > rant even though I am sending it. Beyond my love of sailing and desire > to go and see beyond the horizon is also a desire to escape what this > rant is about. So it is another fundamental motive to do the escape > from as much of the demands of our modern society as possible. Maybe I > will succeed by combining my love of the water with escape from many > (though I know not all) of these problems. So here I lurhq on the > origamiboats group and many others groups looking for ways to opt out > and go sailing. > > Audeojude > > -- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "jumpaltair" wrote: > > I believe that you are very incorrect. The problem that most > > accountants face today is that the client wants us to go back in > > time and fix something that they did, whereas they could have come > > to us before doing the transaction, which would have saved time and > > money. > > > > Perhaps you can go and cut out a piece of aluminum and change the > > design after you've completed some work, but I cannot go back in > > time and change how or when someone paid for something. > > > > Peter > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > > > The problem that most accountants (and other professionals) face > > is that contrary to what common sense might tell us, the future is > > poorly predicted by the past. While this is well understood > > mathematically, customer demand ensures that there is no end of work > > for fortune tellers, whether they rely on crystal balls, the zodiac, > > financial reports, or stock tickers. We expect financial planners > > to be able to tell us where to put our money, but anyone that really > > knew the answer to that questions would not need to work as a > > financial planner. > > > > > > Greg Elliott > > > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > > > > > > > | 3654|3635|2004-05-11 15:24:30|brentswain38|Re: Global Weather & long-term plans|In my last four Pacific crossings in the last five years I haven't noticed any wide variations in the weather patterns from the pilot charts, but in 1998 the westerlies , the first in 40 years ,blew over Fanning island all year.It appears that severe el nino events have become more common, but the weather appears to return to normal in non el nino years. I've heard that the 1900's have been the wettest years in the Canadian prairies in the last 10,000 years , so perhaps the recent droughts are simply a return to a normal pattern, the last 100 years having been an aberation. I've heard that the same is true of California. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "bubblede" wrote: > I just came across a nifty litle program: Digiwave's Visual Passage > Planning, demo at http://www.digwave.com > It is not a charting software, but contains all the pilot charts, > optimizes routes and passages, interface GPS and so on. Lots of fun > to play with ;-) > > That reminded me of a question that I wanted to ask you for some > time already: > > Given that very few people by now seem to think that global warming > is just an invention of some nutty environmentalists - that took > some time - what does that mean for YOU with regards to medium to > long term cruising plans? Are we not among the first to notice and > suffer from irregular weather-patterns in our little boats? > > We may build our boats to get away from a lot of things that > civilization produces, but certainly not from the weather... > > What does it mean to our preferred cruising areas? > Do you think that freak conditions will occur more frequently in all > areas? > If the sea level rises ever so slightly - which it seems to do - > what does that mean to the pacific atolls for example? For other low > coastal areas you might want to visit in 10 years or so? > Did you hear about the theory that cold water from the north might > divert or even stop the atlantik gulf-stream within our life- and > sailing time? > What are estimates & predictions on your side of the globe? > What does all that mean to you personally? > > Gerd > http://www.justmueller.com/boats/ | 3655|3635|2004-05-11 15:36:36|brentswain38|Re: Global Weather & long-term plans|Chile is now charging $1500 US for a cruising permit. At Christmas Island, Kiribati, I was told that my Canadian yacht needed US registry and a US coastguard certificate of seaworthines . When I told the immigration lady there that the US is a different country she said " Don't lie to me, leave immediately" When I said ' It's hurricane season" she said " That's your problem". I was then forced to sail another 2,000 miles to Tonga , during hurricane seasonTthere is no greater insult to a travelling Canadian than to be called a yank.She has since kicked many other yachties out during hurricane season for no good reason. Give Kiribati a miss to avoid having to deal with the abysmal ignorance there. Hopefully she will be gone by the time you get there, but such abysmal ignorance has long been a mandatory requirement for the job there. Cruising fees have been increasing a lot lately in some Pacific Island destinations, , but are probably not as high as some places in the atlantic, so far. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "bubblede" wrote: > here's what I think it means for me: > > My main cruising project will be starting in about five tos even > years when I will hopefully stop working, and then I hope I will be > able to move around for about ten years. Nothing extreme, but maybe > some more unusual routes, I like northern countries, would like to > cross the atlantic and go up the st laurent, then maybe down, chile > also is one of my dream and of course the pacific... after that, if > I get that far, I don't really know. Anyway, I always take a lot of > time to stay and usually get stuck somwhere for years. > > I believe that the first nasty effects of global warming will come, > its not a question of IF but WHEN, and from what I have read over > the last couple of years, this may well become noticable and > disturbing during this period. > - That global warming and higher sea levels will means better > weather and new harbours further inland seems a bit optimistic to > put it midly.. ;-) > - Western Europe enjoys quite a moderate climate due to the gulf > stream, and it looks as if there is a high probability for the > gulfstream being disturbed, deflected, temporarily or permanently > interrupted. This could result in considably colder weather in this > area. There is a lot of talk about a european new "ice age", and > estimates in most articles I have read go from 5 to 70 years to get > it started. > - Ice caps and glaciers ARE melting, there is a lot of photographic > evidence of that for example in the alps on old postcards and so on. > - Sea levels ARE rising, have not got the mumbers, but have seen > them often quoted. > - Global temparature averages ARE rising, I think I have seen > something like 1 over the last 100 years. Seems like nothing, but > its going up, and remember the butterfly effect... > - there seems to be more and more "freak" phenomena. for example, in > the last 5 years there have been a number of smaller tornados > reported in in-land Germany, which was completely unheard of. Of > course these freak reports have to be taken very carefully, because > a) modern communication & press report more things than in the old > days, and this gives a biased impression when comparing with the > past, and b) there would need to be a very sinificant rise over a > relatively long time before you could deduct a tendancy with any > soft of scientific prrof - although, by the time you collect enough > evidence to convince the sceptics It's going to be to late. > - Lack of water in many areas, rising sea levels, and irregular > developments everywhere and so on should create quite a lot of > political and social changes. > - finally, I cant see any large scale approach anywhere that is > going to curve this development, not politically not technically. > > So even if I am not really a doomsday prophet or a pessimist by > nature, I believe that cruising projects situated in a timespan of > 10 to 20 years from now _could_ be quite different from what we are > used to today. I'll go anyway, but I have serious doubts if my kids > will be able to do the same in 50 years. > > Gerd | 3656|3612|2004-05-11 15:40:14|brentswain38|Re: Steel versus alloy, file upload|None of my boats have suffered noticably from having steel masts and all have made excellent passage times. All theory aside, the final criteria is how well they do in terms of passage times.They have consistently beat lighter, far more expensive fibreglass boats with light rigs ,of the same size ,on all points of sail.None has ever been rolled over. What else matters? Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > The question looks to me like one of apples and oranges. Taking data from boats with high ballast ratios, low inertia hulls, and light rigs, and then assuming that what works for those boats will also work for boats that more typically have low ballast ratios, high inertia hulls, and heavy rigs. Steel boats have fantastic inertia as compared to most other materials, and often have poor ballast ratios. Adding weight aloft in those boats, without regard for adequate ballasting, can result in loss. > > Greg Elliott > http://www.origamimagic.com > > Once your roll moment of inertia > is enough that a single big sea can't roll you, there is nothing more > to be gained by increasing it (and nothing to lose!). > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3657|3600|2004-05-11 17:56:10|Michael Casling|Re: Accountants, etc.|A bit rugged but probably the most accurate statement on the subject so far. It is so easy to point a finger at the Yankees with all the murders they have, yet look in our own back yard and it is not a pretty sight. All the professions have mostly good guys with a few bad guys. It is unfortunate but is a fact of life. Michael in BC ----- Original Message ----- From: brentswain38 To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2004 12:17 PM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Accountants, etc. The ratio of good folks to assholes is relatively constant accross all professions, nationalities races, etc., etc. Brent Swain [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3658|3612|2004-05-11 19:26:34|nelstomlinson|Re: Steel versus alloy, file upload|Greg, Static stability keeps you upright in calm water, and tries to flip you over in big seas. Dynamic stability as Marchaj seemed to be using the phrase means negative feedback to whatever forces are trying to flip you over, including static stability. Also, I'd like to reinforce (mainly for the bystanders) that I was talking about _roll_ moment of inertia: the moment of inertia _around_ the fore-and-aft axis through the center of gravity. Deep keels with a big lump of lead at the bottom, or tall steel masts will both increase that. Putting a lot of weight close to that fore-and-aft axis (e.g., a steel hull) won't increase that much. I think most of these parameters have a broad acceptable range. For example, any level of cost which doesn't keep you off the water is acceptable, though clearly, less is always better. The level which keeps you off the water is obviously subjective. Trading a few dollars for a lot more seaworthiness or payload makes perfect sense, unless it puts the total cost over that magic ``keeps you off the water'' level. Any level of static stability which is large enough that the boat won't turn turtle in normal seas, and small enough that it isn't painfully stiff, is acceptable. Notice that ``normal seas'' and ``painfully stiff'' are both entirely subjective. Any level of dynamic stability which is sufficient to keep the seas from flipping the boat is acceptable. Obviously, more static stability means a need for more dynamic stability, since a boat which tends to remain perpendicular to the water surface can get to a nasty angle on a big, steep wave. If a steel mast puts a boat on one end of that acceptable range of static stability, and a carbon-fiber-and-magic mast puts it on the other end, then both are acceptable (for static stability)! But, of course, the heavier mast will give more dynamic stability: the boat is less likely to be rotated too far about that fore-and-aft axis by a sudden, steep wave. That was the lesson of Fastnet, and Marchaj's tank tests: despite being more tiddly (less static stability, slower to right in calm water), the boat with the mast up was harder to roll in a steep, breaking sea. The uses and the users of boats are too varied, and the interactions between elements of a design are too complicated, for us to be dogmatic about single design elements like masts. I will certainly accept your advice that steel masts are unsuitable for your designs. I don't think I'd accept the same statement about steel masts for all boats. Nels --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > The question looks to me like one of apples and oranges. Taking data from boats with high ballast ratios, low inertia hulls, and light rigs, and then assuming that what works for those boats will also work for boats that more typically have low ballast ratios, high inertia hulls, and heavy rigs. Steel boats have fantastic inertia as compared to most other materials, and often have poor ballast ratios. Adding weight aloft in those boats, without regard for adequate ballasting, can result in loss. > > Greg Elliott > http://www.origamimagic.com > > Once your roll moment of inertia > is enough that a single big sea can't roll you, there is nothing more > to be gained by increasing it (and nothing to lose!). > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3659|3612|2004-05-11 21:51:57|ge@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: Steel versus alloy, file upload|Moment of inertia is given by I = MR^2. For a 36 foot steel boat, you have about 5 tons of steel in the hull and deck, 2.25 tons of lead and steel in the keel, and .25 tons in the rig. R for the rig averages about 25, for the keel about 5, and for the hull about 4. The following are some quick approximations. I for the rig is approx .25*(25*25) = 160 foot foot tons. I for keel is approx 2.25*(5*5) = 55 foot foot tons. I for the hull is approx 5*(4*4) = 80 foot foot tons. The inertia in the hull is significant. Because dynamic stability varies as the square, while static stability is linear, you get a much greater increase in dynamic stability for a given static stability, by installing a longer mast in place of a heavier mast. For example. Take 2 masts. One 50 feet long in steel weighing 300 lbs, and one 60 feet long in alloy weighing 250 lbs. static stability steel = 50*300 = 15000 ft lbs static stability alloy = 60*250 = 15000 ft lbs. Both these mast have the same static stability. I steel = 1/3 ML^2 = 1/3*300*50*50 = 250000 = 125 foot foot tons I alloy = 1/3 ML^2 = 1/3*250*60*60 = 300000 = 150 foot foot tons. (for a uniform rod rotating around one end, I = 1/3ML^2 is more exact than I = MR^2) Thus for a given static stability, you get better dynamic stability, and thus resistance to capsize, by installing a longer alloy mast in place of a steel mast. We can design steel masts for our boats. Alloy masts simply give better performance, and better resistance to capsize, when properly engineered. From our calculations in previous e-mails, the benefits outweigh the costs. Thus, alloy masts are wide-spread on yachts. However, if someone wants steel, we can certainly accommodate. Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com Also, I'd like to reinforce (mainly for the bystanders) that I was talking about _roll_ moment of inertia: the moment of inertia _around_ the fore-and-aft axis through the center of gravity. Deep keels with a big lump of lead at the bottom, or tall steel masts will both increase that. Putting a lot of weight close to that fore-and-aft axis (e.g., a steel hull) won't increase that much. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3660|3635|2004-05-12 00:41:35|Dave|Damned yankees|--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" wrote: . is no greater insult to a travelling Canadian than to be > called a yank. I have noticed in this and previous posts you have written that you seem to have a serious bug up your ass when it comes to "yanks". I suppose you have the right, but people, ALL people are individuals who 99.99% have virtually no real say in their government policies other then a vote. In that sense Canadians are in the same boat as yanks. You can go around painting people and countries with a broad brush if you wish, but its the seeds of hatred sown that hurts everyone. In your own words Brent: The ratio of good folks to assholes is relatively constant accross all professions, nationalities races, etc., etc. Brent Swain So which side of that ratio do you fall in? Dave PS, I am a yank who happends to think Canada, both its land and people are wonderful. In fact I am getting married to one this summer...| 3661|3635|2004-05-12 07:05:09|Ben Tucker|Re: Global Weather & long-term plans|Hi brent, $1500Us for a cruising permit for chile, how do i find out more about this? Also I have heard you need full insurance for a Zarpe to cruise in chile, which is very hard to get and expensive. What a shame cos Id love to Go there but i think it would spoil all the fun knowing how much it was costing. cheers Ben| 3662|3621|2004-05-12 12:28:06|ge@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: Centerboards|There is probably a simple way to check. Do the designers advocating steel masts have them on their own personal boats? Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com Hi Greg - My point was simply that, having done and reviewed my stability curves for different configurations, including for a keel version for yago, the positive effect off a strong sealed steel mast far outweighs for me the negative effect of the added topweight in a boat that is designed for cruising rather than flat out performance. In that I had to revise my position, that people like Brent,Dix and others are right and wanted to say so. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3663|3600|2004-05-12 14:45:37|kendall|Re: Accountants, etc.|--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" wrote: > Read the book " Dances with Lawyers " by Nicholas Carroll, and learn > to do your own legal research.Lawyers are the final bulwark against > erosion of civil rights. > There is a contradiction between calling for a flat tax , which > would have the filthy rich paying a much tinier oportion of their > income in taxes and the poor paying a much larger portion of their > total income in taxes, and complaining about the gap between rich and > poor. > The ratio of good folks to assholes is relatively constant accross > all professions, nationalities races, etc., etc. > Brent Swain I realy don't think that would happen, a flat tax, whether based on income, or sales/purchase, would of course effect the wealthier people more than it would the poorer people, if you spend or make $100 dollars, you'd get taxed on a hundred dollars, if you spend/make $1000 you'd pay tax on a thousand, $100,000, $20,000. If the tax is a flat percentage rate, it is the same rate for everyone, say $20 for the guy with a hundred, or $200 for the guy with a thousand, we'd all pay the same tax, I see no need or reason to punish a person by increasing thier taxes, simply because he makes more money than I do. with a flat tax, maybe the rich guy can afford a bigger boat/house/car, but, I can TOO! On my pay scale, a flat %20 tax would mean I'd get an extra $20 to $30 a week for straight 40 hours, at current taxation, that would take 4 or 5 hours overtime, at the end of the month, I'd have a $100 I could put towards whatever whatever I needed or wanted, higher car payment on a better truck, better house, new boat, whatever it would work out nicely. I had to 'return' a raise one time, simply because it put me at the bottom of the next tax bracket, and I brought home less money each week than I did before the raise, worked out in the end, as I got that raise and another at the next review, but with a flat tax, I'd have made money right off the bat. I am not a rich man, far from it, raised 6 kids, (not all mine) and the youngest is still home, and make roughly 26-30k depending on weather, I'm in construction, but I would benefit from a flat tax, flat tax would mean that if I got a $1 raise, I would put more money in my pocket not less, the key to making it work right would be to eliminate loopholes, as it is now there are far too many loopholes to take advantage of, and for the most part, yes, high income people are the ones who are in a position to take the most advantage of it. many times I have worked tons of overtime, only to see maybe $50 more on my check because it put me at the wrong end of the tax bracket, with a flat tax, I'd have put more cash in my pocket, at least triple that. a flat tax is'nt just for the rich, it would be a boon to anyone. If you want to get complicated, tax US business,and civilians at a flat 15%, and offshore based/outsourced corporations at a higher flat rate of 25% or 30% give them some incentive to stay in the US, that would cut back on unemployment and be a big help to all of us working people. Ken now to take advantage of this post, anyone know what is the smallest practical size for this method of construction, a practice size I guess you could say, and also, what is the heaviest gauge that could be worked easily? I have looked at some of the other sites and plans with traditional framed construction, and they seem to use a fairly heavy gauge steel, some of it I wouldn't want to try and fold up. I looked at a couple of the origami boats, and it seemed that they were using a lighter gauge than the plans I had looked at on line. ken again| 3664|3664|2004-05-12 15:13:48|sae140|Boat-plan shifters ... was "Accountants etc."|It's predictable I suppose, that those working in occupations I previously described as being parasites should focus on one particular section of my earlier post and write in defence of their trades, rather than focus on the posting as a whole - but those who have perceived anger seem to have misunderstood me. In a previous post I used the word "parasite" as a descriptor, *not* as a form of personal insult - if there is indeed any anger present, then it is only being expressed on behalf of those who are constantly being exploited - for reliance upon certain occupations is unnecessary for most people, most of the time. A parasite is an organism which rides on the back (so to speak) of another organism, drawing sustenance from the blood of it's victim (or from it's sap, if we're talking plants), without offering anything essential in return. Symbiosis I have no problem with, it's parasitism that I am criticising. But - my post as a whole was rather more directed at those boat designers who have suddenly sprung up like so many weeds in a vegetable patch and are attempting to make money by offering plans for vessels which are often unproven under off-shore conditions, and in some cases a test vessel has never even been constructed. I have absolutely no problem with describing such plan-shifters as "parasites" - and potentially dangerous parasites at that. Of course, one needs to keep a sense of proportion here: with large one-off structures such as bridges, ocean liners and car ferries the experienced professional designer is absolutely essential. But such a person, or company employing such a person will always guarantee the product's performance. No parasitism in this scenario. A friend of mine is a professional steel boat-builder (mostly Dutch barges, some Sprays), and was recently asked to inspect a Bruce Roberts Spray, as a second opinion. On arriving at the yard he observed a 'professional' marine surveyor tapping at the Spray's keel with a hammer. On making enquiries he was told (in confidence) by the surveyor that he knew nothing about steel hulls, but had seen MoT (UK's vehicle roadworthiness test) inspectors tapping chassis' with hammers, so he was doing the same - presumably hoping for a change in note, like an old-fashioned railway wheel-tapper !! My friend charged the client half a day's money plus fuel for a written report on the hull's visual condition, which would automatically be offset against any immediate repair work undertaken. The professional surveyor on the other hand charged many hundreds of pounds for the usual vague "it looks ok, but don't blame me if it sinks" type of report. Which one of these guys is the parasite ? I'll let you decide. And which of these reports would be considered 'essential' by an insurance company ? No comment. It's exactly the same story with house purchases here in the UK - a surveyor's report is considered essential before a finance house will lend any money. You ought to read some of the "it looks ok, but don't blame me if it collapses" rubbish that is written. I've even seen finance companies demanding mining reports when the nearest historical mine was 60 miles away, and asking for tidal flooding risk assessments when the property was 1200ft up a mountain. In France - except in the rarest of cases - they don't even use property surveyors, but rely on builder's reports instead. And as for the person on this forum who suggested that making judgements was a "no-no" (can't remember his exact words) - how on earth does anyone decide between 2 boat designers, between Origami and framed, or between any 2 designs from a portfolio *without* making judgements ?? Every choice we have, every single decision we make in life involves making judgements of one kind or another - I don't know of any other way, short of tossing a coin or seeking Divine guidance. Perhaps when all is said, this is a "blue-collar worker" vs."white- collar worker" issue - and when it comes to steel boat-building matters, I know who I'd rather trust. Colin| 3665|3635|2004-05-12 15:15:08|sae140|Re: Global Weather & long-term plans|> Given that very few people by now seem to think that global warming is just an invention of some nutty environmentalists I don't think there's any doubt that global temperatures are slowly rising, but then - as far as we know they've never been at a constant value. As to what causes it - who knows ? Typical human arrogance claims that we're responsible - I really don't know - but there are a lot of inconsistent claims, such as CO2 and CH4 being the main "green-house gases", when in fact water vapour is by far the most influential controlling gas in the atmosphere, levels of which are directly determined by solar radiation. If you want to reduce CO2, then I guess you could do a lot worse than stop chucking so many bombs and bullets around. Effects on sailing ? Sounds like there's a pretty good case for building a lot more boats, and more affordable ones too. It might be worthwhile doing an energy audit on boat construction, to see which is the greener method, especially if using re-cycled materials. But - I'm mindful that during WWII, iron railings were grubbed-up "to build tanks", and housewives donated aluminium pans - "to build more Spitfires" - but it turns out that these were purely moral-boosting exercises, and that the metals themselves weren't needed. And one problem with repeatingly manipulating the public like this is that wide-scale cynicism invariably results. Also - isn't it about time for the magnetic poles of the Earth to reverse ? That should cause some problems with the solar wind - depending on how abruptly the poles change over - not to mention the havoc which will be reeked on my little ol' compass. Colin| 3666|3635|2004-05-12 15:21:32|brentswain38|Re: Global Weather & long-term plans|Ben The nearest Chilean consulate would have more info. With the BC coast being the same type of country , and far less bureaucratic, If I want to do that kind of cruising, I'll do the northern BC coast.One section has 811 islands in 35 miles. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Ben Tucker" wrote: > Hi brent, > > $1500Us for a cruising permit for chile, how do i find out more about > this? Also I have heard you need full insurance for a Zarpe to cruise > in chile, which is very hard to get and expensive. What a shame cos > Id love to Go there but i think it would spoil all the fun knowing > how much it was costing. > > cheers > > Ben | 3667|3621|2004-05-12 15:29:43|brentswain38|Re: Centerboards|I have a 31 footer which is a bit to small for a steel mast, but it has been done successfully. Most of the 36 footers have steel masts , which is roughly the lower size limit for steel masts . If I had a 36 I'd definitly have a steel mast.I too was originally skeptical of steel masts until friends began putting them on and having great success with them. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > There is probably a simple way to check. Do the designers advocating steel masts have them on their own personal boats? > > Greg Elliott > http://www.origamimagic.com > > Hi Greg - My point was simply that, having done and reviewed my > stability curves for different configurations, including for a keel > version for yago, the positive effect off a strong sealed steel mast > far outweighs for me the negative effect of the added topweight in a > boat that is designed for cruising rather than flat out performance. > In that I had to revise my position, that people like Brent,Dix and > others are right and wanted to say so. > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3668|3600|2004-05-12 15:37:49|brentswain38|Re: Accountants, etc.|Rich people spend, earn and move a larger portion of their money offshore, out of sight and beyond anyones jurisdiction ,which results in a net drain on the local economy, something low income people can't do. Poor folks spend locally. The smallest boat I've done is the 26 footer in ten guage steel, but one could go slightly smaller in steel, much smaller in aluminium. My 7ft 6 dinghy is origami aluminium. I've used up to 1/4 inch hull plate on a 47 footer . The plate thickness didn't have any effect on the ease of pulling it together and 3/8th plate wouldn't be a problem on a much larger boat. As the length goes up , so does the leverage.You just need bigger comealongs . Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "kendall" wrote: > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" > wrote: > > Read the book " Dances with Lawyers " by Nicholas Carroll, and learn > > to do your own legal research.Lawyers are the final bulwark against > > erosion of civil rights. > > There is a contradiction between calling for a flat tax , which > > would have the filthy rich paying a much tinier oportion of their > > income in taxes and the poor paying a much larger portion of their > > total income in taxes, and complaining about the gap between rich and > > poor. > > The ratio of good folks to assholes is relatively constant accross > > all professions, nationalities races, etc., etc. > > Brent Swain > > I realy don't think that would happen, a flat tax, whether based on > income, or sales/purchase, would of course effect the wealthier people > more than it would the poorer people, if you spend or make $100 > dollars, you'd get taxed on a hundred dollars, if you spend/make $1000 > you'd pay tax on a thousand, $100,000, $20,000. If the tax is a flat > percentage rate, it is the same rate for everyone, say $20 for the guy > with a hundred, or $200 for the guy with a thousand, we'd all pay the > same tax, I see no need or reason to punish a person by increasing > thier taxes, simply because he makes more money than I do. > with a flat tax, maybe the rich guy can afford a bigger > boat/house/car, but, I can TOO! On my pay scale, a flat %20 tax would > mean I'd get an extra $20 to $30 a week for straight 40 hours, at > current taxation, that would take 4 or 5 hours overtime, at the end of > the month, I'd have a $100 I could put towards whatever whatever I > needed or wanted, higher car payment on a better truck, better house, > new boat, whatever it would work out nicely. > > > I had to 'return' a raise one time, simply because it put me at the > bottom of the next tax bracket, and I brought home less money each > week than I did before the raise, worked out in the end, as I got that > raise and another at the next review, but with a flat tax, I'd have > made money right off the bat. > > I am not a rich man, far from it, raised 6 kids, (not all mine) and > the youngest is still home, and make roughly 26-30k depending on > weather, I'm in construction, but I would benefit from a flat tax, > flat tax would mean that if I got a $1 raise, I would put more money > in my pocket not less, the key to making it work right would be to > eliminate loopholes, as it is now there are far too many loopholes to > take advantage of, and for the most part, yes, high income people are > the ones who are in a position to take the most advantage of it. > many times I have worked tons of overtime, only to see maybe $50 > more on my check because it put me at the wrong end of the tax > bracket, with a flat tax, I'd have put more cash in my pocket, at > least triple that. a flat tax is'nt just for the rich, it would be a > boon to anyone. > > If you want to get complicated, tax US business,and civilians at a > flat 15%, and offshore based/outsourced corporations at a higher flat > rate of 25% or 30% give them some incentive to stay in the US, that > would cut back on unemployment and be a big help to all of us working > people. > > Ken > > > > > > now to take advantage of this post, anyone know what is the smallest > practical size for this method of construction, a practice size I > guess you could say, and also, what is the heaviest gauge that could > be worked easily? I have looked at some of the other sites and plans > with traditional framed construction, and they seem to use a fairly > heavy gauge steel, some of it I wouldn't want to try and fold up. > I looked at a couple of the origami boats, and it seemed that they > were using a lighter gauge than the plans I had looked at on line. > > ken again | 3669|3635|2004-05-12 15:41:39|brentswain38|Re: Global Weather & long-term plans|The environmental impact of people living on boats is a tiny fraction of that of people living on land. My electricity consumption is roughly 1/10,000th that of people living in the average rich country house. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "sae140" wrote: > > Given that very few people by now seem to think that global warming > is just an invention of some nutty environmentalists > > I don't think there's any doubt that global temperatures are slowly > rising, but then - as far as we know they've never been at a constant > value. > As to what causes it - who knows ? Typical human arrogance claims > that we're responsible - I really don't know - but there are a lot of > inconsistent claims, such as CO2 and CH4 being the main "green- house > gases", when in fact water vapour is by far the most influential > controlling gas in the atmosphere, levels of which are directly > determined by solar radiation. > > If you want to reduce CO2, then I guess you could do a lot worse than > stop chucking so many bombs and bullets around. > > Effects on sailing ? Sounds like there's a pretty good case for > building a lot more boats, and more affordable ones too. > > It might be worthwhile doing an energy audit on boat construction, to > see which is the greener method, especially if using re-cycled > materials. But - I'm mindful that during WWII, iron railings were > grubbed-up "to build tanks", and housewives donated aluminium pans - > "to build more Spitfires" - but it turns out that these were purely > moral-boosting exercises, and that the metals themselves weren't > needed. And one problem with repeatingly manipulating the public > like this is that wide-scale cynicism invariably results. > > Also - isn't it about time for the magnetic poles of the Earth to > reverse ? That should cause some problems with the solar wind - > depending on how abruptly the poles change over - not to mention the > havoc which will be reeked on my little ol' compass. > > Colin | 3670|3635|2004-05-12 15:53:04|brentswain38|Re: Damned yankees|Listenning to KGO San Francisco AM 811 late at night a political talk show ,makes me realise what wonderful people live in the US. Given US foreign policy, which is soaked in blood, they have been saddled with alot of baggage, often against their strongest objections. We Canadians don't want to be burdened with the same baggage when we travel , having usually had our own foreign policies , often at odds with that of the US. That's why we so strongly object to being labeled with someone elses baggage.Hats off to those in the US who have the guts to try to resist being burdened with such baggage. If a yank were asked to show Mexican registry to be allowed into another country, would he object and get defensive? Damned right . During the Vietnam war we got some of the best people anywhere from the US immigrating here, people who did their own thinking, and didn't blindly accept their government's orders to kill people. It appears that history is about to repeat itself. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Dave" wrote: > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" > wrote: > . > is no greater insult to a travelling Canadian than to be > > called a yank. > > I have noticed in this and previous posts you have written that you > seem to have a serious bug up your ass when it comes to "yanks". I > suppose you have the right, but people, ALL people are individuals > who 99.99% have virtually no real say in their government policies > other then a vote. In that sense Canadians are in the same boat as > yanks. You can go around painting people and countries with a broad > brush if you wish, but its the seeds of hatred sown that hurts > everyone. > > In your own words Brent: > > The ratio of good folks to assholes is relatively constant accross > all professions, nationalities races, etc., etc. > Brent Swain > > So which side of that ratio do you fall in? > > Dave > PS, I am a yank who happends to think Canada, both its land and > people are wonderful. In fact I am getting married to one this > summer... | 3671|3664|2004-05-12 16:08:38|Michael Casling|Re: Boat-plan shifters ... was "Accountants etc."|I have a brown belt in farming and many years of experience and education in insurance and financial matters. One day I might drive my new car or the old farm truck, ride a bicycle even. There are many issues, that can be partly resolved by going sailing. Just an observation: the people that have been sailing for a while and continue to do so seem to have less issues to deal with than those trying to decide on what to build. My suggestion get an affordable 22 foot boat and go sailing while planning and building the larger boat. When the white flag goes up later today the fleet will have a combination of all the collars and they all will be equal, for a while at least until the more skilled show there stuff. Michael ----- Original Message ----- From: sae140 To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2004 12:12 PM Subject: [origamiboats] Boat-plan shifters ... was "Accountants etc." Perhaps when all is said, this is a "blue-collar worker" vs."white- collar worker" issue - and when it comes to steel boat-building matters, I know who I'd rather trust. Colin [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3672|3635|2004-05-12 16:14:13|Michael Casling|Re: Global Weather & long-term plans|And the water is so dam cold that global warming would be a good thing. The Bay of Islands of the North aka Barkley Sound is a West Coast treasure. I am planning to be there later this year. Michael ----- Original Message ----- From: brentswain38 To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2004 12:20 PM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Global Weather & long-term plans Ben The nearest Chilean consulate would have more info. With the BC coast being the same type of country , and far less bureaucratic, If I want to do that kind of cruising, I'll do the northern BC coast.One section has 811 islands in 35 miles. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Ben Tucker" wrote: > Hi brent, > > $1500Us for a cruising permit for chile, how do i find out more about > this? Also I have heard you need full insurance for a Zarpe to cruise > in chile, which is very hard to get and expensive. What a shame cos > Id love to Go there but i think it would spoil all the fun knowing > how much it was costing. > > cheers > > Ben To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3673|3635|2004-05-12 16:17:06|Michael Casling|Re: Damned yankees|Thank you for mentioning me. During the Vietnam war the US drafted landed immigrants who did not have the rights of citizenship, could not vote, could not get bonded and thereby were restricted in there employment opportunities. There were other hassels as well like having to register each January as an alien. Fortunately President Carter gave a general pardon and it is now legal to be able to return to the states. Michael ----- Original Message ----- From: brentswain38 To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2004 12:53 PM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Damned yankees During the Vietnam war we got some of the best people anywhere from the US immigrating here, people who did their own thinking, and didn't blindly accept their government's orders to kill people. It appears that history is about to repeat itself. Brent Swain [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3674|3635|2004-05-12 16:31:12|brentswain38|Re: Global Weather & long-term plans|I was refering to Queen's Sound and Hakai wilderness area , just west of Bella Bella, Hakai to Higgens Pass . Being far less accessible, it's far less visted and those who do visit there tend to dissapear into such a maze of islands and not be seen to much.The fly in sports fishermen don't tend to go too far from their main camps.If it fogs up, you only have to go east of Fitzhugh channel to get back in the sun and great swimming in upper Kwakume. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Michael Casling wrote: > And the water is so dam cold that global warming would be a good thing. The Bay of Islands of the North aka Barkley Sound is a West Coast treasure. I am planning to be there later this year. Michael > ----- Original Message ----- > From: brentswain38 > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2004 12:20 PM > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Global Weather & long-term plans > > > Ben > The nearest Chilean consulate would have more info. > With the BC coast being the same type of country , and far less > bureaucratic, If I want to do that kind of cruising, I'll do the > northern BC coast.One section has 811 islands in 35 miles. > Brent Swain > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Ben Tucker" > wrote: > > Hi brent, > > > > $1500Us for a cruising permit for chile, how do i find out more > about > > this? Also I have heard you need full insurance for a Zarpe to > cruise > > in chile, which is very hard to get and expensive. What a shame cos > > Id love to Go there but i think it would spoil all the fun knowing > > how much it was costing. > > > > cheers > > > > Ben > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ADVERTISEMENT > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- > Yahoo! Groups Links > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3675|3612|2004-05-12 16:37:15|brentswain38|Re: Steel versus alloy, file upload|A friend who put a 52 ft aluminium mast on a 36 footer complained that the boat was a bit tender. Others who used a 46 ft steel mast in the same design had no such complaints. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > Moment of inertia is given by I = MR^2. > > For a 36 foot steel boat, you have about 5 tons of steel in the hull and deck, 2.25 tons of lead and steel in the keel, and .25 tons in the rig. R for the rig averages about 25, for the keel about 5, and for the hull about 4. > > The following are some quick approximations. > > I for the rig is approx .25*(25*25) = 160 foot foot tons. > > I for keel is approx 2.25*(5*5) = 55 foot foot tons. > > I for the hull is approx 5*(4*4) = 80 foot foot tons. > > The inertia in the hull is significant. > > Because dynamic stability varies as the square, while static stability is linear, you get a much greater increase in dynamic stability for a given static stability, by installing a longer mast in place of a heavier mast. > > For example. Take 2 masts. One 50 feet long in steel weighing 300 lbs, and one 60 feet long in alloy weighing 250 lbs. > > static stability steel = 50*300 = 15000 ft lbs > static stability alloy = 60*250 = 15000 ft lbs. > > Both these mast have the same static stability. > > I steel = 1/3 ML^2 = 1/3*300*50*50 = 250000 = 125 foot foot tons > I alloy = 1/3 ML^2 = 1/3*250*60*60 = 300000 = 150 foot foot tons. > > (for a uniform rod rotating around one end, I = 1/3ML^2 is more exact than I = MR^2) > > Thus for a given static stability, you get better dynamic stability, and thus resistance to capsize, by installing a longer alloy mast in place of a steel mast. > > We can design steel masts for our boats. Alloy masts simply give better performance, and better resistance to capsize, when properly engineered. From our calculations in previous e-mails, the benefits outweigh the costs. Thus, alloy masts are wide-spread on yachts. However, if someone wants steel, we can certainly accommodate. > > Greg Elliott > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > Also, I'd like to reinforce (mainly for the bystanders) that I was > talking about _roll_ moment of inertia: the moment of inertia _around_ > the fore-and-aft axis through the center of gravity. Deep keels with > a big lump of lead at the bottom, or tall steel masts will both > increase that. Putting a lot of weight close to that fore-and-aft > axis (e.g., a steel hull) won't increase that much. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3676|3635|2004-05-12 16:43:31|Michael Casling|Re: Global Weather & long-term plans|For ease of travelling to places like that I am installing a Nissan diesel in my 18 foot aluminum fishing boat. The sailboat is just a bit big to make short trips so I will explore with the smaller boat and maybe later when I have more time bring the bigger one. My latest idea for cooling the diesel is to use a radiator rather than cooling tanks. This would be a cheaper and simpler option I hope. The discussions on welding are of interest to me as I need a few hull patches on the aluminum. Michael ----- Original Message ----- From: brentswain38 To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2004 1:30 PM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Global Weather & long-term plans I was refering to Queen's Sound and Hakai wilderness area , just west of Bella Bella, Hakai to Higgens Pass . Being far less accessible, it's far less visted and those who do visit there tend to dissapear into such a maze of islands and not be seen to much.The fly in sports fishermen don't tend to go too far from their main camps.If it fogs up, you only have to go east of Fitzhugh channel to get back in the sun and great swimming in upper Kwakume. Brent Swain [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3677|3612|2004-05-12 16:47:54|brentswain38|Re: Steel versus alloy, file upload|Good thinking and logical design are cheap . Throwing a lot of money at a boat doesn't automatically guarantee a more seaworthy design.Don't assume that seaworthiness is porportionate to cost. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "nelstomlinson" wrote: > Greg, > > Static stability keeps you upright in calm water, and tries to flip > you over in big seas. Dynamic stability as Marchaj seemed to be using > the phrase means negative feedback to whatever forces are trying to > flip you over, including static stability. > > Also, I'd like to reinforce (mainly for the bystanders) that I was > talking about _roll_ moment of inertia: the moment of inertia _around_ > the fore-and-aft axis through the center of gravity. Deep keels with > a big lump of lead at the bottom, or tall steel masts will both > increase that. Putting a lot of weight close to that fore-and-aft > axis (e.g., a steel hull) won't increase that much. > > I think most of these parameters have a broad acceptable range. > > For example, any level of cost which doesn't keep you off the water is > acceptable, though clearly, less is always better. The level which > keeps you off the water is obviously subjective. Trading a few > dollars for a lot more seaworthiness or payload makes perfect sense, > unless it puts the total cost over that magic ``keeps you off the > water'' level. > > Any level of static stability which is large enough that the boat > won't turn turtle in normal seas, and small enough that it isn't > painfully stiff, is acceptable. Notice that ``normal seas'' and > ``painfully stiff'' are both entirely subjective. > > Any level of dynamic stability which is sufficient to keep the seas > from flipping the boat is acceptable. Obviously, more static > stability means a need for more dynamic stability, since a boat which > tends to remain perpendicular to the water surface can get to a nasty > angle on a big, steep wave. > > If a steel mast puts a boat on one end of that acceptable range of > static stability, and a carbon-fiber-and-magic mast puts it on the > other end, then both are acceptable (for static stability)! But, of > course, the heavier mast will give more dynamic stability: the boat is > less likely to be rotated too far about that fore-and-aft axis by a > sudden, steep wave. > > That was the lesson of Fastnet, and Marchaj's tank tests: despite > being more tiddly (less static stability, slower to right in calm > water), the boat with the mast up was harder to roll in a steep, > breaking sea. > > The uses and the users of boats are too varied, and the interactions > between elements of a design are too complicated, for us to be > dogmatic about single design elements like masts. I will certainly > accept your advice that steel masts are unsuitable for your designs. > I don't think I'd accept the same statement about steel masts for all > boats. > > Nels > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > > The question looks to me like one of apples and oranges. Taking > data from boats with high ballast ratios, low inertia hulls, and light > rigs, and then assuming that what works for those boats will also work > for boats that more typically have low ballast ratios, high inertia > hulls, and heavy rigs. Steel boats have fantastic inertia as compared > to most other materials, and often have poor ballast ratios. Adding > weight aloft in those boats, without regard for adequate ballasting, > can result in loss. > > > > Greg Elliott > > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > > Once your roll moment of inertia > > is enough that a single big sea can't roll you, there is nothing > more > > to be gained by increasing it (and nothing to lose!). > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3678|3600|2004-05-12 17:48:54|audeojude|Re: Accountants, etc.|This is in line with what I believe. I don't think the rich should pay more than me just because they are rich. Instead tie taxes to what you use. If your willing to live spartanly then you get to keep more and save it. Keep food taxes and taxes to for medical care to a minimum and then tax all the other stuff we buy, clothes, cars, houses, etc.. a one time sales tax. Rich people like their toys :) I'm all about having toys :) just pay the taxes on them when you buy them. If they want to not buy stuff but to save or invest their money then let them and don't tax it. They will buy something eventually :) everyone does :) Now on that note i also think that property taxes are one of the greatest evils around. That you have to pay to keep something you already own or they will take it away is awfull. Many poor land owners in my area over the last 30 years have either lost totaly or had to sell land and homes that have been in their familys for generations due to rising property taxes that they couldn't afford. I pay about 300 dollars a year for property tax on an acre of land and a 1100 sq ft house here (this is low for around hear but it is doubling about every 2 years now :( ). Yet a friend of mine in north myrtle beach near here pays about 6000 dollars a year in property taxes on a house with the same sq footage and a lot maybe three times the size of the house. Thats more than my mortage is. 15 years ago he was paying what I pay now. It's all he can do to pay that and the mortage. Once he hits retirement he will have to sell it as he wont be able to afford to keep it.. thats just wrong. > > I realy don't think that would happen, a flat tax, whether based on > income, or sales/purchase, would of course effect the wealthier people > more than it would the poorer people, if you spend or make $100 > dollars, you'd get taxed on a hundred dollars, if you spend/make $1000 > you'd pay tax on a thousand, $100,000, $20,000. If the tax is a flat > percentage rate, it is the same rate for everyone, say $20 for the guy > with a hundred, or $200 for the guy with a thousand, we'd all pay the > same tax, I see no need or reason to punish a person by increasing > thier taxes, simply because he makes more money than I do. > with a flat tax, maybe the rich guy can afford a bigger > boat/house/car, but, I can TOO! On my pay scale, a flat %20 tax would > mean I'd get an extra $20 to $30 a week for straight 40 hours, at > current taxation, that would take 4 or 5 hours overtime, at the end of > the month, I'd have a $100 I could put towards whatever whatever I > needed or wanted, higher car payment on a better truck, better house, > new boat, whatever it would work out nicely. > > > I had to 'return' a raise one time, simply because it put me at the > bottom of the next tax bracket, and I brought home less money each > week than I did before the raise, worked out in the end, as I got that > raise and another at the next review, but with a flat tax, I'd have > made money right off the bat. > > I am not a rich man, far from it, raised 6 kids, (not all mine) and > the youngest is still home, and make roughly 26-30k depending on > weather, I'm in construction, but I would benefit from a flat tax, > flat tax would mean that if I got a $1 raise, I would put more money > in my pocket not less, the key to making it work right would be to > eliminate loopholes, as it is now there are far too many loopholes to > take advantage of, and for the most part, yes, high income people are > the ones who are in a position to take the most advantage of it. > many times I have worked tons of overtime, only to see maybe $50 > more on my check because it put me at the wrong end of the tax > bracket, with a flat tax, I'd have put more cash in my pocket, at > least triple that. a flat tax is'nt just for the rich, it would be a > boon to anyone. > > If you want to get complicated, tax US business,and civilians at a > flat 15%, and offshore based/outsourced corporations at a higher flat > rate of 25% or 30% give them some incentive to stay in the US, that > would cut back on unemployment and be a big help to all of us working > people. > > Ken > > | 3679|3679|2004-05-12 18:36:47|audeojude|Global weather and warming|I have a minor in marine science and as you would think global warming was a hot topic in a marine science program. Many of the students we classified as tree huggers and dolphin lovers because they came there to save the world from the bad bad people. Trees and dolphins just being two of their favorite things to want to save. The professors, especially the ones involved in reasearch of global processes such as global warming, ocean temperture trends, geological processes affecting the oceans and many other similar areas had a lot of fun with those students. Most of what we hear in the popular media and even what our governments are basing their decisions on are myth and flights of fancy with not a lot of hard science behind them. :) if enough people belive something the government will do something about it (or representatives of the governement will make noise about it because that is a built in voting block) It doesnt matter wether it is right just that there is power in popular perception. Examples of this that I had insight into thru my exposure to very well educated and conservative scientists would be El Nino ... most of what people believe about el nino has never been proven. How it has affected weather patterns in local areas world wide in most cases was pop science at its worst and the media grabbing it and running with it. They (the media)have built it into our cultures modern but mythical understanding of science when the correlation wasn't there. Im not saying that it might not have affected those things but the hard science to back it up hasn't been proved yet to the scientists that are not on the news looking for a name for themselves and that want hard data before making a detiremination. There is no doulbt that global temperatures are on the increase. However the causes are not that certain. Hard science has proven that the earth goes thru cyclic temperature changes as well as being drastically affected by outside factors such as metor impacts or major volcanic eruptions. The points brought up earlier are very true in that natural processes dwarf the output of man made green house gasses. If you want to worry about something that is directly tied to man it would be the effects of chemical polutants such as mercury or pesticides etc.. that concentrate in the oceans food chains or the short term impact of oil spills. Short term being the next few centuries. Over fishing is drastically changing the face of the oceans bio-mass make-up. Talk to the people that have been sailing for the last 40 years and ask them about the differences in what they see or the old fishermen in the ports you visit about the fish they caught in their youth compared to what they catch now. This is a very critical issue and not easily solved. Lots of hungry people out there that eat all those fish. Here is one for you.. There are indications that the magnetic poles are about to swap. So that south becomes north and north south. It averages about every 250,000 years but has been double or triple that since it happened last so we are due. Here is a news story that covers it losely. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/2889127.stm So what happens to our navagation then. How much does the gps system depend on knowing where the magnetic poles are? What will this do to the weather? Is it allready affecting these things? compasses will be interesting to use won't they. Of course it could happen tomorrow or 100,000 years from now. Lots of fun stuff every one of which directly affects or will affect us on the oceans in a practical or a legislative manner. Audeojude| 3680|3679|2004-05-12 19:03:49|Michael Casling|Re: Global weather and warming|I was in Edinburgh and ordered fish and chips. The sign on the door said halibut and chips. While I was waiting I noticed the fish boxes in the rear with the name of the boat on the box. I told the fish monger that the named boat had not caught any halibut recently, as it was my cousins boat and I had been out on it the for the last trip. He said " Aye, you may know that, and I may know that, but thems out there, they don't know that" These days the old fishing boats take out tourists to look at birds and seals and nature around the Farne Islands, there are not any fish and it has been that way for quite a while. Michael ----- Original Message ----- From: audeojude To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2004 3:36 PM Subject: [origamiboats] Global weather and warming Over fishing is drastically changing the face of the oceans bio-mass make-up. Talk to the people that have been sailing for the last 40 years and ask them about the differences in what they see or the old fishermen in the ports you visit about the fish they caught in their youth compared to what they catch now. This is a very critical issue and not easily solved. Lots of hungry people out there that eat all those fish. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3681|3635|2004-05-12 20:28:51|Gerald Niffenegger|Re: Damned yankees|Brent is blunt and too the point and I personally like that. I don't really take what he is saying as a put down to people from the United Sates. He is stating a fact. When you leave the boarders of the USA you are judged based on what the folks in the other country know about people from the USA. They may know people from there or just see what is happening in the US on TV. The area where I live has on person from the USA ....... me. I am judged every time I open my mouth and every action. Ask one of my neighbors what folks from the USA are like and they will tell you how I act. Ask them about the USA government and they will tell you what they have seen on TV. So ..... if a person is traveling they are a representative of their country. To the small percentage of us folks from the USA that have gone beyond the North American boarders are we acting like assholes when outside our boarders or representatives of a great nation? Gerald Niffenegger Florianopolis, SC Brazil| 3682|3682|2004-05-12 20:30:32|noqualms29|need help finding large plate|I've called around and can't find anyone with plate large enough for a hull section of around 28' in aluminum. The max most carry is 20'. Planning on building in Florida but I might go where the metal is. Can anyone help? Thanks, Sam.| 3683|3635|2004-05-12 23:21:03|Dave|Re: Damned yankees|--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" wrote: > Listenning to KGO San Francisco AM 811 late at night a political > talk show ,makes me realise what wonderful people live in the US. Yes, I know exactly what you mean. The crap a lot of those "talk" shows are saying sickens me big time. But getting back to the ratio of good folks to ass holes, the US has 10 times the population of Canada, and thus has 10 times the assholes in an area smaller then Canada, so sure, they are out there, but also we have freedom of speech which means just that. Doesn't mean every American is that way.. I'd say its that vocal 10% that unfortunately are idiots. There has been much turmoil in the brutal history of mankind in the past 2000 years and just about all of it starts off with and comes down to borders, national pride, preceived notions of superiority and that they are all a bunch of ass holes on the other side of the border. Jews hate Muslems, Nazis hate Jews, whites hate blacks, Canadians hate Americans. Where does it stop? If mankind cannot figure that question out then we all need a re-boot! In all fairness I do understand your feelings for the US. This country has done some very bad things, as has Canada,(ask your First Nations citizens about Canada's darker side) but also has done good as well. I can't stand the dufus we now have in the white house, and I know he is leading us down a very ugly path, needlessly. These are very dark times over here with plenty of fear, but still, we are all individuals, country borders be damned! I refuse to group all people of a religion, country or whatever as all the same. Prejudice ultimately starts as individuals, and takes off from there. If we don't stop this shit, as individuals, then we are all doomed, and rightly so.| 3684|3684|2004-05-13 03:19:30|daletrautman|Damn Yankee Comment|You people all need to lighten up.Who cares if you call someone from the U.S. a damn yankee,or a Canadian a cheesehead for that matter,what difference does it make? And what is all this talk about hate.QUIT WHIMPERING and start talking about metal boats. Dale| 3685|3685|2004-05-13 11:33:26|carmella_o3@yahoo.com|Important News|Hello, fellow origamiboats member. This company really helped me out. I almost lost my home. I am self employed and I was able to refinance. The best interest rates are available, for a limited time Don't miss out stop in today. http://sav30npaym3nt.4ever.cc This email was sent because you joined our group. If you do not wish to recieve any emails, unsubscribe. by sending a mail here origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com| 3686|3664|2004-05-13 13:16:47|sae140|Re: Boat-plan shifters ... was "Accountants etc."|--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Michael Casling wrote: > I have a brown belt in farming and many years of experience and education in insurance and financial matters. Well - I don't - but have managed to achieve life-long financial independence (anticipated, of course !) during a 15 year period starting back in 1980 when I was flat broke. Now that I have - what shall I say ? - a "modest" amount of capital, I find that wherever I lodge this money there's always someone of a particular 'type' who starts offering me unsolicited financial advice - at a price, of course. My financial status is but one example of proof that accountants, financial advisers and even insurance companies are not essential members of our society *for all people, all of the time*, as I have used none of these myself, except where the law required third-party insurance to be held. If anyone else on this forum has achieved similar results within a similar time-frame, then I'll happily listen to their opposing views on occupational parasitism. I'd suggest doing this off-forum however, as these posts are beginning to stray badly from the group's definitions. > One day I might drive my new car or the old farm truck, ride a bicycle even. There are many issues, that can be partly resolved by going sailing. Are you seriously suggesting that the issues raised in recent posts - including Wendy's "Crimes in Iraq" tirade which attempted to expose those events of which the world is now only too aware, and which directly affect anyone flying the US flag or the Red Duster abroad - can be 'partly resolved' by simply going sailing ? Might as well take a Valium and go live in DisneyWorld. We are obliged to fly national flags from our sterns (unfortunately), and as I had said before - US foreign policy directly affects *everyone*, especially those boats and their crews who sail outside of Fortress America's waters. I wish it were otherwise. > Just an observation: the people that have been sailing for a while and continue to do so seem to have less issues to deal with than those trying to decide on what to build. My suggestion get an affordable 22 foot boat and go sailing while planning and building the larger boat. Well, I've been sailing off and on since 1965(?) and have been out in The Wash this year nearly every week since early March - but strangely, when I come ashore each time I find that my jolly out on the water doesn't seem to have affected any of the issues I've raised here, one single jot. Maybe I should adopt the ostrich's solution to unacceptable events within my visual field instead ? > When the white flag goes up later today the fleet I don't see winning or surrendering here, only spirited debate and comment, and my own focus is not and has not been specifically directed towards any members of this particular 'fleet'. > will have a combination of all the collars and they all will be equal, for a while at least until the more skilled show there stuff. Depends on what you mean by "equal". Of equal value to their families and friends ? - certainly. Having equally valuable points of view ? - certainly. Of equal experience or skill ? - as you point out, no. Of equal value to society ? - debatable. Do these 'collars' have equal *status* (pay, working conditions, authority, etc) in society ? - depends ... certainly not over here (UK) - maybe it's different in other countries/cultures. Over here, intellectual skills are prized far more highly that physical skills. Welders, toolmakers etc. are perfect examples of high skill but low social status. One paragraph has been chosen from my posting on which to focus a somewhat personal criticism - a paragraph which I would point out begins with the word "perhaps", and as such could just as easily have been ignored. I will continue to value and place my trust and business with working craftsman in all matters marine and otherwise - and will continue to air my views - and if not here, then elsewhere. Others are entitled to hold their own views and can do as they wish. Wishing you all as much peace and tranquility in your lives as we enjoy here in rural Lincolnshire - where the sun is shining and life is currently looking most optimistic. Might even go sailing after lunch. Colin PS - unless I'm personally criticised from this or previous posts, I intend making this my last posting on this stuff, as this is getting way off topic.| 3687|3635|2004-05-13 13:24:36|sae140|Re: Global Weather & long-term plans|--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" wrote: > The environmental impact of people living on boats is a tiny fraction > of that of people living on land. My electricity consumption is > roughly 1/10,000th that of people living in the average rich country > house. > Brent Swain For sure. By "energy audit" I was really referring to a comparison of the energy 'capital' invested in a structure, as well as the energy 'revenue' or 'expenditure' resulting from it. This is a factor often overlooked by advocates of wind turbines (which are currently being imposed on the otherwise beautiful English countyside) who claim that "wind energy is free", whereas in practice it may take many years to repay the energy debt which was created in their initial construction. But my guess is that it would be a phenomenally difficult task - if not impossible - to accurately and fairly cost (in energy terms) any boat's construction for the purposes of comparison - especially where re-cycled materials are concerned. Colin| 3688|3664|2004-05-13 13:48:29|Michael Casling|Re: Boat-plan shifters ... was "Accountants etc."|There was no intent on my part of a personal criticism, quite the contrary, but if it appeared that way to you then I apologise. Michael in Kelowna BC ----- Original Message ----- From: sae140 To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2004 10:14 AM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Boat-plan shifters ... was "Accountants etc." One paragraph has been chosen from my posting on which to focus a somewhat personal criticism - a paragraph which I would point out begins with the word "perhaps", and as such could just as easily have been ignored. I will continue to value and place my trust and business with working craftsman in all matters marine and otherwise - and will continue to air my views - and if not here, then elsewhere. Others are entitled to hold their own views and can do as they wish. Colin PS - unless I'm personally criticised from this or previous posts, I intend making this my last posting on this stuff, as this is getting way off topic. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3689|3689|2004-05-13 14:57:46|richytill|Hidden costs/Interior woodwork|Potential builders can benefit from thinking about what they expect to achieve in the way of interior finish early in building. If you are intending on doing all your own work and getting off to sea in a hurry--try to be realistic about what you can afford in the way of time and money. I continue to be amazed at the mounting costs of glue, screws, zip cut blades, sharpening stones, varnish, jig saw blades, vinyl gloves, paint brushes, chisels and so on. The MY ISLAND project has just gone in to year 4. You can make the interior a fast low cost project or plod away doing joinery as I am doing. It is a personal choice of course. If you take the joinery/real wood approach, be aware of the time and cost involved. I have tried to go middle of the road and estimate the interior will take as long as the steel work--progress is far less visible. Working full time and doing the interior at the same time makes for a full schedule--how will this impact your social/family life? If you are in a rush, it may be worthwhile asking for a quote on the whole job: especially if you are not a woodworker. Try to be clear on what you want. If you are happy with few sheets of plywood fixed with deck screws, a bucket and reclaimed paint that's fine--sail on, have fun. If you want real fancy, expect to expend lots of time or money or both. I am enjoying the challenge of doing the interior and it is rewarding. Be aware tho', the desire for real wood has its costs. rt| 3690|3689|2004-05-13 15:31:30|Joe Earsley|Re: Hidden costs/Interior woodwork|Great Information rt, Could you give some specifics? What are your side surfaces, sole, galley counters and ceiling liner? What about the time spent completing systems like lighting, engine instrumentation, electrical charging and overcurrent protection? Did these take a bunch of time too? Are you installing refrigeration? Is the galley really complex or middle of the road? Again, thanks for the reality check. You speak what I have experienced in all my projects to date. It's why I think I am cut out for house framing rather than finish work. Joe Earsley, Anchorage, Alaska ________________________________ From: richytill [mailto:tillrc@...] Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2004 10:58 AM To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Subject: [origamiboats] Hidden costs/Interior woodwork Potential builders can benefit from thinking about what they expect to achieve in the way of interior finish early in building. If you are intending on doing all your own work and getting off to sea in a hurry--try to be realistic about what you can afford in the way of time and money. I continue to be amazed at the mounting costs of glue, screws, zip cut blades, sharpening stones, varnish, jig saw blades, vinyl gloves, paint brushes, chisels and so on. The MY ISLAND project has just gone in to year 4. You can make the interior a fast low cost project or plod away doing joinery as I am doing. It is a personal choice of course. If you take the joinery/real wood approach, be aware of the time and cost involved. I have tried to go middle of the road and estimate the interior will take as long as the steel work--progress is far less visible. Working full time and doing the interior at the same time makes for a full schedule--how will this impact your social/family life? If you are in a rush, it may be worthwhile asking for a quote on the whole job: especially if you are not a woodworker. Try to be clear on what you want. If you are happy with few sheets of plywood fixed with deck screws, a bucket and reclaimed paint that's fine--sail on, have fun. If you want real fancy, expect to expend lots of time or money or both. I am enjoying the challenge of doing the interior and it is rewarding. Be aware tho', the desire for real wood has its costs. rt To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT click here ________________________________ Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service . [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3691|3664|2004-05-13 15:41:46|brentswain38|Re: Boat-plan shifters ... was "Accountants etc."|on finance When I was a teenager one of my father's friends said "Brent, you'll soon be joining the ratrace." I looked at his big new house, new car every few years and thought, " If I forgo all that, there is no way I can see myself having to work as much as him."It seemed materialism and feedom were largely inversely porporionate. That was many decades ago and I still haven't found the ratrace he was talking about. While I was building a 36 footer in Steveston a guy cam eby who had just bought a wet kit fowe a waterline sloop, shell , painted , ballasted and engine in with some bulkheads. he said that while people often advocate finishing the boat tot he last bolt, he'd noticed that peiople who go cruising in a half finished boat seem to take no longer to get finished than those who finish everything befoe launching, they have a lot more fun in the meantime, and make fewer changes later on. When I began cruising in my current 31 footer , it was bare plywood inpainted interior with much foam showing and bare minimum equipment, but I was cruising and the rest of the building proccess was hobby. The pressure was gone and I had roughly $6,000 into her. Some ask abot wiring. I tell them , just run a bunch of plastic conduit in before foaming and you can do your wiring in some quiet little cove , at your leisure. Kerosene lamps wil do for the meantime. Over the last 20 years I accumulated most of the toys I want, without going in debt and I was having fun in the meantime. Without the need to support a car, marina owners, restaurants and brewries, I only have to work a month or so a year and the rest is play time.People spend more supporting a car than the total cost of cruising away from town. Environmental impact is directly porportionate to what you spend , period. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "sae140" wrote: > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Michael Casling > wrote: > > I have a brown belt in farming and many years of experience and > education in insurance and financial matters. > > Well - I don't - but have managed to achieve life-long financial > independence (anticipated, of course !) during a 15 year period > starting back in 1980 when I was flat broke. Now that I have - what > shall I say ? - a "modest" amount of capital, I find that wherever I > lodge this money there's always someone of a particular 'type' who > starts offering me unsolicited financial advice - at a price, of > course. My financial status is but one example of proof that > accountants, financial advisers and even insurance companies are not > essential members of our society *for all people, all of the time*, > as I have used none of these myself, except where the law required > third-party insurance to be held. If anyone else on this forum has > achieved similar results within a similar time-frame, then I'll > happily listen to their opposing views on occupational parasitism. > I'd suggest doing this off-forum however, as these posts are > beginning to stray badly from the group's definitions. > > > One day I might drive my new car or the old farm truck, ride a > bicycle even. There are many issues, that can be partly resolved by > going sailing. > > Are you seriously suggesting that the issues raised in recent posts - > including Wendy's "Crimes in Iraq" tirade which attempted to expose > those events of which the world is now only too aware, and which > directly affect anyone flying the US flag or the Red Duster abroad - > can be 'partly resolved' by simply going sailing ? Might as well > take a Valium and go live in DisneyWorld. We are obliged to fly > national flags from our sterns (unfortunately), and as I had said > before - US foreign policy directly affects *everyone*, especially > those boats and their crews who sail outside of Fortress America's > waters. I wish it were otherwise. > > > Just an observation: the people that have been sailing for a while > and continue to do so seem to have less issues to deal with than > those trying to decide on what to build. My suggestion get an > affordable 22 foot boat and go sailing while planning and building > the larger boat. > > Well, I've been sailing off and on since 1965(?) and have been out in > The Wash this year nearly every week since early March - but > strangely, when I come ashore each time I find that my jolly out on > the water doesn't seem to have affected any of the issues I've raised > here, one single jot. Maybe I should adopt the ostrich's solution to > unacceptable events within my visual field instead ? > > > When the white flag goes up later today the fleet > > I don't see winning or surrendering here, only spirited debate and > comment, and my own focus is not and has not been specifically > directed towards any members of this particular 'fleet'. > > > will have a combination of all the collars and they all will be > equal, for a while at least until the more skilled show there stuff. > > Depends on what you mean by "equal". Of equal value to their > families and friends ? - certainly. Having equally valuable points > of view ? - certainly. Of equal experience or skill ? - as you point > out, no. Of equal value to society ? - debatable. > Do these 'collars' have equal *status* (pay, working conditions, > authority, etc) in society ? - depends ... certainly not over here > (UK) - maybe it's different in other countries/cultures. Over here, > intellectual skills are prized far more highly that physical skills. > Welders, toolmakers etc. are perfect examples of high skill but low > social status. > > One paragraph has been chosen from my posting on which to focus a > somewhat personal criticism - a paragraph which I would point out > begins with the word "perhaps", and as such could just as easily have > been ignored. I will continue to value and place my trust and > business with working craftsman in all matters marine and otherwise - > and will continue to air my views - and if not here, then elsewhere. > Others are entitled to hold their own views and can do as they wish. > > Wishing you all as much peace and tranquility in your lives as we > enjoy here in rural Lincolnshire - where the sun is shining and life > is currently looking most optimistic. Might even go sailing after > lunch. > > Colin > > PS - unless I'm personally criticised from this or previous posts, I > intend making this my last posting on this stuff, as this is getting > way off topic. | 3692|3635|2004-05-13 15:44:50|brentswain38|Re: Global Weather & long-term plans|Once the energy spent in building a boat is done, it reduces your energy need by over 90% for decades.Land living consumes far more energy in one year than the amount of energy it takes to build a boat . Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "sae140" wrote: > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" > wrote: > > The environmental impact of people living on boats is a tiny > fraction > > of that of people living on land. My electricity consumption is > > roughly 1/10,000th that of people living in the average rich > country > > house. > > Brent Swain > > > For sure. By "energy audit" I was really referring to a comparison > of the energy 'capital' invested in a structure, as well as the > energy 'revenue' or 'expenditure' resulting from it. This is a > factor often overlooked by advocates of wind turbines (which are > currently being imposed on the otherwise beautiful English > countyside) who claim that "wind energy is free", whereas in practice > it may take many years to repay the energy debt which was created in > their initial construction. > > But my guess is that it would be a phenomenally difficult task - if > not impossible - to accurately and fairly cost (in energy terms) any > boat's construction for the purposes of comparison - especially where > re-cycled materials are concerned. > > Colin | 3693|3689|2004-05-13 15:51:04|brentswain38|Re: Hidden costs/Interior woodwork|I knew a guy who hired the fastest , roughest wood butcher around to rough in his interior.It looked like hell. Everyone thought he was nuts . He then hired a master who made it look like fine cabinetry.Roughing in an interior is just that. It has no effect on the finished results if the finishing is well done. Roughing things together gets you cruising quicker and lets the finishing be done under less pressure, and as a pleasant hobby. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "richytill" wrote: > Potential builders can benefit from thinking about what they expect > to achieve in the way of interior finish early in building. If you > are intending on doing all your own work and getting off to sea in a > hurry--try to be realistic about what you can afford in the way of > time and money. > > I continue to be amazed at the mounting costs of glue, screws, zip > cut blades, sharpening stones, varnish, jig saw blades, vinyl gloves, > paint brushes, chisels and so on. The MY ISLAND project has just > gone in to year 4. > > You can make the interior a fast low cost project or plod away doing > joinery as I am doing. It is a personal choice of course. If you > take the joinery/real wood approach, be aware of the time and cost > involved. I have tried to go middle of the road and estimate the > interior will take as long as the steel work--progress is far less > visible. > > Working full time and doing the interior at the same time makes for a > full schedule--how will this impact your social/family life? If you > are in a rush, it may be worthwhile asking for a quote on the whole > job: especially if you are not a woodworker. > > Try to be clear on what you want. If you are happy with few sheets > of plywood fixed with deck screws, a bucket and reclaimed paint > that's fine--sail on, have fun. If you want real fancy, expect to > expend lots of time or money or both. I am enjoying the challenge of > doing the interior and it is rewarding. Be aware tho', the desire > for real wood has its costs. rt | 3694|3689|2004-05-13 23:51:22|Ben Tucker|Re: Hidden costs/Interior woodwork|Hi When We went cruising as a kid the whole interior of the parents ferro ketch was reclamed chipboard and ply, the floors and main Bulkheads were the only bits properly done. The masts were salvaged from a wrecked schooner, with the rot cut out, as were many bits and pieces like anchor winches and stuff, the rigging wire was Galv and cost a case of beer to the right person (it's still going 25 years later) we had no sheet winches, only a new Main and staysail the rest of the sails were old second hand ones or borrowed. We had heaps of fun sailing around NZ and then the old man pulled her out and stuck her in the backyard for a couple of years (soon turned into 5 years)to do the interior properly in rimu toungue and groove. We Built new masts, got some new sails and tweaked all those things that we found needed changing (Ie more bunks for more kids) The Maid returned to the water a like a new ship and we had lots more fun sailing her. The advantage of doing it this way was that we got plenty of use out of the boat before investing another 5 years into building and when we did redo the interior we had a much better idea of what works and what doesn't. Quite a few boats down our way rough out the interior, then sail to the philipines or where ever and get all the fancy work done professionally over there. Working on a boat in a quiet anchorage can be very pleasant and makes a great break from the grind in a marina or where ever, when I find my work output drops and I get sick of working in port and need a break i stock up and head out to a nice bay a do a few fun jobs like painting and rigging and wireing, this also has the advantage of forcing you to clean up the boat and recommision her, which seem to result in increased work output and less stress. I have even got heaps done while sailing under windvane, just pottering about. I am finding it hard living aboard, working full time and rebuilding the boat in the weekends, can't even escape as its all welding and grinding, need 240v. also winter doesn't help. Avoid trying to do all three at the same time!! The only problem with steel is that its stupid to do steel work in bits and peices because the rust, paint and grinding issues so i'm trying to at least get all these jobs out of the way in one go. cheers Ben| 3695|3695|2004-05-13 23:53:34|John Jones|40' Actual length?|Okay so I got the 40' plans and they call for 2 sheets of 40' hull plate but they bend out to make up the sides of the hull so then... just what ai the actual length of the finnished hull ....(really) John| 3696|3635|2004-05-14 00:10:14|fmichael graham|Re: Damned yankees|On my first solo trip to Asia (by plane), I spent 6 days in Seoul, South Korea. Upon my arrival at the local yoinsook (hostel), I was asked by a young american woman why I had two small Canadian flags on my pack. I replied that I thought that if I were found wandering aimlessly around Asia, confused but too drunk to care, The local authorities would know which country to send me home to. The next evening, while "tossing back a few cold ones" with my new-found mates, I was approached by the same woman, whom asked, "why do Canadians suffer from an identity-crisis", a further reference to my flag-adorned pack. As you can imagine, I found out immediately who among my new companions were Canadian and whom were American. Although, I would be labelled "anti-American" for my views on U.S. foreign policy and called a lot of insulting names for any critique that I might offer on U.S. culture, I have met some decent American people and have relatives that were born, and live in California, whom seem tolerable (though I wouldn't want them to move to my neighbourhood). I would also suggest that when I listen to the local talk-show station in Vancouver, CKNW 980 (AM), I am reminded that we in Canada have our own over-abundance of morons. But what about those Icelanders? Living off on their own like that and from most reports, very nice people. That seems suspicious. Perhaps, we should send in a few "representatives" to "monitor" their society. I propose a flotilla of origamiboats be assembled and launched to patrol the waters off their coast. I further suggest that we "visit" this obviously dark and hostile nation in the middle of winter when we can slip into the shallow waters of their largest ports, blanketed by the darkness of a land with little daylight at that time of year. Or, maybe, Pitcairn Island. Now, there's a shady group of ... Regards, Mike Graham Dave wrote: --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" wrote: > Listenning to KGO San Francisco AM 811 late at night a political > talk show ,makes me realise what wonderful people live in the US. Yes, I know exactly what you mean. The crap a lot of those "talk" shows are saying sickens me big time. But getting back to the ratio of good folks to ass holes, the US has 10 times the population of Canada, and thus has 10 times the assholes in an area smaller then Canada, so sure, they are out there, but also we have freedom of speech which means just that. Doesn't mean every American is that way.. I'd say its that vocal 10% that unfortunately are idiots. There has been much turmoil in the brutal history of mankind in the past 2000 years and just about all of it starts off with and comes down to borders, national pride, preceived notions of superiority and that they are all a bunch of ass holes on the other side of the border. Jews hate Muslems, Nazis hate Jews, whites hate blacks, Canadians hate Americans. Where does it stop? If mankind cannot figure that question out then we all need a re-boot! In all fairness I do understand your feelings for the US. This country has done some very bad things, as has Canada,(ask your First Nations citizens about Canada's darker side) but also has done good as well. I can't stand the dufus we now have in the white house, and I know he is leading us down a very ugly path, needlessly. These are very dark times over here with plenty of fear, but still, we are all individuals, country borders be damned! I refuse to group all people of a religion, country or whatever as all the same. Prejudice ultimately starts as individuals, and takes off from there. If we don't stop this shit, as individuals, then we are all doomed, and rightly so. To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links --------------------------------- Post your free ad now! Yahoo! Canada Personals [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3698|3698|2004-05-14 07:58:46|Gerd|It's all YOUR fault|All last winter, until only 3 months ago my wife was pushing me to build a steel boat, because when I met her I had boasted shamelessly with the exploits of my younger days. In the end, mostly to satisfy her but also tickled by the idea to do it just one more time, I dug out an old plan for a 37 footer, and promised her to start building in spring 2005, secretly hoping that until then I might find a good reason not to, or break a leg or something. While doing some lazy research on other plans, I came across this group. When I saw the first pictures of sheets being pulled together to half-hulls without any jig, frame or structure I said "shit!" and imediately began wondering if maybe... a smaller boat... just for fun... this year... Today , 3 months later, I ordered the steel for the hull. When they took me around the shop, showing me their plates & profiles I had a terrible flashback to 20 years ago. I remembered. The rust. the noise, the torn clothes, the burnmarks I still have on my ass (I will not tell you how I got that...) and the scars on my scull and shins I still carry, and I remembered that the backache actually never went away in the last 2 decades since that friend of mine suddenly let go of his end of the 3 m plate to light a fag, the sanding, mixing cement in the bilges to seal the keel, the sawdust in all my food when I lived and worked in the empty hull... Well it's done. I put my money where my mouth is. And it's all your fault. Thank you guys, without the sweet promise of instant origami hulls, I would probably not have signed at the bottom of the page today. I hope you are right! ;-) Gerd ps - The biggest sheets I can get here are 6 m by 1.25 m. I took plain black steel because I could not get any clear answers on precoating, paints and compatibilities here. Price was 0.80 USD per kg, with free 45 km delivery to my doorstep. pps - and to mark the occasion, I have also dropped the old "bubblede" nick, that was a leftover from another life I wanted to get rid of anyway.| 3699|3699|2004-05-14 08:28:39|sae140|Correcting a magnetic compass|> Might even go sailing after lunch. So I went down to the boat, but there was no wind ... So instead I corrected the magnetic compass without all that "steer due north, and then due south whilst halving the error" stuff. And if anyone's interested, here is the problem, with the best solution so far: I am faced with a so-called inter-cardinal compass error which can't be eliminated by the normal fore-and-aft and awthartship corrector magnets - the best that's been achieved has been spreading the error around as equally as possible. So - with correctors removed, the hull was donked around in a wide circle, and whilst holding the course at each ten degree GPS heading, the mag compass readings were logged. These readings showed that there was a classic sigmoidal "S"-shaped error curve, with a -12 degree error at 50 degrees, and a +12 degree error at 220 degrees. Obviously these aren't reciprocals, so there was also an offset to be considered. By plotting these readings in the form of a polar diagram, it was much easier to see these errors graphically, and correction magnets were then placed so as to correct the 'imbalance lobes' in very much the same way as a tyre fitter balances a vehicle wheel by attaching weights. The compass was swung twice more by which time the errors had been reduced to one small lobe (not exceeding 3 degrees error), with 85% of the compass readings being error-free. This was deemed good enough, and anyway the tide was about to stop play for the day. The "corrector magnets" employed were lengths of magnetic strip from a fridge door (caution - some of this stuff has poles at precisely each edge, some doesn't - check by attaching 2 lengths back-to-back) - cut into 1 and 2 inch lengths. Although this was only an experiment, I'd have thought that gluing these magnets in place with bathroom sealant would be adequate. Of course, you might not consider that correcting a magnetic compass is worth the hassle - however, it occurs to me that if you could achieve a magnetically 'neutral' area around the steering compass, then a hand-bearing compass *might* also function ok within that location. As there was no wind, it was impossible to test for heeling error. Regards Colin| 3700|3698|2004-05-14 08:41:02|Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr|Re: It's all YOUR fault|Hello Gerd, I am not sure whether to say "Congratulations" or "This is another fine mess you have gotten yourself into!" or "Good Luck" or to say all of the above. As if you need to add another task to add to the daunting process of building a 37 foot boat, but I think that it would be greatly appreciated and very helpful to us all if you could periodically update us about time spent and material costs incurred as your project progresses. I am also curious about the design that you have chosen to build. You had been talking about building a comparatively narrow, comparatively light (for steel) higher performance boat. Did you decide to go that route or are you building a stock design (and if you went stock what design did you chose)? I have been lurking around here for a long time but somehow I think I missed any final discussion on that topic. Also did you go with supplier cutting or are you going to burn the panels yourself. Best wishes, Jeff| 3701|3689|2004-05-14 09:48:15|johnkupris@aol.com|Re: Hidden costs/Interior woodwork|Nice story Ben. It reminds me of a guy who went cruising with a roughed in interior. He returned glad that he had , as he wood have built it wrong and now he knew exactly what to build. John [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3702|3689|2004-05-14 11:17:50|kendall|Re: Hidden costs/Interior woodwork|--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, johnkupris@a... wrote: > Nice story Ben. It reminds me of a guy who went cruising with a roughed in > interior. > He returned glad that he had , as he wood have built it wrong and now he knew > exactly what to build. John > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] This seems similar to when I was building custom cars and trucks all the time,put just a seat in the car, then have the customer sit in it with thier eyes closed, and have them reach for the pedals, wheel, and shifter, then mount all of them where they reached, they seldom ended up in standard locations, and very seldom even close to where they had visualized them, but they always fit the customer perfectly. It allows you to set up the interior the way that works, rough in the interior, then when you jump in and actually use it, and find out that you should have made that berth an extra inch or two longer, or that the sink and stove are in exactly the wrong place, or those nice looking drawers realy won't hold anything, you can just remodel without trashing a lot of good material. ken.| 3703|3703|2004-05-14 12:11:08|ge@easysoftwareinc.com|the log, the plank, and the rock|Understanding the cause and prevention of capsize does not involve the study of lofty texts. Rather it requires a trip to the beach. Anyone that has sat on the beach, hour after hour watching the driftwood in the surf will know what causes capsize. It has been know for centuries. Watching a straight log in the surf you will notice a very interesting thing. The log turns sideways to the surf, and moves up and down with the waves, but it never capsizes. It simply moves up and down. This is the model for a hull that cannot be rolled. The cylinder. If you look at the traditional wineglass shaped hull, you see that the hull and deck in section form a circle, with a couple of notches cut out of the top to form side decks for walking. An extremely good offshore hull. So, why are not all offshore boats shaped this way? Performance. Try and stand up on a straight log. It immediately dumps you into the water. One solution is to tie a big rock to the bottom of the log, and then you can stand on it. However, when you try and push the log forward in the water, you now have to push the rock as well. Now try and stand on a large plank floating in the water. Amazingly, the plank does not try and dump you. So, why not use this as our boat? Watch a plank in the surf. It will tilt to meet each wave, and when the surf gets to a certain size, the plank will capsize. The difference between the straight log and the plank is form stability. Boats use form stability to reduce ballast, as a means of increasing performance. Inherent to form stability is capsize. Form stability allows boats to gain performance by reducing ballast, and with this comes the risk of capsize. To judge the form stability of a hull, simply look at the hull in section. If it resembles a circle, it has low form stability. If it resembles a rectangle, it has high form stability. The shorter the section, the wider the section, the greater the form stability. Once a breaking wave approaches a critical energy level, a hull with form stability is at risk for capsize. If a boat is fast, but carries only moderate ballast, it probably has high form stability and is at risk for capsize. So, the next time someone quotes their favorite expert to justify this, that or the other feature in their designs, go sit on the beach and watch the driftwood. Just about everything possible has been tried in boats, and it all comes down to the lesson of the log, the rock, and the plank. There is an aspects of capsize, related to drag and form stability. A straight log in the surf does not remain motionless. It rocks backs and forth slightly due to skin friction, and if it has a branch sticking up, it can be rolled when the surf hits. There is a form of capsize in boats that follows this model, for boats in motion. Form stability allows ballast to be reduced to the point that a boat has little or no reserve ballast to carry the weight of the rig. The rig is being carried mostly by the form of the hull. However, when traveling across the face of a large breaking wave, the water pressure acting sideways on the keel will at some point exceed the reserve ballast weight in the keel. At this point the keel will lift to the surface of the water. This lifts the shorter rudder clear of the water in many boats. Directional control is lost, resulting in the classic broach. What some might call tripping over the keel. Sliding sideways down the face of the wave, tumblehome in the wineglass shaped hull helped lift the gunwales clear. In modern FG hulls, tumblehome has been removed to simplify molding. For reasons of style, other boats have followed. In these hulls the gunwales dig in and the buoyancy of the wave lifts the hull over the gunwales into capsize. In the classic full keel boats, the chance of broaching was minimized as the rudders and keel were the same length, and thus some directional control was always maintained. As rudder have been separated from keel to gain performance, twin rudder have been required to minimize the risk of broach induced capsize, resulting from keel drag. Because the rudders are outside the plane of the keel, as the keel lifts to the surface, one rudder still remains submerged. To minimizing drag induced capsize, adequate ballast is required to support the rig weight. For a given strength, solid wood masts are typically the heaviest. Steel, while strong for the cost, is weak for the weight and can be heavy. Hollow, laminated wood masts are typically stronger and lighter. Laminated wood is used in many weight critical applications, such as main wing spars in light aircraft, and for the weight is stronger than steel. Alloy masts are the most common, being light, strong, and rot free. Composite masts are typically the lightest and strongest, but can be expensive. Our triple chine designs are circular in section, to minimize form stability for offshore safety and comfort. We can provide tumblehome to minimize capsize risk, combined with either full keels or twin rudders to minimize the risk of broaching. We recommend light, strong rigs to maximize both static and dynamic stability. Our designs have never suffered any knockdowns, let alone capsize, and they perform beautifully. Not only have they never rolled over completely, they have never rolled over. They are fast and comfortable, with tons of room for supplies. They are not tender, and they do not hobby horse. They cost only a fraction of the cost of production FG yachts, even though they are typically built with mostly new parts. We believe that when you go to the effort to build a boat, you should end up with a new boat. Our designs are not limited to a single hull form. We can re-create just about anybody's favorite boat in origami, in steel or alloy, to any size. After all, if you are going to build a boat, why not build the boat you truly want? Passage times are important, but given that they form one of the smallest usages of a boat for most cruisers, livability at anchor is typically a more important factor. Weather knowledge and stamina play as big a part in passage making as boat design. Lots of people make slow passages simply because the boat is more comfortable, and the crew better rested, when not driven to the limits. If the weather is good, the company pleasant, and the ride comfortable, why rush? For example, many cruisers reduce sails at night to avoid having to make sail changes. Reefing the main on a dark night in the middle of a squall, after just being awoken from a deep sleep, has all the ingredients for mishap. We often just set our sails to match the gusts and squalls, so that we can go day after day without touching the sails or helm. Because of the limitations of hull speed, we still do about 3/4 the distance each day we would do if we pushed the boat and ourselves. With plenty of water, a supply of good books and tunes, and a fishing line dragging behind to supply dinner, relaxed blue water passage making is usually over all too soon. Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com ps: correction to my previous: Re: Steel versus alloy, file upload static stability steel = 50*300 = 15000 ft lbs static stability alloy = 60*250 = 15000 ft lbs. should read static stability steel = 50/2*300 = 7500 ft lbs static stability alloy = 60/2*250 = 7500 ft lbs. This change makes no difference to the final result.| 3704|3703|2004-05-14 12:34:31|Michael Casling|Re: the log, the plank, and the rock|This is why surfers have a fairly good understanding of the forces at work. Michael ----- Original Message ----- From: ge@... To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, May 14, 2004 9:10 AM Subject: [origamiboats] the log, the plank, and the rock Understanding the cause and prevention of capsize does not involve the study of lofty texts. Rather it requires a trip to the beach. Anyone that has sat on the beach, hour after hour watching the driftwood in the surf will know what causes capsize. It has been know for centuries. Watching a straight log in the surf you will notice a very interesting thing. The log turns sideways to the surf, and moves up and down with the waves, but it never capsizes. It simply moves up and down. This is the model for a hull that cannot be rolled. The cylinder. If you look at the traditional wineglass shaped hull, you see that the hull and deck in section form a circle, with a couple of notches cut out of the top to form side decks for walking. An extremely good offshore hull. So, why are not all offshore boats shaped this way? Performance. Try and stand up on a straight log. It immediately dumps you into the water. One solution is to tie a big rock to the bottom of the log, and then you can stand on it. However, when you try and push the log forward in the water, you now have to push the rock as well. Now try and stand on a large plank floating in the water. Amazingly, the plank does not try and dump you. So, why not use this as our boat? Watch a plank in the surf. It will tilt to meet each wave, and when the surf gets to a certain size, the plank will capsize. The difference between the straight log and the plank is form stability. Boats use form stability to reduce ballast, as a means of increasing performance. Inherent to form stability is capsize. Form stability allows boats to gain performance by reducing ballast, and with this comes the risk of capsize. To judge the form stability of a hull, simply look at the hull in section. If it resembles a circle, it has low form stability. If it resembles a rectangle, it has high form stability. The shorter the section, the wider the section, the greater the form stability. Once a breaking wave approaches a critical energy level, a hull with form stability is at risk for capsize. If a boat is fast, but carries only moderate ballast, it probably has high form stability and is at risk for capsize. So, the next time someone quotes their favorite expert to justify this, that or the other feature in their designs, go sit on the beach and watch the driftwood. Just about everything possible has been tried in boats, and it all comes down to the lesson of the log, the rock, and the plank. There is an aspects of capsize, related to drag and form stability. A straight log in the surf does not remain motionless. It rocks backs and forth slightly due to skin friction, and if it has a branch sticking up, it can be rolled when the surf hits. There is a form of capsize in boats that follows this model, for boats in motion. Form stability allows ballast to be reduced to the point that a boat has little or no reserve ballast to carry the weight of the rig. The rig is being carried mostly by the form of the hull. However, when traveling across the face of a large breaking wave, the water pressure acting sideways on the keel will at some point exceed the reserve ballast weight in the keel. At this point the keel will lift to the surface of the water. This lifts the shorter rudder clear of the water in many boats. Directional control is lost, resulting in the classic broach. What some might call tripping over the keel. Sliding sideways down the face of the wave, tumblehome in the wineglass shaped hull helped lift the gunwales clear. In modern FG hulls, tumblehome has been removed to simplify molding. For reasons of style, other boats have followed. In these hulls the gunwales dig in and the buoyancy of the wave lifts the hull over the gunwales into capsize. In the classic full keel boats, the chance of broaching was minimized as the rudders and keel were the same length, and thus some directional control was always maintained. As rudder have been separated from keel to gain performance, twin rudder have been required to minimize the risk of broach induced capsize, resulting from keel drag. Because the rudders are outside the plane of the keel, as the keel lifts to the surface, one rudder still remains submerged. To minimizing drag induced capsize, adequate ballast is required to support the rig weight. For a given strength, solid wood masts are typically the heaviest. Steel, while strong for the cost, is weak for the weight and can be heavy. Hollow, laminated wood masts are typically stronger and lighter. Laminated wood is used in many weight critical applications, such as main wing spars in light aircraft, and for the weight is stronger than steel. Alloy masts are the most common, being light, strong, and rot free. Composite masts are typically the lightest and strongest, but can be expensive. Our triple chine designs are circular in section, to minimize form stability for offshore safety and comfort. We can provide tumblehome to minimize capsize risk, combined with either full keels or twin rudders to minimize the risk of broaching. We recommend light, strong rigs to maximize both static and dynamic stability. Our designs have never suffered any knockdowns, let alone capsize, and they perform beautifully. Not only have they never rolled over completely, they have never rolled over. They are fast and comfortable, with tons of room for supplies. They are not tender, and they do not hobby horse. They cost only a fraction of the cost of production FG yachts, even though they are typically built with mostly new parts. We believe that when you go to the effort to build a boat, you should end up with a new boat. Our designs are not limited to a single hull form. We can re-create just about anybody's favorite boat in origami, in steel or alloy, to any size. After all, if you are going to build a boat, why not build the boat you truly want? Passage times are important, but given that they form one of the smallest usages of a boat for most cruisers, livability at anchor is typically a more important factor. Weather knowledge and stamina play as big a part in passage making as boat design. Lots of people make slow passages simply because the boat is more comfortable, and the crew better rested, when not driven to the limits. If the weather is good, the company pleasant, and the ride comfortable, why rush? For example, many cruisers reduce sails at night to avoid having to make sail changes. Reefing the main on a dark night in the middle of a squall, after just being awoken from a deep sleep, has all the ingredients for mishap. We often just set our sails to match the gusts and squalls, so that we can go day after day without touching the sails or helm. Because of the limitations of hull speed, we still do about 3/4 the distance each day we would do if we pushed the boat and ourselves. With plenty of water, a supply of good books and tunes, and a fishing line dragging behind to supply dinner, relaxed blue water passage making is usually over all too soon. Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com ps: correction to my previous: Re: Steel versus alloy, file upload static stability steel = 50*300 = 15000 ft lbs static stability alloy = 60*250 = 15000 ft lbs. should read static stability steel = 50/2*300 = 7500 ft lbs static stability alloy = 60/2*250 = 7500 ft lbs. This change makes no difference to the final result. To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3705|3600|2004-05-14 12:47:31|Michael Casling|Re: Accountants, etc.|Back in the days when manual labour was used and an average man would carry about 50% of his weight on a fairly continuous basis the heavier man would obviously do more work in a day. Using modern tax theory the same larger man would have to carry his 50% plus a value added portion bringing his load up to a possible 90%. The larger man would either break down or leave the system, it is only logical, and overall production would decline. Why are we not happy with him carrying more weight in the first place, why do we demand more of him? Kind of like the extra weight the faster horses have to carry. If we go to a flat tax there will still be provision for the GST ( VAT ) rebate, the income assistance, the basic exemption on income under about $14500- and so on. I am refferring to BC Canada. In Canada we can thank England and NZ for drawing attention to the value added tax. My gripe is that we have a very heavy tax on personel income plus the value added tax (GST ) plus property taxes, plus tax on used goods, plus user fees, plus for a time heavy capitol gains tax, plus tax on interest at the same rate as income, plus disposal and enviromental taxes and probably a few more taxes. When you consider them all it becomes a heavy load. Michael in Kelowna who will drop this subject if required, but it is a factor in most peoples boat plans. ----- Original Message ----- From: audeojude To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2004 2:47 PM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Accountants, etc. This is in line with what I believe. I don't think the rich should pay more than me just because they are rich. Instead tie taxes to what you use. If your willing to live spartanly then you get to keep more and save it. Keep food taxes and taxes to for medical care to a minimum and then tax all the other stuff we buy, clothes, cars, houses, etc.. a one time sales tax. Rich people like their toys :) I'm all about having toys :) just pay the taxes on them when you buy them. If they want to not buy stuff but to save or invest their money then let them and don't tax it. They will buy something eventually :) everyone does :) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3706|3698|2004-05-14 12:58:34|Gerd|Re: It's all YOUR fault|Jeff, I downscaled the original plan, to a 31 gaff yawl with all- inside ballast & lateral daggerboards, all inside ballast. It's all at http://www.justmueller.com/boats/ and little by little there will be all designs and drawings. The long narrow light one was "the-boat-I-did-not-design-but-would- have-loved-to-if-I-were-alone-and-still-25-without-a-penny" But who knows, I might suddely get younger against all expectations, or find another young idiot to ask me to design it ;-) Gerd --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr" wrote: > Hello Gerd, > > I am not sure whether to say "Congratulations" or "This is another fine mess > you have gotten yourself into!" or "Good Luck" or to say all of the above. > As if you need to add another task to add to the daunting process of > building a 37 foot boat, but I think that it would be greatly appreciated > and very helpful to us all if you could periodically update us about time > spent and material costs incurred as your project progresses. > > I am also curious about the design that you have chosen to build. You had > been talking about building a comparatively narrow, comparatively light (for > steel) higher performance boat. Did you decide to go that route or are you > building a stock design (and if you went stock what design did you chose)? I > have been lurking around here for a long time but somehow I think I missed > any final discussion on that topic. Also did you go with supplier cutting or > are you going to burn the panels yourself. > > Best wishes, > Jeff | 3707|3703|2004-05-14 13:04:50|Gerd|Re: the log, the plank, and the rock|>It simply moves up and down. > This is the model for a hull that cannot be rolled. The >cylinder. ..... and preferably with the daggerboards up ;-) just kidding, Greg. Gerd| 3708|3635|2004-05-14 14:16:17|put_to_sea|Re: Damned yankees|> > Although, I would be labelled "anti-American" for my views on U.S. foreign policy and called a lot of insulting names for any critique that I might offer on U.S. culture, ... Unfortunately, many US citizens are now labeled "anti-American" because they are not being "patriotic" by supporting all our current administration's actions. In addition, I think television and the papers give a misleading view of US culture. Those of us without shocking opinions, conspicuous consumption, violent behavior, etc. do not seem to merit much airtime. Amos| 3709|3635|2004-05-14 20:48:41|kendall|Re: Damned yankees|--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "put_to_sea" wrote: > > > > Although, I would be labelled "anti-American" for my views on U.S. > foreign policy and called a lot of insulting names for any critique > that I might offer on U.S. culture, ... > > > Unfortunately, many US citizens are now labeled "anti-American" > because they are not being "patriotic" by supporting all our current > administration's actions. In addition, I think television and the > papers give a misleading view of US culture. Those of us without > shocking opinions, conspicuous consumption, violent behavior, etc. > do not seem to merit much airtime. > > Amos That's only because we don't provide a 'shock' value, so we'd be pretty boring, and nobody would watch. It is rating wars, whether it's TV or politics, and frankly violence and sexcapades are more likely to sell stories than 'Jim Normal, stopped to help an old lady who broke down on side of road, story at 11' Besides, that happens a million times, and a good story only happens once in a while. Ken.| 3710|3600|2004-05-14 21:04:20|kendall|Re: Accountants, etc.|--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Michael Casling wrote: > Back in the days when manual labour was used and an average man would carry about 50% of his weight on a fairly continuous basis the heavier man would obviously do more work in a day. Using modern tax theory the same larger man would have to carry his 50% plus a value added portion bringing his load up to a possible 90%. The larger man would either break down or leave the system, it is only logical, and overall production would decline. Why are we not happy with him carrying more weight in the first place, why do we demand more of him? cut---------------------------------------------------------------- That's my view, I'm a proponent of an income tax though, not a sales tax, I figure, make the money, pay taxes, put away some for later, and it's there, what you buy will be an income to the seller, so the taxes will still be paid, with a sales tax, it would be real easy for someone to make enough money to live on the rest of thier life, then move away, without ever having paid taxes. Frankly, I hate taxes, but I can see where they are needed, so I live with them. property tax is a total rip off, especially when I can live in a house for 12 years, have a neigghbor reside thier house, and pave thier driveway, and then I have to pay an extra $600 a year to look at my thier house? sorry, I don't like that color siding, since I'm paying, will you change it to something that won't clash with my boat? merc.| 3711|3703|2004-05-15 18:02:45|brentswain38|Re: the log, the plank, and the rock|Well said I remember on my first passage to the Marquesas in 1973 , wondering how people made those fast passage times on racing boats. Then I read about such a race where they made 14 sail changes on one watch, said "Screw that" and was far more content with my leisurely pace. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Michael Casling wrote: > This is why surfers have a fairly good understanding of the forces at work. Michael > ----- Original Message ----- > From: ge@e... > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Friday, May 14, 2004 9:10 AM > Subject: [origamiboats] the log, the plank, and the rock > > > Understanding the cause and prevention of capsize does not involve the study of lofty texts. Rather it requires a trip to the > beach. Anyone that has sat on the beach, hour after hour watching the driftwood in the surf will know what causes capsize. It has > been know for centuries. > > Watching a straight log in the surf you will notice a very interesting thing. The log turns sideways to the surf, and moves up and > down with the waves, but it never capsizes. It simply moves up and down. > > This is the model for a hull that cannot be rolled. The cylinder. If you look at the traditional wineglass shaped hull, you see > that the hull and deck in section form a circle, with a couple of notches cut out of the top to form side decks for walking. An > extremely good offshore hull. > > So, why are not all offshore boats shaped this way? Performance. Try and stand up on a straight log. It immediately dumps you > into the water. One solution is to tie a big rock to the bottom of the log, and then you can stand on it. However, when you try > and push the log forward in the water, you now have to push the rock as well. > > Now try and stand on a large plank floating in the water. Amazingly, the plank does not try and dump you. So, why not use this as > our boat? Watch a plank in the surf. It will tilt to meet each wave, and when the surf gets to a certain size, the plank will > capsize. > > The difference between the straight log and the plank is form stability. Boats use form stability to reduce ballast, as a means of > increasing performance. Inherent to form stability is capsize. Form stability allows boats to gain performance by reducing > ballast, and with this comes the risk of capsize. > > To judge the form stability of a hull, simply look at the hull in section. If it resembles a circle, it has low form stability. If > it resembles a rectangle, it has high form stability. The shorter the section, the wider the section, the greater the form > stability. Once a breaking wave approaches a critical energy level, a hull with form stability is at risk for capsize. If a boat > is fast, but carries only moderate ballast, it probably has high form stability and is at risk for capsize. > > So, the next time someone quotes their favorite expert to justify this, that or the other feature in their designs, go sit on the > beach and watch the driftwood. Just about everything possible has been tried in boats, and it all comes down to the lesson of the > log, the rock, and the plank. > > There is an aspects of capsize, related to drag and form stability. A straight log in the surf does not remain motionless. It > rocks backs and forth slightly due to skin friction, and if it has a branch sticking up, it can be rolled when the surf hits. There > is a form of capsize in boats that follows this model, for boats in motion. > > Form stability allows ballast to be reduced to the point that a boat has little or no reserve ballast to carry the weight of the > rig. The rig is being carried mostly by the form of the hull. However, when traveling across the face of a large breaking wave, > the water pressure acting sideways on the keel will at some point exceed the reserve ballast weight in the keel. At this point the > keel will lift to the surface of the water. This lifts the shorter rudder clear of the water in many boats. Directional control is > lost, resulting in the classic broach. What some might call tripping over the keel. > > Sliding sideways down the face of the wave, tumblehome in the wineglass shaped hull helped lift the gunwales clear. In modern FG > hulls, tumblehome has been removed to simplify molding. For reasons of style, other boats have followed. In these hulls the > gunwales dig in and the buoyancy of the wave lifts the hull over the gunwales into capsize. In the classic full keel boats, the > chance of broaching was minimized as the rudders and keel were the same length, and thus some directional control was always > maintained. As rudder have been separated from keel to gain performance, twin rudder have been required to minimize the risk of > broach induced capsize, resulting from keel drag. Because the rudders are outside the plane of the keel, as the keel lifts to the > surface, one rudder still remains submerged. > > To minimizing drag induced capsize, adequate ballast is required to support the rig weight. For a given strength, solid wood masts > are typically the heaviest. Steel, while strong for the cost, is weak for the weight and can be heavy. Hollow, laminated wood > masts are typically stronger and lighter. Laminated wood is used in many weight critical applications, such as main wing spars in > light aircraft, and for the weight is stronger than steel. Alloy masts are the most common, being light, strong, and rot free. > Composite masts are typically the lightest and strongest, but can be expensive. > > Our triple chine designs are circular in section, to minimize form stability for offshore safety and comfort. We can provide > tumblehome to minimize capsize risk, combined with either full keels or twin rudders to minimize the risk of broaching. We > recommend light, strong rigs to maximize both static and dynamic stability. > > Our designs have never suffered any knockdowns, let alone capsize, and they perform beautifully. Not only have they never rolled > over completely, they have never rolled over. They are fast and comfortable, with tons of room for supplies. They are not tender, > and they do not hobby horse. They cost only a fraction of the cost of production FG yachts, even though they are typically built > with mostly new parts. We believe that when you go to the effort to build a boat, you should end up with a new boat. Our designs > are not limited to a single hull form. We can re-create just about anybody's favorite boat in origami, in steel or alloy, to any > size. After all, if you are going to build a boat, why not build the boat you truly want? > > Passage times are important, but given that they form one of the smallest usages of a boat for most cruisers, livability at anchor > is typically a more important factor. Weather knowledge and stamina play as big a part in passage making as boat design. Lots of > people make slow passages simply because the boat is more comfortable, and the crew better rested, when not driven to the limits. > If the weather is good, the company pleasant, and the ride comfortable, why rush? > > For example, many cruisers reduce sails at night to avoid having to make sail changes. Reefing the main on a dark night in the > middle of a squall, after just being awoken from a deep sleep, has all the ingredients for mishap. We often just set our sails to > match the gusts and squalls, so that we can go day after day without touching the sails or helm. Because of the limitations of hull > speed, we still do about 3/4 the distance each day we would do if we pushed the boat and ourselves. With plenty of water, a supply > of good books and tunes, and a fishing line dragging behind to supply dinner, relaxed blue water passage making is usually over all > too soon. > > Greg Elliott > http://www.origamimagic.com > > ps: correction to my previous: Re: Steel versus alloy, file upload > > static stability steel = 50*300 = 15000 ft lbs > static stability alloy = 60*250 = 15000 ft lbs. > > should read > > static stability steel = 50/2*300 = 7500 ft lbs > static stability alloy = 60/2*250 = 7500 ft lbs. > > This change makes no difference to the final result. > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ADVERTISEMENT > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- > Yahoo! Groups Links > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3712|3703|2004-05-15 18:14:28|Michael Casling|Re: the log, the plank, and the rock|I have always been a light displacement fan but will readily concede that for a cruising boat a ship that will look after itself while I make a cup of tea and not worry about changing sails all the time has merit. Michael ----- Original Message ----- From: brentswain38 To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, May 15, 2004 3:02 PM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: the log, the plank, and the rock Well said I remember on my first passage to the Marquesas in 1973 , wondering how people made those fast passage times on racing boats. Then I read about such a race where they made 14 sail changes on one watch, said "Screw that" and was far more content with my leisurely pace. Brent Swain [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3713|3600|2004-05-15 18:20:26|brentswain38|Re: Accountants, etc.|You avoid paying a lot of tax when you build everything yourself, from cleats to anchors to anchorwinch, etc etc. , especially when you scrounge the materials free or at scrapyard prices. There is no law which says you have to participate fully in the consumer society.If you don't like it, boycott it to the greatest extent possible.It's been discovered that when people win the lotttery, they are very happy; for a short time, then return to the same base level of happiness they were always at. Once we are able to get our basic needs taken care of, that base level of happiness stays more or less constant for most of our lives. If you make less than $7,000 per year ,plenty per person cruising away from the cities, there is no income tax owed and getting free of the city lets you live more off good country food. I just woke up in a beautiful anchorage on Lasquetti Island with the sun shining thru the portholes, had a free breakfast of good country food washed down with fine salmon berrey tea , and had a pleasant stroll accross the island , chatting with friends along the way. I wonder what the rich folks are doing today that's more pleasant . Brent swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "kendall" wrote: > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Michael Casling wrote: > > Back in the days when manual labour was used and an average man > would carry about 50% of his weight on a fairly continuous basis the > heavier man would obviously do more work in a day. Using modern tax > theory the same larger man would have to carry his 50% plus a value > added portion bringing his load up to a possible 90%. The larger man > would either break down or leave the system, it is only logical, and > overall production would decline. Why are we not happy with him > carrying more weight in the first place, why do we demand more of him? > > > cut---------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > That's my view, I'm a proponent of an income tax though, not a sales > tax, I figure, make the money, pay taxes, put away some for later, and > it's there, what you buy will be an income to the seller, so the taxes > will still be paid, with a sales tax, it would be real easy for > someone to make enough money to live on the rest of thier life, then > move away, without ever having paid taxes. > > Frankly, I hate taxes, but I can see where they are needed, so I live > with them. property tax is a total rip off, especially when I can live > in a house for 12 years, have a neigghbor reside thier house, and pave > thier driveway, and then I have to pay an extra $600 a year to look at > my thier house? sorry, I don't like that color siding, since I'm > paying, will you change it to something that won't clash with my boat? > > merc. | 3715|3715|2004-05-16 07:50:53|Gerald Niffenegger|Trading|Just made a trade. Not always the case but I am happy as a clam and the guy I traded with is also. I traded away a 23' O'Day plastic sailboat that I had rescued from the bottom of the sea. I received a 3 cylinder, 33HP Yanmar with a 2.1-1 box, 200 hrs. and an Oerlikon CPW 320 MIG welder. My only problem now is figuring out what the hell all of the gauges and gadgets do on the welder? I have the manual but can't read German. Gerald| 3716|3716|2004-05-16 10:42:25|Jeff Williams|Re: Digest Number 806|Brent, Thanks for bringing back some fond memories. Some really nice people we met there, though we only stayed one night. For any Canadian West Coasters. Could you keep an eye out for my old boat? I miss her and often wonder how she's doing. Skookum Queen, wood, double ended, ketch rig, white with blue trim, last seen in Ucluelet harbour where I delivered her to her new owner about 6 years ago. Jeff > I just woke up in a beautiful anchorage on Lasquetti Island with > the sun shining thru the portholes, had a free breakfast of good > country food washed down with fine salmon berrey tea , and had a > pleasant stroll accross the island , chatting with friends along the > way. I wonder what the rich folks are doing today that's more > pleasant . > Brent swain | 3717|3715|2004-05-16 18:02:06|Gary H. Lucas|Re: Trading|Gerald, If you post a photo of the control panel we can probably tell you what the adjustments and gauges are. Gary H. Lucas ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gerald Niffenegger" To: Sent: Sunday, May 16, 2004 7:49 AM Subject: [origamiboats] Trading > > Just made a trade. Not always the case but I am happy as a clam and > the guy I traded with is also. I traded away a 23' O'Day plastic > sailboat that I had rescued from the bottom of the sea. I received a 3 > cylinder, 33HP Yanmar with a 2.1-1 box, 200 hrs. and an Oerlikon CPW > 320 MIG welder. My only problem now is figuring out what the hell all > of the gauges and gadgets do on the welder? I have the manual but > can't read German. > Gerald > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > | 3718|3715|2004-05-16 19:57:49|Gerald Niffenegger|Re: Trading|My digital camera is on the blink after a sea water bath. However, this is a picture of the machine. http://www.netbid.de/servlets/AuctionConnector?template=newsl_tr_fs&auctionID=514589&lngCode=de It is a far cry from the machines that I have used in the past. There are a few more things than just amp, volt, and wire feed. The head is liquid cooled and there is a four position switch for inox/aluminuim. Guess mild steel would be welded using the stainless-inox setting? Gerald --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gary H. Lucas" wrote: > Gerald, > If you post a photo of the control panel we can probably tell you what the > adjustments and gauges are. > > Gary H. Lucas > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Gerald Niffenegger" > To: > Sent: Sunday, May 16, 2004 7:49 AM > Subject: [origamiboats] Trading > > > > > > Just made a trade. Not always the case but I am happy as a clam and > > the guy I traded with is also. I traded away a 23' O'Day plastic > > sailboat that I had rescued from the bottom of the sea. I received a 3 > > cylinder, 33HP Yanmar with a 2.1-1 box, 200 hrs. and an Oerlikon CPW > > 320 MIG welder. My only problem now is figuring out what the hell all > > of the gauges and gadgets do on the welder? I have the manual but > > can't read German. > > Gerald > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > | 3719|3715|2004-05-16 21:17:45|Gary H. Lucas|Re: Trading|Gerald, Kind of hard to see the details, but that looks like a real nice machine. With two gauges you probably can read both current and arc voltage. It also looks like it may be a dual purpose machine, constant voltage for Mig welding and constant current for stick welding. The adjustments are probably voltage or current, slope which adjusts the voltage droop vs. current, and inductance which is used to control spatter. If the torch is water-cooled then this probably a high amperage high duty cycle machine because you don't need water cooling unless you run continuously above 200 amps or so. Gary H. Lucas ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gerald Niffenegger" To: Sent: Sunday, May 16, 2004 7:57 PM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Trading > > My digital camera is on the blink after a sea water bath. However, > this is a picture of the machine. > http://www.netbid.de/servlets/AuctionConnector?template=newsl_tr_fs&auctionID=514589&lngCode=de > It is a far cry from the machines that I have used in the past. There > are a few more things than just amp, volt, and wire feed. The head is > liquid cooled and there is a four position switch for inox/aluminuim. > Guess mild steel would be welded using the stainless-inox setting? > Gerald > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gary H. Lucas" > wrote: > > Gerald, > > If you post a photo of the control panel we can probably tell you > what the > > adjustments and gauges are. > > > > Gary H. Lucas > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Gerald Niffenegger" > > To: > > Sent: Sunday, May 16, 2004 7:49 AM > > Subject: [origamiboats] Trading > > > > > > > > > > Just made a trade. Not always the case but I am happy as a clam and > > > the guy I traded with is also. I traded away a 23' O'Day plastic > > > sailboat that I had rescued from the bottom of the sea. I received a 3 > > > cylinder, 33HP Yanmar with a 2.1-1 box, 200 hrs. and an Oerlikon CPW > > > 320 MIG welder. My only problem now is figuring out what the hell all > > > of the gauges and gadgets do on the welder? I have the manual but > > > can't read German. > > > Gerald > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > | 3721|3721|2004-05-17 09:24:40|Phil S.|Headed to Vancouver|I am finally headed to Vancouver. I will be in the area July 5th through the 9th. Can some one direct me on where I might look up a Brent Swain boat to check out? I know nothing about the area or distances involved, so a boat scouting trip might be completely unfeasable but it I am looking forward to trying. Phil| 3722|3722|2004-05-17 13:15:48|Rob|Re: Important Info for origamiboats Members|--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, randi_vb08c@y... wrote: Hey Randi Have you met Marisa. I think you two should get together and talk. You seem to have lots in common. | 3723|3715|2004-05-17 20:07:45|Gerald Niffenegger|Re: Trading|Oerlikon CPW 320 MIG Welding machine. The machine is 60% duty cycle at 320 A and 100% at 250 Amps. I tired the machine out today and welded a couple of things. I see now that I was probably welding at 320 amps ...... sure was hot. There are four positions for the ground cable. MIG-MAG 60-150 ..... 80-220 ...... 120 .... 320. Those three, I guess, are the rough amperage settings. There is a fourth called MIG Puls. Maybe when you use for aluminum???? Gerald --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gary H. Lucas" wrote: > Gerald, > Kind of hard to see the details, but that looks like a real nice machine. > With two gauges you probably can read both current and arc voltage. It also > looks like it may be a dual purpose machine, constant voltage for Mig > welding and constant current for stick welding. The adjustments are > probably voltage or current, slope which adjusts the voltage droop vs. > current, and inductance which is used to control spatter. If the torch is > water-cooled then this probably a high amperage high duty cycle machine > because you don't need water cooling unless you run continuously above 200 > amps or so. > > Gary H. Lucas > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Gerald Niffenegger" > To: > Sent: Sunday, May 16, 2004 7:57 PM > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Trading > > > > > > My digital camera is on the blink after a sea water bath. However, > > this is a picture of the machine. > > > http://www.netbid.de/servlets/AuctionConnector?template=newsl_tr_fs&auctionID=514589&lngCode=de > > It is a far cry from the machines that I have used in the past. There > > are a few more things than just amp, volt, and wire feed. The head is > > liquid cooled and there is a four position switch for inox/aluminuim. > > Guess mild steel would be welded using the stainless-inox setting? > > Gerald > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gary H. Lucas" > > wrote: > > > Gerald, > > > If you post a photo of the control panel we can probably tell you > > what the > > > adjustments and gauges are. > > > > > > Gary H. Lucas > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Gerald Niffenegger" > > > To: > > > Sent: Sunday, May 16, 2004 7:49 AM > > > Subject: [origamiboats] Trading > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Just made a trade. Not always the case but I am happy as a clam and > > > > the guy I traded with is also. I traded away a 23' O'Day plastic > > > > sailboat that I had rescued from the bottom of the sea. I received a 3 > > > > cylinder, 33HP Yanmar with a 2.1-1 box, 200 hrs. and an Oerlikon CPW > > > > 320 MIG welder. My only problem now is figuring out what the hell all > > > > of the gauges and gadgets do on the welder? I have the manual but > > > > can't read German. > > > > Gerald > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > > > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > | 3724|3724|2004-05-18 14:27:17|Phil S.|Transmissions|Ok this is going to sound like a stupid question BUT, what type of clutch does a marine transmission need. I have been looking at different brands of Transmission and I don't seem to see how the connection to the engine is hooked up. Or should I jsut try to locate a n engine gear combo. Phil| 3725|3689|2004-05-18 15:02:28|richytill|Re: Hidden costs/Interior woodwork|Joe, 1. The roof liner is 4" X 3/8" yellow cedar boards @ $ 275 + $120 for screws and $180 for clear, satin, varnish and a lot of sand paper. About 4 months. 2. The ceiling strips (sides) are 2" X 7/16" yellow cedar strips cut on a table saw with left-over yellow cedar from the roof and old growth fir from the firing strips plus left over varnish = $150 for screws, gloves, sanding stuff etc. 2 months. 3. Other wood: teak $500; yellow cedar $300; fir $200. 4. Sole is in progress. Yellow cedar frames; 3/4" ply. Using some UHMW blocking (free as scrap) 5. All bulkheads and all ply everwhere is boat grade Chilean Pine. This is virtually void free, done with phenolic resin and comes from the radiata pine family. I have had no luck finding a source of decent used plywood but this stuff comes at $58 cdn. 3/4" a sheet so no complaints on the price. So around $850 for plywood to date. 6. On sale epoxy: 3 gallons @ $300 with free anti sag compound. 7. Yard sale electrical marine stuff @ 500 in one lot: including almost enough to wire the boat not counting lights but lots of breakers and switches etc. (have sold some of the extras). Foamed in conduit as per Brent's instructions. Nav' lights are on, the rest of the wiring has barely started. New alternator $425; house batteries on sale $400. 8. Double acting Henderson bilge pump half price @ $225. Other bilge pumps and pumps extra. 9. No refrigeration. Ice box in progress. 10. Middle of the road galley. Around $1000 so far but not complete. 11. Propane heater: on sale @ $325. 12. Foaming: $2250 11. Used VW diesel $850; rebuilt Borg Warner transmission $1050. Several months to make it all work. Hoses, clamps and fittings seem to cost a lot of money when you add it all up. In this case there have been gains in salvaging metals in new condition and costs for local real wood have been pleasing. I had to bite the plywood so as to keep the project moving along. I have no complaints about the big costs so far--beware of all the gloves screws, clamps, hoses etc., etc. rt --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Joe Earsley" wrote: > Great Information rt, > > > > Could you give some specifics? > > > > What are your side surfaces, sole, galley counters and ceiling liner? > > What about the time spent completing systems like lighting, engine > instrumentation, electrical charging and overcurrent protection? Did > these take a bunch of time too? > > Are you installing refrigeration? > > Is the galley really complex or middle of the road? > > > > Again, thanks for the reality check. You speak what I have experienced > in all my projects to date. It's why I think I am cut out for house > framing rather than finish work. > > > > Joe Earsley, > > Anchorage, Alaska > > > > > > ________________________________ > > From: richytill [mailto:tillrc@h...] > Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2004 10:58 AM > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Subject: [origamiboats] Hidden costs/Interior woodwork > > > > Potential builders can benefit from thinking about what they expect > to achieve in the way of interior finish early in building. If you > are intending on doing all your own work and getting off to sea in a > hurry--try to be realistic about what you can afford in the way of > time and money. > > I continue to be amazed at the mounting costs of glue, screws, zip > cut blades, sharpening stones, varnish, jig saw blades, vinyl gloves, > paint brushes, chisels and so on. The MY ISLAND project has just > gone in to year 4. > > You can make the interior a fast low cost project or plod away doing > joinery as I am doing. It is a personal choice of course. If you > take the joinery/real wood approach, be aware of the time and cost > involved. I have tried to go middle of the road and estimate the > interior will take as long as the steel work--progress is far less > visible. > > Working full time and doing the interior at the same time makes for a > full schedule--how will this impact your social/family life? If you > are in a rush, it may be worthwhile asking for a quote on the whole > job: especially if you are not a woodworker. > > Try to be clear on what you want. If you are happy with few sheets > of plywood fixed with deck screws, a bucket and reclaimed paint > that's fine--sail on, have fun. If you want real fancy, expect to > expend lots of time or money or both. I am enjoying the challenge of > doing the interior and it is rewarding. Be aware tho', the desire > for real wood has its costs. rt > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > ADVERTISEMENT > click here > oups/S=1705150872:HM/EXP=1084561142/A=2128215/R=0/SIG=10se96mf6/*http: /c > ompanion.yahoo.com> > > > s/S=:HM/A=2128215/rand=569217836> > > > > ________________________________ > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > * To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of > Service . > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3726|3726|2004-05-18 16:47:32|run2excess2000|Ultra Bright LED's for boaters|Does anyone know where and which are the best LED flashlights on the market. I do deal in a certain LED light but was wondering if anyone knows of the best and most reasonable lights out there. The lights I have are the Ultra Bright II's that have a lifetime warranty, can be seen for over a mile and LED bulb will never burn out. Great for having on your boat,pilots,hiking, camping, running, or anywhere you need a flashlight.Get them in red as they will not impair your night vision. See them at www.photonmicro.com Thanks, Brad| 3727|3724|2004-05-18 17:12:19|Gerald Niffenegger|Re: Transmissions|Maybe this is a stupid answer? However, the clutches on many marine transmissions are inside the gear box. I have two boats and both transmissions attach to the flywheel differently. The VW has a springy metal plate bolted to the flywheel with splined hole too accept the transmission shaft. The other has a flange bolted to the flywheel with three fingers. Attached to the transmission shaft is a flange with three fingers. A rubber washer with matching holes to the fingers acts as a shock absorber where the metal fingers interlock. Gerald --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Phil S." wrote: > Ok this is going to sound like a stupid question BUT, what type of clutch does a marine > transmission need. I have been looking at different brands of Transmission and I don't > seem to see how the connection to the engine is hooked up. Or should I jsut try to locate a > n engine gear combo. > Phil | 3728|3724|2004-05-18 18:10:48|Michael Casling|Re: Transmissions|What Gerald said. The clutch plates for my Yanmar are in the gearbox. I assume that at idle and neutral they are not engaged as in slipping but when I clunk it in gear they engage and grab. Sailboats are handy for gearboxes and shafts because the hull rises out of the way so the engine sits on an even keel. The problem for my fishing boat is the flat run aft, I would have to tilt the engine down at the back to get the shaft angling down enough for clearance for the prop, so I assume this is why we have V drives. I am going to take a look at a wake board boat to see how they do it. I would prefer a conventional gearbox or auto transmission if possible rather than the OMC leg for my fishing boat. Michael ----- Original Message ----- From: Phil S. To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2004 11:25 AM Subject: [origamiboats] Transmissions Ok this is going to sound like a stupid question BUT, what type of clutch does a marine transmission need. I have been looking at different brands of Transmission and I don't seem to see how the connection to the engine is hooked up. Or should I jsut try to locate a n engine gear combo. Phil To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3729|3724|2004-05-18 20:37:52|Gerald Niffenegger|Re: Transmissions|Michael On the surface it sounds like you want an 8 deg. angle down gear box? Check out this site ..... it has more boxes that anyone would want to look at. Gerald --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Michael Casling wrote: > What Gerald said. The clutch plates for my Yanmar are in the gearbox. I assume that at idle and neutral they are not engaged as in slipping but when I clunk it in gear they engage and grab. Sailboats are handy for gearboxes and shafts because the hull rises out of the way so the engine sits on an even keel. The problem for my fishing boat is the flat run aft, I would have to tilt the engine down at the back to get the shaft angling down enough for clearance for the prop, so I assume this is why we have V drives. I am going to take a look at a wake board boat to see how they do it. I would prefer a conventional gearbox or auto transmission if possible rather than the OMC leg for my fishing boat. Michael > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Phil S. > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2004 11:25 AM > Subject: [origamiboats] Transmissions > > > Ok this is going to sound like a stupid question BUT, what type of clutch does a marine > transmission need. I have been looking at different brands of Transmission and I don't > seem to see how the connection to the engine is hooked up. Or should I jsut try to locate a > n engine gear combo. > Phil > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ADVERTISEMENT > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Yahoo! Groups Links > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3730|3724|2004-05-18 20:49:31|Graeme|Re: Transmissions|Gerald You missed the site lol damn I hate when I do that Graeme -----Original Message----- From: Gerald Niffenegger [mailto:niffeneggerniff@...] Sent: Wednesday, 19 May 2004 8:37 AM To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Transmissions Michael On the surface it sounds like you want an 8 deg. angle down gear box? Check out this site ..... it has more boxes that anyone would want to look at. Gerald --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Michael Casling wrote: > What Gerald said. The clutch plates for my Yanmar are in the gearbox. I assume that at idle and neutral they are not engaged as in slipping but when I clunk it in gear they engage and grab. Sailboats are handy for gearboxes and shafts because the hull rises out of the way so the engine sits on an even keel. The problem for my fishing boat is the flat run aft, I would have to tilt the engine down at the back to get the shaft angling down enough for clearance for the prop, so I assume this is why we have V drives. I am going to take a look at a wake board boat to see how they do it. I would prefer a conventional gearbox or auto transmission if possible rather than the OMC leg for my fishing boat. Michael > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Phil S. > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2004 11:25 AM > Subject: [origamiboats] Transmissions > > > Ok this is going to sound like a stupid question BUT, what type of clutch does a marine > transmission need. I have been looking at different brands of Transmission and I don't > seem to see how the connection to the engine is hooked up. Or should I jsut try to locate a > n engine gear combo. > Phil > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ADVERTISEMENT > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------ > Yahoo! Groups Links > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links| 3731|3724|2004-05-18 21:33:21|Gerald Niffenegger|Re: Transmissions|Michael On the surface it sounds like you want an 8 deg. angle down gear box? Check out this site ..... it has more boxes that anyone would want to look at. http://www.simplicity-marine.com/Hurth-ZF.htm Damn ...... I hate when I have to back track. Gerald --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gerald Niffenegger" wrote: > Michael > On the surface it sounds like you want an 8 deg. angle down gear box? > Check out this site ..... it has more boxes that anyone would want to > look at. > Gerald > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Michael Casling wrote: > > What Gerald said. The clutch plates for my Yanmar are in the > gearbox. I assume that at idle and neutral they are not engaged as in > slipping but when I clunk it in gear they engage and grab. Sailboats > are handy for gearboxes and shafts because the hull rises out of the > way so the engine sits on an even keel. The problem for my fishing > boat is the flat run aft, I would have to tilt the engine down at the > back to get the shaft angling down enough for clearance for the prop, > so I assume this is why we have V drives. I am going to take a look at > a wake board boat to see how they do it. I would prefer a conventional > gearbox or auto transmission if possible rather than the OMC leg for > my fishing boat. Michael > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Phil S. > > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2004 11:25 AM > > Subject: [origamiboats] Transmissions > > > > > > Ok this is going to sound like a stupid question BUT, what type of > clutch does a marine > > transmission need. I have been looking at different brands of > Transmission and I don't > > seem to see how the connection to the engine is hooked up. Or > should I jsut try to locate a > > n engine gear combo. > > Phil > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > ADVERTISEMENT > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of > Service. > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3732|22|2004-05-18 21:43:29|origamiboats@yahoogroups.com|New file uploaded to origamiboats |Hello, This email message is a notification to let you know that a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the origamiboats group. File : /OrigamiTrolleryacht/BS40Footer.pdf Uploaded by : Newbarndesign Description : Preliminary 40 foot Troller Origami You can access this file at the URL http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/files/OrigamiTrolleryacht/BS40Footer.pdf To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/files Regards, Newbarndesign | 3733|22|2004-05-18 22:18:23|origamiboats@yahoogroups.com|New file uploaded to origamiboats |Hello, This email message is a notification to let you know that a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the origamiboats group. File : /OrigamiTrolleryacht/BS40TrollerTop.pdf Uploaded by : Newbarndesign Description : Top View Troller Yacht You can access this file at the URL http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/files/OrigamiTrolleryacht/BS40TrollerTop.pdf To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/files Regards, Newbarndesign | 3734|3734|2004-05-18 22:43:24|Phil S.|Troller Yacht Ideas|I finally got around to scaning in some of my pencil sketched ideas for what I think would be a neat troller/trawler yacht. It is basically the same layout as George Beuhlers(sp) diesel duck 38 but built into a 40' Brent Swain origami hull. I added to the freeboard in the stern, to fit a decent cabin with a bed. The head is in the bow and the cabin has a pointed front to give me enough head room to sit on the crapper without bumbing my head. It has a decent sized engine room with enough room to squat in it and do maintenance. I will get to the interiors someday soon(ok maybe 6 months from now) but I might switch to a full width cabin in front. I was thinking about adding a berth over the eating area. I apologize to Brent for "uglying up" his beautiful design but it fits what I think are my needs. Being 6'2" and nearly 300lbs, I take up a lot of room. I WAGed it out and I think I have only added about 380lbs worth of steel by increasing the cabin and wheel house height. I have to sit down and calculate the center of gravity and the center of bouyancy but I don't believe I am too far off. My ideal is a boat that will self right but won't toss me around. Because this isn't going to sail I shortened the bilge keels and made them wider and longer, to hold more fuel. 99% of my cruising will be in the NY and Canadian canals, the finger lakes and the Great Lakes, I can't see adding a mast for a auxilary sail that will be down most of the time anyway. Heck if the engine does quit I can call for help on my cell phone or tie off the bank and walk. I appreciate your ideas. Phil| 3735|3734|2004-05-18 23:53:46|intiaboats|Re: Troller Yacht Ideas|Phil: Nice work. Where do I buy the plans? As a 6'2" I know that I'll be sqeezing every vertical inch out of my future build. I have also been considering a power version of Brent's design/method, perhaps a limited cargo version, as well, for running supplies from town to my beach in the Philippines. Thanks for sharing your drawings with us. Mike --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Phil S." wrote: > I finally got around to scaning in some of my pencil sketched ideas for what I think > would be a neat troller/trawler yacht... | 3736|3734|2004-05-19 03:26:01|Gerd|Re: Troller Yacht Ideas|Looks very nice, Phil, and should give you lots of living space. I have been tossing a small troller around in my head for some time, because I live far from the sea and would like to have something to spend the weekends on the river. Right now I am busy to get the YAGO started for real, but I hope during the holidays to have some time for that. Will be much smaller though, something like 26 feet. Looking forward to see the interior layout. Gerd| 3737|3734|2004-05-19 08:38:00|Phil S.|Re: Troller Yacht Ideas|Thanks Mike; After I build the boat and cruise it for a while I might sell the as built plans. I do plan on keeping track of how it goes together and keeping notes on changes that needed to be made. Next rainy day I don't have to work I will knock out the intierior, I have it sketched in pencil but I need to scan it in and trace it into my CAD application, that takes a little bit of free time I don't get much of right now. Beach in the Philippines? Wow sounds wonderful, I may get back to the orient someday, cruising Thailand, Vietnam and southern China sounds like a blast. I have always wanted to see the areas north east of Hong Kong. Although the southern Philippine islands sound dangerous right now with all those peace loving Muslims running around hacking heads off in the name of Allah. For now I will have to be content exploring the canadian side of the Great Lakes and the canals of Ontario and NY. In a few years I will have grandchildren to spoil so I want to be in the area for them. Regards Phil --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "intiaboats" wrote: > Phil: > Nice work. Where do I buy the plans? As a 6'2" I know that I'll be > sqeezing every vertical inch out of my future build. I have also > been considering a power version of Brent's design/method, perhaps a > limited cargo version, as well, for running supplies from town to my > beach in the Philippines. > Thanks for sharing your drawings with us. > Mike > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Phil S." > wrote: > > I finally got around to scaning in some of my pencil sketched > ideas for what I think > > would be a neat troller/trawler yacht... | 3738|3734|2004-05-19 09:13:43|Phil S.|Re: Troller Yacht Ideas|Thanks Gerd; My inspirations were the diesel ducks by GB, K'ahn by Jay Benford and of course our own Mr. Swain. I am trying to figure out what engine, transmission wheel combo to use. One of the 41' Ducks uses a 26" variable pitch prop. No way I am spending $4500+ on just the prop alone. I was thinking a 4 blade 28" wheel fairly steep pitch, and 2.5:1 or even a 3:1 gear down of a 48hp Kubota 4 cylinder. I am a big tug fan and think a bigger slow turning wheel will be better. I think I can even make the wheel here at work out of scrap 316ss and a piece of 2" SCH160 316ss pipe. I am really fortunate that I work for a manufacturer of ASME code pressure vessels, so I have a full machine and welding shop at my disposal. Hmm maybe a wheel out of Hastelloy. Deffinately will NEVER corrode. I also have a different Idea about welding, Tack the hull together with my stick welder and then do full penetration welds from the inside with my MIG machine, then flap wheel the outside to clean up the welds. That way I can work outdoors without worrying about the shield gasses being blown away. Just as long as I ventilate so I don't pass out from the CO2. Oh I also have a really cool idea on how to transport this to the Erie canal about 15 miles from my house. With a farm tractor, I can weld on places to bolt a few mobile home axles to the bilge keels, rig up a pivoting front wheel with a towbar, leave my house at 7:30 some sunday morning, and vwalah, I am in the water in about 45 minutes, no trucking fees, no special licensing. I own a farm so if I get pulled over the cops really can't say to much, it is a piece of farm equipment, hahahah. From the canal I can go where ever I decide to head. Ok I have rambled enough. Regards Phil --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gerd" wrote: > Looks very nice, Phil, and should give you lots of living space. > I have been tossing a small troller around in my head for some time, > because I live far from the sea and would like to have something to > spend the weekends on the river. Right now I am busy to get the YAGO > started for real, but I hope during the holidays to have some time > for that. Will be much smaller though, something like 26 feet. > Looking forward to see the interior layout. > Gerd | 3739|3734|2004-05-19 16:47:53|dreemer1962|Re: Troller Yacht Ideas|I'm not really into motor boats, but I do like easily driving, low powered, lean, George Buhler's cruisers, in particular Pilgrim, Ellemaid, Idelwind. Gerd, especially if you want to use the boat on the Danube, where water flows quite fast, you will need narrow boat. Consider for example Pilgrim. Although about 13 meters long (44 ft), she's only 10' 6" wide, should be economical to build and own. You could use it for inspiration to design something similar, maybe just a hair smaller and in steel. Milan http://www.georgebuehler.com/photothumbs.html http://www.georgebuehler.com/Pilgrim.html --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gerd" wrote: > Looks very nice, Phil, and should give you lots of living space. > I have been tossing a small troller around in my head for some time, > because I live far from the sea and would like to have something to > spend the weekends on the river. Right now I am busy to get the YAGO > started for real, but I hope during the holidays to have some time > for that. Will be much smaller though, something like 26 feet. > Looking forward to see the interior layout. > Gerd | 3740|3724|2004-05-19 19:42:46|Michael Casling|Re: Transmissions|That is probably what it would take with the engine tilted a bit, but at $1800- US I will pass. I need a couple of bearings and an adaptor plate and I will have this thing running. Just noticed the strut on the sailboat is loose so that is what I will be working on soon. Michael ----- Original Message ----- From: Gerald Niffenegger To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2004 6:32 PM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Transmissions Michael On the surface it sounds like you want an 8 deg. angle down gear box? Check out this site ..... it has more boxes that anyone would want to look at. http://www.simplicity-marine.com/Hurth-ZF.htm Damn ...... I hate when I have to back track. Gerald --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gerald Niffenegger" wrote: > Michael > On the surface it sounds like you want an 8 deg. angle down gear box? > Check out this site ..... it has more boxes that anyone would want to > look at. > Gerald > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Michael Casling wrote: > > What Gerald said. The clutch plates for my Yanmar are in the > gearbox. I assume that at idle and neutral they are not engaged as in > slipping but when I clunk it in gear they engage and grab. Sailboats > are handy for gearboxes and shafts because the hull rises out of the > way so the engine sits on an even keel. The problem for my fishing > boat is the flat run aft, I would have to tilt the engine down at the > back to get the shaft angling down enough for clearance for the prop, > so I assume this is why we have V drives. I am going to take a look at > a wake board boat to see how they do it. I would prefer a conventional > gearbox or auto transmission if possible rather than the OMC leg for > my fishing boat. Michael > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Phil S. > > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2004 11:25 AM > > Subject: [origamiboats] Transmissions > > > > > > Ok this is going to sound like a stupid question BUT, what type of > clutch does a marine > > transmission need. I have been looking at different brands of > Transmission and I don't > > seem to see how the connection to the engine is hooked up. Or > should I jsut try to locate a > > n engine gear combo. > > Phil > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > ADVERTISEMENT > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of > Service. > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3741|3734|2004-05-20 02:54:36|Gerd|Re: Troller Yacht Ideas|> Although about 13 meters long (44 ft), she's only 10' 6" wide, should be economical to build and own. Milan - 13 m is about 3 times as big in volume and budget as my current main project, and the boat for the river should be a lot smaller ;-) Anyway, I will make some first drawings later this year, right now I am shopping for electrodes, come-alongs and all that stuff - steel for YAGO will be dilivered next week! But yes, I know buehlers boats, and they are very nice. Gerd YAGO PROJECT at http://www.justmueller.com/boats| 3742|3734|2004-05-20 04:33:00|Ben Tucker|Yago31 2mm decks|Hi gerd just to say the yago is looking awesome, specailly the last picture of her on the hard with the boards up. the redesigned transom and deck looks great. A couple of questions that are relevant to the group, I notice that you are using 2mm steel for the decks, how will this go from a welding and Bonging as you walk on it perspective? Sounds like a great way to save weight while keeping the pros of welded steel decks and it might apply to the smaller BS designs for the cabintops? are you going to use galv or something from a corrosion point of view? can the interior lining and insulation be used to stiffen up the 2mm plate by glueing it to the underside, or wedging it under the L beams? Also Im wondering if you have done any stability calculations with the inside ballast/CB combo. The only other similar boats I have seen are the wylos with their stubb keels and CB combo at www.angelfire.com/wy/wyloyacht and the alcyone designs at http://www.alcyone-archive.org/ anyway she looks great and you never know, might get some plans off you myself sometime! as always I will be keen to contribute my two bobs worth, I've got a head full of ideas, some good and some probably not so good! Cheers and well done Ben| 3743|3734|2004-05-20 09:52:00|Gerd|Re: Yago31 2mm decks|Thanks Ben, good to hear some nice words when youre as nerveous as I am at the moment ;-) Steel coming monday.... --- In origamiboats@yaho ogroups.com, "Ben Tucker" wrote: > you are using 2mm steel for the decks, how will this go from a > welding and Bonging as you walk on it perspective? I have done that before, and it is a bit on the nasty side for welding nicely... what we found then was that if you weld very carefully, with short tacks along the stringers it is ok, but as soon as you tack across that, say to frames that would also touch the plate, you get up-and-down rectangles, you step on one up field and it plonks down and brings up the neighbour field.. not nice. You can fix that with heating, if you have a good hand a that, otherwise you need to get somebody. I had a gy who sat on deck with a bearbottle, looked at a ploink for 10 minutes, heated one sport to exactly the right color, dripped some beer on it and it was gone. He tried to show me, but I never managed. In the end you could walk everywhere without plonking sounds. He also drank some of it, of course ;-) Filling it up with foam/lining etc will dampen the sound, but not hold it stiff. > and it might apply to the smaller BS designs for the cabintops? check with Brent on that, would not dare to recommend anything there. > you going to use galv or something from a corrosion point of view? No, I simply bought black steel, and will see that I get somebody to blast it when I am ready. All our boats were blasted inside out, and then epoxy Zink, and after 20 years of use and - in some cases - neglect they are still perfect. I am a lot older and lazier now, and can't really see me blasting inside myself though. I would have gone for pre-painted but could not get anything here at short notice. > Also Im wondering if you have done any stability calculations with > the inside ballast/CB combo. Yes, preliminary AVS is OK, but depending a lot on how you load and equip because of the high ballst and the wide deck - but you have to be _ery_ careful with that sort of calcs. Some very high numbers I have seen seem to be very optimistic, so if you do not know the height of the center of gravity and how it got there in the first place, it does not mean much. In some cases the CG is simply assumed at the waterline, which, on modern boats with moderate ballast and draft and a shallow hull with high sides is simply not true. A boat like that, fully loaded and equipped can have the CG easily at 20 to 25 cm above the waterline, and in that case the curve looks dramatically different. In many cases this calculation will look at the hull-shape and very roughly estimate the major masses, and not take in account the stuff you bring aboard, and of which a lot is actually stowed higher than the empty boat's CG, plus crew, rigg-add- ons, dinghi on deck etc. and without counting on the loose stuff piling up on the ceiling after a 180... I am still working on the final decklayout and distribution of masses, and will then publish the curve as well as the details for the CG. It is clear though that if you want a very high AVS you need to go for a different boat, narrower, higher superstructures, deeper ballast and so on, as it is not realistic to move increase the ballast in full realation to the distance you move it up - YAGO with 1.8 tons in a keel-version will have a higher AVS than the centerboarder with 2.3 to 2.5 inside the hull, and the difference still left over to be filled with cruising equipment or people for the same WL. It' a personal choice. That said, I do not think that a high AVS is the ultimate mesure for seaworthiness... even if a lot of people disagree on that. There are many things to be said about centerboarders, and I do not want to convince anybody, but my own personal conviction is that the fact that a raised board will decrease the likelihood of tripping over and being rolled is a bigger safety factor than the lower AVS and more stable curve in negative. I have sailed big centerboarders is moderately shitty weather, and the way the boat moved board up in broaching waves was conclusive for me. The boat bobs and slides away from the wave, and there is not this heavy lurching and healing when the hull is pushed sideways and the keel want to hold you back in deeper solid water. But that's just me. Everybody else like he wants. I just hope I have not triggered yet another round of stability discussions;-) > I've got a head full of ideas, some good and some probably not so good! keep them coming ;-)| 3744|3734|2004-05-20 10:23:26|Phil S.|Re: Yago31 2mm decks|Gerd; I love the Yago and your web site, I also have a CAD application that I use at work that won't skin objects correctly. Which is why I will not be designing my own hull form, too many variables I don't want to change. I will buy Brent's 40' plan and build the hull from that and make my deck and superstructure modifications in the modeling stage. Hopefully working out any bugs at that point. I am looking forward to seeing how your project progresses and look forward to being at the stage you are. Regards Phil| 3745|3745|2004-05-20 11:51:50|Courtney Thomas|Re: Yago31 - what is EPOXY ZINK, please ?|Epoxy zink is mentioned in the below included posting. Thank you. Gerd wrote: > Thanks Ben, good to hear some nice words when youre as nerveous as I > am at the moment ;-) Steel coming monday.... > > --- In origamiboats@yaho > ogroups.com, "Ben Tucker" wrote: > > >>you are using 2mm steel for the decks, how will this go from a >>welding and Bonging as you walk on it perspective? >> > I have done that before, and it is a bit on the nasty side for > welding nicely... what we found then was that if you weld very > carefully, with short tacks along the stringers it is ok, but as > soon as you tack across that, say to frames that would also touch > the plate, you get up-and-down rectangles, you step on one up field > and it plonks down and brings up the neighbour field.. not nice. You > can fix that with heating, if you have a good hand a that, otherwise > you need to get somebody. I had a gy who sat on deck with a > bearbottle, looked at a ploink for 10 minutes, heated one sport to > exactly the right color, dripped some beer on it and it was gone. He > tried to show me, but I never managed. In the end you could walk > everywhere without plonking sounds. He also drank some of it, of > course ;-) > > Filling it up with foam/lining etc will dampen the sound, but not > hold it stiff. > > >>and it might apply to the smaller BS designs for the cabintops? >> > check with Brent on that, would not dare to recommend anything > there. > > >>you going to use galv or something from a corrosion point of view? >> > No, I simply bought black steel, and will see that I get somebody to > blast it when I am ready. All our boats were blasted inside out, and > then epoxy Zink, and after 20 years of use and - in some cases - > neglect they are still perfect. I am a lot older and lazier now, and > can't really see me blasting inside myself though. I would have gone > for pre-painted but could not get anything here at short notice. > > >>Also Im wondering if you have done any stability calculations with >>the inside ballast/CB combo. >> > Yes, preliminary AVS is OK, but depending a lot on how you load and > equip because of the high ballst and the wide deck - but you have to > be _ery_ careful with that sort of calcs. Some very high numbers I > have seen seem to be very optimistic, so if you do not know the > height of the center of gravity and how it got there in the first > place, it does not mean much. In some cases the CG is simply assumed > at the waterline, which, on modern boats with moderate ballast and > draft and a shallow hull with high sides is simply not true. A boat > like that, fully loaded and equipped can have the CG easily at 20 to > 25 cm above the waterline, and in that case the curve looks > dramatically different. In many cases this calculation will look at > the hull-shape and very roughly estimate the major masses, and not > take in account the stuff you bring aboard, and of which a lot is > actually stowed higher than the empty boat's CG, plus crew, rigg-add- > ons, dinghi on deck etc. and without counting on the loose stuff > piling up on the ceiling after a 180... I am still working on the > final decklayout and distribution of masses, and will then publish > the curve as well as the details for the CG. > > It is clear though that if you want a very high AVS you need to go > for a different boat, narrower, higher superstructures, deeper > ballast and so on, as it is not realistic to move increase the > ballast in full realation to the distance you move it up - YAGO with > 1.8 tons in a keel-version will have a higher AVS than the > centerboarder with 2.3 to 2.5 inside the hull, and the difference > still left over to be filled with cruising equipment or people for > the same WL. It' a personal choice. > > That said, I do not think that a high AVS is the ultimate mesure for > seaworthiness... even if a lot of people disagree on that. > > There are many things to be said about centerboarders, and I do not > want to convince anybody, but my own personal conviction is that the > fact that a raised board will decrease the likelihood of tripping > over and being rolled is a bigger safety factor than the lower AVS > and more stable curve in negative. I have sailed big centerboarders > is moderately shitty weather, and the way the boat moved board up in > broaching waves was conclusive for me. The boat bobs and slides away > from the wave, and there is not this heavy lurching and healing when > the hull is pushed sideways and the keel want to hold you back in > deeper solid water. But that's just me. Everybody else like he > wants. I just hope I have not triggered yet another round of > stability discussions;-) > > >>I've got a head full of ideas, some good and some probably not so >> > good! > keep them coming ;-) > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > -- s/v Mutiny Rhodes Bounty II lying Oriental, NC WDB5619| 3746|3746|2004-05-20 12:03:14|johnkupris@aol.com|epoxy zinc paint|Hi Gerd, You talked about blasting interiors of metal boats and painted them with epoxy zincs and then what paint did you put over that, inside and out? I'm at this stage. John [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3747|3746|2004-05-20 12:38:49|Gerd|Re: epoxy zinc paint|John, I am afraid I can't help you there. that was 20 years ago, and in france, and all I remember is that we - blasted to light grey inside and out applied a first coat of some 2-comp epoxy zink stuff, ver thick, in big drums, that we boght in bulk for several boats at a time - inside then 2 thick coats of brae epoxy - outside some strange coutchouc paint, one coat, any colot you want as long as it was brown and then - finish, used all sorts of paint, including cheapest wall-mart stuff Resulst were extremely good, you could not get the zink-stuff off with a hammer! So if I do not find easier/cheaper ways, that's what I might do again. today I am a bit out of the picture, and will actually have to ask you all for help and update on the latest ideas. Most seem to work with pre-coated plates though. My friends in france tell em they use just brae-epoxy (no zink) inside over just brushed, rusted steel and outside over sandblasted... Really do not know yet - what did you come up with so far? Gerd -- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, johnkupris@a... wrote: > Hi Gerd, > > You talked about blasting interiors of metal boats and painted them with > epoxy zincs and then what paint did you put over that, inside and out? I'm at > this stage. John > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3748|3734|2004-05-20 12:39:16|ge@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: Troller Yacht Ideas|We have a commission to create a new origami power design. We are currently at the concept stage, and are seeking additional clients interested in participating in the new design, in the range of 40-50 feet. http://www.origamimagic.com/Design/Bradley50/Bradley50.htm Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3749|3734|2004-05-20 13:20:36|Phil S.|Re: Troller Yacht Ideas|Thanks But no, I still have at least a year before I can begin making parts, I will use that time to design and build models before commiting to the 1:1 scale work. Regards Phil| 3750|3734|2004-05-20 16:24:48|David K McComber|Re: Troller Yacht Ideas|Hi I would hope that you would design your powerboats with a more appropriate Cp of .64 to .66. These are appropriate for a boat that is expected to be able to cruse eaconamely at hull speed (a speed/length ratio of 1.4 to 1.5) which a power boat should easily reach. Most sail to power conversions are hopelessly encumbered with a Cp of .54 to.56, and thus require much more power to reach the speed that the customer is expecting. Keeping the run as long and strait as possible will also help tremendously. As will keeping the angle of the Quarter Beam Buttock not much over 7 degrees as this will greatly reduce squatting, which soaks up power. From looking at your sketches it appears you misses all of the above. David McComber d.mccomber@... -----Original Message----- From: ge@... [mailto:ge@...] Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2004 12:36 PM To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: Troller Yacht Ideas We have a commission to create a new origami power design. We are currently at the concept stage, and are seeking additional clients interested in participating in the new design, in the range of 40-50 feet. http://www.origamimagic.com/Design/Bradley50/Bradley50.htm Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT click here _____ Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3751|3734|2004-05-20 16:26:23|Gerd|Re: Troller Yacht Ideas|Greg, the hull is quite interesting - your are still at the hard- chine stage there, but I guess that will be origami in the end? Same sort of double dart? I have been playing around with some patterns for a rounded, canoe type stern, and cuts would be quite different, lots of possibilities there. Well in August, during the holidays ... ;-) Gerd --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > We have a commission to create a new origami power design. We are currently at the concept stage, and are seeking additional clients interested in participating in the new design, in the range of 40-50 feet. > > http://www.origamimagic.com/Design/Bradley50/Bradley50.htm > > Greg Elliott > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3752|3752|2004-05-20 17:25:11|Gary|Lifelines|A while ago we were talking about safety harness. Brent made the comment about attachment up high at the back of the harness. Seems he was right! www.sailnet.com/collections/gearandmaintenance/index.cfm? articleid=ouread0072&tfr=fp| 3753|3734|2004-05-21 03:42:11|ge@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: Troller Yacht Ideas|The sketches you see were presented to us as ideas for a starting point for a new origami hull. They are not our designs. We will go with 2 or 3 darts, depending on what features are required. A double dart is the minimum required to achieve tight radius bends in the bow and stern. (I posted a simple paper model you can make to demonstrate this some months back). We never did find a simple pattern to make a rounded canoe stern. They were more like a second bow, which really is a waste of space, given the strength of metal construction. Counter sterns came out well, however. I've been fiddling with a hull that might be a roomy power boat or cargo carrier. A rectangle, with a short, rounded bow on the front, and a "V" or "U" on the bottom to fair it all together. Still preliminary, but I have a hull on my desk that seems to work. The problem with building is typically the time it takes to finish the interior, so a rectangular interior holds open the possibility of creating an instant, drop-in interior using pre-fabricated interiors from travel trailers/motor homes/RV's/etc. Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com Greg, the hull is quite interesting - your are still at the hard- chine stage there, but I guess that will be origami in the end? Same sort of double dart? I have been playing around with some patterns for a rounded, canoe type stern, and cuts would be quite different, lots of possibilities there. Well in August, during the holidays ... ;-) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3754|3734|2004-05-21 03:42:12|ge@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: Troller Yacht Ideas|The sketches you see were presented to us as ideas for a starting point for a new origami hull. They are not our designs. They are conventional hulls. They are based on well proven power designs. We design origami hulls, which approximate the conventional hulls, including the CP. The profile on these boats, with the deep forefoot, suggests a high CP. The CP of Option 1 for example is .645. The BS40 that Phil is considering for a troller is shaped quite differently in the bow. It would be closer to a CP of .54 to .56. Does this mean it would be "hopelessly encumbered"? Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com ---- Original Message ----- I would hope that you would design your powerboats with a more appropriate Cp of .64 to .66. These are appropriate for a boat that is expected to be able to cruse eaconamely at hull speed (a speed/length ratio of 1.4 to 1.5) which a power boat should easily reach. Most sail to power conversions are hopelessly encumbered with a Cp of .54 to.56, and thus require much more power to reach the speed that the customer is expecting. Keeping the run as long and strait as possible will also help tremendously. As will keeping the angle of the Quarter Beam Buttock not much over 7 degrees as this will greatly reduce squatting, which soaks up power. >From looking at your sketches it appears you misses all of the above. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3755|3752|2004-05-21 03:42:30|ge@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: Lifelines|as long as you have a means to pull yourself back aboard via the tether. dragging in the water, face down, with the line behind your back up to the boat, that might prove difficult. with the line in front, leading up to the boat, you will hopefully drag face up in the water, and have a stronger pull with your arms into your chest to get back aboard. Having the tether in front is not as convenient while working on deck, and can be led behind your back with a break-away line. This will keep it out of the way when not required, yet attached in front to simplify recovery. Sort of like the break-away line used to make anchors self un-fouling. Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com A while ago we were talking about safety harness. Brent made the comment about attachment up high at the back of the harness. Seems he was right! www.sailnet.com/collections/gearandmaintenance/index.cfm? articleid=ouread0072&tfr=fp [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3756|3746|2004-05-21 13:07:20|johnkupris@aol.com|Re: epoxy zinc paint|Hi Gerd, I am working alone so I am blasting and and brushing on epoxy zinc at the rate of about 36 square feet a day. It is slow, but inch by inch it's getting done. The outside will get sprayed with cold tar epoxy, with 3 coats and then some kind of 2 part urathane and bottom paint. The inside will get the same. Blasting inside a hull is hell but after learning a few tricks, it is survivable. I think that after blasting, painting with an airless sprayer might even be fun. John [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3757|3734|2004-05-21 13:41:15|David K McComber|Re: Troller Yacht Ideas|An inappropriate Cp can double the resistance of a hull. A Cp of .54 to .56 is appropriate for a speed/length ratio of 1.1, or a speed of 6.6 knots for a 36' LWL boat. Most people would expect a 40' Power boat with a 36' LWL to cruise at a more appropriate speed of 8.5 Knots. This would require a Cp of .64 to .66, or much more HP. The higher Cp also reduces pitching making a more comfortable boat. David McComber d.mccomber@... -----Original Message----- From: ge@... [mailto:ge@...] Sent: Friday, May 21, 2004 3:39 AM To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: Troller Yacht Ideas The sketches you see were presented to us as ideas for a starting point for a new origami hull. They are not our designs. They are conventional hulls. They are based on well proven power designs. We design origami hulls, which approximate the conventional hulls, including the CP. The profile on these boats, with the deep forefoot, suggests a high CP. The CP of Option 1 for example is .645. The BS40 that Phil is considering for a troller is shaped quite differently in the bow. It would be closer to a CP of .54 to .56. Does this mean it would be "hopelessly encumbered"? Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com ---- Original Message ----- I would hope that you would design your powerboats with a more appropriate Cp of .64 to .66. These are appropriate for a boat that is expected to be able to cruse eaconamely at hull speed (a speed/length ratio of 1.4 to 1.5) which a power boat should easily reach. Most sail to power conversions are hopelessly encumbered with a Cp of .54 to.56, and thus require much more power to reach the speed that the customer is expecting. Keeping the run as long and strait as possible will also help tremendously. As will keeping the angle of the Quarter Beam Buttock not much over 7 degrees as this will greatly reduce squatting, which soaks up power. >From looking at your sketches it appears you misses all of the above. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT click here _____ Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3758|3752|2004-05-21 17:42:56|brentswain38|Re: Lifelines|The British did experiments with the lifeline attached to the front. At only four knots the person in the harness built up such a huge bow wave that they couldn't get their head above water. One guy drowned that way recently in the Faralones race despite there being a large crew aboard the boat. He drowned before they could get the boat slowed down.They found that attaching to the back makes it impossible to pull yourself back aboard, even though you were towed comfortably face up . As I mention in my book, the top of the shoulder is the only safe place to attach a tether to a safety harness. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > as long as you have a means to pull yourself back aboard via the tether. dragging in the water, face down, with the line behind your back up to the boat, that might prove difficult. with the line in front, leading up to the boat, you will hopefully drag face up in the water, and have a stronger pull with your arms into your chest to get back aboard. > > Having the tether in front is not as convenient while working on deck, and can be led behind your back with a break-away line. This will keep it out of the way when not required, yet attached in front to simplify recovery. Sort of like the break-away line used to make anchors self un-fouling. > > Greg Elliott > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > > > A while ago we were talking about safety harness. Brent made the > comment about attachment up high at the back of the harness. Seems > he was right! > www.sailnet.com/collections/gearandmaintenance/index.cfm? > articleid=ouread0072&tfr=fp > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3759|3734|2004-05-21 17:50:20|brentswain38|Re: Troller Yacht Ideas|A high prismatic coeficient gives you better performance in strong winds at high speed to waterline length ratios,where there is no sohrtage of power( ie powerboats) but poor performance in light winds. A lower prismatic coeficient will give you much better performance in light winds, but the ability to exceed theoretical hull speed will be less. A heavily loaded 31 foot twin keeler which can make up to 175 miles in 24 hours , Hawaii to BC twice in 23 days ,the first 1,000 miles to windward , and BC to Frisco in 5 days, to Ensenada in 14 days , isn't "hopelessly encumbered " by any stretch of the imagination. All my designs have roughly the same prismatic coeficient. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > The sketches you see were presented to us as ideas for a starting point for a new origami hull. They are not our designs. They are conventional hulls. They are based on well proven power designs. We design origami hulls, which approximate the conventional hulls, including the CP. > > The profile on these boats, with the deep forefoot, suggests a high CP. The CP of Option 1 for example is .645. The BS40 that Phil is considering for a troller is shaped quite differently in the bow. It would be closer to a CP of .54 to .56. Does this mean it would be "hopelessly encumbered"? > > Greg Elliott > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > > ---- Original Message ----- > > I would hope that you would design your powerboats with a more appropriate > Cp of .64 to .66. These are appropriate for a boat that is expected to be > able to cruse eaconamely at hull speed (a speed/length ratio of 1.4 to 1.5) > which a power boat should easily reach. > > Most sail to power conversions are hopelessly encumbered with a Cp of .54 > to.56, and thus require much more power to reach the speed that the customer > is expecting. > > Keeping the run as long and strait as possible will also help tremendously. > As will keeping the angle of the Quarter Beam Buttock not much over 7 > degrees as this will greatly reduce squatting, which soaks up power. > > > > >From looking at your sketches it appears you misses all of the above. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3760|3682|2004-05-21 18:02:43|spencerj71|Re: need help finding large plate|Did you try Transtar metals? They are a big distributor. Their website is www.transtarmetals.com. Under contacts are a couple of phone #'s for Florida. In theory you should be able to get 30' or 40' lenghts, but they are less common. I know they carried these in their Bridgeport, CT facility. Good luck. - Spencer --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "noqualms29" wrote: > I've called around and can't find anyone with plate large enough for > a hull section of around 28' in aluminum. The max most carry is > 20'. Planning on building in Florida but I might go where the metal > is. Can anyone help? Thanks, Sam. | 3761|3734|2004-05-21 18:03:21|brentswain38|Re: Troller Yacht Ideas|There is a fishing schooner in Comox, run by an ex offshore sailor. The fishermen say he uses a fraction the fuel that the much smaller standard design fishboats use, for the same speed.A sailing hull would make a good power cruiser, as long as you are willing to sacrifice a knot or so of speed , in exchange for a huge improvement in fuel economy and seaworthiness. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "dreemer1962" wrote: > I'm not really into motor boats, but I do like easily driving, low > powered, lean, George Buhler's > cruisers, in particular Pilgrim, Ellemaid, Idelwind. Gerd, especially > if you want to use the boat on the Danube, where water flows quite > fast, you will need narrow boat. Consider for example Pilgrim. > Although about 13 meters long (44 ft), she's only 10' 6" wide, should > be economical to build and own. You could use it for inspiration to > design something similar, maybe just a hair smaller and in steel. > > Milan > > http://www.georgebuehler.com/photothumbs.html > http://www.georgebuehler.com/Pilgrim.html > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gerd" wrote: > > Looks very nice, Phil, and should give you lots of living space. > > I have been tossing a small troller around in my head for some > time, > > because I live far from the sea and would like to have something to > > spend the weekends on the river. Right now I am busy to get the > YAGO > > started for real, but I hope during the holidays to have some time > > for that. Will be much smaller though, something like 26 feet. > > Looking forward to see the interior layout. > > Gerd | 3762|3734|2004-05-21 18:15:32|brentswain38|Re: Troller Yacht Ideas|Anyone who can build something as complex as a steel boat can build something as simple as a prop. I just replaced my bronze european built prop with one I welded out of scrap stainless, and got an extra 3/4 knot out of her.The last major advance in prop design was made in 1860 and most modern props are of that design. One of the big advantages of fabricating prop blades out of scrap stainless, then welding them to a hub ,is the ability to balance and match the twist of the blades against one another, before welding them to the hub.With a machine shop you should be able to easily machine hubs out of SS shaft,before attaching the blades to them. I used different sizes of pipe for the job, but a friend has a lathe I can use, so I plan to make a few hubs out of old stainless shaft. A fabricated stainless prop is much tougher than bronze, a consideration here in BC , the land of floating logs and deadheads. Some people have put removeable wheels on twn keels with success. Sometimes the fine is less than the cost of moving.I'd be more inclined to go at 3AM. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Phil S." wrote: > Thanks Gerd; > My inspirations were the diesel ducks by GB, K'ahn by Jay Benford and of course our own > Mr. Swain. I am trying to figure out what engine, transmission wheel combo to use. One > of the 41' Ducks uses a 26" variable pitch prop. No way I am spending $4500+ on just the > prop alone. I was thinking a 4 blade 28" wheel fairly steep pitch, and 2.5:1 or even a 3:1 > gear down of a 48hp Kubota 4 cylinder. I am a big tug fan and think a bigger slow turning > wheel will be better. I think I can even make the wheel here at work out of scrap 316ss and > a piece of 2" SCH160 316ss pipe. I am really fortunate that I work for a manufacturer of > ASME code pressure vessels, so I have a full machine and welding shop at my disposal. > Hmm maybe a wheel out of Hastelloy. Deffinately will NEVER corrode. > > I also have a different Idea about welding, Tack the hull together with my stick welder and > then do full penetration welds from the inside with my MIG machine, then flap wheel the > outside to clean up the welds. That way I can work outdoors without worrying about the > shield gasses being blown away. Just as long as I ventilate so I don't pass out from the > CO2. > > Oh I also have a really cool idea on how to transport this to the Erie canal about 15 miles > from my house. With a farm tractor, I can weld on places to bolt a few mobile home axles > to the bilge keels, rig up a pivoting front wheel with a towbar, leave my house at 7:30 > some sunday morning, and vwalah, I am in the water in about 45 minutes, no trucking > fees, no special licensing. I own a farm so if I get pulled over the cops really can't say to > much, it is a piece of farm equipment, hahahah. From the canal I can go where ever I > decide to head. Ok I have rambled enough. > Regards > Phil > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gerd" wrote: > > Looks very nice, Phil, and should give you lots of living space. > > I have been tossing a small troller around in my head for some time, > > because I live far from the sea and would like to have something to > > spend the weekends on the river. Right now I am busy to get the YAGO > > started for real, but I hope during the holidays to have some time > > for that. Will be much smaller though, something like 26 feet. > > Looking forward to see the interior layout. > > Gerd | 3763|3726|2004-05-21 18:20:13|brentswain38|Re: Ultra Bright LED's for boaters|A lifetime warrantee sounds good if you keep the recieipt, as I've found that LED's have a high failure rate . I've had a lot of them burn out in the last few years, some within a few months. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "run2excess2000" wrote: > Does anyone know where and which are the best LED flashlights on the > market. I do deal in a certain LED light but was wondering if anyone > knows of the best and most reasonable lights out there. The lights I > have are the Ultra Bright II's that have a lifetime warranty, can be > seen for over a mile and LED bulb will never burn out. Great for > having on your boat,pilots,hiking, camping, running, or anywhere you > need a flashlight.Get them in red as they will not impair your night > vision. See them at www.photonmicro.com Thanks, Brad | 3764|3689|2004-05-21 18:31:56|brentswain38|Re: Hidden costs/Interior woodwork|I've always used galvanized finishing nails for my interiors, at a fraction the cost of screws. I've never had any trouble with them as seas are unlikely to brreak over your interior, and if they do, fastenings will be the least of your worries. You can build as big a bilge npump as you want in stainless for a few bucks from the drawings in my book, in less time than it takes to go buy one. The trailer type propane stove in my galley can be found for $50 in used marine places and mine is still working well after 20 years. I panneled my interior with free scrounged plywood, as it came up, while continueing to cruise in the meantime. One of the advantages of well insulated steel boat is that your interior stays much dryer than that of boats built of other materials , so you don't need the same high quality materials. I would paint the backsides of plywood panelling next time to stop condensation from getting into it. An alternator from the auto wreckers costs around $35 and they will test it for you on site. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "richytill" wrote: > Joe, > > 1. The roof liner is 4" X 3/8" yellow cedar boards @ $ 275 + $120 > for screws and $180 for clear, satin, varnish and a lot of sand > paper. About 4 months. > > 2. The ceiling strips (sides) are 2" X 7/16" yellow cedar strips cut > on a table saw with left-over yellow cedar from the roof and old > growth fir from the firing strips plus left over varnish = $150 for > screws, gloves, sanding stuff etc. 2 months. > > 3. Other wood: teak $500; yellow cedar $300; fir $200. > > 4. Sole is in progress. Yellow cedar frames; 3/4" ply. Using some > UHMW blocking (free as scrap) > > 5. All bulkheads and all ply everwhere is boat grade Chilean Pine. > This is virtually void free, done with phenolic resin and comes from > the radiata pine family. I have had no luck finding a source of > decent used plywood but this stuff comes at $58 cdn. 3/4" a sheet so > no complaints on the price. So around $850 for plywood to date. > > 6. On sale epoxy: 3 gallons @ $300 with free anti sag compound. > > 7. Yard sale electrical marine stuff @ 500 in one lot: including > almost enough to wire the boat not counting lights but lots of > breakers and switches etc. (have sold some of the extras). Foamed in > conduit as per Brent's instructions. Nav' lights are on, the rest of > the wiring has barely started. New alternator $425; house batteries > on sale $400. > > 8. Double acting Henderson bilge pump half price @ $225. Other > bilge pumps and pumps extra. > > 9. No refrigeration. Ice box in progress. > > 10. Middle of the road galley. Around $1000 so far but not complete. > > 11. Propane heater: on sale @ $325. > > 12. Foaming: $2250 > > 11. Used VW diesel $850; rebuilt Borg Warner transmission $1050. > Several months to make it all work. Hoses, clamps and fittings seem > to cost a lot of money when you add it all up. > > In this case there have been gains in salvaging metals in new > condition and costs for local real wood have been pleasing. I had to > bite the plywood so as to keep the project moving along. I have no > complaints about the big costs so far--beware of all the gloves > screws, clamps, hoses etc., etc. > > rt > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Joe Earsley" > wrote: > > Great Information rt, > > > > > > > > Could you give some specifics? > > > > > > > > What are your side surfaces, sole, galley counters and ceiling > liner? > > > > What about the time spent completing systems like lighting, engine > > instrumentation, electrical charging and overcurrent protection? > Did > > these take a bunch of time too? > > > > Are you installing refrigeration? > > > > Is the galley really complex or middle of the road? > > > > > > > > Again, thanks for the reality check. You speak what I have > experienced > > in all my projects to date. It's why I think I am cut out for house > > framing rather than finish work. > > > > > > > > Joe Earsley, > > > > Anchorage, Alaska > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > From: richytill [mailto:tillrc@h...] > > Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2004 10:58 AM > > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: [origamiboats] Hidden costs/Interior woodwork > > > > > > > > Potential builders can benefit from thinking about what they expect > > to achieve in the way of interior finish early in building. If you > > are intending on doing all your own work and getting off to sea in > a > > hurry--try to be realistic about what you can afford in the way of > > time and money. > > > > I continue to be amazed at the mounting costs of glue, screws, zip > > cut blades, sharpening stones, varnish, jig saw blades, vinyl > gloves, > > paint brushes, chisels and so on. The MY ISLAND project has just > > gone in to year 4. > > > > You can make the interior a fast low cost project or plod away > doing > > joinery as I am doing. It is a personal choice of course. If you > > take the joinery/real wood approach, be aware of the time and cost > > involved. I have tried to go middle of the road and estimate the > > interior will take as long as the steel work--progress is far less > > visible. > > > > Working full time and doing the interior at the same time makes for > a > > full schedule--how will this impact your social/family life? If > you > > are in a rush, it may be worthwhile asking for a quote on the whole > > job: especially if you are not a woodworker. > > > > Try to be clear on what you want. If you are happy with few sheets > > of plywood fixed with deck screws, a bucket and reclaimed paint > > that's fine--sail on, have fun. If you want real fancy, expect to > > expend lots of time or money or both. I am enjoying the challenge > of > > doing the interior and it is rewarding. Be aware tho', the desire > > for real wood has its costs. rt > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > > > ADVERTISEMENT > > click here > > > gr > > > oups/S=1705150872:HM/EXP=1084561142/A=2128215/R=0/SIG=10se96mf6/*http: > /c > > ompanion.yahoo.com> > > > > > > M=295196.4901138.6071305.3001176/D=group > > s/S=:HM/A=2128215/rand=569217836> > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > * To visit your group on the web, go to: > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > > > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > subject=Unsubscribe> > > > > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of > > Service . > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3765|3721|2004-05-21 18:35:20|brentswain38|Re: Headed to Vancouver|Phil Email me direct when you get to Vancouver. Most of my designs are on Vancover Island, Nanaimo or Comox.. brentswain38@... Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Phil S." wrote: > I am finally headed to Vancouver. I will be in the area July 5th through the 9th. Can some > one direct me on where I might look up a Brent Swain boat to check out? I know nothing > about the area or distances involved, so a boat scouting trip might be completely > unfeasable but it I am looking forward to trying. > Phil | 3766|3716|2004-05-21 18:38:35|brentswain38|Re: Digest Number 806|I knew the Skookum Queen well when lucky owned her. I don't remember seeing her in Ucluelet last summer, and would have recognized her. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff Williams" wrote: > Brent, > > Thanks for bringing back some fond memories. Some really nice people we met > there, though we only stayed one night. > > For any Canadian West Coasters. Could you keep an eye out for my old boat? I > miss her and often wonder how she's doing. > Skookum Queen, wood, double ended, ketch rig, white with blue trim, last > seen in Ucluelet harbour where I delivered her to her new owner about 6 > years ago. > > Jeff > > > I just woke up in a beautiful anchorage on Lasquetti Island with > > the sun shining thru the portholes, had a free breakfast of good > > country food washed down with fine salmon berrey tea , and had a > > pleasant stroll accross the island , chatting with friends along the > > way. I wonder what the rich folks are doing today that's more > > pleasant . > > Brent swain | 3767|3746|2004-05-21 20:07:30|Gerald Niffenegger|Re: epoxy zinc paint|John I am at the point where I need to blast and paint. I have two compressors that I plan to hook to a blasting rig. Your doing about 3 square meters per day and I am wondering how large your compressor and blasting outfit is? Gerald --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, johnkupris@a... wrote: > Hi Gerd, > > I am working alone so I am blasting and and brushing on epoxy zinc at the > rate of about 36 square feet a day. It is slow, but inch by inch it's getting > done. The outside will get sprayed with cold tar epoxy, with 3 coats and then > some kind of 2 part urathane and bottom paint. The inside will get the same. > Blasting inside a hull is hell but after learning a few tricks, it is > survivable. I think that after blasting, painting with an airless sprayer might even be > fun. John > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3768|3752|2004-05-21 20:35:47|ge@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: Lifelines|Those fun loving brits. Guess they don't do much water skiing. You will drown if you try and drag face down at any speed, and panic will make it impossible to turn over if you keep trying to lift your head. To turn over, bend forward and tilt your head down into the water towards your chest while dropping one knee and the opposite shoulder. You will rotate away from the knee, and the tilt of your head forward towards your chest will bring you back up to the surface on your back. The hard part is putting your head down into the water and trusting that you will come back. If you have never been dragged behind a boat during watersports, some practice behind a dinghy might be in order. Once you are on your back, the tilt of your head towards your chest provides the lift so you don't dive under and clears a path through the water so you can breath. Regardless of where the harness is tethered, you will need to hand over hand up the rope, pulling the tether towards your chest - like climbing a rope - if you are going to save yourself, which means you must drag on your back. One thing we find handy is to double up the tether for routine work, so that it is only 1/2 length. Thus, if you do go in, you have only to pull yourself up a 3 foot tether instead of the more typical 6 feet. With a short tether, once the height of the lifelines is taken into account, you probably will only get the lower half of your body wet if you do go over. Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com ----- Original Message ----- The British did experiments with the lifeline attached to the front. At only four knots the person in the harness built up such a huge bow wave that they couldn't get their head above water. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3769|3769|2004-05-22 07:12:06|Gerd|Last Minute Questions|After you guys made me to commit myself to yet another rusty folly, the least you could do is to help me get it over with fast and easy ;-) So, before they dump the steel into my garden the day after tomorrow, here are some last questions that you ex-origami-builders can help me with: Folding secquence On my site you can see that I have a 2-dart template, which should make it a bit easier to pull them together. (will it?) Is there any preferred way where to start, which dart, all darts at the same time or one finished then the next and so on? Come Along I finally managed to find where I could get a Kézi csörlo – that's what they tell me is a come-along in Hungarian… - but have not seen the thing yet. How much pulling power will I really need? Could be quite a lot at times... Would strong multipart blocks & tackle do the job? Joining the Centerline Start where? Front? Back? In the middle and work outwards? More Pictures? I have seen the pics of the building sequence, as well as the G55 sequence on Gregs site. Brents Book also only says something like ".. and then pull it together and weld...", so either it is so fast and easy that nobody even had the time to snap some pics, or so bad that you all prefer not to talk about it ;-) I would really like to see some more pictures of the pulling-together of the half-hulls themselves, but more importantly of the joining of the 2 halves that I can not really imagine in detail now. Anybody still has some pictures around he could post please? Supporting the hull? Contrary to Gregs hulls, YAGO is actually quite flat at the bottom, and I always was a bit worried that the bottom panel and join might be pushed upwards, into negative, when the half hulls sit on it. In the meantime I have added a very light central v-chine to round the shape off and to give a bit more resistance with the added edge along the center, but nothing compared to the BS design. Will that bottom fold in when I set the halves up against each other and do I have to support them there? (it's 3 mm in my case) Welding sequence Welding the sheets and the darts might be done best when the hull- halves are still flat on the ground. When do you weld the backside? From your experience, which is the order to get easiest welding position with the least deformation and shape control? At the moment I think I would like to tack all, including deck, cockpit and cabin and most of the interior structure before doing any full length welds, but it might be better to do some of them while you still can do it in good position. Flippin' it With full length panels you may not have much choice but to trace and cut them one by one, but because my biggest panel is only about 20 feet by 5, I was thinking to do it like this: - Place 2 layers of tacked together sheets on top of each other and trace the first half-hull on the upper one. - The layer underneath would only be lightly tacked, just enough to keep the sheets in place for tracing. - Cut the one on top and copy to the bottom panel. (Cut the two sheets at the same time?) - Pull the top one together and drag it aside - draw a couple of additional long reference lines anywhere on the bottom layer - Break up the bottom panels into individual sheets, flip them over and turn into proper position, re-join and carefully align them using the broken tacks and added lines as reference, then tack together again, pull and mount. I should then have 2 halves facing each other. Any comments on this? Rolling it Presuming that the darts and central bottom seam have not been welded, would you roll the hull on its side for easy access and to get better flat welding positions? META in France was using a suspended turning jig at one time, that allowed them to roll the entire hull over the long axis and to do all welds flat, I saw some very impressive picture of that. Any other good ideas you might have for me except to go and shoot myself? Gerd http://www.justmueller.com/boats/| 3770|3746|2004-05-22 09:13:33|johnkupris@aol.com|Re: epoxy zinc paint|Hi Gerald, My compressor is an old Ingersal Rand ( circa 1960 )on wheels that was used to break up concrete/cement. I had to replace 3 epoxy paddle blades ( about 6 x 3 inches each ) in the air pump but it puts out alot of air at 120 PSI or 8.7 kgs, it would probably run 2 sandblasters. It has a 4 cylinder international gas engine. I made a sandblaster that works OK. The high pressure tank is an Oxygen tank from a P-51 airplane and it is about 2 1/2 feet tall and about 14 inches in diameter and holds about 70 lbs of shot. With a 3/16 inch hole in a ceramic nozzle I can blast about 18 square feet or 1.5 sq meters. A larger tank and larger wheels would work better. I tried sandblasting with a large commercial garage compressor but it will only hold the high pressure for a couple minutes and then the blasting is poor. Use one compressor to flood your blasting hood with lots of fresh air to cool your head and defog but drain the motor oil from it and replace it with vegetable oil incase you breath in oil fumes, the vegetable oil will not harm your lungs, or so commercial divers tell me. So far so good,cough,cough. I tried using sand but it seemed to turn into powder and very fine. I now use black grit and only one time ,as when I recycled I got some rusting on deck throught the zinc, over the winter. I believe that recycling rounds the grit and the result is a peening effect instead of a toothed surface for the paint to grip. John [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3771|3721|2004-05-22 10:54:39|Phil S.|Re: Headed to Vancouver|Brent: Thank you, I am really looking forward to seeing the BC area and your designs in person. I lived in Alaska for 5 years and can't wait to see real mountains again. I will send you a note and let you know, I believe there is public internet access at the hotel we are staying at. Regards Phil| 3772|3734|2004-05-22 11:17:39|Phil S.|Re: Troller Yacht Ideas|Brent: I agree, even with GB Pilgrim design if you slowed down to 7 knots(1.2 V/L), the optimum weather range with 100 gallons is 3400 miles. Plenty to get you any where in the world and with a higher average speed than most sail boats and you can take advantage of weather that would be less windy. I know where there is a Sabb 10hp with the gear and vaiable pitch 3 blade prop is for sale for about $1500us asking price. Brent you said your boat only has a 4hp engine if I remember correctly. I might grab it if it would work, anyones opinion would be appreciated. When you do motor, do you get up to hull speed or higher, discounting the windage of the rigg and poles? I have made model props before when I was building model tug boats one as big as a 5" 4 blade. Given the low speed that they spun balance wasn't much of an issue, but they did come out pretty well. Right now I have full acces to a machine and weld shop, I will probably TIG the prop together. I just have to figure out what size and pitch prop to use. Does anyone have any experiance with a Cummins 220 engine. Adelmans has running take outs for $950us, but I will be damned if I can find any information out about one either on the Cummins site or any of the others. Regards Phil| 3773|3769|2004-05-22 11:20:43|Phil S.|Sand Blasting and Painting|Ok, I just finished reading the book "In Peril" about the supertanker that rescued the tug pulling the space shuttle fuel tank. In the the captain says they use Coroseal to treat corrosion with success, he even admited he diodn't know how it work it just saved them allot of work in chipping and painting. I think I will send for a sample to try out on some of the scrap metal I have and see how it holds up to weather and how it hold paint. Phil| 3774|3721|2004-05-22 11:28:48|jumpaltair|Re: Headed to Vancouver|Phil, even if the hotel does not have internet access, in most of BC, the libraries have free internet access. And there's quite a few internet cafe's around too. Peter --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Phil S." wrote: > Brent: > Thank you, I am really looking forward to seeing the BC area and your designs in > person. I lived in Alaska for 5 years and can't wait to see real mountains again. I will > send you a note and let you know, I believe there is public internet access at the hotel > we are staying at. > Regards > Phil | 3775|3775|2004-05-22 11:29:23|odessa_pjs0o@yahoo.com|Important News for origamiboats Members|I was really far into debt. Like Most I was in Financial dispair. I could not seem to get ahead no matter how hard I tried. Untill I found this place. http://dobetter.4ever.cc If you are in debt they can help you out. Check them out today I did. This email was sent because you joined our group. If you do not wish to recieve any emails, unsubscribe. by sending a mail here origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com| 3776|3746|2004-05-22 16:14:27|Gerald Niffenegger|Re: epoxy zinc paint|Sounds like I could make the sand tank from a propane tank. About the same size that you described and will surly hold 120# of pressure. My two compressors will put out about 40 cubic feet of air. For the hood I have been using the output from an industrial vacuum cleaner fed into a motor cycle helmet. Works fine until you have a chilly day and it freezes the top of my bald head. I was inside a 33 ft. steel sailboat today that has a hull manufactured in 1922. Against the inside of the steel hull they had packed rock wool. Some areas of the rock wool had gotten wet because of a previously used water collection system. The metal looks like it was painted with oil based paint and not a very thick coat of paint. There are some thin rust spots but nothing serious. I had a good laugh as I thought about the warnings I have received about getting paint on that shot blasted metal within 15 minutes or it will start to rust and you will have problems blah blah blah. Makes one wonder how this 80 year old boat has held up without epoxy or fancy designer coatings? The owner explaind that back in the old days they used better steel and that is why there is no rust. Gerald --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, johnkupris@a... wrote: > Hi Gerald, > My compressor is an old Ingersal Rand ( circa 1960 )on wheels that was used > to break up concrete/cement. I had to replace 3 epoxy paddle blades ( about 6 x > 3 inches each ) in the air pump but it puts out alot of air at 120 PSI or 8.7 > kgs, it would probably run 2 sandblasters. It has a 4 cylinder international > gas engine. > > > I made a sandblaster that works OK. The high pressure tank is an Oxygen tank > from a P-51 airplane and it is about > 2 1/2 feet tall and about 14 inches in diameter and holds about 70 lbs of > shot. With a 3/16 inch hole in a ceramic nozzle > I can blast about 18 square feet or 1.5 sq meters. A larger tank and larger > wheels would work better. > > I tried sandblasting with a large commercial garage compressor but it will > only hold the high pressure for a couple minutes and then the blasting is poor. > > Use one compressor to flood your blasting hood with lots of fresh > air to cool your head and defog but drain the motor oil from it and replace it > with vegetable oil incase you breath in oil fumes, the vegetable oil will not > harm your lungs, or so commercial divers tell me. So far so good,cough,cough. > > I tried using sand but it seemed to turn into powder and very fine. I now use > black grit and only one time ,as when I recycled I got some rusting on deck > throught the zinc, over the winter. I believe that recycling rounds the grit > and the result is a peening effect instead of a toothed surface for the paint to > grip. John > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3777|3612|2004-05-22 17:17:48|ge@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: Steel versus alloy, file upload|Annecdotal evidence is a poor basis by which to design boats. Annecdotes are not accepted as proof because they can be misleading. Something only needs to work for 1 person in 7 billion, for it to work by annecdote. Something only needs to fail once, and by annecdote it will fail for everyone. When there are conflicting annecdotes, look at the person telling the annecdote, and ask if they have anything to gain. The problem with annecdotal information regarding stability is that many people do not understand what stability means in a boat. It does not mean a boat has a slow comfortable motion. That can often be a sign of a boat with low stability. It means a boat that is able to resist extremes of motion. However, most people equate a comfortable motion with stability, and thus they can easily report that a boat is more stable, when in fact it is not. Designers often lower the stability of coastal boats to make them more comfortable, and increase the stability of offshore boats, at the expense of comfort. Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com A friend who put a 52 ft aluminium mast on a 36 footer complained that the boat was a bit tender. Others who used a 46 ft steel mast in the same design had no such complaints. The scuttlebutt around our area is that the BS boats with steel masts are notably tender and tend to hobbyhorse going to weather because of the heavy stick. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3778|3752|2004-05-22 17:19:58|ge@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: Lifelines|I personally would recommend a chest mounted harness. A harness is not a guarantee of survival, any more than a seat belt in a car. Water and traffic accidents are hazardous environments, and people will die when wearing a harness as with seatbelts. If you do go over the side, a chest mount provides the greatest hope of survival. If you go over unconscious, the tether from your chest to the deck will tend to roll you over onto your back, allowing you to breath, and prevents you from rolling onto your face. Attached to the back you would likely drown, and attached to the shoulders you have only a 50/50 chance of landing on your back, and this still leaves you free to roll over unconscious in the seaway to your front and drown. If you go over conscious, the tether on a chest mount will still tend to roll you on your back. All other attachments require that at least 50% of the time you will have to roll over on your back, which can be difficult if you panic. The temptation is to lift your head when dragging on your face, which makes it impossible to roll over. The more you panic, the more you struggle to lift your head, the more water you inhale, until you drown. People have drowned with chest mount harnesses. This does not mean alternative attachments are safer. It simply means that going over the side in a moving boat is extremely dangerous. Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com ----- Original Message ----- From: ge@... To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, May 21, 2004 5:35 PM Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: Lifelines Those fun loving brits. Guess they don't do much water skiing. You will drown if you try and drag face down at any speed, and panic will make it impossible to turn over if you keep trying to lift your head. To turn over, bend forward and tilt your head down into the water towards your chest while dropping one knee and the opposite shoulder. You will rotate away from the knee, and the tilt of your head forward towards your chest will bring you back up to the surface on your back. The hard part is putting your head down into the water and trusting that you will come back. If you have never been dragged behind a boat during watersports, some practice behind a dinghy might be in order. Once you are on your back, the tilt of your head towards your chest provides the lift so you don't dive under and clears a path through the water so you can breath. Regardless of where the harness is tethered, you will need to hand over hand up the rope, pulling the tether towards your chest - like climbing a rope - if you are going to save yourself, which means you must drag on your back. One thing we find handy is to double up the tether for routine work, so that it is only 1/2 length. Thus, if you do go in, you have only to pull yourself up a 3 foot tether instead of the more typical 6 feet. With a short tether, once the height of the lifelines is taken into account, you probably will only get the lower half of your body wet if you do go over. Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com ----- Original Message ----- The British did experiments with the lifeline attached to the front. At only four knots the person in the harness built up such a huge bow wave that they couldn't get their head above water. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3779|3746|2004-05-23 10:14:47|johnkupris@aol.com|Re: epoxy zinc paint|It is interesting about the 1922 boat's interior looking good after all these years. Suposedly the old square riggers used a concoction of : tree tar, unboiled lindseed oil and a kerosene thinner on metal. I have used it on rusty metal for years. I spray it on the underside of trucks. I think that 1922 steel was probably close to present steel but maybe they oil quenced it or something. I heard that wrought iron on plows and such held up to rust because it was hot dipped in oil and the oil in the pores somehow stayed sealed in. All this is conjecture, worth exactly what I paid for it , nothing. John [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3780|3746|2004-05-23 11:35:14|Henri Naths|Re: epoxy zinc paint|I saw a pic. of the 15" ? plate they used to build the Bismark laying there in the shipyard. They looked just as clean as the day they made them. ( my two cents worth) H. ---- Original Message ----- From: johnkupris@... To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: 23 May, 2004 8:14 AM Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: epoxy zinc paint It is interesting about the 1922 boat's interior looking good after all these years. Suposedly the old square riggers used a concoction of : tree tar, unboiled lindseed oil and a kerosene thinner on metal. I have used it on rusty metal for years. I spray it on the underside of trucks. I think that 1922 steel was probably close to present steel but maybe they oil quenced it or something. I heard that wrought iron on plows and such held up to rust because it was hot dipped in oil and the oil in the pores somehow stayed sealed in. All this is conjecture, worth exactly what I paid for it , nothing. John [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3781|3746|2004-05-23 12:06:10|Robert Gainer|Re: epoxy zinc paint|Start with the disclaimer, I am not a metallurgist. But it is my understanding that the proportions of the additives in steel will change the way it rusts. Some of the older steel was very high in silica (sand) and was very rust resistant. The old sailing ships used puddle iron for a lot of the rigging parts, so high in sand that its almost rust proof. The fact is, if you add the right ingredients to steel you get stainless steel, the far end of rust resistant steel. The down side of the old steels is that they are very brittle. The Titanic is the best example of what happens with brittle steel. By the way the armor belt on the Bismarck I think is Krupp cementite steel, Face-hardened armor steel. 3.5-3.8% nickel, 2% chrome, 0.3% carbon, 0.3% manganese, and 0.2% molybdenum. All the best: Robert Gainer >From: "Henri Naths" >Reply-To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com >To: >Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: epoxy zinc paint >Date: Sun, 23 May 2004 09:34:58 -0600 > >I saw a pic. of the 15" ? plate they used to build the Bismark laying there >in the shipyard. They looked just as clean as the day they made them. ( my >two cents worth) H. > >---- Original Message ----- > From: johnkupris@... > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Sent: 23 May, 2004 8:14 AM > Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: epoxy zinc paint > > > It is interesting about the 1922 boat's interior looking good after all >these > years. > Suposedly the old square riggers used a concoction of : tree tar, >unboiled > lindseed oil and a kerosene thinner on metal. I have used it on rusty >metal for > years. I spray it on the underside of trucks. I think that 1922 steel >was > probably close to present steel but maybe they oil quenced it or >something. I > heard that wrought iron on plows and such held up to rust because it was >hot > dipped in oil and the oil in the pores somehow stayed sealed in. All >this is > conjecture, worth exactly what I paid for it , nothing. John > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: >origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ADVERTISEMENT > > > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Yahoo! Groups Links > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of >Service. > > > >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > _________________________________________________________________ Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee� Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963| 3782|3734|2004-05-23 18:12:14|put_to_sea|Re: Troller Yacht Ideas|The 220 Cummins is a pretty old engine. I don't think it was made after the sixties. Amos --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Phil S." wrote: > Does anyone have any experiance with a Cummins 220 engine. Adelmans has > running take outs for $950us, but I will be damned if I can find any information out > about one either on the Cummins site or any of the others. > Regards > Phil | 3783|3726|2004-05-23 19:23:44|T.H. & V.D. Cain|Re: Ultra Bright LED's for boaters_reliability?|LED's are not bullet proof, but if they are used within their simple and conservative limitations, they have a life measured in the many tens of thousands of hours. Brent's experience is unusual. It would help if Brent could supply a bit more detail about the failures, and the systems to which these diodes were connected. There are some techniques which can improve LED operating conditions in circuits where the supply voltage varies a lot. The new high output types may not be as tolerant as the older indicating types, and perhaps some versions are operating very close to their maximum ratings to achieve the light output. These devices belong to a family undergoing rapid development. Many traffic control lamps (street lights) are now based on a cluster of high-output LED's, and these are standing up quite well in lifetime cost studies in the US and other countries. They were introduced because of reliability in a critical service. The early studies were done on Hewlett Packard LED's in traffic lights. The eye-level stop lamps on most recent autos are based on LED arrays, but this application has a low on/off ratio. I have LED indicators and panel illumination LED's from 20 years back still operating as new, and many of these would have over 50 000 hours on-time. In fact the only failures I can recall when working in a large company using countless numbers of these things, were due to either: 1. over-driving with currents well in excess of the original standard 20 milliamps (wrong series resistor or very high pulse rates and currents), or 2. reverse voltage in excess of the usually low limits ( connected wrongly included), or 3. affected by lightning induced surges (these were in semi-remote telemetry gear which copped severe abuse from storm surges) For boat use, the 3000 to 6000 mCd red units are very useful in a strip light for night vision requirements. These are roughly equivalent to the 12 volt LED after-market stop lamps you can buy at the auto accessories places. I have no information on reliability for these commercial units in continuous service. Kits for self-build strips are available in Oz. and these perform well. --- 20 of these LED's in 5 groups of 4 each (with 4 series resistors) on 11 to 15 volts will give good red illumination to the sole/floor and surrounds from a 2 metre height without any reflector --- just the integral lens in each LED is sufficient. Terry -----Original Message----- From: brentswain38 [mailto:brentswain38@...] Sent: Saturday, 22 May 2004 7:50 To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Ultra Bright LED's for boaters A lifetime warrantee sounds good if you keep the recieipt, as I've found that LED's have a high failure rate . I've had a lot of them burn out in the last few years, some within a few months. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "run2excess2000" wrote: > Does anyone know where and which are the best LED flashlights on the > market. I do deal in a certain LED light but was wondering if anyone > knows of the best and most reasonable lights out there. The lights I > have are the Ultra Bright II's that have a lifetime warranty, can be > seen for over a mile and LED bulb will never burn out. Great for > having on your boat,pilots,hiking, camping, running, or anywhere you > need a flashlight.Get them in red as they will not impair your night > vision. See them at www.photonmicro.com Thanks, Brad To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links| 3784|3784|2004-05-23 22:09:51|Larry Doyle|Ultra bright LED's|I've found a great source for 10,000MCD white LED's. The URL is www.besthongkong.com. I bought a lot of 50 for $13.00 US to experiment with. So far I've taken two 2 tube fluorescence fixtures and a 1 tube fluorescence fixture and replaced the guts with LEDs. The results were very favorable. As to be expected, the LED fixtures do not put out as much light as the original, but the light level is more than adequate. Plus the savings in energy are well worth it. The 2-tube fixture originally drew 600 ma. The converted fixture draws 120 ma. A significant savings. In reference to Brent's experience, the problem probably was related to the current draw. A lot of people over pump the LEDs to get more light output, which will decrease the life of the LED.| 3785|3775|2004-05-24 01:32:27|tsuhaung@aol.com|Re: Important News for origamiboats Members|I do wish to receive e-mails but not about unrelated crap. This group is about steel boats. This is one of the best groups I have met. Largely do to the people that contribute and respect meaningful subject related comments. To those that are looking for a soap box to preach their newest revelation of spiritual growth whether it be religion or money please find somewhere else and leave us to peacefully pursue our own journey. Ken [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3786|3775|2004-05-24 04:47:26|jim dorey|Re: Important News for origamiboats Members|ya, a world without spam would be lovely, but unfortunately that's not gonna happen any time soon. even worse, bellyaching about it won't garner apologies from the computers that send most of it, particularly the religion, money, sex, pharmacy and doily patterns. tsuhaung@... wrote: > I do wish to receive e-mails but not about unrelated crap. This group is > about steel boats. This is one of the best groups I have met. Largely > do to the > people that contribute and respect meaningful subject related > comments. To those > that are looking for a soap box to preach their newest revelation of > spiritual growth whether it be religion or money please find somewhere > else and leave > us to peacefully pursue our own journey. > Ken > > -- http://www.skaar.101main.net http://www.PetitionOnline.com/spcdvd/ http://www.petitiononline.com/impjapan/petition-sign.html? moderator of wildsteam@yahoogroups.com DOM and proud!!!| 3787|3787|2004-05-24 06:58:25|Robert Gainer|Re: Spam, but not this.|Spam was a problem in some of the other groups I am a member of. The owner of the list just kicked the offender off the list. Can the owner of this list do the same? How does that work? And by the way, this is the best boatbuilding group I have seen yet. All the best; Robert Gainer >From: jim dorey >Reply-To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com >To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com >Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Important News for origamiboats Members >Date: Mon, 24 May 2004 05:46:06 -0300 > >ya, a world without spam would be lovely, but unfortunately that's not >gonna happen any time soon. even worse, bellyaching about it won't >garner apologies from the computers that send most of it, particularly >the religion, money, sex, pharmacy and doily patterns. > >tsuhaung@... wrote: > > > I do wish to receive e-mails but not about unrelated crap. This group is > > about steel boats. This is one of the best groups I have met. Largely > > do to the > > people that contribute and respect meaningful subject related > > comments. To those > > that are looking for a soap box to preach their newest revelation of > > spiritual growth whether it be religion or money please find somewhere > > else and leave > > us to peacefully pursue our own journey. > > Ken > > > > >-- >http://www.skaar.101main.net >http://www.PetitionOnline.com/spcdvd/ >http://www.petitiononline.com/impjapan/petition-sign.html? >moderator of wildsteam@yahoogroups.com >DOM and proud!!! > > _________________________________________________________________ FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar � get it now! http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/| 3788|3787|2004-05-24 07:06:04|jim dorey|Re: Spam, but not this.|it's one of the simpler things to do, if the spammer uses a stable name, if they sign up with a new name every week they can send loads, no way to stop that kind of thing, but the ones here already that are spamming can be dealt with. perhaps a curt reminder of this groups intent to the offending party, then maybe tell their mom, later a boot may be the only recourse. ya, spam really buggers up my lurking, but only for a moment. Robert Gainer wrote: >Spam was a problem in some of the other groups I am a member of. The owner >of the list just kicked the offender off the list. Can the owner of this >list do the same? How does that work? And by the way, this is the best >boatbuilding group I have seen yet. >All the best; >Robert Gainer > -- http://www.skaar.101main.net http://www.PetitionOnline.com/spcdvd/ http://www.petitiononline.com/impjapan/petition-sign.html? moderator of wildsteam@yahoogroups.com DOM and proud!!!| 3789|3789|2004-05-24 07:46:53|Gerd|The steel's in the garden|- and I will be offline for a couple of days getting started. I just wanted to thank you guys for the helpful postings and quite a lot of offline mails I got in the last days and weeks. I will be back here as soon as there is something to show - and of course if I get stuck and need urgent help ;-) Gerd The YAGO PROJECT at http.//www.justmueller.com/boats/| 3790|3734|2004-05-24 12:27:48|ge@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: Troller Yacht Ideas|For a 40 foot power design, we would typically recommend getting a larger engine rather than smaller. Something like a 50 hp automotive diesel, 3:1 reduction, on a 24" or larger prop. For a low cost installation, why not use a front wheel out of a FWD vehicle? Drive the wheel shaft using an automotive transmission. The CV joint will take care of alignment, and the wheel bearings will take care of the thrust loads. An automotive automatic transmission with transmission cooler led to the hull should deliver much of the benefits of a variable pitch prop, for a fraction of the cost. Punching into a sea you would use low range for power, and downwind in a following sea, use high range for fuel economy. Why 50 hp? In good conditions, you will be able to achieve hull speed at low RPM's which will be quiet. Engine noise is always an issue when running an engine, and as the RPM's build up, so does the noise. In bad conditions, you will have lots of reserve to punch into head seas. When faced with storm winds and square waves that can develop in wind against current conditions, you will need every ounce of HP you can muster if you are on a lee shore. The Bones has 33 HP on a 18" prop. More than a few times I've wished for a bigger engine. One day off Bali we were caught in a squall on a lee shore, with no room to sail in the reefs, and all we could do with the engine at red line was to maintain our position. If the winds had increased, we could easily have been lost. The reefs in the area drop off vertical for hundreds of feet, leaving no room to anchor. Phil, our design offices in Vancouver. Stop by if you get a chance for a look at some of our hulls. I'm nearly done on an "origami duck" that might interest you. Greg Elliott Origami Magic http://www.origamimagic.com 1.604.987.0050 ----- Original Message ----- From: Phil S. To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, May 22, 2004 8:16 AM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Troller Yacht Ideas Brent: I agree, even with GB Pilgrim design if you slowed down to 7 knots(1.2 V/L), the optimum weather range with 100 gallons is 3400 miles. Plenty to get you any where in the world and with a higher average speed than most sail boats and you can take advantage of weather that would be less windy. I know where there is a Sabb 10hp with the gear and vaiable pitch 3 blade prop is for sale for about $1500us asking price. Brent you said your boat only has a 4hp engine if I remember correctly. I might grab it if it would work, anyones opinion would be appreciated. When you do motor, do you get up to hull speed or higher, discounting the windage of the rigg and poles? I have made model props before when I was building model tug boats one as big as a 5" 4 blade. Given the low speed that they spun balance wasn't much of an issue, but they did come out pretty well. Right now I have full acces to a machine and weld shop, I will probably TIG the prop together. I just have to figure out what size and pitch prop to use. Does anyone have any experiance with a Cummins 220 engine. Adelmans has running take outs for $950us, but I will be damned if I can find any information out about one either on the Cummins site or any of the others. Regards Phil To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3791|3734|2004-05-24 13:02:25|Phil S.|Re: Troller Yacht Ideas|> Why 50 hp? In good conditions, you will be able to achieve hull speed at low RPM's >which will be quiet. Engine noise is always an issue when running an engine, and as the >RPM's build up, so does the noise. In bad conditions, you will have lots of reserve to >punch into head seas. When faced with storm winds and square waves that can develop >in wind against current conditions, you will need every ounce of HP you can muster if you >are on a lee shore. The Bones has 33 HP on a 18" prop. More than a few times I've >wished for a bigger engine. Bingo! Exactly the kind of information I was looking for. I will go with a 45hp or slightly larger engine. Storms on the great lakes have killed their fair share of sailors. The down side is you don't have a lot of room to just heave too and blow with the wind. I have some experiance with DD 6-71 from my military days and I hated that noisy, leaking piece of junk. Adlemans has 3-53's for $1500, hopefully they are a better engine. > For a 40 foot power design, we would typically recommend getting a larger engine >rather than smaller. Something like a 50 hp automotive diesel, 3:1 reduction, on a 24" >or larger prop. For a low cost installation, why not use a front wheel out of a FWD >vehicle? Drive the wheel shaft using an automotive transmission. The CV joint will take >care of alignment, and the wheel bearings will take care of the thrust loads. An >automotive automatic transmission with transmission cooler led to the hull should >deliver much of the benefits of a variable pitch prop, for a fraction of the cost. Punching >into a sea you would use low range for power, and downwind in a following sea, use high >range for fuel economy. That is a cool Ideal, never thought of it, I have been looking at Turbo350 and Turbo400, AT's. They are practically indestructable, but I was wondering what to do about 2nd and 3 rd gear. Also, why couldn't you use a regular universal jointed drive shaft to take care of the alignment, one of GB builders used a nautical version of what appears to be a standard drive shaft. I am not sure how the higher gears would handle the constant tourqe load. Granted, twisting with a 30hp engine can't be nearly as rough pulling 4500#s worth of horse trailer with a 300hp 454. > > > Phil, our design offices in Vancouver. Stop by if you get a chance for a look at some of our hulls. I'm nearly done on an "origami duck" that might interest you. Thank you for the invitation, I will try to do that. Regards phil| 3792|3734|2004-05-24 13:06:05|kendall|Re: Troller Yacht Ideas|--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > For a 40 foot power design, we would typically recommend getting a larger engine rather than smaller. Something like a 50 hp automotive diesel, 3:1 reduction, on a 24" or larger prop. For a low cost installation, why not use a front wheel out of a FWD vehicle? Drive the wheel shaft using an automotive transmission. The CV joint will take care of alignment, and the wheel bearings will take care of the thrust loads. An automotive automatic transmission with transmission cooler led to the hull should deliver much of the benefits of a variable pitch prop, for a fraction of the cost. Punching into a sea you would use low range for power, and downwind in a following sea, use high range for fuel economy. > The cv joint and axle sounds good, but the transmission, while workable, would be unneccessary weight, a prop is going to produce thrust at certain RPM's, with a selector it would prove extremely dificult to choose a wheel that would work all around. most 'old' plans that used automotive transmissions used only 1st, nuetral, and reverse. as engines produce power and operate most efficiently at certain rpms, and props are designed for most effective use at certain rpms, it's better to choose one gear, and get a prop for that rpm.| 3793|3787|2004-05-24 13:16:03|kendall|Re: Spam, but not this.|--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, jim dorey wrote: > it's one of the simpler things to do, if the spammer uses a stable name, > if they sign up with a new name every week they can send loads, no way > to stop that kind of thing, but the ones here already that are spamming > can be dealt with. perhaps a curt reminder of this groups intent to the > offending party, then maybe tell their mom, later a boot may be the only > recourse. ya, spam really buggers up my lurking, but only for a moment. they are gettiing too sneaky now though, I've gotten spam from myself on a couple occasions. All these laws and regs that they are working on to punish spammers, I think they should start punishing the people who hire the spammers, I mean if a few companies get hit with a lawsuit because they hired spammers, it would start cutting in to the motivation to hire spammers in the first place. And frankly, if a company can say they hired an 'advertising agency' without having a clue as to what the advertising methods consisted of, then there's something questionable about that company in the first place. I say for every bit of spam you get, write a letter to the company that is being advertised, and let them know that you were considering the purchase of thier product/service, but found someone local who didn't use spam for advertising. or send them a bill for the use of the bandwidth for advertising purposes! they'll get the idea ken| 3794|3746|2004-05-24 13:22:58|Henri Naths|Re: epoxy zinc paint|I don't know if you saw the same pics as I did but ya if it was the armor plate (belt ) that would definately account for the anticorrosion quality of that particqular steel. Without looking it up I understood the armour plate was greater than the 15 or so inch thick steel that I saw. Based on hear-say the older steel before the nuclear era had better anticorrosion qualities because of the non radioactive properties. all conjecture. Henri p.s.the high carbon content of the steel on the Titanic was thought to be superior in that day but they did not account for the frigid temperature they would encounter. Something like a log loader's T1 steel cracking at 40c below. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert Gainer" To: Sent: 23 May, 2004 10:06 AM Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: epoxy zinc paint > Start with the disclaimer, I am not a metallurgist. But it is my > understanding that the proportions of the additives in steel will change the > way it rusts. Some of the older steel was very high in silica (sand) and was > very rust resistant. The old sailing ships used puddle iron for a lot of the > rigging parts, so high in sand that its almost rust proof. The fact is, if > you add the right ingredients to steel you get stainless steel, the far end > of rust resistant steel. The down side of the old steels is that they are > very brittle. The Titanic is the best example of what happens with brittle > steel. By the way the armor belt on the Bismarck I think is Krupp cementite > steel, Face-hardened armor steel. 3.5-3.8% nickel, 2% chrome, 0.3% carbon, > 0.3% manganese, and 0.2% molybdenum. > All the best: > Robert Gainer > > > > >From: "Henri Naths" > >Reply-To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > >To: > >Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: epoxy zinc paint > >Date: Sun, 23 May 2004 09:34:58 -0600 > > > >I saw a pic. of the 15" ? plate they used to build the Bismark laying there > >in the shipyard. They looked just as clean as the day they made them. ( my > >two cents worth) H. > > > >---- Original Message ----- > > From: johnkupris@... > > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > Sent: 23 May, 2004 8:14 AM > > Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: epoxy zinc paint > > > > > > It is interesting about the 1922 boat's interior looking good after all > >these > > years. > > Suposedly the old square riggers used a concoction of : tree tar, > >unboiled > > lindseed oil and a kerosene thinner on metal. I have used it on rusty > >metal for > > years. I spray it on the underside of trucks. I think that 1922 steel > >was > > probably close to present steel but maybe they oil quenced it or > >something. I > > heard that wrought iron on plows and such held up to rust because it was > >hot > > dipped in oil and the oil in the pores somehow stayed sealed in. All > >this is > > conjecture, worth exactly what I paid for it , nothing. John > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > >origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > ADVERTISEMENT > > > > > > > > > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- --- > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of > >Service. > > > > > > > >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee® > Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > | 3795|3734|2004-05-24 13:57:00|ge@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: Troller Yacht Ideas|You usually want a thrust bearing and a reduction gear. Automotive transmission provide the reduction, but typically are not designed to take fore and aft loads. Depending on the transmission ratios, first and reverse would likely be the gears to match with the prop. The high range gear would likely only be used downwind, when the engine is running without much load, and some mismatch in prop efficiency would be outweighed by selecting a higher range, allowing greater fuel economy and/or less noise. We have a standard 2:1 reduction gear, so I haven't tried this myself. If you are using an automotive tranny, it seems reasonable to keep open the option to use the high range when conditions suit. Greg Elliott Origami Magic http://www.origamimagic.com 1.604.987.0050 ----- Original Message ----- From: kendall To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, May 24, 2004 10:05 AM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Troller Yacht Ideas --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > For a 40 foot power design, we would typically recommend getting a larger engine rather than smaller. Something like a 50 hp automotive diesel, 3:1 reduction, on a 24" or larger prop. For a low cost installation, why not use a front wheel out of a FWD vehicle? Drive the wheel shaft using an automotive transmission. The CV joint will take care of alignment, and the wheel bearings will take care of the thrust loads. An automotive automatic transmission with transmission cooler led to the hull should deliver much of the benefits of a variable pitch prop, for a fraction of the cost. Punching into a sea you would use low range for power, and downwind in a following sea, use high range for fuel economy. > The cv joint and axle sounds good, but the transmission, while workable, would be unneccessary weight, a prop is going to produce thrust at certain RPM's, with a selector it would prove extremely dificult to choose a wheel that would work all around. most 'old' plans that used automotive transmissions used only 1st, nuetral, and reverse. as engines produce power and operate most efficiently at certain rpms, and props are designed for most effective use at certain rpms, it's better to choose one gear, and get a prop for that rpm. To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3796|3734|2004-05-24 14:00:10|ge@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: Troller Yacht Ideas|On the Bones we have a standard marine gear with a rubber disk connected to the shaft. Works well, but not low cost, and impossible to replace in the third world, and a pain to align. One of the other origami builders is using CV joints, and swears by them. Given that you can get them cheap, it looks to me like an area that holds promise. Rubber mounting the engine, and solid mounting the CV joint, using all automotive parts to reduce costs. The CV joint automatically takes care of alignment, making re-aligning the engine a thing of the past, and allows you to have the engine mounted at a different angle than the shaft. Also, it allows the shaft packing glad to be solid mounted to the hull, eliminating a potential source of problems. With a flex mounted engine, you normally use a flex mounted shaft. We came within a hair of losing the boat when the rubber coupling between the packing gland and the hull let go, flooding the boat at an unbelievable rate. A solid mount shaft is one less source of failure. http://hostingprod.com/@.../library/cvjoint1.htm Greg Elliott Origami Magic http://www.origamimagic.com 1.604.987.0050 ----- Original Message ----- From: Phil S. To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, May 24, 2004 10:01 AM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Troller Yacht Ideas > Why 50 hp? In good conditions, you will be able to achieve hull speed at low RPM's >which will be quiet. Engine noise is always an issue when running an engine, and as the >RPM's build up, so does the noise. In bad conditions, you will have lots of reserve to >punch into head seas. When faced with storm winds and square waves that can develop >in wind against current conditions, you will need every ounce of HP you can muster if you >are on a lee shore. The Bones has 33 HP on a 18" prop. More than a few times I've >wished for a bigger engine. Bingo! Exactly the kind of information I was looking for. I will go with a 45hp or slightly larger engine. Storms on the great lakes have killed their fair share of sailors. The down side is you don't have a lot of room to just heave too and blow with the wind. I have some experiance with DD 6-71 from my military days and I hated that noisy, leaking piece of junk. Adlemans has 3-53's for $1500, hopefully they are a better engine. > For a 40 foot power design, we would typically recommend getting a larger engine >rather than smaller. Something like a 50 hp automotive diesel, 3:1 reduction, on a 24" >or larger prop. For a low cost installation, why not use a front wheel out of a FWD >vehicle? Drive the wheel shaft using an automotive transmission. The CV joint will take >care of alignment, and the wheel bearings will take care of the thrust loads. An >automotive automatic transmission with transmission cooler led to the hull should >deliver much of the benefits of a variable pitch prop, for a fraction of the cost. Punching >into a sea you would use low range for power, and downwind in a following sea, use high >range for fuel economy. That is a cool Ideal, never thought of it, I have been looking at Turbo350 and Turbo400, AT's. They are practically indestructable, but I was wondering what to do about 2nd and 3 rd gear. Also, why couldn't you use a regular universal jointed drive shaft to take care of the alignment, one of GB builders used a nautical version of what appears to be a standard drive shaft. I am not sure how the higher gears would handle the constant tourqe load. Granted, twisting with a 30hp engine can't be nearly as rough pulling 4500#s worth of horse trailer with a 300hp 454. > > > Phil, our design offices in Vancouver. Stop by if you get a chance for a look at some of our hulls. I'm nearly done on an "origami duck" that might interest you. Thank you for the invitation, I will try to do that. Regards phil To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3797|3734|2004-05-24 14:08:14|Henri Naths|Re: Troller Yacht Ideas|hmm, sounds familar. (lol)( re. alternate drives) Suppose the weight of the vessel is 2.5-3 ton. Engine is 90hp @3000rpm( vw tdi diesel) how would one configure dia. prop and pitch with an automatic transmission? H. ----- Original Message ----- From: ge@... To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: 24 May, 2004 10:27 AM Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: Troller Yacht Ideas For a 40 foot power design, we would typically recommend getting a larger engine rather than smaller. Something like a 50 hp automotive diesel, 3:1 reduction, on a 24" or larger prop. For a low cost installation, why not use a front wheel out of a FWD vehicle? Drive the wheel shaft using an automotive transmission. The CV joint will take care of alignment, and the wheel bearings will take care of the thrust loads. An automotive automatic transmission with transmission cooler led to the hull should deliver much of the benefits of a variable pitch prop, for a fraction of the cost. Punching into a sea you would use low range for power, and downwind in a following sea, use high range for fuel economy. Why 50 hp? In good conditions, you will be able to achieve hull speed at low RPM's which will be quiet. Engine noise is always an issue when running an engine, and as the RPM's build up, so does the noise. In bad conditions, you will have lots of reserve to punch into head seas. When faced with storm winds and square waves that can develop in wind against current conditions, you will need every ounce of HP you can muster if you are on a lee shore. The Bones has 33 HP on a 18" prop. More than a few times I've wished for a bigger engine. One day off Bali we were caught in a squall on a lee shore, with no room to sail in the reefs, and all we could do with the engine at red line was to maintain our position. If the winds had increased, we could easily have been lost. The reefs in the area drop off vertical for hundreds of feet, leaving no room to anchor. Phil, our design offices in Vancouver. Stop by if you get a chance for a look at some of our hulls. I'm nearly done on an "origami duck" that might interest you. Greg Elliott Origami Magic http://www.origamimagic.com 1.604.987.0050 ----- Original Message ----- From: Phil S. To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, May 22, 2004 8:16 AM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Troller Yacht Ideas Brent: I agree, even with GB Pilgrim design if you slowed down to 7 knots(1.2 V/L), the optimum weather range with 100 gallons is 3400 miles. Plenty to get you any where in the world and with a higher average speed than most sail boats and you can take advantage of weather that would be less windy. I know where there is a Sabb 10hp with the gear and vaiable pitch 3 blade prop is for sale for about $1500us asking price. Brent you said your boat only has a 4hp engine if I remember correctly. I might grab it if it would work, anyones opinion would be appreciated. When you do motor, do you get up to hull speed or higher, discounting the windage of the rigg and poles? I have made model props before when I was building model tug boats one as big as a 5" 4 blade. Given the low speed that they spun balance wasn't much of an issue, but they did come out pretty well. Right now I have full acces to a machine and weld shop, I will probably TIG the prop together. I just have to figure out what size and pitch prop to use. Does anyone have any experiance with a Cummins 220 engine. Adelmans has running take outs for $950us, but I will be damned if I can find any information out about one either on the Cummins site or any of the others. Regards Phil To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3798|3746|2004-05-24 14:25:14|ge@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: epoxy zinc paint|I've been hearing that steel has increased in price dramatically of late due to demand in China. I'd be interested to hear from anyone that has done a recent costing. One of the other origami builders wrote me the other day that he just priced a job in alloy and steel, and was surprised because the alloy came out cheaper, and I'd like to move from anecdote to actual numbers. Over the winter I was fabricating a steel part, and was "fitting" it with a big hammer, when the steel shattered in my hand. I've been in the tropics so long that I'd forgotten how brittle steel can become when cold. The weather was below freezing, but not much. Alloy does not have the same problem, and can actually improve structurally as it gets cold. Anyone contemplating a hull for use in cold weather may find that alloy is a better choice. I'd like to propose that we change this group to frameless "metal" boat construction, rather than "steel". Aluminum is one of the most common elements on earth. More common than iron, with recycling advantages. As the third world industrializes I can see much of the first world converting from steel to alloy to remain competitive in an era of rising oil prices, in any application where weight and/or corrosion resistance is an issue. Greg Elliott Origami Magic http://www.origamimagic.com 1.604.987.0050 ----- Original Message ----- From: Henri Naths To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, May 24, 2004 10:20 AM Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: epoxy zinc paint I don't know if you saw the same pics as I did but ya if it was the armor plate (belt ) that would definately account for the anticorrosion quality of that particqular steel. Without looking it up I understood the armour plate was greater than the 15 or so inch thick steel that I saw. Based on hear-say the older steel before the nuclear era had better anticorrosion qualities because of the non radioactive properties. all conjecture. Henri p.s.the high carbon content of the steel on the Titanic was thought to be superior in that day but they did not account for the frigid temperature they would encounter. Something like a log loader's T1 steel cracking at 40c below. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert Gainer" To: Sent: 23 May, 2004 10:06 AM Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: epoxy zinc paint > Start with the disclaimer, I am not a metallurgist. But it is my > understanding that the proportions of the additives in steel will change the > way it rusts. Some of the older steel was very high in silica (sand) and was > very rust resistant. The old sailing ships used puddle iron for a lot of the > rigging parts, so high in sand that its almost rust proof. The fact is, if > you add the right ingredients to steel you get stainless steel, the far end > of rust resistant steel. The down side of the old steels is that they are > very brittle. The Titanic is the best example of what happens with brittle > steel. By the way the armor belt on the Bismarck I think is Krupp cementite > steel, Face-hardened armor steel. 3.5-3.8% nickel, 2% chrome, 0.3% carbon, > 0.3% manganese, and 0.2% molybdenum. > All the best: > Robert Gainer > > > > >From: "Henri Naths" > >Reply-To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > >To: > >Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: epoxy zinc paint > >Date: Sun, 23 May 2004 09:34:58 -0600 > > > >I saw a pic. of the 15" ? plate they used to build the Bismark laying there > >in the shipyard. They looked just as clean as the day they made them. ( my > >two cents worth) H. > > > >---- Original Message ----- > > From: johnkupris@... > > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > Sent: 23 May, 2004 8:14 AM > > Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: epoxy zinc paint > > > > > > It is interesting about the 1922 boat's interior looking good after all > >these > > years. > > Suposedly the old square riggers used a concoction of : tree tar, > >unboiled > > lindseed oil and a kerosene thinner on metal. I have used it on rusty > >metal for > > years. I spray it on the underside of trucks. I think that 1922 steel > >was > > probably close to present steel but maybe they oil quenced it or > >something. I > > heard that wrought iron on plows and such held up to rust because it was > >hot > > dipped in oil and the oil in the pores somehow stayed sealed in. All > >this is > > conjecture, worth exactly what I paid for it , nothing. John > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > >origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > ADVERTISEMENT > > > > > > > > > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- --- > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of > >Service. > > > > > > > >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee® > Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3799|3734|2004-05-24 14:46:14|ge@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: Troller Yacht Ideas|You'd need the reduction ratio on the tranny, allow for slip in the torque converted, and then look up the prop size in one of the tables found in many books on marine design. You also need to know the speed you want to achieve. 90 hp in a 3 ton vessel is PLENTY for displacement applications. I'd normally say 1-5 hp/ton is enough for a displacement hull. 1hp/ton (or even less) if the engine is only needed to get you out sailing, and 5hp/ton for a power application with lots of reserve, although I have seen boats with up to 10hp/ton - and plenty of unballasted power boats have lots more. We are 2.5hp/ton in the Bones. We sailed with a 44 foot heavy displacement steel boat (18 tons) that replaced their 55 hp engine with a 90 hp, and were very happy with the result. Prior to the replacement they had trouble keeping up with us under motor. After the replacement they walked by us, with plenty of reserve. Greg Elliott Origami Magic http://www.origamimagic.com 1.604.987.0050 ----- Original Message ----- From: Henri Naths To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, May 24, 2004 11:04 AM Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: Troller Yacht Ideas hmm, sounds familar. (lol)( re. alternate drives) Suppose the weight of the vessel is 2.5-3 ton. Engine is 90hp @3000rpm( vw tdi diesel) how would one configure dia. prop and pitch with an automatic transmission? H. ----- Original Message ----- From: ge@... To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: 24 May, 2004 10:27 AM Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: Troller Yacht Ideas For a 40 foot power design, we would typically recommend getting a larger engine rather than smaller. Something like a 50 hp automotive diesel, 3:1 reduction, on a 24" or larger prop. For a low cost installation, why not use a front wheel out of a FWD vehicle? Drive the wheel shaft using an automotive transmission. The CV joint will take care of alignment, and the wheel bearings will take care of the thrust loads. An automotive automatic transmission with transmission cooler led to the hull should deliver much of the benefits of a variable pitch prop, for a fraction of the cost. Punching into a sea you would use low range for power, and downwind in a following sea, use high range for fuel economy. Why 50 hp? In good conditions, you will be able to achieve hull speed at low RPM's which will be quiet. Engine noise is always an issue when running an engine, and as the RPM's build up, so does the noise. In bad conditions, you will have lots of reserve to punch into head seas. When faced with storm winds and square waves that can develop in wind against current conditions, you will need every ounce of HP you can muster if you are on a lee shore. The Bones has 33 HP on a 18" prop. More than a few times I've wished for a bigger engine. One day off Bali we were caught in a squall on a lee shore, with no room to sail in the reefs, and all we could do with the engine at red line was to maintain our position. If the winds had increased, we could easily have been lost. The reefs in the area drop off vertical for hundreds of feet, leaving no room to anchor. Phil, our design offices in Vancouver. Stop by if you get a chance for a look at some of our hulls. I'm nearly done on an "origami duck" that might interest you. Greg Elliott Origami Magic http://www.origamimagic.com 1.604.987.0050 ----- Original Message ----- From: Phil S. To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, May 22, 2004 8:16 AM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Troller Yacht Ideas Brent: I agree, even with GB Pilgrim design if you slowed down to 7 knots(1.2 V/L), the optimum weather range with 100 gallons is 3400 miles. Plenty to get you any where in the world and with a higher average speed than most sail boats and you can take advantage of weather that would be less windy. I know where there is a Sabb 10hp with the gear and vaiable pitch 3 blade prop is for sale for about $1500us asking price. Brent you said your boat only has a 4hp engine if I remember correctly. I might grab it if it would work, anyones opinion would be appreciated. When you do motor, do you get up to hull speed or higher, discounting the windage of the rigg and poles? I have made model props before when I was building model tug boats one as big as a 5" 4 blade. Given the low speed that they spun balance wasn't much of an issue, but they did come out pretty well. Right now I have full acces to a machine and weld shop, I will probably TIG the prop together. I just have to figure out what size and pitch prop to use. Does anyone have any experiance with a Cummins 220 engine. Adelmans has running take outs for $950us, but I will be damned if I can find any information out about one either on the Cummins site or any of the others. Regards Phil To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3800|3734|2004-05-24 15:20:05|Courtney Thomas|Re: Troller Yacht Ideas|Would someone please forward to me Greg Elliot's post regarding the implementation of a flexible shaft arrangement where he mentions nearly sinking due to a shaft's letting go ? I accidentally deleted it before entirely reading. Appreciatively, Courtney| 3801|3734|2004-05-24 15:50:26|Phil S.|VW Diesel/Trans combo|What a cool Idea Greg, I did some fast shopping on e-bay for diesel VWs, for less than $500 (probably even less locally), you could get not only the engine but the transmission and CV joint/wheel bearings too. I would of course rebuild the engine and transmission before putting it in the boat. Which would be good practice so I know how it is put together. If I decide to use a turbo350 or T400 I don't believe weight would be much of a concern, I have to add ballast any way, I would rather have a heavy transmission and less ballast than ship a couple hundred extra pounds of lead around. This all brings up some interesting ideas that need some research and thought that is for sure. Phil| 3802|3734|2004-05-24 17:12:54|Henri Naths|Re: Troller Yacht Ideas|Ok so what if you were to figure the bigest prop and the most agessive pitch per displacement(and hp) so at idle speed 850rpm and in top gear(re 1-1 ratio) your boat would do 5kn on glass seas. You need to do 10kns so you increase rpm to 1500 If you had cruise control this would govern the out put shaft(prop) to a set rpm.In this case 1500.You now encounter head seas and the transmission drops a gear so the engine rpm increases to 2000 ( like going up a hill on land) The outputshaft is still 1500rpm. The wind picks up and the transmission has to drop an other gear in order to maintain 1500 rpm.prop speed, now engine speed is 2500rpm. In therory if the prop was a rubber tire on pavement you would still be doing 10 kns but because it's pushing water it is not as efficient(.Who knows what the forward speed would be) Is this a fair assesment of the phyical elements here? I guess what I'm trying to do here is figure out the engineering of prop size, rpm,pitch and fuel efficiency.If you went by the book It would give you a general overall average of prop size per hp and displ and not the physics as per efficiency. Henri Naths Energy7 Ltd. ----- Original Message ----- From: ge@... To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: 24 May, 2004 12:45 PM Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: Troller Yacht Ideas You'd need the reduction ratio on the tranny, allow for slip in the torque converted, and then look up the prop size in one of the tables found in many books on marine design. You also need to know the speed you want to achieve. 90 hp in a 3 ton vessel is PLENTY for displacement applications. I'd normally say 1-5 hp/ton is enough for a displacement hull. 1hp/ton (or even less) if the engine is only needed to get you out sailing, and 5hp/ton for a power application with lots of reserve, although I have seen boats with up to 10hp/ton - and plenty of unballasted power boats have lots more. We are 2.5hp/ton in the Bones. We sailed with a 44 foot heavy displacement steel boat (18 tons) that replaced their 55 hp engine with a 90 hp, and were very happy with the result. Prior to the replacement they had trouble keeping up with us under motor. After the replacement they walked by us, with plenty of reserve. Greg Elliott Origami Magic http://www.origamimagic.com 1.604.987.0050 ----- Original Message ----- From: Henri Naths To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, May 24, 2004 11:04 AM Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: Troller Yacht Ideas hmm, sounds familar. (lol)( re. alternate drives) Suppose the weight of the vessel is 2.5-3 ton. Engine is 90hp @3000rpm( vw tdi diesel) how would one configure dia. prop and pitch with an automatic transmission? H. ----- Original Message ----- From: ge@... To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: 24 May, 2004 10:27 AM Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: Troller Yacht Ideas For a 40 foot power design, we would typically recommend getting a larger engine rather than smaller. Something like a 50 hp automotive diesel, 3:1 reduction, on a 24" or larger prop. For a low cost installation, why not use a front wheel out of a FWD vehicle? Drive the wheel shaft using an automotive transmission. The CV joint will take care of alignment, and the wheel bearings will take care of the thrust loads. An automotive automatic transmission with transmission cooler led to the hull should deliver much of the benefits of a variable pitch prop, for a fraction of the cost. Punching into a sea you would use low range for power, and downwind in a following sea, use high range for fuel economy. Why 50 hp? In good conditions, you will be able to achieve hull speed at low RPM's which will be quiet. Engine noise is always an issue when running an engine, and as the RPM's build up, so does the noise. In bad conditions, you will have lots of reserve to punch into head seas. When faced with storm winds and square waves that can develop in wind against current conditions, you will need every ounce of HP you can muster if you are on a lee shore. The Bones has 33 HP on a 18" prop. More than a few times I've wished for a bigger engine. One day off Bali we were caught in a squall on a lee shore, with no room to sail in the reefs, and all we could do with the engine at red line was to maintain our position. If the winds had increased, we could easily have been lost. The reefs in the area drop off vertical for hundreds of feet, leaving no room to anchor. Phil, our design offices in Vancouver. Stop by if you get a chance for a look at some of our hulls. I'm nearly done on an "origami duck" that might interest you. Greg Elliott Origami Magic http://www.origamimagic.com 1.604.987.0050 ----- Original Message ----- From: Phil S. To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, May 22, 2004 8:16 AM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Troller Yacht Ideas Brent: I agree, even with GB Pilgrim design if you slowed down to 7 knots(1.2 V/L), the optimum weather range with 100 gallons is 3400 miles. Plenty to get you any where in the world and with a higher average speed than most sail boats and you can take advantage of weather that would be less windy. I know where there is a Sabb 10hp with the gear and vaiable pitch 3 blade prop is for sale for about $1500us asking price. Brent you said your boat only has a 4hp engine if I remember correctly. I might grab it if it would work, anyones opinion would be appreciated. When you do motor, do you get up to hull speed or higher, discounting the windage of the rigg and poles? I have made model props before when I was building model tug boats one as big as a 5" 4 blade. Given the low speed that they spun balance wasn't much of an issue, but they did come out pretty well. Right now I have full acces to a machine and weld shop, I will probably TIG the prop together. I just have to figure out what size and pitch prop to use. Does anyone have any experiance with a Cummins 220 engine. Adelmans has running take outs for $950us, but I will be damned if I can find any information out about one either on the Cummins site or any of the others. Regards Phil To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3803|3734|2004-05-25 00:34:22|Michael Casling|Re: Troller Yacht Ideas|One time I was in North East NZ when the round the world boats were just reaching Auckland. The chat in the bar was to go out in the large trawler boats and say hi and wave as they went by. I told everyone that the plan would not work as the 80 foot sailboats would be going too fast and if they did not go out early enough and basically sit in their path then they would not get to see them. I think they are still shaking their heads at having a twin engine fourty foot 12 knot trawler unable to get anywhere near close to the big boats doing 15 knots or more. I convinced my brother to go out early in his 36 foot sailboat, we were still too slow getting there but I did get a couple of long range photos for the guys back at the bar. I agree with whoever suggested to lower your speed expectations to 8 knots from 12 and save a large amount of fuel and use a sailboat hull. Michael ----- Original Message ----- From: David K McComber To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, May 21, 2004 10:35 AM Subject: RE: [origamiboats] Re: Troller Yacht Ideas An inappropriate Cp can double the resistance of a hull. A Cp of .54 to .56 is appropriate for a speed/length ratio of 1.1, or a speed of 6.6 knots for a 36' LWL boat. Most people would expect a 40' Power boat with a 36' LWL to cruise at a more appropriate speed of 8.5 Knots. This would require a Cp of .64 to .66, or much more HP. The higher Cp also reduces pitching making a more comfortable boat. David McComber d.mccomber@... -----Original Message----- From: ge@... [mailto:ge@...] Sent: Friday, May 21, 2004 3:39 AM To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: Troller Yacht Ideas The sketches you see were presented to us as ideas for a starting point for a new origami hull. They are not our designs. They are conventional hulls. They are based on well proven power designs. We design origami hulls, which approximate the conventional hulls, including the CP. The profile on these boats, with the deep forefoot, suggests a high CP. The CP of Option 1 for example is .645. The BS40 that Phil is considering for a troller is shaped quite differently in the bow. It would be closer to a CP of .54 to .56. Does this mean it would be "hopelessly encumbered"? Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com ---- Original Message ----- I would hope that you would design your powerboats with a more appropriate Cp of .64 to .66. These are appropriate for a boat that is expected to be able to cruse eaconamely at hull speed (a speed/length ratio of 1.4 to 1.5) which a power boat should easily reach. Most sail to power conversions are hopelessly encumbered with a Cp of .54 to.56, and thus require much more power to reach the speed that the customer is expecting. Keeping the run as long and strait as possible will also help tremendously. As will keeping the angle of the Quarter Beam Buttock not much over 7 degrees as this will greatly reduce squatting, which soaks up power. >From looking at your sketches it appears you misses all of the above. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT click here _____ Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3804|3734|2004-05-25 00:42:18|Michael Casling|Re: VW Diesel/Trans combo|When I called all the wreckers in BC with an 800 number the VW motors were listed at $1000- to $1200-, I found an Isuzu in a Chevy Vega for $500- complete car minus the gearbox, a Nissan pickup for $600- with a 2.2 liter motor and a 2.5 liter Nissan engine for $550- I got the Nissan 2.5 after looking at the performance curves, it had twice as much torque as the others and a geared cam drive. This was more suitable for my fishing boat which is an aluminum planing hull. Otherwise I would have got the Isuzu and replaced the belt cam drive. The Nissan is probably a bit big for a sailboat under 40 feet. Michael ----- Original Message ----- From: Phil S. To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, May 24, 2004 12:49 PM Subject: [origamiboats] VW Diesel/Trans combo What a cool Idea Greg, I did some fast shopping on e-bay for diesel VWs, for less than $500 (probably even less locally), you could get not only the engine but the transmission and CV joint/wheel bearings too. I would of course rebuild the engine and transmission before putting it in the boat. Which would be good practice so I know how it is put together. If I decide to use a turbo350 or T400 I don't believe weight would be much of a concern, I have to add ballast any way, I would rather have a heavy transmission and less ballast than ship a couple hundred extra pounds of lead around. This all brings up some interesting ideas that need some research and thought that is for sure. Phil To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3805|3746|2004-05-25 00:48:17|Michael Casling|Re: epoxy zinc paint|The futures traders told me that China is the reason for the increased oil demand. In CI Funds latest publication they have this to say. " In 2003 China imported 40 million tonnes of steel, 15 million tonnes more than the year before. This type of increase has huge implications for absorbing excess capacity and driving steel prices upward " Talvest has a good China fund. Michael ----- Original Message ----- From: ge@... To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, May 24, 2004 11:23 AM Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: epoxy zinc paint I've been hearing that steel has increased in price dramatically of late due to demand in China. I'd be interested to hear from anyone that has done a recent costing. One of the other origami builders wrote me the other day that he just priced a job in alloy and steel, and was surprised because the alloy came out cheaper, and I'd like to move from anecdote to actual numbers. Over the winter I was fabricating a steel part, and was "fitting" it with a big hammer, when the steel shattered in my hand. I've been in the tropics so long that I'd forgotten how brittle steel can become when cold. The weather was below freezing, but not much. Alloy does not have the same problem, and can actually improve structurally as it gets cold. Anyone contemplating a hull for use in cold weather may find that alloy is a better choice. I'd like to propose that we change this group to frameless "metal" boat construction, rather than "steel". Aluminum is one of the most common elements on earth. More common than iron, with recycling advantages. As the third world industrializes I can see much of the first world converting from steel to alloy to remain competitive in an era of rising oil prices, in any application where weight and/or corrosion resistance is an issue. Greg Elliott Origami Magic http://www.origamimagic.com 1.604.987.0050 ----- Original Message ----- From: Henri Naths To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, May 24, 2004 10:20 AM Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: epoxy zinc paint [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3806|3806|2004-05-25 05:48:37|sae140|Drip-free inner shaft seal.|Thoughts - I think older steel was generally of a higher quality, due to it containing less recycled material. And I'm not entirely convinced about the use of LED's for 360 degree use as they have a relatively small viewing angle, perfect for traffic lights, but less so for all-round whites ? (Unless you did some clever stuff with mirrors and a diffuser, of course) Ok - anybody want a drip-free inner shaft seal ? If using a rigidly mounted prop-shaft with cv joint etc., then you could do worse than consider an in-board seal arrangement as used on submarines (so I'm told). Stay with Brent's 'cheap and cheerful' plain bearing on the outboard end of the shaft, but on the inner end make up a housing to take two vehicle-type automotive oil seals - the type which have a fine coil spring gently pressing a feather edge onto the shaft. These are both mounted with their feather-edges facing aft - i.e. to keep seawater out. Between the two seals is a small void holding heavy oil, which is filled and kept topped-up from a small header tank via a flexible hose, thus keeping the oil in the void under a token positive pressure with respect to the seawater in the shaft-tube. For added security, mounted on the inboard side of the seal housing assembly is a traditional stuffing-box arrangement, which is normally run completely slack and would only be tightened and brought into play in the event of complete seal failure. The outboard of these two seals is thus lubricated by seawater on one side and oil on the other. The inboard seal being lubricated by oil on it's feather edge side only, as per normal vehicle useage. Should the outboard seal fail, then this will be indicated by a loss of oil from the header tank, with the oil gradually displacing some of the seawater in the shaft tube. Should the inboard seal fail, then oil (rather than seawater) will drip into the boat - likewise, this will be indicated at the header tank. In the unlikely event of both seals failing, then the stuffing-box can be tightened and brought into play as usual, until such time as the seals can be replaced. It occurs to me that the oil-filled cavity surrounding the shaft could also be used with some additional engineering (spacers, collars etc.) to house a thrust bearing - but you might prefer to install this externally. Colin| 3807|3734|2004-05-25 07:38:21|Henri Naths|Re: Troller Yacht Ideas|If your going to use the gear box out of a front wheel drive vehicle, the differential is a part of that system. The power will go to the side with least resistance and not to the prop. You will need to "lock" it somehow so both sides turn equally. ----- Original Message ----- From: Henri Naths To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: 24 May, 2004 3:10 PM Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: Troller Yacht Ideas Ok so what if you were to figure the bigest prop and the most agessive pitch per displacement(and hp) so at idle speed 850rpm and in top gear(re 1-1 ratio) your boat would do 5kn on glass seas. You need to do 10kns so you increase rpm to 1500 If you had cruise control this would govern the out put shaft(prop) to a set rpm.In this case 1500.You now encounter head seas and the transmission drops a gear so the engine rpm increases to 2000 ( like going up a hill on land) The outputshaft is still 1500rpm. The wind picks up and the transmission has to drop an other gear in order to maintain 1500 rpm.prop speed, now engine speed is 2500rpm. In therory if the prop was a rubber tire on pavement you would still be doing 10 kns but because it's pushing water it is not as efficient(.Who knows what the forward speed would be) Is this a fair assesment of the phyical elements here? I guess what I'm trying to do here is figure out the engineering of prop size, rpm,pitch and fuel efficiency.If you went by the book It would give you a general overall average of prop size per hp and displ and not the physics as per efficiency. Henri Naths Energy7 Ltd. ----- Original Message ----- From: ge@... To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: 24 May, 2004 12:45 PM Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: Troller Yacht Ideas You'd need the reduction ratio on the tranny, allow for slip in the torque converted, and then look up the prop size in one of the tables found in many books on marine design. You also need to know the speed you want to achieve. 90 hp in a 3 ton vessel is PLENTY for displacement applications. I'd normally say 1-5 hp/ton is enough for a displacement hull. 1hp/ton (or even less) if the engine is only needed to get you out sailing, and 5hp/ton for a power application with lots of reserve, although I have seen boats with up to 10hp/ton - and plenty of unballasted power boats have lots more. We are 2.5hp/ton in the Bones. We sailed with a 44 foot heavy displacement steel boat (18 tons) that replaced their 55 hp engine with a 90 hp, and were very happy with the result. Prior to the replacement they had trouble keeping up with us under motor. After the replacement they walked by us, with plenty of reserve. Greg Elliott Origami Magic http://www.origamimagic.com 1.604.987.0050 ----- Original Message ----- From: Henri Naths To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, May 24, 2004 11:04 AM Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: Troller Yacht Ideas hmm, sounds familar. (lol)( re. alternate drives) Suppose the weight of the vessel is 2.5-3 ton. Engine is 90hp @3000rpm( vw tdi diesel) how would one configure dia. prop and pitch with an automatic transmission? H. ----- Original Message ----- From: ge@... To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: 24 May, 2004 10:27 AM Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: Troller Yacht Ideas For a 40 foot power design, we would typically recommend getting a larger engine rather than smaller. Something like a 50 hp automotive diesel, 3:1 reduction, on a 24" or larger prop. For a low cost installation, why not use a front wheel out of a FWD vehicle? Drive the wheel shaft using an automotive transmission. The CV joint will take care of alignment, and the wheel bearings will take care of the thrust loads. An automotive automatic transmission with transmission cooler led to the hull should deliver much of the benefits of a variable pitch prop, for a fraction of the cost. Punching into a sea you would use low range for power, and downwind in a following sea, use high range for fuel economy. Why 50 hp? In good conditions, you will be able to achieve hull speed at low RPM's which will be quiet. Engine noise is always an issue when running an engine, and as the RPM's build up, so does the noise. In bad conditions, you will have lots of reserve to punch into head seas. When faced with storm winds and square waves that can develop in wind against current conditions, you will need every ounce of HP you can muster if you are on a lee shore. The Bones has 33 HP on a 18" prop. More than a few times I've wished for a bigger engine. One day off Bali we were caught in a squall on a lee shore, with no room to sail in the reefs, and all we could do with the engine at red line was to maintain our position. If the winds had increased, we could easily have been lost. The reefs in the area drop off vertical for hundreds of feet, leaving no room to anchor. Phil, our design offices in Vancouver. Stop by if you get a chance for a look at some of our hulls. I'm nearly done on an "origami duck" that might interest you. Greg Elliott Origami Magic http://www.origamimagic.com 1.604.987.0050 ----- Original Message ----- From: Phil S. To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, May 22, 2004 8:16 AM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Troller Yacht Ideas Brent: I agree, even with GB Pilgrim design if you slowed down to 7 knots(1.2 V/L), the optimum weather range with 100 gallons is 3400 miles. Plenty to get you any where in the world and with a higher average speed than most sail boats and you can take advantage of weather that would be less windy. I know where there is a Sabb 10hp with the gear and vaiable pitch 3 blade prop is for sale for about $1500us asking price. Brent you said your boat only has a 4hp engine if I remember correctly. I might grab it if it would work, anyones opinion would be appreciated. When you do motor, do you get up to hull speed or higher, discounting the windage of the rigg and poles? I have made model props before when I was building model tug boats one as big as a 5" 4 blade. Given the low speed that they spun balance wasn't much of an issue, but they did come out pretty well. Right now I have full acces to a machine and weld shop, I will probably TIG the prop together. I just have to figure out what size and pitch prop to use. Does anyone have any experiance with a Cummins 220 engine. Adelmans has running take outs for $950us, but I will be damned if I can find any information out about one either on the Cummins site or any of the others. Regards Phil To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3808|3746|2004-05-25 08:05:43|Bill Jaine|Re: epoxy zinc paint|And Wal-Mart, by itself, accounts for a full 10% of all of China�s exports. Bill Port Hope. Canada -----Original Message----- From: Michael Casling [mailto:casling@...] Sent: 25-May-04 12:46 AM To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: epoxy zinc paint The futures traders told me that China is the reason for the increased oil demand. In CI Funds latest publication they have this to say. " In 2003 China imported 40 million tonnes of steel, 15 million tonnes more than the year before. This type of increase has huge implications for absorbing excess capacity and driving steel prices upward " Talvest has a good China fund. Michael ----- Original Message ----- From: ge@... To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, May 24, 2004 11:23 AM Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: epoxy zinc paint I've been hearing that steel has increased in price dramatically of late due to demand in China. I'd be interested to hear from anyone that has done a recent costing. One of the other origami builders wrote me the other day that he just priced a job in alloy and steel, and was surprised because the alloy came out cheaper, and I'd like to move from anecdote to actual numbers. Over the winter I was fabricating a steel part, and was "fitting" it with a big hammer, when the steel shattered in my hand. I've been in the tropics so long that I'd forgotten how brittle steel can become when cold. The weather was below freezing, but not much. Alloy does not have the same problem, and can actually improve structurally as it gets cold. Anyone contemplating a hull for use in cold weather may find that alloy is a better choice. I'd like to propose that we change this group to frameless "metal" boat construction, rather than "steel". Aluminum is one of the most common elements on earth. More common than iron, with recycling advantages. As the third world industrializes I can see much of the first world converting from steel to alloy to remain competitive in an era of rising oil prices, in any application where weight and/or corrosion resistance is an issue. Greg Elliott Origami Magic HYPERLINK "http://www.origamimagic.com"http://www.origamimagic.com 1.604.987.0050 ----- Original Message ----- From: Henri Naths To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, May 24, 2004 10:20 AM Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: epoxy zinc paint [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT HYPERLINK "http://rd.yahoo.com/SIG=129ebuii2/M=295196.4901138.6071305.3001176/D=gr oups/S=1705150872:HM/EXP=1085546897/A=2128215/R=0/SIG=10se96mf6/*http:/c ompanion.yahoo.com"click here HYPERLINK "http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=295196.4901138.6071305.3001176/D=group s/S=:HM/A=2128215/rand=958295814" _____ Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: HYPERLINK "http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/"http://groups.yahoo.com/gro up/origamiboats/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: HYPERLINK "mailto:origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe"ori gamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the HYPERLINK "http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/"Yahoo! Terms of Service. --- Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.690 / Virus Database: 451 - Release Date: 22/05/2004 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.690 / Virus Database: 451 - Release Date: 22/05/2004 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3809|3809|2004-05-25 09:49:41|Phil S.|Local Steel Pricing|From my vast research I have concliuded I should have bought the steel for my bought last year. When I priced 1/4" A36 mild steel plate last year it was $0.24 a pound (US) it is now $0.52 a Pound for a June delivery. It is unlikely that pricing will drop any time soon. In fact another increase is predicted for July and August time frame. At this rate it will be cheaper to build with Aluminum than Steel. As far as I can tell 5000 series aluminum pricing is uneffected. I also belong to the Ore Rail group and activity in the taconite mines is picking up dramatically, a chinese company has even purchased one of the shut down mines in partnership with a US company, restarted it and are transporting the pellets over land by rail to BC and transfering it to ships from there. Something that was thought to be impracticaly expensive just a few months ago. Plywood prices have tripled in the last 6 months, a sheet of 7/16" OSB Board has gone from $5.75 a sheet to nearly $17.00 a sheet. Supposedly due to the demand placed by government orders for materials needed in Iraq and Afganistan. Not that this effects us metal boat builders but any lurkers out there thinking they will get off by building with dead vegitation, aren't. Personally I think it is all a bunch of crap, if the demand is higher there are a bunch of steel mills sitting idle, but why make more steel and lower the price when you can sell what you are making for twice the money. Like fuel prices and everything else, once an excuse can be found for raising prices it will be a long time before they go back down. Regards Phil| 3810|3809|2004-05-25 11:50:51|put_to_sea|Re: Local Steel Pricing|> > Personally I think it is all a bunch of crap, if the demand is higher there are a bunch of > steel mills sitting idle, but why make more steel and lower the price when you can sell > what you are making for twice the money. Like fuel prices and everything else, once an > excuse can be found for raising prices it will be a long time before they go back down. > Regards > Phil Steel is a commodity. Barring governmental meddling, production will increase, and the price will eventually come back down to its production cost plus a small margin. The price may not be as low as it has been due to increasing input costs but we will see surpluses again, I just don't know how long we will have to wait. Amos| 3811|3809|2004-05-25 12:39:12|jumpaltair|Re: Local Steel Pricing|The forecast from a steel importer friend of mine is that China's steel imports are to be very strong for another year or so, but after that India is expected to be greatly increasing their imports, so somebody will have to increase production. Peter > > Steel is a commodity. Barring governmental meddling, production > will increase, and the price will eventually come back down to its > production cost plus a small margin. The price may not be as low as > it has been due to increasing input costs but we will see surpluses > again, I just don't know how long we will have to wait. > > Amos | 3812|3806|2004-05-25 12:55:47|Gerald Niffenegger|Re: Drip-free inner shaft seal.|I was talking with a friend the other day about the exact setup for a shaft seal that you are talking about. He had crewed on a French made boat with the sealing system that you have described. I like the idea and am considering it for my 36' hull. Since the prop shaft is mounted solid the motor would need to be hard mounted and dead on. Or as you suggest, having a universal joint should allow you to soft mount the motor. I believe the universal would need to slide the same as on the car drive shaft of old. By the time the machine work is done for a soft mount, I am wondering where the cost savings would be? Gerald --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "sae140" wrote: > > Thoughts - I think older steel was generally of a higher quality, due > to it containing less recycled material. And I'm not entirely > convinced about the use of LED's for 360 degree use as they have a > relatively small viewing angle, perfect for traffic lights, but less > so for all-round whites ? (Unless you did some clever stuff with > mirrors and a diffuser, of course) > > > Ok - anybody want a drip-free inner shaft seal ? > > If using a rigidly mounted prop-shaft with cv joint etc., then you > could do worse than consider an in-board seal arrangement as used on > submarines (so I'm told). Stay with Brent's 'cheap and cheerful' > plain bearing on the outboard end of the shaft, but on the inner end > make up a housing to take two vehicle-type automotive oil seals - the > type which have a fine coil spring gently pressing a feather edge > onto the shaft. These are both mounted with their feather-edges > facing aft - i.e. to keep seawater out. Between the two seals is a > small void holding heavy oil, which is filled and kept topped-up from > a small header tank via a flexible hose, thus keeping the oil in the > void under a token positive pressure with respect to the seawater in > the shaft-tube. > For added security, mounted on the inboard side of the seal housing > assembly is a traditional stuffing-box arrangement, which is normally > run completely slack and would only be tightened and brought into > play in the event of complete seal failure. > > The outboard of these two seals is thus lubricated by seawater on one > side and oil on the other. The inboard seal being lubricated by oil > on it's feather edge side only, as per normal vehicle useage. > > Should the outboard seal fail, then this will be indicated by a loss > of oil from the header tank, with the oil gradually displacing some > of the seawater in the shaft tube. Should the inboard seal fail, > then oil (rather than seawater) will drip into the boat - likewise, > this will be indicated at the header tank. > In the unlikely event of both seals failing, then the stuffing-box > can be tightened and brought into play as usual, until such time as > the seals can be replaced. > > It occurs to me that the oil-filled cavity surrounding the shaft > could also be used with some additional engineering (spacers, collars > etc.) to house a thrust bearing - but you might prefer to install > this externally. > > Colin | 3813|3734|2004-05-25 13:56:08|David K McComber|Re: Troller Yacht Ideas|The correct Cp for hull speed, a speed length ratio of 1.34 is .64. trying to force a sailboat up to hull speed with an engine with it's Cp of .55 will take more power than if the boat had a Cp of .64. If you don't believe me, check out "Skene's elements of yacht design", "Principles of Yacht Design..Lars Larsson & Rolf E Eliasson", & "Designing Power & Sail .Arthur Edmunds", among others. If you designed a Sail boat with a Cp for hull speed .64, it would be the fastest around the buoys in strong winds, 15 t0 25 Knots, but would be looking at the transoms of the rest of the fleet as soon as the wind dropped to 15 knots or less. This why most sail boats are designed for a speed length ratio of 1.1. David McComber d.mccomber@... -----Original Message----- From: Michael Casling [mailto:casling@...] Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2004 12:30 AM To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: Troller Yacht Ideas One time I was in North East NZ when the round the world boats were just reaching Auckland. The chat in the bar was to go out in the large trawler boats and say hi and wave as they went by. I told everyone that the plan would not work as the 80 foot sailboats would be going too fast and if they did not go out early enough and basically sit in their path then they would not get to see them. I think they are still shaking their heads at having a twin engine fourty foot 12 knot trawler unable to get anywhere near close to the big boats doing 15 knots or more. I convinced my brother to go out early in his 36 foot sailboat, we were still too slow getting there but I did get a couple of long range photos for the guys back at the bar. I agree with whoever suggested to lower your speed expectations to 8 knots from 12 and save a large amount of fuel and use a sailboat hull. Michael ----- Original Message ----- From: David K McComber To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, May 21, 2004 10:35 AM Subject: RE: [origamiboats] Re: Troller Yacht Ideas An inappropriate Cp can double the resistance of a hull. A Cp of .54 to .56 is appropriate for a speed/length ratio of 1.1, or a speed of 6.6 knots for a 36' LWL boat. Most people would expect a 40' Power boat with a 36' LWL to cruise at a more appropriate speed of 8.5 Knots. This would require a Cp of .64 to .66, or much more HP. The higher Cp also reduces pitching making a more comfortable boat. David McComber d.mccomber@... -----Original Message----- From: ge@... [mailto:ge@...] Sent: Friday, May 21, 2004 3:39 AM To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: Troller Yacht Ideas The sketches you see were presented to us as ideas for a starting point for a new origami hull. They are not our designs. They are conventional hulls. They are based on well proven power designs. We design origami hulls, which approximate the conventional hulls, including the CP. The profile on these boats, with the deep forefoot, suggests a high CP. The CP of Option 1 for example is .645. The BS40 that Phil is considering for a troller is shaped quite differently in the bow. It would be closer to a CP of .54 to .56. Does this mean it would be "hopelessly encumbered"? Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com ---- Original Message ----- I would hope that you would design your powerboats with a more appropriate Cp of .64 to .66. These are appropriate for a boat that is expected to be able to cruse eaconamely at hull speed (a speed/length ratio of 1.4 to 1.5) which a power boat should easily reach. Most sail to power conversions are hopelessly encumbered with a Cp of .54 to.56, and thus require much more power to reach the speed that the customer is expecting. Keeping the run as long and strait as possible will also help tremendously. As will keeping the angle of the Quarter Beam Buttock not much over 7 degrees as this will greatly reduce squatting, which soaks up power. >From looking at your sketches it appears you misses all of the above. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT click here _____ Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT click here _____ Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3814|3734|2004-05-25 16:16:59|brentswain38|Re: Troller Yacht Ideas|You are absolutely right, for that speed length ratio. If you were willing to settle for a lower speed length ratio, with a lower prismatic coeficient, your maximum speed would be less, but your fuel consumption would be reduced drastically.It all depends what you want and what your priorities are. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "David K McComber" wrote: > The correct Cp for hull speed, a speed length ratio of 1.34 is .64. trying > to force a sailboat up to hull speed with an engine with it's Cp of .55 will > take more power than if the boat had a Cp of .64. > > If you don't believe me, check out "Skene's elements of yacht design", > "Principles of Yacht Design..Lars Larsson & Rolf E Eliasson", & "Designing > Power & Sail .Arthur Edmunds", among others. > > If you designed a Sail boat with a Cp for hull speed .64, it would be the > fastest around the buoys in strong winds, 15 t0 25 Knots, but would be > looking at the transoms of the rest of the fleet as soon as the wind dropped > to 15 knots or less. This why most sail boats are designed for a speed > length ratio of 1.1. > > > > David McComber > > d.mccomber@c... > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Michael Casling [mailto:casling@s...] > Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2004 12:30 AM > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: Troller Yacht Ideas > > > > One time I was in North East NZ when the round the world boats were just > reaching Auckland. The chat in the bar was to go out in the large trawler > boats and say hi and wave as they went by. I told everyone that the plan > would not work as the 80 foot sailboats would be going too fast and if they > did not go out early enough and basically sit in their path then they would > not get to see them. I think they are still shaking their heads at having a > twin engine fourty foot 12 knot trawler unable to get anywhere near close to > the big boats doing 15 knots or more. I convinced my brother to go out early > in his 36 foot sailboat, we were still too slow getting there but I did get > a couple of long range photos for the guys back at the bar. I agree with > whoever suggested to lower your speed expectations to 8 knots from 12 and > save a large amount of fuel and use a sailboat hull. Michael > ----- Original Message ----- > From: David K McComber > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Friday, May 21, 2004 10:35 AM > Subject: RE: [origamiboats] Re: Troller Yacht Ideas > > > An inappropriate Cp can double the resistance of a hull. A Cp of .54 to > .56 > is appropriate for a speed/length ratio of 1.1, or a speed of 6.6 knots > for > a 36' LWL boat. Most people would expect a 40' Power boat with a 36' LWL > to > cruise at a more appropriate speed of 8.5 Knots. This would require a Cp > of > .64 to .66, or much more HP. The higher Cp also reduces pitching making a > more comfortable boat. > > > > > > David McComber > > d.mccomber@c... > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: ge@e... [mailto:ge@e...] > Sent: Friday, May 21, 2004 3:39 AM > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: Troller Yacht Ideas > > > > The sketches you see were presented to us as ideas for a starting point > for > a new origami hull. They are not our designs. They are conventional > hulls. > They are based on well proven power designs. We design origami hulls, > which > approximate the conventional hulls, including the CP. > > The profile on these boats, with the deep forefoot, suggests a high CP. > The > CP of Option 1 for example is .645. The BS40 that Phil is considering for > a > troller is shaped quite differently in the bow. It would be closer to a > CP > of .54 to .56. Does this mean it would be "hopelessly encumbered"? > > Greg Elliott > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > > ---- Original Message ----- > > I would hope that you would design your powerboats with a more > appropriate > Cp of .64 to .66. These are appropriate for a boat that is expected to > be > able to cruse eaconamely at hull speed (a speed/length ratio of 1.4 to > 1.5) > which a power boat should easily reach. > > Most sail to power conversions are hopelessly encumbered with a Cp of > .54 > to.56, and thus require much more power to reach the speed that the > customer > is expecting. > > Keeping the run as long and strait as possible will also help > tremendously. > As will keeping the angle of the Quarter Beam Buttock not much over 7 > degrees as this will greatly reduce squatting, which soaks up power. > > > > >From looking at your sketches it appears you misses all of the above. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > > > ADVERTISEMENT > > > > /S=1705150872:HM/EXP=1085211757/A=2128215/R=0/SIG=10se96mf6/*http:/c ompanion > .yahoo.com> click here > > > > > :HM/A=2128215/rand=906300020> > > > > _____ > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > * To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of > Service. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ADVERTISEMENT > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------- > -- > Yahoo! Groups Links > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > > > ADVERTISEMENT > > /S=1705150872:HM/EXP=1085546062/A=2128215/R=0/SIG=10se96mf6/*http:/c ompanion > .yahoo.com> click here > > > > :HM/A=2128215/rand=282780326> > > > > _____ > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > * To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of > Service. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3815|3806|2004-05-25 16:23:55|brentswain38|Re: Drip-free inner shaft seal.|I used the vertically fluted clear lens over the LED's to difuse the light horizontally while leaving it concentrated vertically. It works well. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "sae140" wrote: > > Thoughts - I think older steel was generally of a higher quality, due > to it containing less recycled material. And I'm not entirely > convinced about the use of LED's for 360 degree use as they have a > relatively small viewing angle, perfect for traffic lights, but less > so for all-round whites ? (Unless you did some clever stuff with > mirrors and a diffuser, of course) > > > Ok - anybody want a drip-free inner shaft seal ? > > If using a rigidly mounted prop-shaft with cv joint etc., then you > could do worse than consider an in-board seal arrangement as used on > submarines (so I'm told). Stay with Brent's 'cheap and cheerful' > plain bearing on the outboard end of the shaft, but on the inner end > make up a housing to take two vehicle-type automotive oil seals - the > type which have a fine coil spring gently pressing a feather edge > onto the shaft. These are both mounted with their feather-edges > facing aft - i.e. to keep seawater out. Between the two seals is a > small void holding heavy oil, which is filled and kept topped-up from > a small header tank via a flexible hose, thus keeping the oil in the > void under a token positive pressure with respect to the seawater in > the shaft-tube. > For added security, mounted on the inboard side of the seal housing > assembly is a traditional stuffing-box arrangement, which is normally > run completely slack and would only be tightened and brought into > play in the event of complete seal failure. > > The outboard of these two seals is thus lubricated by seawater on one > side and oil on the other. The inboard seal being lubricated by oil > on it's feather edge side only, as per normal vehicle useage. > > Should the outboard seal fail, then this will be indicated by a loss > of oil from the header tank, with the oil gradually displacing some > of the seawater in the shaft tube. Should the inboard seal fail, > then oil (rather than seawater) will drip into the boat - likewise, > this will be indicated at the header tank. > In the unlikely event of both seals failing, then the stuffing-box > can be tightened and brought into play as usual, until such time as > the seals can be replaced. > > It occurs to me that the oil-filled cavity surrounding the shaft > could also be used with some additional engineering (spacers, collars > etc.) to house a thrust bearing - but you might prefer to install > this externally. > > Colin | 3816|3734|2004-05-25 16:27:55|brentswain38|Re: VW Diesel/Trans combo|Both Nissan's and Isuzu's are better diesels for a boat than the VW. Not all Isuzu's have overhead cams. Mine doesn't.Both fit well in a 36 footer and can be ran at 20 HP as long as you rev them up from time to time before shutting them down to burn the carbon out. I just read about a lifetime heavy duty mechanic saying that a rebuilt engine is much more reliable than a new one. Castings, no matter how well done , involve a bit of luck.Don't use synthetic oil on a rebuilt, as it will just run out.It's a bit too slipery. Brent Swain Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Michael Casling wrote: > When I called all the wreckers in BC with an 800 number the VW motors were listed at $1000- to $1200-, I found an Isuzu in a Chevy Vega for $500- complete car minus the gearbox, a Nissan pickup for $600- with a 2.2 liter motor and a 2.5 liter Nissan engine for $550- I got the Nissan 2.5 after looking at the performance curves, it had twice as much torque as the others and a geared cam drive. This was more suitable for my fishing boat which is an aluminum planing hull. Otherwise I would have got the Isuzu and replaced the belt cam drive. The Nissan is probably a bit big for a sailboat under 40 feet. Michael > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Phil S. > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Monday, May 24, 2004 12:49 PM > Subject: [origamiboats] VW Diesel/Trans combo > > > What a cool Idea Greg, I did some fast shopping on e-bay for diesel VWs, for less than > $500 (probably even less locally), you could get not only the engine but the transmission > and CV joint/wheel bearings too. I would of course rebuild the engine and transmission > before putting it in the boat. Which would be good practice so I know how it is put > together. > > If I decide to use a turbo350 or T400 I don't believe weight would be much of a concern, I > have to add ballast any way, I would rather have a heavy transmission and less ballast than > ship a couple hundred extra pounds of lead around. This all brings up some interesting > ideas that need some research and thought that is for sure. > Phil > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ADVERTISEMENT > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- > Yahoo! Groups Links > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3817|3817|2004-05-25 16:28:04|Phil S.|Hull Costs|With the increase in steel pricing I have punched the numbers in my little spread sheet and buying the steel for a 40 footer is up to around $5400(USD). My hope is it will come down a bit next year when I am finally ready to start my hull. Although I may end up hitting the scrap yard and buying the biggest sheets they have and doing the best i can there. Ebay has a bunch of Nissan and Other diesel engines up for bid. Prices average about $1200 for a engine and transmission. Cool, another source to check out. Phil| 3818|3818|2004-05-25 17:07:15|ge@easysoftwareinc.com|Fw: [origamiboats] Re: Troller Yacht Ideas|This article shows an example of sailboat hulls with .534 and .60 Cp http://www.newavesys.com/hullvary.htm Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com ----- Original Message ----- From: David K McComber To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, May 21, 2004 10:35 AM Subject: RE: [origamiboats] Re: Troller Yacht Ideas An inappropriate Cp can double the resistance of a hull. A Cp of .54 to .56 is appropriate for a speed/length ratio of 1.1, or a speed of 6.6 knots for a 36' LWL boat. Most people would expect a 40' Power boat with a 36' LWL to cruise at a more appropriate speed of 8.5 Knots. This would require a Cp of .64 to .66, or much more HP. The higher Cp also reduces pitching making a more comfortable boat. David McComber d.mccomber@... -----Original Message----- From: ge@... [mailto:ge@...] Sent: Friday, May 21, 2004 3:39 AM To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: Troller Yacht Ideas The sketches you see were presented to us as ideas for a starting point for a new origami hull. They are not our designs. They are conventional hulls. They are based on well proven power designs. We design origami hulls, which approximate the conventional hulls, including the CP. The profile on these boats, with the deep forefoot, suggests a high CP. The CP of Option 1 for example is .645. The BS40 that Phil is considering for a troller is shaped quite differently in the bow. It would be closer to a CP of .54 to .56. Does this mean it would be "hopelessly encumbered"? Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com ---- Original Message ----- I would hope that you would design your powerboats with a more appropriate Cp of .64 to .66. These are appropriate for a boat that is expected to be able to cruse eaconamely at hull speed (a speed/length ratio of 1.4 to 1.5) which a power boat should easily reach. Most sail to power conversions are hopelessly encumbered with a Cp of .54 to.56, and thus require much more power to reach the speed that the customer is expecting. Keeping the run as long and strait as possible will also help tremendously. As will keeping the angle of the Quarter Beam Buttock not much over 7 degrees as this will greatly reduce squatting, which soaks up power. >From looking at your sketches it appears you misses all of the above. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT click here _____ Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3819|3734|2004-05-25 18:11:22|fmichael graham|Re: VW Diesel/Trans combo|In the Philippines, everyone uses Japanese "surplus" engines for re-powering cars, trucks, & boats. I fitted used Isuzu diesels on my fish boats. once aligned properly, these things "go forever" and are cheap to replace. The biggest hassle was adding an additional lever for engaging the clutch. Watching the vessels' operators manoeuvre the boats(LOA 83') was like observing a one-armed paper hanger in action. I think that, should one wish to go with an auto trans., a manual valve-body would be in order. Mike brentswain38 wrote: Both Nissan's and Isuzu's are better diesels for a boat than the VW. Not all Isuzu's have overhead cams. Mine doesn't.Both fit well in a 36 footer and can be ran at 20 HP as long as you rev them up from time to time before shutting them down to burn the carbon out. I just read about a lifetime heavy duty mechanic saying that a rebuilt engine is much more reliable than a new one. Castings, no matter how well done , involve a bit of luck.Don't use synthetic oil on a rebuilt, as it will just run out.It's a bit too slipery. Brent Swain Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Michael Casling wrote: > When I called all the wreckers in BC with an 800 number the VW motors were listed at $1000- to $1200-, I found an Isuzu in a Chevy Vega for $500- complete car minus the gearbox, a Nissan pickup for $600- with a 2.2 liter motor and a 2.5 liter Nissan engine for $550- I got the Nissan 2.5 after looking at the performance curves, it had twice as much torque as the others and a geared cam drive. This was more suitable for my fishing boat which is an aluminum planing hull. Otherwise I would have got the Isuzu and replaced the belt cam drive. The Nissan is probably a bit big for a sailboat under 40 feet. Michael > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Phil S. > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Monday, May 24, 2004 12:49 PM > Subject: [origamiboats] VW Diesel/Trans combo > > > What a cool Idea Greg, I did some fast shopping on e-bay for diesel VWs, for less than > $500 (probably even less locally), you could get not only the engine but the transmission > and CV joint/wheel bearings too. I would of course rebuild the engine and transmission > before putting it in the boat. Which would be good practice so I know how it is put > together. > > If I decide to use a turbo350 or T400 I don't believe weight would be much of a concern, I > have to add ballast any way, I would rather have a heavy transmission and less ballast than > ship a couple hundred extra pounds of lead around. This all brings up some interesting > ideas that need some research and thought that is for sure. > Phil > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ADVERTISEMENT > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- > Yahoo! Groups Links > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links --------------------------------- Post your free ad now! Yahoo! Canada Personals [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3820|3734|2004-05-25 22:57:57|Michael Casling|Re: VW Diesel/Trans combo|When a cast iron block is new, it will distort from the heating cooling process. Some manufacturers cured the blocks by leaving them outside for a few months. When you drill a round hole in a cured or used block it will stay round better and the engine will make more horsepower. This is what Don Garlitts was saying in the 60's. I will be getting the engine rebuilt in the belch mobile ( farm truck ) this winter. The VW is low on my list too. I have heard that the Nissan can be hard to find parts for, which makes the Isuzu a good choice for a sailboat. They are in the Vauxhall cars and Isuzu pickups in Europe. Michael ----- Original Message ----- From: brentswain38 To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2004 1:27 PM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: VW Diesel/Trans combo Both Nissan's and Isuzu's are better diesels for a boat than the VW. Not all Isuzu's have overhead cams. Mine doesn't.Both fit well in a 36 footer and can be ran at 20 HP as long as you rev them up from time to time before shutting them down to burn the carbon out. I just read about a lifetime heavy duty mechanic saying that a rebuilt engine is much more reliable than a new one. Castings, no matter how well done , involve a bit of luck.Don't use synthetic oil on a rebuilt, as it will just run out.It's a bit too slipery. Brent Swain Brent Swain [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3821|3806|2004-05-26 04:15:33|sae140|Re: Drip-free inner shaft seal.|--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gerald Niffenegger" wrote: > I was talking with a friend the other day about the exact setup for a > shaft seal that you are talking about. He had crewed on a French made > boat with the sealing system that you have described. I like the idea > and am considering it for my 36' hull. Since the prop shaft is mounted > solid the motor would need to be hard mounted and dead on. Or as you > suggest, having a universal joint should allow you to soft mount the > motor. I believe the universal would need to slide the same as on the > car drive shaft of old. By the time the machine work is done for a > soft mount, I am wondering where the cost savings would be? > Gerald Ah - but I never claimed that this was cheaper :-( Imo, such a seal set-up is completely unnecessary for a simple, minimalistic approach ... but a great boon to those (like me) who have something of a neurosis about that cupful of seawater which always seems to live under the stern gland. Would probably cost about the same to fabricate as a home-built bilge-pump (?). For either the hard- or soft-mounted engine option, each rear drive- shaft from a Ford Sierra (or similar vehicle with independent rear suspension) will supply you with two sliding cv joints - at next to zero cost. In my view, tedious and exacting engine alignment really ought to be a thing of the past. Needless to say, it's important to have a thrust-bearing arrangement *outboard* of any cv joint in order to prevent excessive fore-and-aft movement of the shaft. When compared with marine prices, I think there are considerable savings to be made by using automotive components wherever possible. Colin| 3822|3734|2004-05-26 04:23:51|sae140|Re: Troller Yacht Ideas|--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Henri Naths" wrote: > If your going to use the gear box out of a front wheel drive vehicle, the differential is a part of that system. The power will go to the side with least resistance and not to the prop. You will need to "lock" it somehow so both sides turn equally. Or selectively lock one side at a time - which could be useful if you're planning on driving something 'big and dirty' hanging on the inboard shaft - like a mains generator/ welder/ compressor ..... Colin| 3823|3734|2004-05-26 07:29:40|Bill Jaine|Re: VW Diesel/Trans combo|Our local, best guy in 200 miles, diesel garage very strongly recommends using Standyne Performance Chemicals diesel additive. When I first took the (diesel) Jetta in to him it wouldn�t do above 120 kph (it�s non-turbo), but after two shots of the additive it would run comfortably all day at 140kph. now has over 330,000 k on it. I�m waiting for the rest of the car to die so that I can put it in the boat :-). We did have an Isuzu diesel pick up, ran all day and took all kinds of abuse and very little diesel. I read that VW spares are really expensive. Bill Port Hope. Canada -----Original Message----- From: Michael Casling [mailto:casling@...] Sent: 25-May-04 10:53 PM To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: VW Diesel/Trans combo When a cast iron block is new, it will distort from the heating cooling process. Some manufacturers cured the blocks by leaving them outside for a few months. When you drill a round hole in a cured or used block it will stay round better and the engine will make more horsepower. This is what Don Garlitts was saying in the 60's. I will be getting the engine rebuilt in the belch mobile ( farm truck ) this winter. The VW is low on my list too. I have heard that the Nissan can be hard to find parts for, which makes the Isuzu a good choice for a sailboat. They are in the Vauxhall cars and Isuzu pickups in Europe. Michael ----- Original Message ----- From: brentswain38 To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2004 1:27 PM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: VW Diesel/Trans combo Both Nissan's and Isuzu's are better diesels for a boat than the VW. Not all Isuzu's have overhead cams. Mine doesn't.Both fit well in a 36 footer and can be ran at 20 HP as long as you rev them up from time to time before shutting them down to burn the carbon out. I just read about a lifetime heavy duty mechanic saying that a rebuilt engine is much more reliable than a new one. Castings, no matter how well done , involve a bit of luck.Don't use synthetic oil on a rebuilt, as it will just run out.It's a bit too slipery. Brent Swain Brent Swain [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT HYPERLINK "http://rd.yahoo.com/SIG=129cc1aph/M=295196.4901138.6071305.3001176/D=gr oups/S=1705150872:HM/EXP=1085626677/A=2128215/R=0/SIG=10se96mf6/*http:/c ompanion.yahoo.com"click here HYPERLINK "http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=295196.4901138.6071305.3001176/D=group s/S=:HM/A=2128215/rand=497591102" _____ Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: HYPERLINK "http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/"http://groups.yahoo.com/gro up/origamiboats/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: HYPERLINK "mailto:origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe"ori gamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the HYPERLINK "http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/"Yahoo! Terms of Service. --- Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.690 / Virus Database: 451 - Release Date: 22/05/2004 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.690 / Virus Database: 451 - Release Date: 22/05/2004 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3824|3734|2004-05-26 12:37:14|Henri Naths|Re: Troller Yacht Ideas|Or selectively lock one side at a time - which could be useful if you're planning on driving something 'big and dirty' hanging on the inboard shaft - like a mains generator/ welder/ compressor ..... Colin Hey Colin, Selectely locking one side at a time would be ideal, could possibly use the disc brakes. What I was wondering about was if locking one side of the diff. would cause the other side to spin faster, like the standard diff on a rear wheel drive unit. Henri ----- Original Message ----- From: sae140 To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: 26 May, 2004 2:22 AM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Troller Yacht Ideas --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Henri Naths" wrote: > If your going to use the gear box out of a front wheel drive vehicle, the differential is a part of that system. The power will go to the side with least resistance and not to the prop. You will need to "lock" it somehow so both sides turn equally. Or selectively lock one side at a time - which could be useful if you're planning on driving something 'big and dirty' hanging on the inboard shaft - like a mains generator/ welder/ compressor ..... Colin To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3825|3734|2004-05-26 12:42:48|Henri Naths|Re: VW Diesel/Trans combo|Bill, What year is your jetta? I just bought a 1996 tdi with 37000 k in Calgary for 2200.00 Thatwas the best price I could find after two week of searching. H. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill Jaine" To: Sent: 26 May, 2004 5:24 AM Subject: RE: [origamiboats] Re: VW Diesel/Trans combo Our local, best guy in 200 miles, diesel garage very strongly recommends using Standyne Performance Chemicals diesel additive. When I first took the (diesel) Jetta in to him it wouldn't do above 120 kph (it's non-turbo), but after two shots of the additive it would run comfortably all day at 140kph. now has over 330,000 k on it. I'm waiting for the rest of the car to die so that I can put it in the boat :-). We did have an Isuzu diesel pick up, ran all day and took all kinds of abuse and very little diesel. I read that VW spares are really expensive. Bill Port Hope. Canada -----Original Message----- From: Michael Casling [mailto:casling@...] Sent: 25-May-04 10:53 PM To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: VW Diesel/Trans combo When a cast iron block is new, it will distort from the heating cooling process. Some manufacturers cured the blocks by leaving them outside for a few months. When you drill a round hole in a cured or used block it will stay round better and the engine will make more horsepower. This is what Don Garlitts was saying in the 60's. I will be getting the engine rebuilt in the belch mobile ( farm truck ) this winter. The VW is low on my list too. I have heard that the Nissan can be hard to find parts for, which makes the Isuzu a good choice for a sailboat. They are in the Vauxhall cars and Isuzu pickups in Europe. Michael ----- Original Message ----- From: brentswain38 To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2004 1:27 PM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: VW Diesel/Trans combo Both Nissan's and Isuzu's are better diesels for a boat than the VW. Not all Isuzu's have overhead cams. Mine doesn't.Both fit well in a 36 footer and can be ran at 20 HP as long as you rev them up from time to time before shutting them down to burn the carbon out. I just read about a lifetime heavy duty mechanic saying that a rebuilt engine is much more reliable than a new one. Castings, no matter how well done , involve a bit of luck.Don't use synthetic oil on a rebuilt, as it will just run out.It's a bit too slipery. Brent Swain Brent Swain [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT HYPERLINK "http://rd.yahoo.com/SIG=129cc1aph/M=295196.4901138.6071305.3001176/D=gr oups/S=1705150872:HM/EXP=1085626677/A=2128215/R=0/SIG=10se96mf6/*http:/c ompanion.yahoo.com"click here HYPERLINK "http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=295196.4901138.6071305.3001176/D=group s/S=:HM/A=2128215/rand=497591102" _____ Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: HYPERLINK "http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/"http://groups.yahoo.com/gro up/origamiboats/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: HYPERLINK "mailto:origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe"ori gamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the HYPERLINK "http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/"Yahoo! Terms of Service. --- Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.690 / Virus Database: 451 - Release Date: 22/05/2004 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.690 / Virus Database: 451 - Release Date: 22/05/2004 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links | 3826|3826|2004-05-26 15:03:08|Phil S.|AutoTransmission|After doing some research, I am thinking using an automatic transmission isn't such a good Idea. For a couple of reasons; Heat; With the torque converter and all of that oil even running a keel cooling system might not be enough. Loss of power, there is some loss of power in the torque converter as the pump drives the impeller. Not a significant amount to a car but in long range cruising it could make a significant range difference. I did some research into really old drive trains and standard transmissions, many of the old marine systems seem to use some type of clutch system. After looking over an old stick transmission I think it would be possible to your own, even without a clutch. The syncronizer collar should have enough friction to get the prop rotating so you could engage the dog teeth. Although the better way would be to just have a small hydralic ram hooked to a lever and then to the clutch, so you could disengage it.| 3827|3734|2004-05-26 15:16:04|Dick Pilz|Re: VW Diesel/Trans combo|For many of the "stock block" Indy racing engines, the builders seek out used school bus engines with 250K or better on them, Many heating/cooling cycles, so any re-machining will be nuts on. Packard Motor in the 30s used to chuck their fresh iron block castings out into a field for a few years before machining them. Maybe that attitude is why thy got the contract to manufacture Rolls- Royce aircraft engines in WWII. Cast iron does so many things well that if it were discovered today, it would be hailed as a wonder material. It casts easily, it is wear resistant and self-lubricating, thanks to the over-abundance of carbon, and it is vibration-damping, again thanks to the carbon inclusions. If you want a one-off casting, just glue up some styrofoam and carve to shape about one to two percent larger than the desired article, plus about a .125 inch/3mm all-over machining allowance and have a foundyy do its magic with it. Works for iron, bronze or aluminum. --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Michael Casling wrote: > When a cast iron block is new, it will distort from the heating cooling process. Some manufacturers cured the blocks by leaving them outside for a few months. When you drill a round hole in a cured or used block it will stay round better and the engine will make more horsepower. This is what Don Garlitts was saying in the 60's. I will be getting the engine rebuilt in the belch mobile ( farm truck ) this winter. The VW is low on my list too. I have heard that the Nissan can be hard to find parts for, which makes the Isuzu a good choice for a sailboat. They are in the Vauxhall cars and Isuzu pickups in Europe. Michael| 3828|3826|2004-05-26 16:36:00|ge@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: AutoTransmission|Some torque converters have a clutch built in, that locks the unit when driven at speed to eliminate loss. http://www.edmunds.com/ownership/techcenter/articles/43836/article.html http://autorepair.about.com/cs/troubleshooting/a/aa061701a.htm http://www.drivesubaru.com/Fall02_TorqueConvert.htm The water and prop are a torque converter, so you may actually be able to leave the torque converter clutch permanently locked by bypassing the solenoid, or bypass/remove the torque converter entirely, and connect the AT directly to the engine. What you are after is a transmission that shifts using permanently engaged gears and a clutch pack, rather than syncros and physically engaging of gears. In general, marine gears use this method, allowing you to shift at full throttle from forward to reverse in some transmissions. While I don't recommend it, I've had to do this on two occasion in the Bones, and the tranny survived without incident. Lots of ATs use clutch packs, so you should be able to find one to do the job. Bands may also work just fine, I've just less familar with them. Basically, an automatic transmission without a torque converter is the equivalent of a standard marine transmission, only the automotive transmission has multiple gear ratios. Greg Elliott Origami Magic http://www.origamimagic.com 1.604.987.0050 ----- Original Message ----- > After doing some research, I am thinking using an automatic transmission isn't such a > good Idea. For a couple of reasons; > | 3829|3734|2004-05-26 17:51:49|David K McComber|Re: Troller Yacht Ideas|If you just lock the shaft it will cause the other shaft to turn at double speed using the spider gears in the differential. What you need to do is take the differential apart and weld up the spider gears so only the ring & pinion gears can turn. David McComber d.mccomber@... > If your going to use the gear box out of a front wheel drive vehicle, the differential is a part of that system. The power will go to the side with least resistance and not to the prop. You will need to "lock" it somehow so both sides turn equally. Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT click here _____ Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3830|3734|2004-05-26 18:18:50|Bill Jaine|Re: VW Diesel/Trans combo|It�s a 91, Paid $12,000 when it was 12 months old , I guess the old owner sold it because it was so gutless ( a magnificent 57 hp) The Standyne certainly gave it a few more guts but you do learn to judge overtaking distances carefully :-) That sounds like a great deal for your VW, another word of advice, follow the lubrication instructions carefully for door handles DON�T use WD40, use the lithium grease because I used WD 40 and have had to repair/replace just about all the handles. Bill Port Hope. Canada -----Original Message----- From: Henri Naths [mailto:c_hnaths@...] Sent: 26-May-04 12:41 PM To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: VW Diesel/Trans combo Bill, What year is your jetta? I just bought a 1996 tdi with 37000 k in Calgary for 2200.00 Thatwas the best price I could find after two week of searching. H. --- Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.691 / Virus Database: 452 - Release Date: 26/05/2004 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.691 / Virus Database: 452 - Release Date: 26/05/2004 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3831|3734|2004-05-26 18:34:22|Michael Casling|Re: VW Diesel/Trans combo|The RR motors still had a performance edge over the Packards. There are some excellent articles written about the trials and tribulations of getting the RR motors operational in a short period of time, makes for good reading. Michael ----- Original Message ----- From: Dick Pilz To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2004 12:15 PM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: VW Diesel/Trans combo For many of the "stock block" Indy racing engines, the builders seek out used school bus engines with 250K or better on them, Many heating/cooling cycles, so any re-machining will be nuts on. Packard Motor in the 30s used to chuck their fresh iron block castings out into a field for a few years before machining them. Maybe that attitude is why thy got the contract to manufacture Rolls- Royce aircraft engines in WWII. Cast iron does so many things well that if it were discovered today, it would be hailed as a wonder material. It casts easily, it is wear resistant and self-lubricating, thanks to the over-abundance of carbon, and it is vibration-damping, again thanks to the carbon inclusions. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3832|3826|2004-05-26 18:35:27|Michael Casling|Re: AutoTransmission|In the truly old days and in the drag boats, you start the engine in neutral then shut it off, clunk it in gear and restart, same process for reverse. If you were running the number six tug in Kelowna and let the air pressure get low you could not restart the engine and a collision was imminent. This was a common occurrence with big boats in small places and beer impaired drag boat operators. Last week I found out that my old friend Lenny who had used an auto in his boat had died. Michael in Kelowna ----- Original Message ----- From: Phil S. To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2004 12:01 PM Subject: [origamiboats] AutoTransmission After doing some research, I am thinking using an automatic transmission isn't such a good Idea. For a couple of reasons; Heat; With the torque converter and all of that oil even running a keel cooling system might not be enough. Loss of power, there is some loss of power in the torque converter as the pump drives the impeller. Not a significant amount to a car but in long range cruising it could make a significant range difference. I did some research into really old drive trains and standard transmissions, many of the old marine systems seem to use some type of clutch system. After looking over an old stick transmission I think it would be possible to your own, even without a clutch. The syncronizer collar should have enough friction to get the prop rotating so you could engage the dog teeth. Although the better way would be to just have a small hydralic ram hooked to a lever and then to the clutch, so you could disengage it. To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3833|3806|2004-05-26 18:52:32|Gerald Niffenegger|Re: Drip-free inner shaft seal.|I also want a dry bilge ....... for a change! My 32' 1967 wood yawl leaks bad at the shaft. It is not so common here to use packing nuts. Many boats have grease packed behind a brass bushing. Kind of works but about every minute I get a drip. When I said where is the cost savings I was thinking about the carbon seals that claim to be 100% leak free. I have yet to read bad things about them but I am sure there must be some horror stories out there? The claim is that if you keep oil and grease away from the seal you will get absolutely zero water inside the boat? Gerald --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "sae140" wrote: > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gerald Niffenegger" > wrote: > > I was talking with a friend the other day about the exact setup for > a > > shaft seal that you are talking about. He had crewed on a French > made > > boat with the sealing system that you have described. I like the > idea > > and am considering it for my 36' hull. Since the prop shaft is > mounted > > solid the motor would need to be hard mounted and dead on. Or as you > > suggest, having a universal joint should allow you to soft mount the > > motor. I believe the universal would need to slide the same as on > the > > car drive shaft of old. By the time the machine work is done for a > > soft mount, I am wondering where the cost savings would be? > > Gerald > > Ah - but I never claimed that this was cheaper :-( > Imo, such a seal set-up is completely unnecessary for a simple, > minimalistic approach ... but a great boon to those (like me) who > have something of a neurosis about that cupful of seawater which > always seems to live under the stern gland. Would probably cost > about the same to fabricate as a home-built bilge-pump (?). > > For either the hard- or soft-mounted engine option, each rear drive- > shaft from a Ford Sierra (or similar vehicle with independent rear > suspension) will supply you with two sliding cv joints - at next to > zero cost. In my view, tedious and exacting engine alignment really > ought to be a thing of the past. > Needless to say, it's important to have a thrust-bearing arrangement > *outboard* of any cv joint in order to prevent excessive fore-and-aft > movement of the shaft. > > When compared with marine prices, I think there are considerable > savings to be made by using automotive components wherever possible. > > Colin | 3834|3734|2004-05-26 19:22:25|Gerald Niffenegger|Re: VW Diesel/Trans combo|There are other ways to get stress free castings, besides throwing them out in a field. Back in the late 60's I was in charge of steel stores and we had a Kolene system in the building. The system heated castings to around 1,100 degrees in a liquid salt bath and then the parts were dipped in cold water. Besides giving them a nice black coating it also removed some internal fins and stress relived the castings. In addition to all that it burned the hell out of various parts of poor old Paul's body. The poor operator had lots of little marks on his arms and head where the hot salts had fallen on him. Gerald --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Michael Casling wrote: > The RR motors still had a performance edge over the Packards. There are some excellent articles written about the trials and tribulations of getting the RR motors operational in a short period of time, makes for good reading. Michael > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Dick Pilz > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2004 12:15 PM > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: VW Diesel/Trans combo > > > For many of the "stock block" Indy racing engines, the builders seek > out used school bus engines with 250K or better on them, Many > heating/cooling cycles, so any re-machining will be nuts on. > > Packard Motor in the 30s used to chuck their fresh iron block > castings out into a field for a few years before machining them. > Maybe that attitude is why thy got the contract to manufacture Rolls- > Royce aircraft engines in WWII. > > Cast iron does so many things well that if it were discovered today, > it would be hailed as a wonder material. It casts easily, it is wear > resistant and self-lubricating, thanks to the over-abundance of > carbon, and it is vibration-damping, again thanks to the carbon > inclusions. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3835|3734|2004-05-26 19:41:42|Gary H. Lucas|Re: Troller Yacht Ideas|Guys, Locking one side is a really bad idea. The other side will turn twice as fast for one. The really important part though is that the spider gears only turn on their shafts when the car is turning. They also turn slowly when this happens except when you turn very sharply, and you only do that when going slowly. So the bearings in the spider gears will be shot in a VERY short time doing this. Gary H. Lucas ----- Original Message ----- From: "Henri Naths" To: Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2004 12:35 PM Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: Troller Yacht Ideas > Or selectively lock one side at a time - which could be useful if > you're planning on driving something 'big and dirty' hanging on the > inboard shaft - like a mains generator/ welder/ compressor ..... > > Colin > > Hey Colin, > Selectely locking one side at a time would be ideal, could possibly use the disc brakes. What I was wondering about was if locking one side of the diff. would cause the other side to spin faster, like the standard diff on a rear wheel drive unit. > Henri > ----- Original Message ----- > From: sae140 > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Sent: 26 May, 2004 2:22 AM > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Troller Yacht Ideas > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Henri Naths" > wrote: > > If your going to use the gear box out of a front wheel drive > vehicle, the differential is a part of that system. The power will go > to the side with least resistance and not to the prop. You will need > to "lock" it somehow so both sides turn equally. > > > Or selectively lock one side at a time - which could be useful if > you're planning on driving something 'big and dirty' hanging on the > inboard shaft - like a mains generator/ welder/ compressor ..... > > Colin > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ADVERTISEMENT > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- > Yahoo! Groups Links > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > | 3836|3806|2004-05-26 20:01:52|Gary H. Lucas|Re: Drip-free inner shaft seal.|You guys might want to take a look at using the seals from a Deublin rotary union. http://www.deublin.com/products/sealing.htm The ones I've been using, part # 555-000-001 is a 1-1/2" Pipe size union with a cartridge seal. The whole thing cost me $225 but the seals are available as a replacement part for a whole lot less. It takes about 1 minute to replace the seal on the union. This is a balanced face seal using silicon carbide. The faces are lapped so flat that when pressed together it is almost impossible two separate them by hand! One side of the seal is mounted in rubber so that it floats against the other mounted side. I've been using them at over 100 psi on water containing fertilizer, (salts) and in 18 years I've had two failures. Both failures were because the customer didn't drain them in the winter and froze them completely solid more than once! None of them have ever dripped. Two other well known brands failed in this service after less than a year. Gary H. Lucas ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gerald Niffenegger" To: Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2004 6:52 PM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Drip-free inner shaft seal. > I also want a dry bilge ....... for a change! My 32' 1967 wood yawl > leaks bad at the shaft. It is not so common here to use packing nuts. > Many boats have grease packed behind a brass bushing. Kind of works > but about every minute I get a drip. > When I said where is the cost savings I was thinking about the carbon > seals that claim to be 100% leak free. I have yet to read bad things > about them but I am sure there must be some horror stories out there? > The claim is that if you keep oil and grease away from the seal you > will get absolutely zero water inside the boat? > Gerald > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "sae140" wrote: > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gerald Niffenegger" > > wrote: > > > I was talking with a friend the other day about the exact setup for > > a > > > shaft seal that you are talking about. He had crewed on a French > > made > > > boat with the sealing system that you have described. I like the > > idea > > > and am considering it for my 36' hull. Since the prop shaft is > > mounted > > > solid the motor would need to be hard mounted and dead on. Or as you > > > suggest, having a universal joint should allow you to soft mount the > > > motor. I believe the universal would need to slide the same as on > > the > > > car drive shaft of old. By the time the machine work is done for a > > > soft mount, I am wondering where the cost savings would be? > > > Gerald > > > > Ah - but I never claimed that this was cheaper :-( > > Imo, such a seal set-up is completely unnecessary for a simple, > > minimalistic approach ... but a great boon to those (like me) who > > have something of a neurosis about that cupful of seawater which > > always seems to live under the stern gland. Would probably cost > > about the same to fabricate as a home-built bilge-pump (?). > > > > For either the hard- or soft-mounted engine option, each rear drive- > > shaft from a Ford Sierra (or similar vehicle with independent rear > > suspension) will supply you with two sliding cv joints - at next to > > zero cost. In my view, tedious and exacting engine alignment really > > ought to be a thing of the past. > > Needless to say, it's important to have a thrust-bearing arrangement > > *outboard* of any cv joint in order to prevent excessive fore-and-aft > > movement of the shaft. > > > > When compared with marine prices, I think there are considerable > > savings to be made by using automotive components wherever possible. > > > > Colin > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > | 3837|3806|2004-05-26 21:45:49|Gerald Niffenegger|Re: Drip-free inner shaft seal.|That is an impressive sealing system that will hold 100 psi and not leak a drop! I have been looking at the PSS seals and it sounds like they are the same system. Here is a site that explains them. http://www.spursmarine.com/pss_info.htm The price is high on this site but it looks like an 1 1/4" shaft seal will run around 200US$. Gerald --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gary H. Lucas" wrote: > You guys might want to take a look at using the seals from a Deublin rotary > union. http://www.deublin.com/products/sealing.htm The ones I've been > using, part # 555-000-001 is a 1-1/2" Pipe size union with a cartridge seal. > The whole thing cost me $225 but the seals are available as a replacement > part for a whole lot less. It takes about 1 minute to replace the seal on > the union. This is a balanced face seal using silicon carbide. The faces > are lapped so flat that when pressed together it is almost impossible two > separate them by hand! One side of the seal is mounted in rubber so that it > floats against the other mounted side. I've been using them at over 100 psi > on water containing fertilizer, (salts) and in 18 years I've had two > failures. Both failures were because the customer didn't drain them in the > winter and froze them completely solid more than once! None of them have > ever dripped. Two other well known brands failed in this service after less > than a year. > > Gary H. Lucas > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Gerald Niffenegger" > To: > Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2004 6:52 PM > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Drip-free inner shaft seal. > > > > I also want a dry bilge ....... for a change! My 32' 1967 wood yawl > > leaks bad at the shaft. It is not so common here to use packing nuts. > > Many boats have grease packed behind a brass bushing. Kind of works > > but about every minute I get a drip. > > When I said where is the cost savings I was thinking about the carbon > > seals that claim to be 100% leak free. I have yet to read bad things > > about them but I am sure there must be some horror stories out there? > > The claim is that if you keep oil and grease away from the seal you > > will get absolutely zero water inside the boat? > > Gerald > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "sae140" wrote: > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gerald Niffenegger" > > > wrote: > > > > I was talking with a friend the other day about the exact setup for > > > a > > > > shaft seal that you are talking about. He had crewed on a French > > > made > > > > boat with the sealing system that you have described. I like the > > > idea > > > > and am considering it for my 36' hull. Since the prop shaft is > > > mounted > > > > solid the motor would need to be hard mounted and dead on. Or as you > > > > suggest, having a universal joint should allow you to soft mount the > > > > motor. I believe the universal would need to slide the same as on > > > the > > > > car drive shaft of old. By the time the machine work is done for a > > > > soft mount, I am wondering where the cost savings would be? > > > > Gerald > > > > > > Ah - but I never claimed that this was cheaper :-( > > > Imo, such a seal set-up is completely unnecessary for a simple, > > > minimalistic approach ... but a great boon to those (like me) who > > > have something of a neurosis about that cupful of seawater which > > > always seems to live under the stern gland. Would probably cost > > > about the same to fabricate as a home-built bilge-pump (?). > > > > > > For either the hard- or soft-mounted engine option, each rear drive- > > > shaft from a Ford Sierra (or similar vehicle with independent rear > > > suspension) will supply you with two sliding cv joints - at next to > > > zero cost. In my view, tedious and exacting engine alignment really > > > ought to be a thing of the past. > > > Needless to say, it's important to have a thrust-bearing arrangement > > > *outboard* of any cv joint in order to prevent excessive fore-and-aft > > > movement of the shaft. > > > > > > When compared with marine prices, I think there are considerable > > > savings to be made by using automotive components wherever possible. > > > > > > Colin > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > | 3838|3734|2004-05-26 22:04:22|Henri Naths|Re: VW Diesel/Trans combo|I just reread my post:- it should have read .....a 1996 tdi ENGINE with..... . Thank for the tip on the wd40. We wd40 everthing,(must have 7or 8 cans around the place). Notorious problem with the door handles. Standyne eh...? might have to give that a try. I've been using Duralube(engine oil additive) in engines for about 12 years,( my chev pickup engine has about 600,000 ks on it) great stuff. That tdi engine I got is a 1.9 you must have got the 1.6 Henri ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill Jaine" To: Sent: 26 May, 2004 4:17 PM Subject: RE: [origamiboats] Re: VW Diesel/Trans combo It's a 91, Paid $12,000 when it was 12 months old , I guess the old owner sold it because it was so gutless ( a magnificent 57 hp) The Standyne certainly gave it a few more guts but you do learn to judge overtaking distances carefully :-) That sounds like a great deal for your VW, another word of advice, follow the lubrication instructions carefully for door handles DON"T use WD40, use the lithium grease because I used WD 40 and have had to repair/replace just about all the handles. Bill Port Hope. Canada -----Original Message----- From: Henri Naths [mailto:c_hnaths@...] Sent: 26-May-04 12:41 PM To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: VW Diesel/Trans combo Bill, What year is your jetta? I just bought a 1996 tdi with 37000 k in Calgary for 2200.00 Thatwas the best price I could find after two week of searching. H. --- Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.691 / Virus Database: 452 - Release Date: 26/05/2004 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.691 / Virus Database: 452 - Release Date: 26/05/2004 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links | 3839|3734|2004-05-26 22:04:29|Henri Naths|Re: Troller Yacht Ideas|David; an exert from my previous post re; alternate drives....(I've seen diffs on rear wheel drives welded so that both wheels turn, if you can do that to a vw jetta diff. would be interesting, ) 25/may/2004/5:30 I wrote ("you will need to "lock" it somehow so both sides turn equally") by "locking" it I was refferring to the diff.and not the shaft. , you're saying the vw diff. is the same as a rear wheel drive diff and it's just a simple matter of welding the spider gears? Or... get fancy and get a couple 60--or 80 sprockets, bolt one to each side of the diff.(before your half shafts), chain drive a lenght of shafting to connect the two sides with sliding dogs that you can engage or disengage.Your lenght of shaft would be actually be cut in the middle with one side with splines that the dog could slide on ( with bearings etc). This way you could disengage your prop and run generator / welder / compresser etc. Under sail with dogs engaged your prop would be turning your generator. Under power the engine, with the dogs engaged, would be turning both the prop and generator. Henri ----- Original Message ----- From: David K McComber To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: 26 May, 2004 2:52 PM Subject: RE: [origamiboats] Re: Troller Yacht Ideas If you just lock the shaft it will cause the other shaft to turn at double speed using the spider gears in the differential. What you need to do is take the differential apart and weld up the spider gears so only the ring & pinion gears can turn. David McComber d.mccomber@... > If your going to use the gear box out of a front wheel drive vehicle, the differential is a part of that system. The power will go to the side with least resistance and not to the prop. You will need to "lock" it somehow so both sides turn equally. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3840|3806|2004-05-26 22:14:49|ge@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: Drip-free inner shaft seal.|One boat we know (Default Judgment) reported problems with the drip free seals. They leaked unless the shaft was perfectly aligned, vibration free. Only one report - you never hear when things go right. Alternatively, weld a zinc on the inside of the boat in the sump and don't worry about a bit of salt from the packing gland. When the engine is running, my salt water pump for the exhaust routinely leaks almost as much water into the sump, in spite of numerous rebuild. Neither the pump nor the packing gland leak when the motor is off, so no worries. You need a bilge pump no matter what. Might as well give it a bit of work now and then, to make sure it is working. Most everything on a boat dies pretty quick if you don't use it. Greg Elliott Origami Magic http://www.origamimagic.com 1.604.987.0050 ----- Original Message ----- > When I said where is the cost savings I was thinking about the carbon > seals that claim to be 100% leak free. I have yet to read bad things > about them but I am sure there must be some horror stories out there? > The claim is that if you keep oil and grease away from the seal you > will get absolutely zero water inside the boat? | 3841|3734|2004-05-26 23:51:48|ge@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: Troller Yacht Ideas|A design has been selected and transferred to a computer model, with an origami overlay. http://www.origamimagic.com/Design/Bradley50/Bradley50.htm (Hit refresh if no new drawings appear). Greg Elliott Origami Magic http://www.origamimagic.com 1.604.987.0050 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3842|3806|2004-05-27 00:49:39|kendall|Re: Drip-free inner shaft seal.|--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gerald Niffenegger" wrote: > I also want a dry bilge ....... for a change! My 32' 1967 wood yawl > leaks bad at the shaft. It is not so common here to use packing nuts. > Many boats have grease packed behind a brass bushing. Kind of works > but about every minute I get a drip. > When I said where is the cost savings I was thinking about the carbon > seals that claim to be 100% leak free. I have yet to read bad things > about them but I am sure there must be some horror stories out there? > The claim is that if you keep oil and grease away from the seal you > will get absolutely zero water inside the boat? > Gerald they are good, and like you, I have never heard any bad reviews, but they need to be run in to be leak free, the surfaces need to wear together and untill they do, they leak. I attempted to tell my 'boat' neighbor that since he installed them without having the engines ready to run,(having carbs rebuilt) but he splashed the boat anyway, planning to use it as a barge untill he gets everything going, and has major leaks, he's installed a small sump pump untill he can get the carbs back on. so make sure you are prepared for some leakage untill they seal up. myself I prefer to run the old style packing type, and realy don't have a problem with it, it leaks maybe a half cup a week, if it begins leaking more a slight turn on the nut will take care of it, and if it needs changing I can do so without worry with the boat in the water, and if it's an emergency, a shoestring will fix it. the other style, at least the type the neighbor used, required the shafts to be backed out for replacement, which opens up a lot of hassles that is better managed on dry ground. Ken.| 3843|3806|2004-05-27 01:02:56|Michael Casling|Re: Drip-free inner shaft seal.|I had a good look at the new style seals at the Vancouver boat show in February. I noticed that if something was to touch the sealing part they good be moved apart very easily and a large amount of water would be let in. I have the old style seal in our boat and frankly can not see a problem. A drip once in a while and that is all. Change the packing seal every 10 years. They are relatively cheap and do the job. Michael ----- Original Message ----- From: kendall To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2004 9:49 PM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Drip-free inner shaft seal. myself I prefer to run the old style packing type, and realy don't have a problem with it, it leaks maybe a half cup a week, if it begins leaking more a slight turn on the nut will take care of it, and if it needs changing I can do so without worry with the boat in the water, and if it's an emergency, a shoestring will fix it. the other style, at least the type the neighbor used, required the shafts to be backed out for replacement, which opens up a lot of hassles that is better managed on dry ground. Ken. To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3844|3734|2004-05-27 02:33:59|David K McComber|Re: Troller Yacht Ideas|To the best of my knowledge, (I'm a Toolmaker for GM) all car differentials are based on the same principles. All the front wheel transmissions I have seen have a differential just like the old rear wheel drive. Making dog clutches would probably cost you more then a rebuilt marine transmission. David McComber d.mccomber@... -----Original Message----- From: Henri Naths [mailto:c_hnaths@...] Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2004 10:01 PM To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: Troller Yacht Ideas David; an exert from my previous post re; alternate drives....(I've seen diffs on rear wheel drives welded so that both wheels turn, if you can do that to a vw jetta diff. would be interesting, ) 25/may/2004/5:30 I wrote ("you will need to "lock" it somehow so both sides turn equally") by "locking" it I was refferring to the diff.and not the shaft. , you're saying the vw diff. is the same as a rear wheel drive diff and it's just a simple matter of welding the spider gears? Or... get fancy and get a couple 60--or 80 sprockets, bolt one to each side of the diff.(before your half shafts), chain drive a lenght of shafting to connect the two sides with sliding dogs that you can engage or disengage.Your lenght of shaft would be actually be cut in the middle with one side with splines that the dog could slide on ( with bearings etc). This way you could disengage your prop and run generator / welder / compresser etc. Under sail with dogs engaged your prop would be turning your generator. Under power the engine, with the dogs engaged, would be turning both the prop and generator. Henri ----- Original Message ----- From: David K McComber To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: 26 May, 2004 2:52 PM Subject: RE: [origamiboats] Re: Troller Yacht Ideas If you just lock the shaft it will cause the other shaft to turn at double speed using the spider gears in the differential. What you need to do is take the differential apart and weld up the spider gears so only the ring & pinion gears can turn. David McComber d.mccomber@... > If your going to use the gear box out of a front wheel drive vehicle, the differential is a part of that system. The power will go to the side with least resistance and not to the prop. You will need to "lock" it somehow so both sides turn equally. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT click here _____ Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3845|3845|2004-05-27 04:38:43|romaxcn_23|Jeanneau SunOdyssey 371 1995 For Sale|Dear Sir, Direct from the owner we have for sale Jeanneau SunOdyssey 371 1995 3 dbl bed cabins, 2 toilets, Yanmar 48hp, roller main and genoa, Spinnaker gear, Elect.fridge and windlass, hot water, sprayhood, bimini, icebox, VHF,GPS,Navtex, wind and nav. instruments, liferaft, dinghy. Price Ideas Euro 78.000 excl VAT Vessel in good condition. Photos available at http://www.maritimecentral.com/Yachts/Sailing_Yachts/m/1570/0/ . Please do not hesitate to contact us for further information. I wait for your reply. Best regard. Loran Raul Str Sabinelor nr 5 Bl.E4 sc.B ap 12 Tulcea, n/a 820119 RO Tel : +040 722702393 email:romaxcn_23@y...| 3846|3806|2004-05-27 05:03:56|Ben Tucker|Re: Drip-free inner shaft seal.|Hi Here in tasmania its very common to use a single lip seal on a flexible bit of hose, A$140 odd and completly drip free. Only thing to remember, you must bleed the air out of it after slipping or grounding or else your water lubricated cutlass bearing runs dry and melts (the unfortunate experience of a friend). This can be avoided by running a permenant bleed line, easily fitted during building, not nessarily after built! Also, what is best for freezing conditions, Friends who have wintered in Antartica, Norway and Sweden reckon that ordinary stuffing boxes are no good, and only an oil filled stern tube is ok? Cheers Ben| 3847|3806|2004-05-27 06:47:34|Gerald Niffenegger|Re: Drip-free inner shaft seal.|I personally don't like the idea of just let it leak. If I can keep salt water far away from my and electric wires and motor I will. However, I do like the idea of adding a zinc to the inside of a boat that already leaks, like my wooden boat. Ben There must be some catch to using a lip seal mounted in a rubber hose! The idea is way to simple and trouble free. Tomorrow I am going to remove the brass bushing with the grease gland on my wooden boat and have the machine shop cut a groove in the bushing for a lip seal. I still have the grease sealing the water out and lubricating the lip seal. Kind of like wearing suspenders and a belt. For the fans of oil filled cavities, lip seals could be placed at the ends of an oil filled tube and then inserted into the rubber hose. Ben ... I didn't understand the $140 part, maybe it was your accent that threw me off. Here in Brazil lip seals run around 3US$. Thanks for the ideas Gerald --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Ben Tucker" wrote: > Hi > > Here in tasmania its very common to use a single lip seal on a > flexible bit of hose, A$140 odd and completly drip free. Only thing > to remember, you must bleed the air out of it after slipping or > grounding or else your water lubricated cutlass bearing runs dry and > melts (the unfortunate experience of a friend). This can be avoided > by running a permenant bleed line, easily fitted during building, not > nessarily after built! > > Also, what is best for freezing conditions, Friends who have wintered > in Antartica, Norway and Sweden reckon that ordinary stuffing boxes > are no good, and only an oil filled stern tube is ok? > > Cheers > > Ben | 3848|3806|2004-05-27 08:39:07|Courtney Thomas|Re: Drip-free inner shaft seal.|Pardon my ignorance but what is a lip seal ? Thank you. Gerald Niffenegger wrote: > I personally don't like the idea of just let it leak. If I can keep > salt water far away from my and electric wires and motor I will. > However, I do like the idea of adding a zinc to the inside of a boat > that already leaks, like my wooden boat. > Ben > There must be some catch to using a lip seal mounted in a rubber hose! > The idea is way to simple and trouble free. Tomorrow I am going to > remove the brass bushing with the grease gland on my wooden boat and > have the machine shop cut a groove in the bushing for a lip seal. I > still have the grease sealing the water out and lubricating the lip > seal. Kind of like wearing suspenders and a belt. For the fans of oil > filled cavities, lip seals could be placed at the ends of an oil > filled tube and then inserted into the rubber hose. Ben ... I didn't > understand the $140 part, maybe it was your accent that threw me off. > Here in Brazil lip seals run around 3US$. > Thanks for the ideas > Gerald > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Ben Tucker" wrote: > >>Hi >> >>Here in tasmania its very common to use a single lip seal on a >>flexible bit of hose, A$140 odd and completly drip free. Only thing >>to remember, you must bleed the air out of it after slipping or >>grounding or else your water lubricated cutlass bearing runs dry and >>melts (the unfortunate experience of a friend). This can be avoided >>by running a permenant bleed line, easily fitted during building, not >>nessarily after built! >> >>Also, what is best for freezing conditions, Friends who have wintered >>in Antartica, Norway and Sweden reckon that ordinary stuffing boxes >>are no good, and only an oil filled stern tube is ok? >> >>Cheers >> >>Ben >> > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > -- s/v Mutiny Rhodes Bounty II lying Oriental, NC WDB5619| 3849|3849|2004-05-27 08:53:26|Phil S.|Cp For BS 40footer|Brent: What is the Cp for your 40' hull? As I will be using that hull unmodified for my troller yacht, I can get a better Idea of what hull speed is and try and look for an appropriate engine, prop and gear combination. I will be getting started building (the design is posted on my home page) my work shop this weekend (finishing my deck tonight). So I may be posting a lot less, but it is the last project before I start on the boat, having decided to forego getting horses again and all of the responsibilty they entail. I can't wait to pick up a few old transmissions to tear apart and experiment with different combinations for a home built boat gear. How about an Origami Dory to as a dingy? Phil| 3850|3734|2004-05-27 09:08:15|sae140|Re: Troller Yacht Ideas|--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "David K McComber" wrote: > If you just lock the shaft it will cause the other shaft to turn at double > speed using the spider gears in the differential. What you need to do is > take the differential apart and weld up the spider gears so only the ring & > pinion gears can turn.If you just lock the shaft it will cause the other shaft to turn at double speed using the spider gears in the differential. What you need to do is take the differential apart and weld up the spider gears so only the ring & pinion gears can turn. David McComber That's certainly a good solution, but doubling the speed can have an advantage in some situations - let's take the VW Golf 1.6D as an example: it's quoted as producing 54 BHP at 4800 rpm - however, max. torque is developed at 2300 rpm, when it produces 26 BHP - so I think it's kinder to treat this as a 2300 rpm/ 26 BHP lump, only revving it up occasionally to blow out the cobwebs. At 2300 rpm in top (4th) gear, the drive shafts rotate at 1064 rpm, which certainly suggests that welding-up the diff would be an ideal solution. But - the problem arises when you try to create a usable reverse gear. Although I don't have Nigel Warren's "Marine Conversions" to hand, if memory serves he suggests using 2nd gear rather than top (depending on the box, the ratios available, and it's suitability for conversion). If you should choose to adopt this route, then doubling the speed of one driveshaft by locking the other may actually become desirable in order to keep the max. output shaft speed somewhere around the 800-1000 rpm range. Unlike all the examples given in Warren, here we have the diff ratio to take into account as well, of course. I clearly remember that he doesn't give any examples of modifying a transverse gearbox, and would be most interested to hear if anyone has already done this. Colin| 3851|3806|2004-05-27 09:10:14|sae140|Re: Drip-free inner shaft seal.|--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gerald Niffenegger" wrote: > I also want a dry bilge ....... for a change! My 32' 1967 wood yawl > leaks bad at the shaft. It is not so common here to use packing nuts. > Many boats have grease packed behind a brass bushing. Kind of works > but about every minute I get a drip. > When I said where is the cost savings I was thinking about the carbon > seals that claim to be 100% leak free. I have yet to read bad things > about them but I am sure there must be some horror stories out there? > The claim is that if you keep oil and grease away from the seal you > will get absolutely zero water inside the boat? > Gerald These being the spring-loaded carbon disks enclosed in a gaiter pressing against a s/s shaft-mounted disk ? Well, this certainly is an ingenious design, and like yourself have yet to hear of one failing. Can't remember what these cost, off-hand. Two concerns. They both relate to Sod's Law (a.k.a. Murphy's Law) "If anything CAN happen, then it WILL" - like something with sharp corners finding it's way into the bilges and taking out the gaiter .... or even something coming adrift and rubbing through the gaiter with the boat's motion. (passing thought - fit a removable guard around the assembly ?) But - at this end of the boat I'd sleep better knowing that there's something down there which can take some real abuse. The other thought is more of a "belt and braces" consideration - if the carbon system fails, then you're in deep trouble (possibly quite literally) - whereas with the 2 seals *and a stuffing box*, you have a secondary and permanent means of keeping water out of the boat - should Murphy have found his way onboard. There is also the further consideration of availability and cost of spares: so buy 6 seals, not 2, and maybe make-up a spare c.v. joint assembly as well (?) - although I've seen several of these in service for 10 yrs + , usually having had nothing more done to them than having a new boot (gaiter) fitted before install, plus a spoonful of moly grease. Colin| 3852|3734|2004-05-27 09:33:57|sae140|Re: Troller Yacht Ideas|--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gary H. Lucas" wrote: > Guys, > Locking one side is a really bad idea. The other side will turn twice as > fast for one. The really important part though is that the spider gears > only turn on their shafts when the car is turning. They also turn slowly > when this happens except when you turn very sharply, and you only do that > when going slowly. So the bearings in the spider gears will be shot in a > VERY short time doing this. > > Gary H. Lucas Ah - never thought of this. Perhaps this is one reason why Nigel Warren doesn't show any enthusiasm for 'em ... Colin| 3853|3806|2004-05-27 11:04:55|ge@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: Drip-free inner shaft seal.|Wooden boats can badly suffer from rot if you stop all salt water leaks. Fresh water from rain promotes rot, and wooden boats often leak slightly through their decks. If you don't have salt in the bilge, hull problems can follow. Greg Elliott Origami Magic http://www.origamimagic.com 1.604.987.0050 ----- Original Message ----- > I personally don't like the idea of just let it leak. If I can keep > salt water far away from my and electric wires and motor I will. > However, I do like the idea of adding a zinc to the inside of a boat > that already leaks, like my wooden boat. | 3854|3806|2004-05-27 11:18:54|Gerald Niffenegger|Re: Drip-free inner shaft seal.|Lip seal is probably a little on the side of slang. However, a google search found about 200,000 hits. It is the kind of seal used to seal your crankshaft so that oil won't run out on the ground and dirt won't get into your oil pan. There are more than a hand full of these type seals on a car. Here is a site and a picture of a triple radial lip seal. http://www.busakshamban.us/prod_global.htm?pid=271 That would be like wearing suspenders, a belt and holding your pants up. On older cars, for example a 272 - 292 - 312 Ford the seal was a piece of braided rope. When it hardened you drove a wire shim behind it or replaced it. It was equal to a cord or string packing nut. Gerald --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Courtney Thomas wrote: > Pardon my ignorance but what is a lip seal ? > > Thank you. > > > > Gerald Niffenegger wrote: > > > I personally don't like the idea of just let it leak. If I can keep > > salt water far away from my and electric wires and motor I will. > > However, I do like the idea of adding a zinc to the inside of a boat > > that already leaks, like my wooden boat. > > Ben > > There must be some catch to using a lip seal mounted in a rubber hose! > > The idea is way to simple and trouble free. Tomorrow I am going to > > remove the brass bushing with the grease gland on my wooden boat and > > have the machine shop cut a groove in the bushing for a lip seal. I > > still have the grease sealing the water out and lubricating the lip > > seal. Kind of like wearing suspenders and a belt. For the fans of oil > > filled cavities, lip seals could be placed at the ends of an oil > > filled tube and then inserted into the rubber hose. Ben ... I didn't > > understand the $140 part, maybe it was your accent that threw me off. > > Here in Brazil lip seals run around 3US$. > > Thanks for the ideas > > Gerald > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Ben Tucker" wrote: > > > >>Hi > >> > >>Here in tasmania its very common to use a single lip seal on a > >>flexible bit of hose, A$140 odd and completly drip free. Only thing > >>to remember, you must bleed the air out of it after slipping or > >>grounding or else your water lubricated cutlass bearing runs dry and > >>melts (the unfortunate experience of a friend). This can be avoided > >>by running a permenant bleed line, easily fitted during building, not > >>nessarily after built! > >> > >>Also, what is best for freezing conditions, Friends who have wintered > >>in Antartica, Norway and Sweden reckon that ordinary stuffing boxes > >>are no good, and only an oil filled stern tube is ok? > >> > >>Cheers > >> > >>Ben > >> > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > s/v Mutiny > Rhodes Bounty II > lying Oriental, NC > WDB5619 | 3855|3806|2004-05-27 11:33:50|Gerald Niffenegger|Re: Drip-free inner shaft seal.|Very good point. However, I would rather not have salt water being slug around by a revolving shaft, inside the engine compartment. If I want salt water in the bilge I would like control of the situation. I have had several wooden boats and have helped work on several. I have seen few with rot problems below the water line. A friend is redoing a 40 double endear that has extensive rot above the water line but below is absolutely the same as when the boat was built back in the 1940s. I think he is going to fix it well enough to put back in the water and live in it. Gerald --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > Wooden boats can badly suffer from rot if you stop all salt water leaks. > Fresh water from rain promotes rot, and wooden boats often leak slightly > through their decks. If you don't have salt in the bilge, hull problems can > follow. > > Greg Elliott > Origami Magic > http://www.origamimagic.com > 1.604.987.0050 > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > I personally don't like the idea of just let it leak. If I can keep > > salt water far away from my and electric wires and motor I will. > > However, I do like the idea of adding a zinc to the inside of a boat > > that already leaks, like my wooden boat. | 3856|3806|2004-05-27 12:12:16|moby_duck_2004|Re: Spam, but not this.|MARK YOUR CALENDARS FOR NEXT SATURDAY. AS YOU MAY ALREADY KNOW, IT IS A SIN FOR A TALIBAN MALE TO SEE ANY WOMAN OTHER THAN HIS WIFE NAKED, AND THAT HE MUST COMMIT SUICIDE IF HE DOES. SO THIS SATURDAY AT 4 P.M. EASTERN TIME ALL AMERICAN WOMEN ARE ASKED TO WALK OUT OF THEIR HOUSE COMPLETELY NAKED TO HELP WEED OUT ANY NEIGHBORHOOD TERRORISTS. CIRCLING YOUR BLOCK FOR ONE HOUR IS RECOMMENDED FOR THIS ANTI- TERRORIST EFFORT. ALL MEN ARE TO POSITION THEMSELVES IN LAWN CHAIRS IN FRONT OF THEIR HOUSE TO PROVE THEY ARE NOT TALIBAN, AND TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THEY THINK ITS OKAY TO SEE NUDE WOMEN OTHER THAN THEIR WIFE AND TO SHOW SUPPORT FOR ALL AMERICAN WOMEN. SINCE THE TALIBAN ALSO DOES NOT APPROVE OF ALCOHOL, A COLD 6-PACK AT YOUR SIDE IS FURTHER PROOF OF YOUR ANTI-TALIBAN SENTIMENT. THE AMERICAN GOVERNMENT APPRECIATES YOUR EFFORTS TO ROOT OUT TERRORISTS AND APPLAUDS YOUR PARTICIPATION IN THIS ANTI-TERRORIST ACTIVITY. GOD BLESS AMERICA . IT IS YOUR PATRIOTIC DUTY TO PASS THIS ON.| 3857|3806|2004-05-27 13:21:18|Gerd|Re: Spam, but not this.|Not only is this very funny but I also noticed that some messages before we broke the all-time-record of february 2004 and are now well past the 300-postings mark for this month!!! ... living proof that quantity and quality can very well live together in peace in one discussion group! No flame-wars, polite discussions, tons of useful information - is this for real?? ;-) Gerd --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "moby_duck_2004" wrote: > MARK YOUR CALENDARS FOR NEXT SATURDAY. > > AS YOU MAY ALREADY KNOW, IT IS A SIN FOR A TALIBAN MALE TO SEE ANY > WOMAN OTHER THAN HIS WIFE NAKED, AND THAT HE MUST COMMIT SUICIDE IF > HE DOES. > > SO THIS SATURDAY AT 4 P.M. EASTERN TIME ALL AMERICAN WOMEN ARE ASKED > TO WALK OUT OF THEIR HOUSE COMPLETELY NAKED TO HELP WEED OUT ANY > NEIGHBORHOOD TERRORISTS. > > CIRCLING YOUR BLOCK FOR ONE HOUR IS RECOMMENDED FOR THIS ANTI- > TERRORIST EFFORT. > > ALL MEN ARE TO POSITION THEMSELVES IN LAWN CHAIRS IN FRONT OF THEIR > HOUSE TO PROVE THEY ARE NOT TALIBAN, AND TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THEY > THINK ITS OKAY TO SEE NUDE WOMEN OTHER THAN THEIR WIFE AND TO SHOW > SUPPORT FOR ALL AMERICAN WOMEN. > > SINCE THE TALIBAN ALSO DOES NOT APPROVE OF ALCOHOL, A COLD 6-PACK AT > YOUR SIDE IS FURTHER PROOF OF YOUR ANTI-TALIBAN SENTIMENT. > > > > THE AMERICAN GOVERNMENT APPRECIATES YOUR EFFORTS TO ROOT OUT > TERRORISTS AND APPLAUDS YOUR PARTICIPATION IN THIS ANTI-TERRORIST > ACTIVITY. GOD BLESS AMERICA . > > > IT IS YOUR PATRIOTIC DUTY TO PASS THIS ON. | 3858|3849|2004-05-27 14:31:05|ge@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: Cp For BS 40footer|There is a change in Cp when a chined hull is converted to origami, because the curved chines in the bow and stern are replaced with conic sections that run relatively straight fore and aft. Normally this reduces the Cp in a sailboat hull from the typical .55 to .52 or even less. As a result, using the Cp of the original hull to judge the origami hull can be misleading, and the calculation of Cp should be made using the lines of the origami hull, not the original chined hull. We found that the shorter the darts, the more dramatic the change, requiring the profile to be squared up and section curvature increased towards the ends to compensate. The lines drawings for the B50 hull shows how this might be done for a single chine troller. http://www.origamimagic.com/Design/Bradley50/Bradley50.htm Greg Elliott Origami Magic http://www.origamimagic.com 1.604.987.0050 ----- Original Message ----- > What is the Cp for your 40' hull? | 3859|3734|2004-05-27 15:19:23|Bill Jaine|Re: VW Diesel/Trans combo|Still a great price, would be interested in following how you convert it since I hope to do that in the future. In the mean time if I find out anything on marinising the VW engine I�ll post it. TTFN Bill Bill Port Hope. Canada -----Original Message----- From: Henri Naths [mailto:c_hnaths@...] Sent: 26-May-04 7:36 PM To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: VW Diesel/Trans combo I just reread my post:- it should have read .....a 1996 tdi ENGINE with..... . Thank for the tip on the wd40. We wd40 everthing,(must have 7or 8 cans around the place). Notorious problem with the door handles. Standyne eh...? might have to give that a try. I've been using Duralube(engine oil additive) in engines for about 12 years,( my chev pickup engine has about 600,000 ks on it) great stuff. That tdi engine I got is a 1.9 you must have got the 1.6 Henri ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill Jaine" To: Sent: 26 May, 2004 4:17 PM Subject: RE: [origamiboats] Re: VW Diesel/Trans combo It's a 91, Paid $12,000 when it was 12 months old , I guess the old owner sold it because it was so gutless ( a magnificent 57 hp) The Standyne certainly gave it a few more guts but you do learn to judge overtaking distances carefully :-) That sounds like a great deal for your VW, another word of advice, follow the lubrication instructions carefully for door handles DON"T use WD40, use the lithium grease because I used WD 40 and have had to repair/replace just about all the handles. Bill Port Hope. Canada -----Original Message----- From: Henri Naths [mailto:c_hnaths@...] Sent: 26-May-04 12:41 PM To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: VW Diesel/Trans combo Bill, What year is your jetta? I just bought a 1996 tdi with 37000 k in Calgary for 2200.00 Thatwas the best price I could find after two week of searching. H. --- Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (HYPERLINK "http://www.grisoft.com)."http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.691 / Virus Database: 452 - Release Date: 26/05/2004 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (HYPERLINK "http://www.grisoft.com)."http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.691 / Virus Database: 452 - Release Date: 26/05/2004 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT HYPERLINK "http://rd.yahoo.com/SIG=129l3fqe9/M=295196.4901138.6071305.3001176/D=gr oups/S=1705150872:HM/EXP=1085709863/A=2128215/R=0/SIG=10se96mf6/*http:/c ompanion.yahoo.com"click here HYPERLINK "http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=295196.4901138.6071305.3001176/D=group s/S=:HM/A=2128215/rand=297640879" _____ Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: HYPERLINK "http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/"http://groups.yahoo.com/gro up/origamiboats/ * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: HYPERLINK "mailto:origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe"ori gamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the HYPERLINK "http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/"Yahoo! Terms of Service. --- Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.691 / Virus Database: 452 - Release Date: 26/05/2004 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.691 / Virus Database: 452 - Release Date: 26/05/2004 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3860|3849|2004-05-27 15:31:15|brentswain38|Re: Cp For BS 40footer|Phil The Cp for the 40 footer is .54 An origami dory would be very easy to build, but as is the case with all dories, reducing the flare in the topsides by widening the bottom,will add greatly to the initial stability and take the extreme tipiness, that dories are famous for , out of them.They can also be made into two part nesting dories quite easily, giving his and hers dories for short distance flat harbours , and bolted together for rougher anchorages. Brent --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Phil S." wrote: > Brent: > What is the Cp for your 40' hull? As I will be using that hull unmodified for my troller > yacht, I can get a better Idea of what hull speed is and try and look for an appropriate > engine, prop and gear combination. > > I will be getting started building (the design is posted on my home page) my work shop > this weekend (finishing my deck tonight). So I may be posting a lot less, but it is the last > project before I start on the boat, having decided to forego getting horses again and all of > the responsibilty they entail. > > I can't wait to pick up a few old transmissions to tear apart and experiment with different > combinations for a home built boat gear. > > How about an Origami Dory to as a dingy? > Phil | 3861|3806|2004-05-27 15:38:01|brentswain38|Re: Drip-free inner shaft seal.|I tried the dripless seal for a while once, but given that the slightest bump could put them out of line and let the boat sink quite easily,and quickly , I could never leave the boat alone without worrying about it. I went back to the standard stuffing box for the peace of mind of knowing that if it had a slow drip, it wouldn't suddenly get worse. Brent --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Michael Casling wrote: > I had a good look at the new style seals at the Vancouver boat show in February. I noticed that if something was to touch the sealing part they good be moved apart very easily and a large amount of water would be let in. I have the old style seal in our boat and frankly can not see a problem. A drip once in a while and that is all. Change the packing seal every 10 years. They are relatively cheap and do the job. Michael > ----- Original Message ----- > From: kendall > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2004 9:49 PM > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Drip-free inner shaft seal. > > > myself I prefer to run the old style packing type, and realy don't > have a problem with it, it leaks maybe a half cup a week, if it begins > leaking more a slight turn on the nut will take care of it, and if it > needs changing I can do so without worry with the boat in the water, > and if it's an emergency, a shoestring will fix it. the other style, > at least the type the neighbor used, required the shafts to be backed > out for replacement, which opens up a lot of hassles that is better > managed on dry ground. > > Ken. > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ADVERTISEMENT > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- > Yahoo! Groups Links > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3862|3734|2004-05-27 16:44:39|Gerald Niffenegger|Re: VW Diesel/Trans combo|I have a 1.9 VW in my 32' 6 ton yawl. I have more power than I need but the motors are manufactured close to here and I bought one new for less than 2,000 US$. The machine shop made a brass heat exchanger for me. I installed a much larger sea water pump than the motor requires thinking that it would run much quieter. The motor is smooth as silk and has a great sound at the back of the boat. I am not running any kind of muffler and at half throttle you can hardly hear it run. At 2,300 rpm I cruise at about 5.5 knots. It will do 7.5+ but don't like the sound when it turns up that high. I had to change flywheels to accept a starter that mounts along side the motor instead of behind. I cut down a bell housing to use as a starter motor mount. Careful if you do that because a spark sets off the magnesium dust and will burn all the hair off you arm! och! I need to go back in and play with thermostats. I had to remove the thermostat because the motor was heating up. It now runs too cold, only about 70 deg. cen. I have now logged 120 hours on the motor and have had zero problems. Gerald Florianopolis SC, Brazil --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Bill Jaine" wrote: > Still a great price, would be interested in following how you convert it > since I hope to do that in the future. In the mean time if I find out > anything on marinising the VW engine I'll post it. > TTFN > Bill > > Bill > Port Hope. Canada > > -----Original Message----- > From: Henri Naths [mailto:c_hnaths@t...] > Sent: 26-May-04 7:36 PM > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: VW Diesel/Trans combo > > I just reread my post:- it should have read .....a 1996 tdi ENGINE > with..... > . Thank for the tip on the wd40. We wd40 everthing,(must have 7or 8 cans > around the place). Notorious problem with the door handles. Standyne > eh...? > might have to give that a try. I've been using Duralube(engine oil > additive) in engines for about 12 years,( my chev pickup engine has > about > 600,000 ks on it) great stuff. That tdi engine I got is a 1.9 you must > have > got the 1.6 > > Henri > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Bill Jaine" > To: > Sent: 26 May, 2004 4:17 PM > Subject: RE: [origamiboats] Re: VW Diesel/Trans combo > > > It's a 91, Paid $12,000 when it was 12 months old , I guess the old > owner sold it because it was so gutless ( a magnificent 57 hp) > The Standyne certainly gave it a few more guts but you do learn to judge > overtaking distances carefully :-) > That sounds like a great deal for your VW, another word of advice, > follow the lubrication instructions carefully for door handles DON"T use > WD40, use the lithium grease because I used WD 40 and have had to > repair/replace just about all the handles. > > Bill > Port Hope. Canada > > -----Original Message----- > From: Henri Naths [mailto:c_hnaths@t...] > Sent: 26-May-04 12:41 PM > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: VW Diesel/Trans combo > > Bill, > What year is your jetta? I just bought a 1996 tdi with 37000 k in > Calgary > for 2200.00 Thatwas the best price I could find after two week of > searching. > H. > > --- > Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (HYPERLINK > "http://www.grisoft.com)."http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.691 / Virus Database: 452 - Release Date: 26/05/2004 > > > --- > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (HYPERLINK > "http://www.grisoft.com)."http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.691 / Virus Database: 452 - Release Date: 26/05/2004 > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > > ADVERTISEMENT > HYPERLINK > "http://rd.yahoo.com/SIG=129l3fqe9/M=295196.4901138.6071305.3001176/D=gr > oups/S=1705150872:HM/EXP=1085709863/A=2128215/R=0/SIG=10se96mf6/*http:/c > ompanion.yahoo.com"click here > > HYPERLINK > "http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=295196.4901138.6071305.3001176/D=group > s/S=:HM/A=2128215/rand=297640879" > > _____ > > Yahoo! Groups Links > * To visit your group on the web, go to: > HYPERLINK > "http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/"http://groups.yahoo.com/gro > up/origamiboats/ > > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > HYPERLINK > "mailto:origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe"ori > gamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the HYPERLINK > "http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/"Yahoo! Terms of Service. > > --- > Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.691 / Virus Database: 452 - Release Date: 26/05/2004 > > > --- > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.691 / Virus Database: 452 - Release Date: 26/05/2004 > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3863|3734|2004-05-27 18:30:30|Henri Naths|Re: Troller Yacht Ideas|Colin I'm recalling my Idea about locking one shaft. After talking to my vw specialist, He said idea has merrit, would work but he did not recommend it. He said it would be no problem to weld the spider gears. Henri ----- Original Message ----- From: sae140 To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: 27 May, 2004 7:07 AM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Troller Yacht Ideas --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "David K McComber" wrote: > If you just lock the shaft it will cause the other shaft to turn at double > speed using the spider gears in the differential. What you need to do is > take the differential apart and weld up the spider gears so only the ring & > pinion gears can turn.If you just lock the shaft it will cause the other shaft to turn at double speed using the spider gears in the differential. What you need to do is take the differential apart and weld up the spider gears so only the ring & pinion gears can turn. David McComber That's certainly a good solution, but doubling the speed can have an advantage in some situations - let's take the VW Golf 1.6D as an example: it's quoted as producing 54 BHP at 4800 rpm - however, max. torque is developed at 2300 rpm, when it produces 26 BHP - so I think it's kinder to treat this as a 2300 rpm/ 26 BHP lump, only revving it up occasionally to blow out the cobwebs. At 2300 rpm in top (4th) gear, the drive shafts rotate at 1064 rpm, which certainly suggests that welding-up the diff would be an ideal solution. But - the problem arises when you try to create a usable reverse gear. Although I don't have Nigel Warren's "Marine Conversions" to hand, if memory serves he suggests using 2nd gear rather than top (depending on the box, the ratios available, and it's suitability for conversion). If you should choose to adopt this route, then doubling the speed of one driveshaft by locking the other may actually become desirable in order to keep the max. output shaft speed somewhere around the 800-1000 rpm range. Unlike all the examples given in Warren, here we have the diff ratio to take into account as well, of course. I clearly remember that he doesn't give any examples of modifying a transverse gearbox, and would be most interested to hear if anyone has already done this. Colin To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3864|3734|2004-05-27 19:12:05|Henri Naths|Re: VW Diesel/Trans combo|Gerald : A while back we talked about marinising the alternator. I can't find the posts but if I recall it involved rewinding it to off-set the corrosion of the salt air.It might be cheaper to carry a couple of spares. I'm wondering if you did anything. Henri ----- Original Message ----- From: Gerald Niffenegger To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: 27 May, 2004 2:44 PM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: VW Diesel/Trans combo I have a 1.9 VW in my 32' 6 ton yawl. I have more power than I need but the motors are manufactured close to here and I bought one new for less than 2,000 US$. The machine shop made a brass heat exchanger for me. I installed a much larger sea water pump than the motor requires thinking that it would run much quieter. The motor is smooth as silk and has a great sound at the back of the boat. I am not running any kind of muffler and at half throttle you can hardly hear it run. At 2,300 rpm I cruise at about 5.5 knots. It will do 7.5+ but don't like the sound when it turns up that high. I had to change flywheels to accept a starter that mounts along side the motor instead of behind. I cut down a bell housing to use as a starter motor mount. Careful if you do that because a spark sets off the magnesium dust and will burn all the hair off you arm! och! I need to go back in and play with thermostats. I had to remove the thermostat because the motor was heating up. It now runs too cold, only about 70 deg. cen. I have now logged 120 hours on the motor and have had zero problems. Gerald Florianopolis SC, Brazil --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Bill Jaine" wrote: > Still a great price, would be interested in following how you convert it > since I hope to do that in the future. In the mean time if I find out > anything on marinising the VW engine I'll post it. > TTFN > Bill > > Bill > Port Hope. Canada > > -----Original Message----- > From: Henri Naths [mailto:c_hnaths@t...] > Sent: 26-May-04 7:36 PM > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: VW Diesel/Trans combo > > I just reread my post:- it should have read .....a 1996 tdi ENGINE > with..... > . Thank for the tip on the wd40. We wd40 everthing,(must have 7or 8 cans > around the place). Notorious problem with the door handles. Standyne > eh...? > might have to give that a try. I've been using Duralube(engine oil > additive) in engines for about 12 years,( my chev pickup engine has > about > 600,000 ks on it) great stuff. That tdi engine I got is a 1.9 you must > have > got the 1.6 > > Henri > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Bill Jaine" > To: > Sent: 26 May, 2004 4:17 PM > Subject: RE: [origamiboats] Re: VW Diesel/Trans combo > > > It's a 91, Paid $12,000 when it was 12 months old , I guess the old > owner sold it because it was so gutless ( a magnificent 57 hp) > The Standyne certainly gave it a few more guts but you do learn to judge > overtaking distances carefully :-) > That sounds like a great deal for your VW, another word of advice, > follow the lubrication instructions carefully for door handles DON"T use > WD40, use the lithium grease because I used WD 40 and have had to > repair/replace just about all the handles. > > Bill > Port Hope. Canada > > -----Original Message----- > From: Henri Naths [mailto:c_hnaths@t...] > Sent: 26-May-04 12:41 PM > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: VW Diesel/Trans combo > > Bill, > What year is your jetta? I just bought a 1996 tdi with 37000 k in > Calgary > for 2200.00 Thatwas the best price I could find after two week of > searching. > H. > > --- > Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (HYPERLINK > "http://www.grisoft.com)."http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.691 / Virus Database: 452 - Release Date: 26/05/2004 > > > --- > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (HYPERLINK > "http://www.grisoft.com)."http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.691 / Virus Database: 452 - Release Date: 26/05/2004 > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > > ADVERTISEMENT > HYPERLINK > "http://rd.yahoo.com/SIG=129l3fqe9/M=295196.4901138.6071305.3001176/D=gr > oups/S=1705150872:HM/EXP=1085709863/A=2128215/R=0/SIG=10se96mf6/*http:/c > ompanion.yahoo.com"click here > > HYPERLINK > "http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=295196.4901138.6071305.3001176/D=group > s/S=:HM/A=2128215/rand=297640879" > > _____ > > Yahoo! Groups Links > * To visit your group on the web, go to: > HYPERLINK > "http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/"http://groups.yahoo.com/gro > up/origamiboats/ > > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > HYPERLINK > "mailto:origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe"ori > gamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the HYPERLINK > "http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/"Yahoo! Terms of Service. > > --- > Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.691 / Virus Database: 452 - Release Date: 26/05/2004 > > > --- > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > Version: 6.0.691 / Virus Database: 452 - Release Date: 26/05/2004 > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3865|3734|2004-05-27 20:27:47|Gerald Niffenegger|Re: VW Diesel/Trans combo|I didn't do anything special to a used 45 amp alternator. I can buy rebuilts for about 30US$ so I haven't really been too concerned. There is an extra one in the boat. I have sprayed the alternator starter and all the aluminum parts with WD-40 on several occasions. Don't know if it really helps but the locals swear by it. On the other hand ...... I just came by a 120 Amp alternator today and will be hooking it up to a small Yanmar to charge the batteries instead of starting the big motor, in the steel boat. I will go back and read the posts because I am interested in protecting the bigger alternator. There is a a wimp +-25 Amp. alternator on my 33 HP Yanmar. It looks about the same as the 120 Amp, only smaller. I wonder what Yanmar is doing to protect the alternator?? Gerald --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Henri Naths" wrote: > Gerald : > A while back we talked about marinising the alternator. I can't find the posts but if I recall it involved rewinding it to off-set the corrosion of the salt air.It might be cheaper to carry a couple of spares. I'm wondering if you did anything. > Henri > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Gerald Niffenegger > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Sent: 27 May, 2004 2:44 PM > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: VW Diesel/Trans combo > > > I have a 1.9 VW in my 32' 6 ton yawl. I have more power than I need > but the motors are manufactured close to here and I bought one new for > less than 2,000 US$. The machine shop made a brass heat exchanger for > me. I installed a much larger sea water pump than the motor requires > thinking that it would run much quieter. The motor is smooth as silk > and has a great sound at the back of the boat. I am not running any > kind of muffler and at half throttle you can hardly hear it run. At > 2,300 rpm I cruise at about 5.5 knots. It will do 7.5+ but don't like > the sound when it turns up that high. > I had to change flywheels to accept a starter that mounts along side > the motor instead of behind. I cut down a bell housing to use as a > starter motor mount. Careful if you do that because a spark sets off > the magnesium dust and will burn all the hair off you arm! och! I need > to go back in and play with thermostats. I had to remove the > thermostat because the motor was heating up. It now runs too cold, > only about 70 deg. cen. I have now logged 120 hours on the motor and > have had zero problems. > Gerald > Florianopolis SC, Brazil > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Bill Jaine" wrote: > > Still a great price, would be interested in following how you convert it > > since I hope to do that in the future. In the mean time if I find out > > anything on marinising the VW engine I'll post it. > > TTFN > > Bill > > > > Bill > > Port Hope. Canada > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Henri Naths [mailto:c_hnaths@t...] > > Sent: 26-May-04 7:36 PM > > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: VW Diesel/Trans combo > > > > I just reread my post:- it should have read .....a 1996 tdi ENGINE > > with..... > > . Thank for the tip on the wd40. We wd40 everthing,(must have 7or 8 cans > > around the place). Notorious problem with the door handles. Standyne > > eh...? > > might have to give that a try. I've been using Duralube(engine oil > > additive) in engines for about 12 years,( my chev pickup engine has > > about > > 600,000 ks on it) great stuff. That tdi engine I got is a 1.9 you must > > have > > got the 1.6 > > > > Henri > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Bill Jaine" > > To: > > Sent: 26 May, 2004 4:17 PM > > Subject: RE: [origamiboats] Re: VW Diesel/Trans combo > > > > > > It's a 91, Paid $12,000 when it was 12 months old , I guess the old > > owner sold it because it was so gutless ( a magnificent 57 hp) > > The Standyne certainly gave it a few more guts but you do learn to judge > > overtaking distances carefully :-) > > That sounds like a great deal for your VW, another word of advice, > > follow the lubrication instructions carefully for door handles DON"T use > > WD40, use the lithium grease because I used WD 40 and have had to > > repair/replace just about all the handles. > > > > Bill > > Port Hope. Canada > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Henri Naths [mailto:c_hnaths@t...] > > Sent: 26-May-04 12:41 PM > > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: VW Diesel/Trans combo > > > > Bill, > > What year is your jetta? I just bought a 1996 tdi with 37000 k in > > Calgary > > for 2200.00 Thatwas the best price I could find after two week of > > searching. > > H. > > > > --- > > Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. > > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (HYPERLINK > > "http://www.grisoft.com)."http://www.grisoft.com). > > Version: 6.0.691 / Virus Database: 452 - Release Date: 26/05/2004 > > > > > > --- > > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (HYPERLINK > > "http://www.grisoft.com)."http://www.grisoft.com). > > Version: 6.0.691 / Virus Database: 452 - Release Date: 26/05/2004 > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > > > > > ADVERTISEMENT > > HYPERLINK > > "http://rd.yahoo.com/SIG=129l3fqe9/M=295196.4901138.6071305.3001176/D=gr > > oups/S=1705150872:HM/EXP=1085709863/A=2128215/R=0/SIG=10se96mf6/*http:/c > > ompanion.yahoo.com"click here > > > > HYPERLINK > > "http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=295196.4901138.6071305.3001176/D=group > > s/S=:HM/A=2128215/rand=297640879" > > > > _____ > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > * To visit your group on the web, go to: > > HYPERLINK > > "http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/"http://groups.yahoo.com/gro > > up/origamiboats/ > > > > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > HYPERLINK > > "mailto:origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe"ori > > gamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the HYPERLINK > > "http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/"Yahoo! Terms of Service. > > > > --- > > Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. > > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > > Version: 6.0.691 / Virus Database: 452 - Release Date: 26/05/2004 > > > > > > --- > > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. > > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). > > Version: 6.0.691 / Virus Database: 452 - Release Date: 26/05/2004 > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ADVERTISEMENT > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Yahoo! Groups Links > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3866|3806|2004-05-27 20:53:15|Gerald Niffenegger|Re: Drip-free inner shaft seal.|Brent You have probably said the magic words that will keep me from using a carbon dripless seal. Unless a hole tears in the rubber hose or it comes loose, there is little chance that a normal stuff box will leak. I am assuming that the stuff box is just a tube thru the hull with a rubber hose attached and the other end of the hose is plugged with the packing flange? That being the case a lip seal added to the packing flange assembly shouldn't hurt anything and should made the system dripless? Gerald --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" wrote: > I tried the dripless seal for a while once, but given that the > slightest bump could put them out of line and let the boat sink quite > easily,and quickly , I could never leave the boat alone without > worrying about it. > I went back to the standard stuffing box for the peace of mind of > knowing that if it had a slow drip, it wouldn't suddenly get worse. > Brent > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Michael Casling > wrote: > > I had a good look at the new style seals at the Vancouver boat show > in February. I noticed that if something was to touch the sealing > part they good be moved apart very easily and a large amount of water > would be let in. I have the old style seal in our boat and frankly > can not see a problem. A drip once in a while and that is all. Change > the packing seal every 10 years. They are relatively cheap and do the > job. Michael > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: kendall > > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2004 9:49 PM > > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Drip-free inner shaft seal. > > > > > > myself I prefer to run the old style packing type, and realy don't > > have a problem with it, it leaks maybe a half cup a week, if it > begins > > leaking more a slight turn on the nut will take care of it, and > if it > > needs changing I can do so without worry with the boat in the > water, > > and if it's an emergency, a shoestring will fix it. the other > style, > > at least the type the neighbor used, required the shafts to be > backed > > out for replacement, which opens up a lot of hassles that is > better > > managed on dry ground. > > > > Ken. > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- > unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > ADVERTISEMENT > > > > > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > ---------- > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of > Service. > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3867|3867|2004-05-27 21:17:41|bilgekeeldave|Propeller shaft stuffing box|I have had the same bronze stuffing box for twenty years, I used teflon pump shaft packing and haven't had any problems, only an occasional drip when the weather is hitting me on the stern. Why change things if what I have works just fine? Dave| 3868|3806|2004-05-27 21:51:02|Steve Rankin|Re: Drip-free inner shaft seal.|I've used a carbon style dripless system for 7 or 8 years without problem or drips. I like it so far. Steve brentswain38 wrote: > I tried the dripless seal for a while once, but given that the > slightest bump could put them out of line and let the boat sink quite > easily,and quickly , I could never leave the boat alone without > worrying about it. > I went back to the standard stuffing box for the peace of mind of > knowing that if it had a slow drip, it wouldn't suddenly get worse. > Brent > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Michael Casling > wrote: > >>I had a good look at the new style seals at the Vancouver boat show > > in February. I noticed that if something was to touch the sealing > part they good be moved apart very easily and a large amount of water > would be let in. I have the old style seal in our boat and frankly > can not see a problem. A drip once in a while and that is all. Change > the packing seal every 10 years. They are relatively cheap and do the > job. Michael > >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: kendall >> To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com >> Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2004 9:49 PM >> Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Drip-free inner shaft seal. >> >> >> myself I prefer to run the old style packing type, and realy don't >> have a problem with it, it leaks maybe a half cup a week, if it > > begins > >> leaking more a slight turn on the nut will take care of it, and > > if it > >> needs changing I can do so without worry with the boat in the > > water, > >> and if it's an emergency, a shoestring will fix it. the other > > style, > >> at least the type the neighbor used, required the shafts to be > > backed > >> out for replacement, which opens up a lot of hassles that is > > better > >> managed on dry ground. >> >> Ken. >> >> >> >> To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com >> To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- > > unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > >> >> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor >> ADVERTISEMENT >> >> >> >> >> >>-------------------------------------------------------------------- > > ---------- > >> Yahoo! Groups Links >> >> a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: >> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ >> >> b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: >> origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com >> >> c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of > > Service. > >> >> >>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > | 3869|3734|2004-05-27 23:57:34|Michael Casling|Re: VW Diesel/Trans combo|The Chevy V8 70's pickup alternator is the cheapest one around here. To make them suitable for a boat they just put spark shields on them. It costs a bit more for a 70 plus amp unit, all available at my local auto electric shop. I have one on my 1941 Ford tractor that sits out in the weather and one in the truck that charges two batteries, have not had to touch either since I have had them and that has been a few years. Gonna put an amp meter in the sailboat to see how many amps the Yanmar unit is producing, then I will make a decision about a larger unit. 45 amps is about standard for one of these units the larger amp units have a different housing. And like Gerald said they are cheap enough to carry a spare. Michael ----- Original Message ----- From: Gerald Niffenegger To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2004 5:27 PM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: VW Diesel/Trans combo I didn't do anything special to a used 45 amp alternator. I can buy rebuilts for about 30US$ so I haven't really been too concerned. There is an extra one in the boat. I have sprayed the alternator starter and all the aluminum parts with WD-40 on several occasions. Don't know if it really helps but the locals swear by it. On the other hand ...... I just came by a 120 Amp alternator today and will be hooking it up to a small Yanmar to charge the batteries instead of starting the big motor, in the steel boat. I will go back and read the posts because I am interested in protecting the bigger alternator. There is a a wimp +-25 Amp. alternator on my 33 HP Yanmar. It looks about the same as the 120 Amp, only smaller. I wonder what Yanmar is doing to protect the alternator?? Gerald [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3870|3806|2004-05-28 04:04:34|Ben Tucker|Re: Drip-free inner shaft seal.|Hi The Tasmanian Lip seals I was talking about are Built up by a local company especaily for boats, they are a neoprene lipseal inserted into a machined SS block abit like a stuffing box. I think the lip seal can be replaced independantly very cheaply. Another thought! why not put a plastic drip catcher under the stuffing box and drain the drips into a plastic container with an auto bilge pump, probably cheaper than any fancy dripless seal. Always remember to put the stuffing back in the stuffing box!! My old man forgot to once after slipping the boat. He raced of to help put the next boat on the slip. I heard the tinkle of water pouring in and spent the next 20 minutes pumping flat out! The only other time I've had a big fright was when the bolts came out of the coupling and the shaft went out backwards (when we hit reverse) the coupling was still rotating when it hit the stuffing box and uncrewed it. Looked like the whole sterntube had been ripped out but fortunately the stuffing box just screwed back on, good job the coupling stayed on! Still interested in any tales of wintering in ice, What did dove III? have when she went through the NW passage? Cheers Ben| 3871|3806|2004-05-28 11:03:25|Michael Casling|Re: Drip-free inner shaft seal.|My boat stays in the water during the winter and usually has ice around it, sometimes up to 12 inches but the stuffing box is still in the water. So far I have not been able to see a problem with a boat on ice with the old style stuffing box. The rudder and prop could get could get ice pressure on them, I remove the transom hung rudder when the boat is moored. I pay for year round moorage so I figure I will use it. Michael ----- Original Message ----- From: Ben Tucker To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, May 28, 2004 1:03 AM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Drip-free inner shaft seal. Still interested in any tales of wintering in ice, What did dove III? have when she went through the NW passage? Cheers Ben To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3872|3806|2004-05-28 13:50:01|brentswain38|Re: Drip-free inner shaft seal.|I once got frozen in and had to spend three days bashing my way thru 1/4 mile of five inch ice. No problem witht he stuffing box, then or since. Brent --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Michael Casling wrote: > My boat stays in the water during the winter and usually has ice around it, sometimes up to 12 inches but the stuffing box is still in the water. So far I have not been able to see a problem with a boat on ice with the old style stuffing box. The rudder and prop could get could get ice pressure on them, I remove the transom hung rudder when the boat is moored. I pay for year round moorage so I figure I will use it. Michael > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Ben Tucker > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Friday, May 28, 2004 1:03 AM > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Drip-free inner shaft seal. > > > > > Still interested in any tales of wintering in ice, What did dove III? > have when she went through the NW passage? > > Cheers > > Ben > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ADVERTISEMENT > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- > Yahoo! Groups Links > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3873|3746|2004-05-28 20:58:58|Gerald Niffenegger|Re: epoxy zinc paint|A short time ago I stated that I had been in a steel hull built in 1922 and there was minimal visible rust. I had a closer look at the boat today and talked to the owner over a cup of coffee. In the engine room there are areas that were never painted. The boat was hot zinc coated when it was built. The areas where paint had never been applied look almost like aluminum. The small rusted areas are where the current owner had been grinding to remove an old water system and make some changes to the cabin area. Gerald --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gerald Niffenegger" wrote: > Sounds like I could make the sand tank from a propane tank. About the > same size that you described and will surly hold 120# of pressure. My > two compressors will put out about 40 cubic feet of air. For the hood > I have been using the output from an industrial vacuum cleaner fed > into a motor cycle helmet. Works fine until you have a chilly day and > it freezes the top of my bald head. > I was inside a 33 ft. steel sailboat today that has a hull > manufactured in 1922. Against the inside of the steel hull they had > packed rock wool. Some areas of the rock wool had gotten wet because > of a previously used water collection system. The metal looks like it > was painted with oil based paint and not a very thick coat of paint. > There are some thin rust spots but nothing serious. I had a good laugh > as I thought about the warnings I have received about getting paint on > that shot blasted metal within 15 minutes or it will start to rust and > you will have problems blah blah blah. Makes one wonder how this 80 > year old boat has held up without epoxy or fancy designer coatings? > The owner explaind that back in the old days they used better steel > and that is why there is no rust. > Gerald > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, johnkupris@a... wrote: > > Hi Gerald, > > My compressor is an old Ingersal Rand ( circa 1960 )on wheels that > was used > > to break up concrete/cement. I had to replace 3 epoxy paddle blades > ( about 6 x > > 3 inches each ) in the air pump but it puts out alot of air at 120 > PSI or 8.7 > > kgs, it would probably run 2 sandblasters. It has a 4 cylinder > international > > gas engine. > > > > > > I made a sandblaster that works OK. The high pressure tank is an > Oxygen tank > > from a P-51 airplane and it is about > > 2 1/2 feet tall and about 14 inches in diameter and holds about 70 > lbs of > > shot. With a 3/16 inch hole in a ceramic nozzle > > I can blast about 18 square feet or 1.5 sq meters. A larger tank and > larger > > wheels would work better. > > > > I tried sandblasting with a large commercial garage compressor but > it will > > only hold the high pressure for a couple minutes and then the > blasting is poor. > > > > Use one compressor to flood your blasting hood with lots of > fresh > > air to cool your head and defog but drain the motor oil from it and > replace it > > with vegetable oil incase you breath in oil fumes, the vegetable oil > will not > > harm your lungs, or so commercial divers tell me. So far so > good,cough,cough. > > > > I tried using sand but it seemed to turn into powder and very fine. > I now use > > black grit and only one time ,as when I recycled I got some rusting > on deck > > throught the zinc, over the winter. I believe that recycling rounds > the grit > > and the result is a peening effect instead of a toothed surface for > the paint to > > grip. John > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3874|3746|2004-05-28 21:21:54|Courtney Thomas|Re: epoxy zinc paint|Did you, by any chance, ask "how" the builder(s) actually hot zinc coated it ? That is, was it done piecemeal and then assembled, or what ? What exactly was the process and what materials & tools were used ? Appreciatively, Courtney Gerald Niffenegger wrote: > A short time ago I stated that I had been in a steel hull built in > 1922 and there was minimal visible rust. I had a closer look at the > boat today and talked to the owner over a cup of coffee. In the engine > room there are areas that were never painted. The boat was hot zinc > coated when it was built. The areas where paint had never been applied > look almost like aluminum. The small rusted areas are where the > current owner had been grinding to remove an old water system and make > some changes to the cabin area. > Gerald > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gerald Niffenegger" > wrote: > >>Sounds like I could make the sand tank from a propane tank. About the >>same size that you described and will surly hold 120# of pressure. My >>two compressors will put out about 40 cubic feet of air. For the hood >>I have been using the output from an industrial vacuum cleaner fed >>into a motor cycle helmet. Works fine until you have a chilly day and >>it freezes the top of my bald head. >>I was inside a 33 ft. steel sailboat today that has a hull >>manufactured in 1922. Against the inside of the steel hull they had >>packed rock wool. Some areas of the rock wool had gotten wet because >>of a previously used water collection system. The metal looks like it >>was painted with oil based paint and not a very thick coat of paint. >>There are some thin rust spots but nothing serious. I had a good laugh >>as I thought about the warnings I have received about getting paint on >>that shot blasted metal within 15 minutes or it will start to rust and >>you will have problems blah blah blah. Makes one wonder how this 80 >>year old boat has held up without epoxy or fancy designer coatings? >>The owner explaind that back in the old days they used better steel >>and that is why there is no rust. >>Gerald >>--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, johnkupris@a... wrote: >> >>>Hi Gerald, >>>My compressor is an old Ingersal Rand ( circa 1960 )on wheels that >>> >>was used >> >>>to break up concrete/cement. I had to replace 3 epoxy paddle blades >>> >>( about 6 x >> >>>3 inches each ) in the air pump but it puts out alot of air at 120 >>> >>PSI or 8.7 >> >>>kgs, it would probably run 2 sandblasters. It has a 4 cylinder >>> >>international >> >>>gas engine. >>> >>> >>> I made a sandblaster that works OK. The high pressure tank is an >>> >>Oxygen tank >> >>>from a P-51 airplane and it is about >>>2 1/2 feet tall and about 14 inches in diameter and holds about 70 >>> >>lbs of >> >>>shot. With a 3/16 inch hole in a ceramic nozzle >>>I can blast about 18 square feet or 1.5 sq meters. A larger tank and >>> >>larger >> >>>wheels would work better. >>> >>>I tried sandblasting with a large commercial garage compressor but >>> >>it will >> >>>only hold the high pressure for a couple minutes and then the >>> >>blasting is poor. >> >>> >>> Use one compressor to flood your blasting hood with lots of >>> >>fresh >> >>>air to cool your head and defog but drain the motor oil from it and >>> >>replace it >> >>>with vegetable oil incase you breath in oil fumes, the vegetable oil >>> >>will not >> >>>harm your lungs, or so commercial divers tell me. So far so >>> >>good,cough,cough. >> >>>I tried using sand but it seemed to turn into powder and very fine. >>> >>I now use >> >>>black grit and only one time ,as when I recycled I got some rusting >>> >>on deck >> >>>throught the zinc, over the winter. I believe that recycling rounds >>> >>the grit >> >>>and the result is a peening effect instead of a toothed surface for >>> >>the paint to >> >>>grip. John >>> >>> >>>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed] >>> > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > -- s/v Mutiny Rhodes Bounty II lying Oriental, NC WDB5619| 3875|3746|2004-05-28 21:35:53|Gerald Niffenegger|Re: epoxy zinc paint|The boat lies here in Florianopolis, SC Brazil. However, if was built somewhere in Europe? Story is that it was built as a transport boat to ferry passengers from point A to point B. In the 1950s it was converted to a sailboat. It seemed to be more of an open boat and the cabin portion was added on. The workmanship of the cabin covering is lower quality than the hull. My guess is that it was coated in 1922 when built because of the great condition that the hull is in? I'll look it over a little more next week. Gerald --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Courtney Thomas wrote: > Did you, by any chance, ask "how" the builder(s) actually hot zinc > coated it ? That is, was it done piecemeal and then assembled, or what ? > > What exactly was the process and what materials & tools were used ? > > Appreciatively, > Courtney > > > > Gerald Niffenegger wrote: > > > A short time ago I stated that I had been in a steel hull built in > > 1922 and there was minimal visible rust. I had a closer look at the > > boat today and talked to the owner over a cup of coffee. In the engine > > room there are areas that were never painted. The boat was hot zinc > > coated when it was built. The areas where paint had never been applied > > look almost like aluminum. The small rusted areas are where the > > current owner had been grinding to remove an old water system and make > > some changes to the cabin area. > > Gerald > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gerald Niffenegger" > > wrote: > > > >>Sounds like I could make the sand tank from a propane tank. About the > >>same size that you described and will surly hold 120# of pressure. My > >>two compressors will put out about 40 cubic feet of air. For the hood > >>I have been using the output from an industrial vacuum cleaner fed > >>into a motor cycle helmet. Works fine until you have a chilly day and > >>it freezes the top of my bald head. > >>I was inside a 33 ft. steel sailboat today that has a hull > >>manufactured in 1922. Against the inside of the steel hull they had > >>packed rock wool. Some areas of the rock wool had gotten wet because > >>of a previously used water collection system. The metal looks like it > >>was painted with oil based paint and not a very thick coat of paint. > >>There are some thin rust spots but nothing serious. I had a good laugh > >>as I thought about the warnings I have received about getting paint on > >>that shot blasted metal within 15 minutes or it will start to rust and > >>you will have problems blah blah blah. Makes one wonder how this 80 > >>year old boat has held up without epoxy or fancy designer coatings? > >>The owner explaind that back in the old days they used better steel > >>and that is why there is no rust. > >>Gerald > >>--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, johnkupris@a... wrote: > >> > >>>Hi Gerald, > >>>My compressor is an old Ingersal Rand ( circa 1960 )on wheels that > >>> > >>was used > >> > >>>to break up concrete/cement. I had to replace 3 epoxy paddle blades > >>> > >>( about 6 x > >> > >>>3 inches each ) in the air pump but it puts out alot of air at 120 > >>> > >>PSI or 8.7 > >> > >>>kgs, it would probably run 2 sandblasters. It has a 4 cylinder > >>> > >>international > >> > >>>gas engine. > >>> > >>> > >>> I made a sandblaster that works OK. The high pressure tank is an > >>> > >>Oxygen tank > >> > >>>from a P-51 airplane and it is about > >>>2 1/2 feet tall and about 14 inches in diameter and holds about 70 > >>> > >>lbs of > >> > >>>shot. With a 3/16 inch hole in a ceramic nozzle > >>>I can blast about 18 square feet or 1.5 sq meters. A larger tank and > >>> > >>larger > >> > >>>wheels would work better. > >>> > >>>I tried sandblasting with a large commercial garage compressor but > >>> > >>it will > >> > >>>only hold the high pressure for a couple minutes and then the > >>> > >>blasting is poor. > >> > >>> > >>> Use one compressor to flood your blasting hood with lots of > >>> > >>fresh > >> > >>>air to cool your head and defog but drain the motor oil from it and > >>> > >>replace it > >> > >>>with vegetable oil incase you breath in oil fumes, the vegetable oil > >>> > >>will not > >> > >>>harm your lungs, or so commercial divers tell me. So far so > >>> > >>good,cough,cough. > >> > >>>I tried using sand but it seemed to turn into powder and very fine. > >>> > >>I now use > >> > >>>black grit and only one time ,as when I recycled I got some rusting > >>> > >>on deck > >> > >>>throught the zinc, over the winter. I believe that recycling rounds > >>> > >>the grit > >> > >>>and the result is a peening effect instead of a toothed surface for > >>> > >>the paint to > >> > >>>grip. John > >>> > >>> > >>>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > >>> > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > s/v Mutiny > Rhodes Bounty II > lying Oriental, NC > WDB5619 | 3876|3746|2004-05-28 22:28:29|Steve Rankin|Re: epoxy zinc paint|My boat was flame sprayed with zinc after sand blasting. It is the equivalent of hot dipping as far as I can see. Steve Rankin Courtney Thomas wrote: > Did you, by any chance, ask "how" the builder(s) actually hot zinc > coated it ? That is, was it done piecemeal and then assembled, or what ? > > What exactly was the process and what materials & tools were used ? > > Appreciatively, > Courtney > > > > Gerald Niffenegger wrote: > > >>A short time ago I stated that I had been in a steel hull built in >>1922 and there was minimal visible rust. I had a closer look at the >>boat today and talked to the owner over a cup of coffee. In the engine >>room there are areas that were never painted. The boat was hot zinc >>coated when it was built. The areas where paint had never been applied >>look almost like aluminum. The small rusted areas are where the >>current owner had been grinding to remove an old water system and make >>some changes to the cabin area. >>Gerald >>--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gerald Niffenegger" >> wrote: >> >> >>>Sounds like I could make the sand tank from a propane tank. About the >>>same size that you described and will surly hold 120# of pressure. My >>>two compressors will put out about 40 cubic feet of air. For the hood >>>I have been using the output from an industrial vacuum cleaner fed >>>into a motor cycle helmet. Works fine until you have a chilly day and >>>it freezes the top of my bald head. >>>I was inside a 33 ft. steel sailboat today that has a hull >>>manufactured in 1922. Against the inside of the steel hull they had >>>packed rock wool. Some areas of the rock wool had gotten wet because >>>of a previously used water collection system. The metal looks like it >>>was painted with oil based paint and not a very thick coat of paint. >>>There are some thin rust spots but nothing serious. I had a good laugh >>>as I thought about the warnings I have received about getting paint on >>>that shot blasted metal within 15 minutes or it will start to rust and >>>you will have problems blah blah blah. Makes one wonder how this 80 >>>year old boat has held up without epoxy or fancy designer coatings? >>>The owner explaind that back in the old days they used better steel >>>and that is why there is no rust. >>>Gerald >>>--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, johnkupris@a... wrote: >>> >>> >>>>Hi Gerald, >>>>My compressor is an old Ingersal Rand ( circa 1960 )on wheels that >>>> >>> >>>was used >>> >>> >>>>to break up concrete/cement. I had to replace 3 epoxy paddle blades >>>> >>> >>>( about 6 x >>> >>> >>>>3 inches each ) in the air pump but it puts out alot of air at 120 >>>> >>> >>>PSI or 8.7 >>> >>> >>>>kgs, it would probably run 2 sandblasters. It has a 4 cylinder >>>> >>> >>>international >>> >>> >>>>gas engine. >>>> >>>> >>>>I made a sandblaster that works OK. The high pressure tank is an >>>> >>> >>>Oxygen tank >>> >>>>from a P-51 airplane and it is about >>> >>>>2 1/2 feet tall and about 14 inches in diameter and holds about 70 >>>> >>> >>>lbs of >>> >>> >>>>shot. With a 3/16 inch hole in a ceramic nozzle >>>>I can blast about 18 square feet or 1.5 sq meters. A larger tank and >>>> >>> >>>larger >>> >>> >>>>wheels would work better. >>>> >>>>I tried sandblasting with a large commercial garage compressor but >>>> >>> >>>it will >>> >>> >>>>only hold the high pressure for a couple minutes and then the >>>> >>> >>>blasting is poor. >>> >>> >>>> >>>> Use one compressor to flood your blasting hood with lots of >>>> >>> >>>fresh >>> >>> >>>>air to cool your head and defog but drain the motor oil from it and >>>> >>> >>>replace it >>> >>> >>>>with vegetable oil incase you breath in oil fumes, the vegetable oil >>>> >>> >>>will not >>> >>> >>>>harm your lungs, or so commercial divers tell me. So far so >>>> >>> >>>good,cough,cough. >>> >>> >>>>I tried using sand but it seemed to turn into powder and very fine. >>>> >>> >>>I now use >>> >>> >>>>black grit and only one time ,as when I recycled I got some rusting >>>> >>> >>>on deck >>> >>> >>>>throught the zinc, over the winter. I believe that recycling rounds >>>> >>> >>>the grit >>> >>> >>>>and the result is a peening effect instead of a toothed surface for >>>> >>> >>>the paint to >>> >>> >>>>grip. John >>>> >>>> >>>>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed] >>>> >> >> >> >> >>To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com >>To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com >>Yahoo! Groups Links >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > | 3877|3746|2004-05-29 07:34:44|Courtney Thomas|Re: epoxy zinc paint|Thank you. How "exactly" is flame sprayed epoxy zinc accomplished, please ? Cordially, Courtney Steve Rankin wrote: > My boat was flame sprayed with zinc after sand blasting. It is the > equivalent of hot dipping as far as I can see. > > Steve Rankin > Courtney Thomas wrote: > >>Did you, by any chance, ask "how" the builder(s) actually hot zinc >>coated it ? That is, was it done piecemeal and then assembled, or what ? >> >>What exactly was the process and what materials & tools were used ? >> >>Appreciatively, >>Courtney >> >> >> >>Gerald Niffenegger wrote: >> >> >> >>>A short time ago I stated that I had been in a steel hull built in >>>1922 and there was minimal visible rust. I had a closer look at the >>>boat today and talked to the owner over a cup of coffee. In the engine >>>room there are areas that were never painted. The boat was hot zinc >>>coated when it was built. The areas where paint had never been applied >>>look almost like aluminum. The small rusted areas are where the >>>current owner had been grinding to remove an old water system and make >>>some changes to the cabin area. >>>Gerald >>>--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gerald Niffenegger" >>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>>Sounds like I could make the sand tank from a propane tank. About the >>>>same size that you described and will surly hold 120# of pressure. My >>>>two compressors will put out about 40 cubic feet of air. For the hood >>>>I have been using the output from an industrial vacuum cleaner fed >>>>into a motor cycle helmet. Works fine until you have a chilly day and >>>>it freezes the top of my bald head. >>>>I was inside a 33 ft. steel sailboat today that has a hull >>>>manufactured in 1922. Against the inside of the steel hull they had >>>>packed rock wool. Some areas of the rock wool had gotten wet because >>>>of a previously used water collection system. The metal looks like it >>>>was painted with oil based paint and not a very thick coat of paint. >>>>There are some thin rust spots but nothing serious. I had a good laugh >>>>as I thought about the warnings I have received about getting paint on >>>>that shot blasted metal within 15 minutes or it will start to rust and >>>>you will have problems blah blah blah. Makes one wonder how this 80 >>>>year old boat has held up without epoxy or fancy designer coatings? >>>>The owner explaind that back in the old days they used better steel >>>>and that is why there is no rust. >>>>Gerald >>>>--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, johnkupris@a... wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>Hi Gerald, >>>>>My compressor is an old Ingersal Rand ( circa 1960 )on wheels that >>>>> >>>>> >>>>was used >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>to break up concrete/cement. I had to replace 3 epoxy paddle blades >>>>> >>>>> >>>>( about 6 x >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>3 inches each ) in the air pump but it puts out alot of air at 120 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>PSI or 8.7 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>kgs, it would probably run 2 sandblasters. It has a 4 cylinder >>>>> >>>>> >>>>international >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>gas engine. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>I made a sandblaster that works OK. The high pressure tank is an >>>>> >>>>> >>>>Oxygen tank >>>> >>>>>from a P-51 airplane and it is about >>>> >>>> >>>>>2 1/2 feet tall and about 14 inches in diameter and holds about 70 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>lbs of >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>shot. With a 3/16 inch hole in a ceramic nozzle >>>>>I can blast about 18 square feet or 1.5 sq meters. A larger tank and >>>>> >>>>> >>>>larger >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>wheels would work better. >>>>> >>>>>I tried sandblasting with a large commercial garage compressor but >>>>> >>>>> >>>>it will >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>only hold the high pressure for a couple minutes and then the >>>>> >>>>> >>>>blasting is poor. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Use one compressor to flood your blasting hood with lots of >>>>> >>>>> >>>>fresh >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>air to cool your head and defog but drain the motor oil from it and >>>>> >>>>> >>>>replace it >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>with vegetable oil incase you breath in oil fumes, the vegetable oil >>>>> >>>>> >>>>will not >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>harm your lungs, or so commercial divers tell me. So far so >>>>> >>>>> >>>>good,cough,cough. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>I tried using sand but it seemed to turn into powder and very fine. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>I now use >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>black grit and only one time ,as when I recycled I got some rusting >>>>> >>>>> >>>>on deck >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>throught the zinc, over the winter. I believe that recycling rounds >>>>> >>>>> >>>>the grit >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>and the result is a peening effect instead of a toothed surface for >>>>> >>>>> >>>>the paint to >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>grip. John >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed] >>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> >>> >>>To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com >>>To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com >>>Yahoo! Groups Links >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > -- s/v Mutiny Rhodes Bounty II lying Oriental, NC WDB5619| 3878|3746|2004-05-29 12:23:48|kendall|Re: epoxy zinc paint|--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Courtney Thomas wrote: > Did you, by any chance, ask "how" the builder(s) actually hot zinc > coated it ? That is, was it done piecemeal and then assembled, or what ? > > What exactly was the process and what materials & tools were used ? > > Appreciatively, > Courtney Many times with large items, they'll zinc coat it the same way you'll tin something with solder, use a torch, rosin or flux then wipe on the zinc, works nicely, used to re-zinc old barn roofs, and that's how it was done, a regular propane roofer/weedburner torch works well for large areas, a smaller one for 'delicate' areas. start at the top and work down so you can re-work the runs, place wood or something down to keep the zinc from hitting concrete, sand works well, clean up drips, melt them into new ingots, and you'll use less zinc than you think. only do it when it's dry, water will explode spraying hot zinc everywhere (concrete too). ken| 3879|3746|2004-05-29 13:36:19|Steve Rankin|Re: epoxy zinc paint|go to http://www.gordonengland.co.uk/cws.htm for a complete discription. kendall wrote: > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Courtney Thomas > wrote: > >>Did you, by any chance, ask "how" the builder(s) actually hot zinc >>coated it ? That is, was it done piecemeal and then assembled, or what ? >> >>What exactly was the process and what materials & tools were used ? >> >>Appreciatively, >>Courtney > > > > Many times with large items, they'll zinc coat it the same way > you'll tin something with solder, use a torch, rosin or flux then > wipe on the zinc, works nicely, used to re-zinc old barn roofs, and > that's how it was done, a regular propane roofer/weedburner torch > works well for large areas, a smaller one for 'delicate' areas. start > at the top and work down so you can re-work the runs, place wood or > something down to keep the zinc from hitting concrete, sand works > well, clean up drips, melt them into new ingots, and you'll use less > zinc than you think. only do it when it's dry, water will explode > spraying hot zinc everywhere (concrete too). > > ken > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > | 3880|3746|2004-05-29 14:45:19|brentswain38|Re: epoxy zinc paint|I once flame sprayed a 36 footer with aluminium. The owner found the spraygun at a garage sale for $60, then bought the whole rig with all the bells and whistles used for $200. It took a lot of acetylene and oxygen, but the wire was cheap. When I began spraying it went on easily leaving the surface like fine sandpaper. As the gun gradually clogged up, the surface got gradually rougher and the surface temperature got hotter, indicating time to take out and clean the nozzle with a cutting torch tip cleaner. The more often you clean the tip, the better the job you end up with.It made the steel barely warm to the touch when the gun was clean. Aluminium , being lighter is more expensive per pound, but you used fewer pounds , so cost roughly the same as zinc ,and is tougher and more long lasting. It's expensive to have done, but if a bunch of builders get together and buy the equipment, it can work out much cheaper. It's an excellent way to do a boat, and will eleiminate almost all above water maintenance except cosmetic. I had a couple of anchors done in 1992 and they are only now due for redoing altho they have never had much painting done on them.It works well for propane tanks . Brent --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Steve Rankin wrote: > go to http://www.gordonengland.co.uk/cws.htm for a complete discription. > > > kendall wrote: > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Courtney Thomas > > wrote: > > > >>Did you, by any chance, ask "how" the builder(s) actually hot zinc > >>coated it ? That is, was it done piecemeal and then assembled, or what ? > >> > >>What exactly was the process and what materials & tools were used ? > >> > >>Appreciatively, > >>Courtney > > > > > > > > Many times with large items, they'll zinc coat it the same way > > you'll tin something with solder, use a torch, rosin or flux then > > wipe on the zinc, works nicely, used to re-zinc old barn roofs, and > > that's how it was done, a regular propane roofer/weedburner torch > > works well for large areas, a smaller one for 'delicate' areas. start > > at the top and work down so you can re-work the runs, place wood or > > something down to keep the zinc from hitting concrete, sand works > > well, clean up drips, melt them into new ingots, and you'll use less > > zinc than you think. only do it when it's dry, water will explode > > spraying hot zinc everywhere (concrete too). > > > > ken > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > | 3881|3746|2004-05-29 14:46:19|brentswain38|Re: epoxy zinc paint|The US navy was selling off al their oxy acetylene metalspray rigs and going for the electric rigs, so they may sometimes be found in US scrapyards, etc.if you know what to look for. Brent --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Steve Rankin wrote: > go to http://www.gordonengland.co.uk/cws.htm for a complete discription. > > > kendall wrote: > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Courtney Thomas > > wrote: > > > >>Did you, by any chance, ask "how" the builder(s) actually hot zinc > >>coated it ? That is, was it done piecemeal and then assembled, or what ? > >> > >>What exactly was the process and what materials & tools were used ? > >> > >>Appreciatively, > >>Courtney > > > > > > > > Many times with large items, they'll zinc coat it the same way > > you'll tin something with solder, use a torch, rosin or flux then > > wipe on the zinc, works nicely, used to re-zinc old barn roofs, and > > that's how it was done, a regular propane roofer/weedburner torch > > works well for large areas, a smaller one for 'delicate' areas. start > > at the top and work down so you can re-work the runs, place wood or > > something down to keep the zinc from hitting concrete, sand works > > well, clean up drips, melt them into new ingots, and you'll use less > > zinc than you think. only do it when it's dry, water will explode > > spraying hot zinc everywhere (concrete too). > > > > ken > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > | 3882|3746|2004-05-29 15:22:46|Courtney Thomas|Re: epoxy zinc paint|Thanks Ken for the clear reply. Cordially, Courtney kendall wrote: > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Courtney Thomas > wrote: > >>Did you, by any chance, ask "how" the builder(s) actually hot zinc >>coated it ? That is, was it done piecemeal and then assembled, or what ? >> >>What exactly was the process and what materials & tools were used ? >> >>Appreciatively, >>Courtney >> > > > Many times with large items, they'll zinc coat it the same way > you'll tin something with solder, use a torch, rosin or flux then > wipe on the zinc, works nicely, used to re-zinc old barn roofs, and > that's how it was done, a regular propane roofer/weedburner torch > works well for large areas, a smaller one for 'delicate' areas. start > at the top and work down so you can re-work the runs, place wood or > something down to keep the zinc from hitting concrete, sand works > well, clean up drips, melt them into new ingots, and you'll use less > zinc than you think. only do it when it's dry, water will explode > spraying hot zinc everywhere (concrete too). > > ken > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > -- s/v Mutiny Rhodes Bounty II lying Oriental, NC WDB5619| 3883|3746|2004-05-29 15:28:34|Courtney Thomas|Re: epoxy zinc paint|What do you recommend regarding anchor painting/coating ? Thank you, Courtney brentswain38 wrote: > I once flame sprayed a 36 footer with aluminium. The owner found the > spraygun at a garage sale for $60, then bought the whole rig with all > the bells and whistles used for $200. It took a lot of acetylene and > oxygen, but the wire was cheap. When I began spraying it went on > easily leaving the surface like fine sandpaper. As the gun gradually > clogged up, the surface got gradually rougher and the surface > temperature got hotter, indicating time to take out and clean the > nozzle with a cutting torch tip cleaner. The more often you clean the > tip, the better the job you end up with.It made the steel barely warm > to the touch when the gun was clean. > Aluminium , being lighter is more expensive per pound, but you used > fewer pounds , so cost roughly the same as zinc ,and is tougher and > more long lasting. > It's expensive to have done, but if a bunch of builders get > together and buy the equipment, it can work out much cheaper. > It's an excellent way to do a boat, and will eleiminate almost all > above water maintenance except cosmetic. > I had a couple of anchors done in 1992 and they are only now due > for redoing altho they have never had much painting done on them.It > works well for propane tanks . > Brent > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Steve Rankin > wrote: > >>go to http://www.gordonengland.co.uk/cws.htm for a complete >> > discription. > >> >>kendall wrote: >> >> >>>--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Courtney Thomas >>> > > >>>wrote: >>> >>> >>>>Did you, by any chance, ask "how" the builder(s) actually hot >>>> > zinc > >>>>coated it ? That is, was it done piecemeal and then assembled, or >>>> > what ? > >>>>What exactly was the process and what materials & tools were >>>> > used ? > >>>>Appreciatively, >>>>Courtney >>>> >>> >>> >>> Many times with large items, they'll zinc coat it the same way >>>you'll tin something with solder, use a torch, rosin or flux then >>>wipe on the zinc, works nicely, used to re-zinc old barn roofs, >>> > and > >>>that's how it was done, a regular propane roofer/weedburner torch >>>works well for large areas, a smaller one for 'delicate' areas. >>> > start > >>>at the top and work down so you can re-work the runs, place wood >>> > or > >>>something down to keep the zinc from hitting concrete, sand works >>>well, clean up drips, melt them into new ingots, and you'll use >>> > less > >>>zinc than you think. only do it when it's dry, water will explode >>>spraying hot zinc everywhere (concrete too). >>> >>>ken >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com >>>To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- >>> > unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > >>>Yahoo! Groups Links >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > -- s/v Mutiny Rhodes Bounty II lying Oriental, NC WDB5619| 3884|3746|2004-05-29 15:30:37|Courtney Thomas|Re: epoxy zinc paint|Any further elaboration on how one of these may be run down ? Thank you. Courtney brentswain38 wrote: > The US navy was selling off al their oxy acetylene metalspray rigs > and going for the electric rigs, so they may sometimes be found in US > scrapyards, etc.if you know what to look for. > Brent > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Steve Rankin > wrote: > >>go to http://www.gordonengland.co.uk/cws.htm for a complete >> > discription. > >> >>kendall wrote: >> >> >>>--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Courtney Thomas >>> > > >>>wrote: >>> >>> >>>>Did you, by any chance, ask "how" the builder(s) actually hot >>>> > zinc > >>>>coated it ? That is, was it done piecemeal and then assembled, or >>>> > what ? > >>>>What exactly was the process and what materials & tools were >>>> > used ? > >>>>Appreciatively, >>>>Courtney >>>> >>> >>> >>> Many times with large items, they'll zinc coat it the same way >>>you'll tin something with solder, use a torch, rosin or flux then >>>wipe on the zinc, works nicely, used to re-zinc old barn roofs, >>> > and > >>>that's how it was done, a regular propane roofer/weedburner torch >>>works well for large areas, a smaller one for 'delicate' areas. >>> > start > >>>at the top and work down so you can re-work the runs, place wood >>> > or > >>>something down to keep the zinc from hitting concrete, sand works >>>well, clean up drips, melt them into new ingots, and you'll use >>> > less > >>>zinc than you think. only do it when it's dry, water will explode >>>spraying hot zinc everywhere (concrete too). >>> >>>ken >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com >>>To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- >>> > unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > >>>Yahoo! Groups Links >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > -- s/v Mutiny Rhodes Bounty II lying Oriental, NC WDB5619| 3885|3746|2004-05-29 19:08:34|Gerald Niffenegger|Re: epoxy zinc paint|I have a spool of aluminum wire and a stand alone wire feed on my MIG. I have an oxygen acetylene torch. I have a compressor. That should about do it for a system. Who has the plan too put all that stuff together for a metal spray rig? $60 for a unit at a garage sale!!!! Garage sales are almost justification for moving to North America. Well, ..... almost. Gerald --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" wrote: > The US navy was selling off al their oxy acetylene metalspray rigs > and going for the electric rigs, so they may sometimes be found in US > scrapyards, etc.if you know what to look for. > Brent > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Steve Rankin > wrote: > > go to http://www.gordonengland.co.uk/cws.htm for a complete > discription. > > > > > > kendall wrote: > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Courtney Thomas > > > > wrote: > > > > > >>Did you, by any chance, ask "how" the builder(s) actually hot > zinc > > >>coated it ? That is, was it done piecemeal and then assembled, or > what ? > > >> > > >>What exactly was the process and what materials & tools were > used ? > > >> > > >>Appreciatively, > > >>Courtney > > > > > > > > > > > > Many times with large items, they'll zinc coat it the same way > > > you'll tin something with solder, use a torch, rosin or flux then > > > wipe on the zinc, works nicely, used to re-zinc old barn roofs, > and > > > that's how it was done, a regular propane roofer/weedburner torch > > > works well for large areas, a smaller one for 'delicate' areas. > start > > > at the top and work down so you can re-work the runs, place wood > or > > > something down to keep the zinc from hitting concrete, sand works > > > well, clean up drips, melt them into new ingots, and you'll use > less > > > zinc than you think. only do it when it's dry, water will explode > > > spraying hot zinc everywhere (concrete too). > > > > > > ken > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- > unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > | 3886|3886|2004-05-30 02:20:10|chery|why you have to?|why you have to read the Koran 1. Inimitable It dares you to disprove it. How? It says that humans cannot write a book like this even if they pooled all their resources together and got help also from the spirits. The Qur�an said this fourteen hundred years ago and yet no one has been able to disprove it. Billions of books have been written-but not another one like the Qur�an. 2. Incorruptible It is the only religious sacred writing that has been in circulation for such a long time and yet remains as pure as it was in the beginning. The Qur�an was kept intact. Nothing was added to it; nothing was changed in it; and nothing was taken away from it ever since its revelation was completed 1400 years ago. 3. Unsurpassable The Qur�an is God�s final revelation to humankind. God revealed the Torah to Moses, the Psalms to David, the Gospel to Jesus, and finally the Qur�an to Muhammad. Peace be upon Moses, David, Jesus and Muhammad. No other book will come from God to surpass His final revelation. 4. Indisputable The Qur�an withstands the test of time and scrutiny. No one can dispute the truth of this book. It speaks about past history and turns out right. It speaks about the future in prophecies and it turns out right. It mentions details of physical phenomena which were not known to people at the time; yet later scientific discoveries prove that the Qur�an was right all along. Every other book needs to be revised to accord with modern knowledge. The Qur�an alone is never contradicted by a newly discovered scientific fact. 5. Your Roadmap for Life and Afterlife The Qur�an is the best guidebook on how to structure your life. No other book presents such a comprehensive system involving all aspects of human life and endeavor. The Qur�an also points out the way to secure everlasting happiness in the afterlife. It is your roadmap showing how to get to Paradise. 6. God�s Gift of Guidance God has not left you alone. You were made for a reason. God tells you why he made you, what he demands from you and what he has in store for you. If you operate a machine contrary to it�s manufacturer�s specification you will ruin that machine. What about you? Do you have an owner�s manual for yourself? The Qur�an is from your Maker. It is a gift for you to make sure you function for success, lest you fail to function. It is a healing from God. It satisfies the soul, and cleans the heart. It removes doubts and brings peace. 7. Your Calling Card to Communicate with your Lord Humans are social creatures. We love to communicate with other intelligent life. The Qur�an tells us how to communicate with the source of all intelligence and the source of all life-the One God. The Qur�an tells us who God is, by what name we should address Him, and the way in which to communicate with Him. Are these not seven sufficient reasons for reading the Qur�an To discover Islam�Join the Lively Discussions in ImanWay Forums: www.en.imanway.com/index.php For more Information about Islam contact: imanway_qa@... To request your �Free� Copy of the Noble Quran and Books contact: imanway_ibaw@... For more information about Islam: http://www.geocities.com/assila2811/1.html| 3887|3746|2004-05-30 02:56:38|Gerd|Re: flame spraying|I have never seen that done - sounds interesting. Could you tell us a bit more about: How good is it compared to epoxy zink? What preparation is needed? same blasting finish? What are possible disadvantages? What to put on top of it? Thanks Gerd The YAGO PROJECT at http://www.justmueller.com/boats/ --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" wrote: > I once flame sprayed a 36 footer with aluminium. The owner found the > spraygun at a garage sale for $60, then bought the whole rig with all > the bells and whistles used for $200. It took a lot of acetylene and > oxygen, but the wire was cheap. When I began spraying it went on > easily leaving the surface like fine sandpaper. As the gun gradually > clogged up, the surface got gradually rougher and the surface > temperature got hotter, indicating time to take out and clean the > nozzle with a cutting torch tip cleaner. The more often you clean the > tip, the better the job you end up with.It made the steel barely warm > to the touch when the gun was clean. > Aluminium , being lighter is more expensive per pound, but you used > fewer pounds , so cost roughly the same as zinc ,and is tougher and > more long lasting. > It's expensive to have done, but if a bunch of builders get > together and buy the equipment, it can work out much cheaper. > It's an excellent way to do a boat, and will eleiminate almost all > above water maintenance except cosmetic. > I had a couple of anchors done in 1992 and they are only now due > for redoing altho they have never had much painting done on them.It > works well for propane tanks . > Brent > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Steve Rankin > wrote: > > go to http://www.gordonengland.co.uk/cws.htm for a complete > discription. > > > > > > kendall wrote: > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Courtney Thomas > > > > wrote: > > > > > >>Did you, by any chance, ask "how" the builder(s) actually hot > zinc > > >>coated it ? That is, was it done piecemeal and then assembled, or > what ? > > >> > > >>What exactly was the process and what materials & tools were > used ? > > >> > > >>Appreciatively, > > >>Courtney > > > > > > > > > > > > Many times with large items, they'll zinc coat it the same way > > > you'll tin something with solder, use a torch, rosin or flux then > > > wipe on the zinc, works nicely, used to re-zinc old barn roofs, > and > > > that's how it was done, a regular propane roofer/weedburner torch > > > works well for large areas, a smaller one for 'delicate' areas. > start > > > at the top and work down so you can re-work the runs, place wood > or > > > something down to keep the zinc from hitting concrete, sand works > > > well, clean up drips, melt them into new ingots, and you'll use > less > > > zinc than you think. only do it when it's dry, water will explode > > > spraying hot zinc everywhere (concrete too). > > > > > > ken > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- > unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > | 3888|3746|2004-05-30 08:18:46|Gerald Niffenegger|Re: flame spraying|I am also very interested to learn more about the process. I found this site: http://www.sculptor.org/Foundries/MetalSpray.htm It helped me understand the good and bad points of the process. Darn few bad points! Would sure like to hear more from Brent or someone else that has actually done it. At this point I think I have all of the items necessary except the gun and a new wire guide for the wire. The smallest wire that they mention is .080". I could not find a site that sells wire, guns or any of the related equipment. Gerald --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gerd" wrote: > I have never seen that done - sounds interesting. Could you tell us > a bit more about: > How good is it compared to epoxy zink? > What preparation is needed? same blasting finish? > What are possible disadvantages? > What to put on top of it? > > Thanks > Gerd > > The YAGO PROJECT at http://www.justmueller.com/boats/ > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" > wrote: > > I once flame sprayed a 36 footer with aluminium. The owner found > the > > spraygun at a garage sale for $60, then bought the whole rig with > all > > the bells and whistles used for $200. It took a lot of acetylene > and > > oxygen, but the wire was cheap. When I began spraying it went on > > easily leaving the surface like fine sandpaper. As the gun > gradually > > clogged up, the surface got gradually rougher and the surface > > temperature got hotter, indicating time to take out and clean the > > nozzle with a cutting torch tip cleaner. The more often you clean > the > > tip, the better the job you end up with.It made the steel barely > warm > > to the touch when the gun was clean. > > Aluminium , being lighter is more expensive per pound, but you > used > > fewer pounds , so cost roughly the same as zinc ,and is tougher > and > > more long lasting. > > It's expensive to have done, but if a bunch of builders get > > together and buy the equipment, it can work out much cheaper. > > It's an excellent way to do a boat, and will eleiminate almost > all > > above water maintenance except cosmetic. > > I had a couple of anchors done in 1992 and they are only now due > > for redoing altho they have never had much painting done on > them.It > > works well for propane tanks . > > Brent > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Steve Rankin > > wrote: > > > go to http://www.gordonengland.co.uk/cws.htm for a complete > > discription. > > > > > > > > > kendall wrote: > > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Courtney Thomas > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >>Did you, by any chance, ask "how" the builder(s) actually hot > > zinc > > > >>coated it ? That is, was it done piecemeal and then assembled, > or > > what ? > > > >> > > > >>What exactly was the process and what materials & tools were > > used ? > > > >> > > > >>Appreciatively, > > > >>Courtney > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Many times with large items, they'll zinc coat it the same > way > > > > you'll tin something with solder, use a torch, rosin or flux > then > > > > wipe on the zinc, works nicely, used to re-zinc old barn > roofs, > > and > > > > that's how it was done, a regular propane roofer/weedburner > torch > > > > works well for large areas, a smaller one for 'delicate' > areas. > > start > > > > at the top and work down so you can re-work the runs, place > wood > > or > > > > something down to keep the zinc from hitting concrete, sand > works > > > > well, clean up drips, melt them into new ingots, and you'll > use > > less > > > > zinc than you think. only do it when it's dry, water will > explode > > > > spraying hot zinc everywhere (concrete too). > > > > > > > > ken > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- > > unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > | 3889|3746|2004-05-30 10:42:00|Courtney Thomas|Re: epoxy zinc paint|Gerald, If you come up with said "plan", please let me know as I too have "all that stuff" and would like to enable this capability. Is this a duplication of what is done when regalvanizing chain, anchors, etc. ? Cordially, Courtney Gerald Niffenegger wrote: > I have a spool of aluminum wire and a stand alone wire feed on my MIG. > I have an oxygen acetylene torch. I have a compressor. That should > about do it for a system. Who has the plan too put all that stuff > together for a metal spray rig? > $60 for a unit at a garage sale!!!! Garage sales are almost > justification for moving to North America. Well, ..... almost. > Gerald > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" > wrote: > >>The US navy was selling off al their oxy acetylene metalspray rigs >>and going for the electric rigs, so they may sometimes be found in US >>scrapyards, etc.if you know what to look for. >> Brent >> >> >>--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Steve Rankin >>wrote: >> >>>go to http://www.gordonengland.co.uk/cws.htm for a complete >>> >>discription. >> >>> >>>kendall wrote: >>> >>> >>>>--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Courtney Thomas >>>> >> >> >>>>wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>>Did you, by any chance, ask "how" the builder(s) actually hot >>>>> >>zinc >> >>>>>coated it ? That is, was it done piecemeal and then assembled, or >>>>> >>what ? >> >>>>>What exactly was the process and what materials & tools were >>>>> >>used ? >> >>>>>Appreciatively, >>>>>Courtney >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Many times with large items, they'll zinc coat it the same way >>>>you'll tin something with solder, use a torch, rosin or flux then >>>>wipe on the zinc, works nicely, used to re-zinc old barn roofs, >>>> >>and >> >>>>that's how it was done, a regular propane roofer/weedburner torch >>>>works well for large areas, a smaller one for 'delicate' areas. >>>> >>start >> >>>>at the top and work down so you can re-work the runs, place wood >>>> >>or >> >>>>something down to keep the zinc from hitting concrete, sand works >>>>well, clean up drips, melt them into new ingots, and you'll use >>>> >>less >> >>>>zinc than you think. only do it when it's dry, water will explode >>>>spraying hot zinc everywhere (concrete too). >>>> >>>>ken >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com >>>>To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- >>>> >>unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com >> >>>>Yahoo! Groups Links >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > -- s/v Mutiny Rhodes Bounty II lying Oriental, NC WDB5619| 3890|3890|2004-05-30 21:45:41|prairiemaidca|Flame Spray|Hi All: I too was interested in the flame spray Idea after talking to the owner of the 36ft. C.C. Silas Crosby who used this method above the waterline with great sucsess. If you do a Google search with the words flame spray you will have all kinds of info. Martin Forster (Prairie Maid)| 3891|3891|2004-05-30 22:36:49|Glen|help with numbers|I am wondering if someone out there can help me with this problem. I am looking at a set of plans from a designer & the LWL has not been shown on the plans. Is there a formula for which I can input numbers to find out where approx the LWL would be on the hull, or is there a mathematical formula to find out where the hull will sit in the water? Glen| 3892|3890|2004-05-30 22:56:37|silascrosby|Flame Spray|I had my 36' flame-sprayed or "metallized" in 1993. I had the entire exterior from the waterline up done and the inside bilges and surrounding the windows inside. I used zinc. 10 years later I have no rust . I topcoated the original Devoe epoxy last year with another coat of Devoe(Ameron) epoxy purely for cosmetic fading reasons. At the time it cost about $2200 Can. A fellow on a 44' steel Brewer boat,'Kodiak', living in Sidney,Vancouver Is. had the gun and I supplied the acetylene tank. I had it sandblasted earlier in the day ( a hot july day). We sprayed on the 1st coat of epoxy ( according to specs from Artie Bates at Ameron in Vancouver) on the next day( another hot dry day). Probably by the time it was all blasted , flame-sprayed and painted I had spent $ 5000 to $6000 can. In retrospect it was worth it for us. A friend had flame sprayed below the waterline and had big problems with blistering in the first season. Steve.| 3893|3893|2004-05-31 01:15:57|shorinjin01|catamarans|I just discovered origami boats and this group. I did a search on catamarans, but found nothing. Have any been built using this method? Dale| 3894|3891|2004-05-31 01:28:01|vinnie_barberino2000|Re: help with numbers|Use a scale ruler. Steve --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Glen" wrote: > I am wondering if someone out there can help me with this problem. > I am looking at a set of plans from a designer & the LWL has not > been shown on the plans. Is there a formula for which I can input > numbers to find out where approx the LWL would be on the hull, or > is there a mathematical formula to find out where the hull will sit > in the water? > > Glen | 3895|3890|2004-05-31 07:07:11|Gerald Niffenegger|Re: Flame Spray|Here is a site and a lengthy study done for oil platforms: http://www.corrosion.com/thermal.html The way I read it aluminum provides better protection than zinc and would not require paint? It also states that the zinc coat needs to be applied up to 4 times thicker than aluminum? Steve Thank you for your input! I am wondering why you didn't coat the entire inside of your boat? The $2,200 figure you mentioned was for wire and gas? Thanks Gerald --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "silascrosby" wrote: > I had my 36' flame-sprayed or "metallized" in 1993. I had the entire > exterior from the waterline up done and the inside bilges and > surrounding the windows inside. I used zinc. 10 years later I have > no rust . I topcoated the original Devoe epoxy last year with > another coat of Devoe(Ameron) epoxy purely for cosmetic fading > reasons. At the time it cost about $2200 Can. A fellow on a 44' > steel Brewer boat,'Kodiak', living in Sidney,Vancouver Is. had the > gun and I supplied the acetylene tank. I had it sandblasted earlier > in the day ( a hot july day). We sprayed on the 1st coat of epoxy ( > according to specs from Artie Bates at Ameron in Vancouver) on the > next day( another hot dry day). Probably by the time it was all > blasted , flame-sprayed and painted I had spent $ 5000 to $6000 can. > In retrospect it was worth it for us. A friend had flame sprayed > below the waterline and had big problems with blistering in the > first season. Steve. | 3896|3890|2004-05-31 11:11:11|ge@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: Flame Spray|I was talking with another origami builder of the weekend. His latest quote for steel and alloy in BC had alloy slightly cheaper, thickness for thickness. Why not simply build in alloy to start with? Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gerald Niffenegger" To: Sent: Monday, May 31, 2004 4:07 AM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: re:Flame Spray > Here is a site and a lengthy study done for oil platforms: > http://www.corrosion.com/thermal.html > The way I read it aluminum provides better protection than zinc and > would not require paint? It also states that the zinc coat needs to be > applied up to 4 times thicker than aluminum? > Steve > Thank you for your input! I am wondering why you didn't coat the > entire inside of your boat? The $2,200 figure you mentioned was for > wire and gas? > Thanks > Gerald > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "silascrosby" > wrote: > > I had my 36' flame-sprayed or "metallized" in 1993. I had the entire > > exterior from the waterline up done and the inside bilges and > > surrounding the windows inside. I used zinc. 10 years later I have > > no rust . I topcoated the original Devoe epoxy last year with > > another coat of Devoe(Ameron) epoxy purely for cosmetic fading > > reasons. At the time it cost about $2200 Can. A fellow on a 44' > > steel Brewer boat,'Kodiak', living in Sidney,Vancouver Is. had the > > gun and I supplied the acetylene tank. I had it sandblasted earlier > > in the day ( a hot july day). We sprayed on the 1st coat of epoxy ( > > according to specs from Artie Bates at Ameron in Vancouver) on the > > next day( another hot dry day). Probably by the time it was all > > blasted , flame-sprayed and painted I had spent $ 5000 to $6000 can. > > In retrospect it was worth it for us. A friend had flame sprayed > > below the waterline and had big problems with blistering in the > > first season. Steve. > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > | 3897|3890|2004-05-31 11:47:08|Courtney Thomas|Re: Flame Spray|Anyone have ideas on this "blistering below the waterline" problem ? Better yet.....has anyone solved it ? Thank you, Courtney silascrosby wrote: > I had my 36' flame-sprayed or "metallized" in 1993. I had the entire > exterior from the waterline up done and the inside bilges and > surrounding the windows inside. I used zinc. 10 years later I have > no rust . I topcoated the original Devoe epoxy last year with > another coat of Devoe(Ameron) epoxy purely for cosmetic fading > reasons. At the time it cost about $2200 Can. A fellow on a 44' > steel Brewer boat,'Kodiak', living in Sidney,Vancouver Is. had the > gun and I supplied the acetylene tank. I had it sandblasted earlier > in the day ( a hot july day). We sprayed on the 1st coat of epoxy ( > according to specs from Artie Bates at Ameron in Vancouver) on the > next day( another hot dry day). Probably by the time it was all > blasted , flame-sprayed and painted I had spent $ 5000 to $6000 can. > In retrospect it was worth it for us. A friend had flame sprayed > below the waterline and had big problems with blistering in the > first season. Steve. > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > -- s/v Mutiny Rhodes Bounty II lying Oriental, NC WDB5619| 3898|3890|2004-05-31 12:50:21|ge@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: Flame Spray|In salt water, hydrogen gas is released as an anode is sacrificed to protect the steel. Flame sprayed zinc or aluminum operates as an anode, releasing hydrogen which can blister overlying paint. Zinc will be more problematic in this regard than aluminum, because it is electrically further from steel than aluminum. Zinc rich primers are sometimes avoided underwater for this reason. To avoid blistering, you can use coatings such as tin, which function as a cathode, but the coating must be perfect, otherwise the steel will be sacrificed to protect the tin, which make cathode coatings impractical for small boats. Paint will also blister underwater for other causes as well, such as poor adhesion, leading to osmosis and from electrolysis caused by electrical currents in the water. Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Courtney Thomas" To: Sent: Monday, May 31, 2004 9:59 AM Subject: Re: [origamiboats] re:Flame Spray > Anyone have ideas on this "blistering below the waterline" problem ? > > Better yet.....has anyone solved it ? > > Thank you, > Courtney > > > > silascrosby wrote: > > > I had my 36' flame-sprayed or "metallized" in 1993. I had the entire > > exterior from the waterline up done and the inside bilges and > > surrounding the windows inside. I used zinc. 10 years later I have > > no rust . I topcoated the original Devoe epoxy last year with > > another coat of Devoe(Ameron) epoxy purely for cosmetic fading > > reasons. At the time it cost about $2200 Can. A fellow on a 44' > > steel Brewer boat,'Kodiak', living in Sidney,Vancouver Is. had the > > gun and I supplied the acetylene tank. I had it sandblasted earlier > > in the day ( a hot july day). We sprayed on the 1st coat of epoxy ( > > according to specs from Artie Bates at Ameron in Vancouver) on the > > next day( another hot dry day). Probably by the time it was all > > blasted , flame-sprayed and painted I had spent $ 5000 to $6000 can. > > In retrospect it was worth it for us. A friend had flame sprayed > > below the waterline and had big problems with blistering in the > > first season. Steve. > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > s/v Mutiny > Rhodes Bounty II > lying Oriental, NC > WDB5619 > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > | 3899|3890|2004-05-31 12:58:06|Steve Rankin|Re: Flame Spray|My Gazelle is flame sprayed inside and out on the entire hull and decks. I haven't had any blistering after 9 years. Blistering is likely a result of tiny pinholes left after painting. Water gets in and raises the paint. I was prewarned about this by the Hempel folks and took great care to go around and fill the pinholes that I found after spraying the paint. Steve R Courtney Thomas wrote: > Anyone have ideas on this "blistering below the waterline" problem ? > > Better yet.....has anyone solved it ? > > Thank you, > Courtney > > > > silascrosby wrote: > > >>I had my 36' flame-sprayed or "metallized" in 1993. I had the entire >>exterior from the waterline up done and the inside bilges and >>surrounding the windows inside. I used zinc. 10 years later I have >>no rust . I topcoated the original Devoe epoxy last year with >>another coat of Devoe(Ameron) epoxy purely for cosmetic fading >>reasons. At the time it cost about $2200 Can. A fellow on a 44' >>steel Brewer boat,'Kodiak', living in Sidney,Vancouver Is. had the >>gun and I supplied the acetylene tank. I had it sandblasted earlier >>in the day ( a hot july day). We sprayed on the 1st coat of epoxy ( >>according to specs from Artie Bates at Ameron in Vancouver) on the >>next day( another hot dry day). Probably by the time it was all >>blasted , flame-sprayed and painted I had spent $ 5000 to $6000 can. >>In retrospect it was worth it for us. A friend had flame sprayed >>below the waterline and had big problems with blistering in the >>first season. Steve. >> >> >> >> >>To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com >>To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com >>Yahoo! Groups Links >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > | 3900|3890|2004-05-31 13:41:16|Gerd|Re: Flame Spray|Don't know, Greg, probably because: - I can't replace my steel thickness for thickness with alloy - I have to work outside - I like to work with steel and have a good feeling about it - I have no alloy equipment nor experience - I have not got the higher starting sum in cash for materials, tools and shelter That said, I am bginning to discus with some friends here, and It might be that we will start a smaller alloy hull (motor for the river) later this autumn, because I really would like to give it a try. Been cutting plates all weekend, and steel sure is hot - sweated off about 2 kg ;-) Gerd The YAGO PROJECT at http://www.justmueller.com/boats/ --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > I was talking with another origami builder of the weekend. His latest quote for steel and alloy in BC had alloy slightly cheaper, > thickness for thickness. Why not simply build in alloy to start with? > > Greg Elliott > http://www.origamimagic.com > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Gerald Niffenegger" > To: > Sent: Monday, May 31, 2004 4:07 AM > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: re:Flame Spray > > > > Here is a site and a lengthy study done for oil platforms: > > http://www.corrosion.com/thermal.html > > The way I read it aluminum provides better protection than zinc and > > would not require paint? It also states that the zinc coat needs to be > > applied up to 4 times thicker than aluminum? > > Steve > > Thank you for your input! I am wondering why you didn't coat the > > entire inside of your boat? The $2,200 figure you mentioned was for > > wire and gas? > > Thanks > > Gerald > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "silascrosby" > > wrote: > > > I had my 36' flame-sprayed or "metallized" in 1993. I had the entire > > > exterior from the waterline up done and the inside bilges and > > > surrounding the windows inside. I used zinc. 10 years later I have > > > no rust . I topcoated the original Devoe epoxy last year with > > > another coat of Devoe(Ameron) epoxy purely for cosmetic fading > > > reasons. At the time it cost about $2200 Can. A fellow on a 44' > > > steel Brewer boat,'Kodiak', living in Sidney,Vancouver Is. had the > > > gun and I supplied the acetylene tank. I had it sandblasted earlier > > > in the day ( a hot july day). We sprayed on the 1st coat of epoxy ( > > > according to specs from Artie Bates at Ameron in Vancouver) on the > > > next day( another hot dry day). Probably by the time it was all > > > blasted , flame-sprayed and painted I had spent $ 5000 to $6000 can. > > > In retrospect it was worth it for us. A friend had flame sprayed > > > below the waterline and had big problems with blistering in the > > > first season. Steve. > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > | 3901|3901|2004-05-31 14:43:09|Alex|New 36' project under way|Well we did it, your friendly moderator has finally started his own 36 foot steel Brent Swain hull after more than 4 years of putting it off. We are building in a field behind a welder's shop in Courtenay, BC. I have to say, having a semi-retired master welder with nearly 40 years of welding under his belt working in his shop only feet away from me is - how shall I put it - an immense benefit. When you are having trouble working that weld puddle, nothing beats having a skilled welder talking you through it: "okay, slower, slower, no you're dragging it, keep feeding that rod in, good you've got it." I make an effort at keeping my hands mitts of the great tools in his shop, but the temptation is too strong ("Can I pleeeze borrow your 7" grinder?"). Luckily my welder landlord is good-natured and generous! The other great thing is having the designer Brent Swain working with me -- I'm bloody lucky in that. There are many tips that he has showed me, things I'd not have thought of until I'd built 20 boats, which have saved me a lot of trouble. For this reason I am also documenting as many of these tricks and tips on video which I will edit into a little movie as a guide to building these boats, as well as a few things about welding safety, steel handling (to show that you can build the entire hull without the use of a crane, for instance), equipment choices, general welding techniques, fitting out the interiors and a survey of interesting aspects of current boats afloat. The film is a whole other project in itself and I hope to have it ready by September. Today is day 6 of the project and I am completing the stainless steel welding on the sheer-pipes (also called bulwark pipes). The project is at this moment exactly as you see it on the cover photo (took that yesterday), although you can't see the other half-hull. If I complete the ss welding (309 rod) of the sheer-pipe on the other half we may end up pulling both half hulls into shape plus attaching together on the centreline. That said, I should be welding right now, not sitting at this computer in the coffee shop, so I'll now bid you adieu and get on with it! Alex| 3902|3902|2004-05-31 14:44:13|Gerd|New Picture !! ;-)|Great, Alex, keep them coming! For zthe moment, your's looka bou as flat as mine, but that will change soon I hope ! ;-) Gerd The YAGO PROJECT at http://www.justmueller.com/boats/| 3903|3890|2004-05-31 14:56:30|brentswain38|Re: Flame Spray|You wouldn't use the same thickness alloy for a given boat and the welding of alloy is still much more expensive, and finding an antifouling for alloy which won't corrode it is still a problem.Welding of alloy is still much more weather sensitive. I understand that you sail a steel boat because you can't afford an alloy one. I'm also curious to know how many metal boats you've built with your own hands. Brent --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > I was talking with another origami builder of the weekend. His latest quote for steel and alloy in BC had alloy slightly cheaper, > thickness for thickness. Why not simply build in alloy to start with? > > Greg Elliott > http://www.origamimagic.com > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Gerald Niffenegger" > To: > Sent: Monday, May 31, 2004 4:07 AM > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: re:Flame Spray > > > > Here is a site and a lengthy study done for oil platforms: > > http://www.corrosion.com/thermal.html > > The way I read it aluminum provides better protection than zinc and > > would not require paint? It also states that the zinc coat needs to be > > applied up to 4 times thicker than aluminum? > > Steve > > Thank you for your input! I am wondering why you didn't coat the > > entire inside of your boat? The $2,200 figure you mentioned was for > > wire and gas? > > Thanks > > Gerald > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "silascrosby" > > wrote: > > > I had my 36' flame-sprayed or "metallized" in 1993. I had the entire > > > exterior from the waterline up done and the inside bilges and > > > surrounding the windows inside. I used zinc. 10 years later I have > > > no rust . I topcoated the original Devoe epoxy last year with > > > another coat of Devoe(Ameron) epoxy purely for cosmetic fading > > > reasons. At the time it cost about $2200 Can. A fellow on a 44' > > > steel Brewer boat,'Kodiak', living in Sidney,Vancouver Is. had the > > > gun and I supplied the acetylene tank. I had it sandblasted earlier > > > in the day ( a hot july day). We sprayed on the 1st coat of epoxy ( > > > according to specs from Artie Bates at Ameron in Vancouver) on the > > > next day( another hot dry day). Probably by the time it was all > > > blasted , flame-sprayed and painted I had spent $ 5000 to $6000 can. > > > In retrospect it was worth it for us. A friend had flame sprayed > > > below the waterline and had big problems with blistering in the > > > first season. Steve. > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > | 3904|3902|2004-05-31 15:10:15|Gerd|Re: New Picture !! ;-)|Im too tired ;-) should read: for the moment your's looks about as flat as mine... --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gerd" wrote: > Great, Alex, keep them coming! > For zthe moment, your's looka bou as flat as mine, but that will > change soon I hope ! ;-) > > Gerd > > > The YAGO PROJECT at http://www.justmueller.com/boats/ | 3905|3901|2004-05-31 17:55:57|Gerd|Re: New 36' project under way|Alex, welcome to the club if I dare say so, as you have been a much longer standing member than most anyway ;-) I feel with you, but I do envie you The Great Mr Swain in person. With all your work for the group here you sure deserve it ;-) We poor people over here in Europe have to do it all on our own - just like you I was cutting and welding half-hulls today. PLEEEEZE take lots of pictures dayly and put them in the photo section, especially on the pulling and the joining of the halves, ok? Looking forward to the movie, even if that's going to be a bit late for me. Get a good start, and more important, keep the good vibrations all the long long way! Take it easy!! ;-) Gerd http://www.justmueller.com/boats/ --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Alex" wrote: > Well we did it, your friendly moderator has finally started his own > 36 foot steel Brent Swain hull after more than 4 years of putting it > off. We are building in a field behind a welder's shop in Courtenay, > BC. I have to say, having a semi-retired master welder with nearly > 40 years of welding under his belt working in his shop only feet away > from me is - how shall I put it - an immense benefit. When you are > having trouble working that weld puddle, nothing beats having a > skilled welder talking you through it: "okay, slower, slower, no > you're dragging it, keep feeding that rod in, good you've got it." I > make an effort at keeping my hands mitts of the great tools in his > shop, but the temptation is too strong ("Can I pleeeze borrow your 7" > grinder?"). Luckily my welder landlord is good-natured and generous! > > The other great thing is having the designer Brent Swain working with > me -- I'm bloody lucky in that. There are many tips that he has > showed me, things I'd not have thought of until I'd built 20 boats, > which have saved me a lot of trouble. For this reason I am also > documenting as many of these tricks and tips on video which I will > edit into a little movie as a guide to building these boats, as well > as a few things about welding safety, steel handling (to show that > you can build the entire hull without the use of a crane, for > instance), equipment choices, general welding techniques, fitting out > the interiors and a survey of interesting aspects of current boats > afloat. The film is a whole other project in itself and I hope to > have it ready by September. > > Today is day 6 of the project and I am completing the stainless steel > welding on the sheer-pipes (also called bulwark pipes). The project > is at this moment exactly as you see it on the cover photo (took that > yesterday), although you can't see the other half-hull. If I > complete the ss welding (309 rod) of the sheer-pipe on the other half > we may end up pulling both half hulls into shape plus attaching > together on the centreline. That said, I should be welding right > now, not sitting at this computer in the coffee shop, so I'll now bid > you adieu and get on with it! > > Alex | 3906|3890|2004-05-31 20:15:43|ge@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: Flame Spray|In smaller boat sizes steel is thicker than it needs to be to provide a corrosion allowance. You may well be able to replace thickness for thickness. I've seen a number of 50 foot cats come out of Oz done in 3mm alloy (1/8") that worked very well. The loads on those hulls would likely be much greater than a 30 foot monohull. I've built large shelters using plastic poly sheeting for a few hundred dollars. Very handy for keeping the rain off your tools, and the sun off your head. It is a right pain to have to move all your tools and materials under shelter every time in rains, as it does here on the coast more than 200 days of the year. Such a shelter is all you to build in alloy. There are plans available in this group for a low cost inflatable shelter. If you use reinforced plastic sheeting, the shelter can be used afterwards to make the sails for a junk or gaff rig. In fact, you can build in alloy outside, as I have already outlined on this site, without shelter. Only the final welding needs be done under shelter. If anything, alloy is better suited to outside building than steel, because it does not rust when left unprotected. Tools to work alloy are not an extra cost. You will need woodworking tools to do the interior of your boat, which are the same tools your use for alloy. A low powered MIG welder and Argon is not much different in cost than an Arc welder and Oxy torch. MIG wire is cheaper than welding rods. Usually it is the unknowns that keep people from using a new material. You are experienced in steel, so it is only natural to feel more comfortable with the material. Ron is the same way. I am more experienced with wood, and probably feel more comfortable with alloy because it can be worked much the same way. Most people have more experience with wood than steel. Thus, first time builders, that have not done a lot of steel work may find that alloy, not steel is easier to use. Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gerd" To: Sent: Monday, May 31, 2004 10:41 AM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: re:Flame Spray > Don't know, Greg, probably because: > - I can't replace my steel thickness for thickness with alloy > - I have to work outside > - I like to work with steel and have a good feeling about it > - I have no alloy equipment nor experience > - I have not got the higher starting sum in cash for materials, > tools and shelter > > That said, I am bginning to discus with some friends here, and It > might be that we will start a smaller alloy hull (motor for the > river) later this autumn, because I really would like to give it a > try. > Been cutting plates all weekend, and steel sure is hot - sweated off > about 2 kg ;-) > > Gerd > The YAGO PROJECT at http://www.justmueller.com/boats/ > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > > I was talking with another origami builder of the weekend. His > latest quote for steel and alloy in BC had alloy slightly cheaper, > > thickness for thickness. Why not simply build in alloy to start > with? > > > > Greg Elliott > > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Gerald Niffenegger" > > To: > > Sent: Monday, May 31, 2004 4:07 AM > > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: re:Flame Spray > > > > > > > Here is a site and a lengthy study done for oil platforms: > > > http://www.corrosion.com/thermal.html > > > The way I read it aluminum provides better protection than zinc > and > > > would not require paint? It also states that the zinc coat needs > to be > > > applied up to 4 times thicker than aluminum? > > > Steve > > > Thank you for your input! I am wondering why you didn't coat the > > > entire inside of your boat? The $2,200 figure you mentioned was > for > > > wire and gas? > > > Thanks > > > Gerald > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "silascrosby" > > > > wrote: > > > > I had my 36' flame-sprayed or "metallized" in 1993. I had the > entire > > > > exterior from the waterline up done and the inside bilges and > > > > surrounding the windows inside. I used zinc. 10 years later I > have > > > > no rust . I topcoated the original Devoe epoxy last year with > > > > another coat of Devoe(Ameron) epoxy purely for cosmetic fading > > > > reasons. At the time it cost about $2200 Can. A fellow on a 44' > > > > steel Brewer boat,'Kodiak', living in Sidney,Vancouver Is. had > the > > > > gun and I supplied the acetylene tank. I had it sandblasted > earlier > > > > in the day ( a hot july day). We sprayed on the 1st coat of > epoxy ( > > > > according to specs from Artie Bates at Ameron in Vancouver) on > the > > > > next day( another hot dry day). Probably by the time it was all > > > > blasted , flame-sprayed and painted I had spent $ 5000 to > $6000 can. > > > > In retrospect it was worth it for us. A friend had flame > sprayed > > > > below the waterline and had big problems with blistering in the > > > > first season. Steve. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- > unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > | 3907|3890|2004-05-31 20:17:21|ge@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: Flame Spray|I sail a steel boat because I bought it many years ago, when the price differential between alloy and steel was much different. Should I sell a perfectly good boat that has seen me right for many years, and is the prototype for our triple dart designs, just because the prices of alloy and steel have now changed? No, because the past is not the present. If I was buying a used boat today, I would buy steel because steel typically has a low resale value, thus it can often be bought used at bargain prices. We have seen a couple of origami boats advertised recently for considerably less than the cost of replacement. If I was to build a new boat I would build in alloy, because the overall cost (including outfitting) is similar to steel, while the performance is better and the maintenance less. In the long term alloy boats typically hold their value better, should I every want to sell the boat and build another one. By far the bulk of small commercial boats build on this coast are built in alloy. If they actually had the problems suggested, then people would be building in steel not alloy. The simple fact is that for the most part steel construction for small boats is a thing of the past. It has been kept alive for amateur builders only by the "free" cost of doing your own work. However, with the changing cost of materials this advantage is rapidly disappearing. Origami Magic is organized differently than Brent Swain. We have two people doing each boat design. Ron Pearson, my partner is principally the builder, and I am principally the sailor. Ron tells me what works from a builders point of view and I tell him what works from a sailors point of view. However, Ron has also done lots of sailing and I have done lots of building. Thus, we double check each others work to ensure you receive the best possible result. I spent many years racing dinghies, yachts, and sailing offshore with my wife and two children and I know what works in a boat. Ron learned low cost metal boat building firsthand from many of the same builders on the west coast as Brent. As well, Ron has worked professionally building steel boats. His cost saving techniques are similar to Brent's, however to my eye Ron takes a more balanced approach between price, comfort, and performance, which is why I trust my family's life to one of Ron's boats. Low cost boats, flashed together in a few months, from salvaged and used parts are not something to trust with the lives of your loved ones. I guess they are fine for making 5 times your money, but if a car dealer put together cars from used and salvaged parts, and sold them around town, would you want to buy one? Most people would want the cars off the road. Would you want your family to fly in an airplane made as cheaply as possible of mostly salvaged or used parts? A boat is no different. If something critical fails you can't just pull over and wait for AAA. Thus, most people end up spending much more time and money to build an origami boat than the hype would suggest. Most of our customers have already built a Brent boat, and while they believe in the technique, they have found that one design does not suit all. They want a design that better suits their needs, built to higher quality, with patterns to match. What is the use of building a better boat, if in the end it looks homemade? Why build with a pattern that needs a hammer to remove the knuckles, when our computers have already removed them from our patterns? Our patterns allow you to build the better, better boat. Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "brentswain38" To: Sent: Monday, May 31, 2004 11:55 AM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: re:Flame Spray > You wouldn't use the same thickness alloy for a given boat and the > welding of alloy is still much more expensive, and finding an > antifouling for alloy which won't corrode it is still a > problem.Welding of alloy is still much more weather sensitive. I > understand that you sail a steel boat because you can't afford an > alloy one. I'm also curious to know how many metal boats you've built > with your own hands. > Brent > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > > I was talking with another origami builder of the weekend. His > latest quote for steel and alloy in BC had alloy slightly cheaper, > > thickness for thickness. Why not simply build in alloy to start > with? > > > > Greg Elliott > > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Gerald Niffenegger" > > To: > > Sent: Monday, May 31, 2004 4:07 AM > > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: re:Flame Spray > > > > > > > Here is a site and a lengthy study done for oil platforms: > > > http://www.corrosion.com/thermal.html > > > The way I read it aluminum provides better protection than zinc > and > > > would not require paint? It also states that the zinc coat needs > to be > > > applied up to 4 times thicker than aluminum? > > > Steve > > > Thank you for your input! I am wondering why you didn't coat the > > > entire inside of your boat? The $2,200 figure you mentioned was > for > > > wire and gas? > > > Thanks > > > Gerald > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "silascrosby" > > > > wrote: > > > > I had my 36' flame-sprayed or "metallized" in 1993. I had the > entire > > > > exterior from the waterline up done and the inside bilges and > > > > surrounding the windows inside. I used zinc. 10 years later I > have > > > > no rust . I topcoated the original Devoe epoxy last year with > > > > another coat of Devoe(Ameron) epoxy purely for cosmetic fading > > > > reasons. At the time it cost about $2200 Can. A fellow on a 44' > > > > steel Brewer boat,'Kodiak', living in Sidney,Vancouver Is. had > the > > > > gun and I supplied the acetylene tank. I had it sandblasted > earlier > > > > in the day ( a hot july day). We sprayed on the 1st coat of > epoxy ( > > > > according to specs from Artie Bates at Ameron in Vancouver) on > the > > > > next day( another hot dry day). Probably by the time it was all > > > > blasted , flame-sprayed and painted I had spent $ 5000 to $6000 > can. > > > > In retrospect it was worth it for us. A friend had flame sprayed > > > > below the waterline and had big problems with blistering in the > > > > first season. Steve. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- > unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > | 3908|3890|2004-06-01 03:38:31|Gerd|Re: Flame Spray|Greg, I sure would not go anywhere with an amateur built 3 mm alloy hull. As for starting cost: I just got YAGO going with about 1500 US to buy the plates for the hull, a big hammer, couple of chinese come- alongs, clamps and a small ventilated stick welder, on the lawn and with a borrowed oxy rig. This means I can actually start a 31 footer anytime it facies me, without any preparation of the site, without building shelter, from money that leaves hardly a bigger dent in the budget than some electronic houshold equipment or a multimedia computer for the kids, knowing that I can get all the rest of the steel, smaller sheets and profiles and the electrodes and gas as I go along, from the pocketmoney so to say, until the end of the steelworks. I know from my ealier experiences that it will not stay like that, and that there will be bigger jumps to make later that may not be the same in alloy (sandblasting and painting for one thing) but that's a couple of months away, working only on the weekends. I do understand that on the long run, the difference will be smaller and that - given the proper design with structure and plating optimized to the point for alloy by a professional and very experienced designer, preferably welded in best conditions by professional welders - the alloy-boat can be a better, lighter boat. But that was not my point. Gerd The YAGO PROJECT at http;//www.justmueller.com/boats/ --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > In smaller boat sizes steel is thicker than it needs to be to provide a corrosion allowance. You may well be able to replace > thickness for thickness. I've seen a number of 50 foot cats come out of Oz done in 3mm alloy (1/8") that worked very well. The > loads on those hulls would likely be much greater than a 30 foot monohull. > > I've built large shelters using plastic poly sheeting for a few hundred dollars. Very handy for keeping the rain off your tools, > and the sun off your head. It is a right pain to have to move all your tools and materials under shelter every time in rains, as it > does here on the coast more than 200 days of the year. Such a shelter is all you to build in alloy. There are plans available in > this group for a low cost inflatable shelter. If you use reinforced plastic sheeting, the shelter can be used afterwards to make > the sails for a junk or gaff rig. > > In fact, you can build in alloy outside, as I have already outlined on this site, without shelter. Only the final welding needs be > done under shelter. If anything, alloy is better suited to outside building than steel, because it does not rust when left > unprotected. Tools to work alloy are not an extra cost. You will need woodworking tools to do the interior of your boat, which are > the same tools your use for alloy. A low powered MIG welder and Argon is not much different in cost than an Arc welder and Oxy > torch. MIG wire is cheaper than welding rods. > > Usually it is the unknowns that keep people from using a new material. You are experienced in steel, so it is only natural to feel > more comfortable with the material. Ron is the same way. I am more experienced with wood, and probably feel more comfortable with > alloy because it can be worked much the same way. Most people have more experience with wood than steel. Thus, first time > builders, that have not done a lot of steel work may find that alloy, not steel is easier to use. > > Greg Elliott > http://www.origamimagic.com > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Gerd" > To: > Sent: Monday, May 31, 2004 10:41 AM > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: re:Flame Spray > > > > Don't know, Greg, probably because: > > - I can't replace my steel thickness for thickness with alloy > > - I have to work outside > > - I like to work with steel and have a good feeling about it > > - I have no alloy equipment nor experience > > - I have not got the higher starting sum in cash for materials, > > tools and shelter > > > > That said, I am bginning to discus with some friends here, and It > > might be that we will start a smaller alloy hull (motor for the > > river) later this autumn, because I really would like to give it a > > try. > > Been cutting plates all weekend, and steel sure is hot - sweated off > > about 2 kg ;-) > > > > Gerd > > The YAGO PROJECT at http://www.justmueller.com/boats/ > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > > > I was talking with another origami builder of the weekend. His > > latest quote for steel and alloy in BC had alloy slightly cheaper, > > > thickness for thickness. Why not simply build in alloy to start > > with? > > > > > > Greg Elliott > > > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Gerald Niffenegger" > > > To: > > > Sent: Monday, May 31, 2004 4:07 AM > > > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: re:Flame Spray > > > > > > > > > > Here is a site and a lengthy study done for oil platforms: > > > > http://www.corrosion.com/thermal.html > > > > The way I read it aluminum provides better protection than zinc > > and > > > > would not require paint? It also states that the zinc coat needs > > to be > > > > applied up to 4 times thicker than aluminum? > > > > Steve > > > > Thank you for your input! I am wondering why you didn't coat the > > > > entire inside of your boat? The $2,200 figure you mentioned was > > for > > > > wire and gas? > > > > Thanks > > > > Gerald > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "silascrosby" > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > I had my 36' flame-sprayed or "metallized" in 1993. I had the > > entire > > > > > exterior from the waterline up done and the inside bilges and > > > > > surrounding the windows inside. I used zinc. 10 years later I > > have > > > > > no rust . I topcoated the original Devoe epoxy last year with > > > > > another coat of Devoe(Ameron) epoxy purely for cosmetic fading > > > > > reasons. At the time it cost about $2200 Can. A fellow on a 44' > > > > > steel Brewer boat,'Kodiak', living in Sidney,Vancouver Is. had > > the > > > > > gun and I supplied the acetylene tank. I had it sandblasted > > earlier > > > > > in the day ( a hot july day). We sprayed on the 1st coat of > > epoxy ( > > > > > according to specs from Artie Bates at Ameron in Vancouver) on > > the > > > > > next day( another hot dry day). Probably by the time it was all > > > > > blasted , flame-sprayed and painted I had spent $ 5000 to > > $6000 can. > > > > > In retrospect it was worth it for us. A friend had flame > > sprayed > > > > > below the waterline and had big problems with blistering in the > > > > > first season. Steve. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- > > unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > | 3909|3893|2004-06-01 04:43:47|dreemer1962|Re: catamarans|Hi Dale Indeed, archive search doesn't always find words, which stands in previous posts, I don't know why, I had a same problem. Howewer, I found that search does find names of authors every time. There was some discusitions about multyhulls couple of months ago. I think that Denis posted most of the mails about catamarans. Try searching his name. Milan --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "shorinjin01" wrote: > I just discovered origami boats and this group. I did a search on > catamarans, but found nothing. Have any been built using this method? > > Dale | 3910|3901|2004-06-01 05:07:00|dreemer1962|Re: New 36' project under way|Can't wait to see the video, you can put me on the buyers list. Milan --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Alex" wrote: > Well we did it, your friendly moderator has finally started his own > 36 foot steel Brent Swain hull after more than 4 years of putting it > off. We are building in a field behind a welder's shop in Courtenay, > BC. I have to say, having a semi-retired master welder with nearly > 40 years of welding under his belt working in his shop only feet away > from me is - how shall I put it - an immense benefit. When you are > having trouble working that weld puddle, nothing beats having a > skilled welder talking you through it: "okay, slower, slower, no > you're dragging it, keep feeding that rod in, good you've got it." I > make an effort at keeping my hands mitts of the great tools in his > shop, but the temptation is too strong ("Can I pleeeze borrow your 7" > grinder?"). Luckily my welder landlord is good-natured and generous! > > The other great thing is having the designer Brent Swain working with > me -- I'm bloody lucky in that. There are many tips that he has > showed me, things I'd not have thought of until I'd built 20 boats, > which have saved me a lot of trouble. For this reason I am also > documenting as many of these tricks and tips on video which I will > edit into a little movie as a guide to building these boats, as well > as a few things about welding safety, steel handling (to show that > you can build the entire hull without the use of a crane, for > instance), equipment choices, general welding techniques, fitting out > the interiors and a survey of interesting aspects of current boats > afloat. The film is a whole other project in itself and I hope to > have it ready by September. > > Today is day 6 of the project and I am completing the stainless steel > welding on the sheer-pipes (also called bulwark pipes). The project > is at this moment exactly as you see it on the cover photo (took that > yesterday), although you can't see the other half-hull. If I > complete the ss welding (309 rod) of the sheer-pipe on the other half > we may end up pulling both half hulls into shape plus attaching > together on the centreline. That said, I should be welding right > now, not sitting at this computer in the coffee shop, so I'll now bid > you adieu and get on with it! > > Alex | 3911|3734|2004-06-01 05:17:53|dreemer1962|Re: Troller Yacht Ideas|Forgive me if I missed it, but I didn't notice anyone posting this link: http://www.boatbuilding.ws/PwrPlans.htm Milan| 3912|3734|2004-06-01 06:02:09|dreemer1962|Re: Troller Yacht Ideas|The most cost-effective way to achieve relatively high average speeds on long passages for economical powerboat is to minimize drag. That excludes planing and semi displacement hulls. Long, low and narrow, displacement hull is a way to go. Small sails could help fuel economy and improve comfort (damping rolling motion), considerably. This line of thought would be especially good for amateur builders. It's much easier (and more effective), to keep the hull lines simple but add a few meters of waterline length, then to build boats with complicated for and aft sections. Lot of older boat types from the times of engines of much lower power/weight ratio were built like that, for example sardine carriers and older generation of low powered offshore rescue boats. (The second type had ultimate seaworthiness as additional bonus) George Buhler, L. F. Hereshoff and Benford among the others explained how does it work in great detail. Milan --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "David K McComber" wrote: > Hi > > I would hope that you would design your powerboats with a more appropriate > Cp of .64 to .66. These are appropriate for a boat that is expected to be > able to cruse eaconamely at hull speed (a speed/length ratio of 1.4 to 1.5) > which a power boat should easily reach. > > Most sail to power conversions are hopelessly encumbered with a Cp of .54 > to.56, and thus require much more power to reach the speed that the customer > is expecting. > > Keeping the run as long and strait as possible will also help tremendously. > As will keeping the angle of the Quarter Beam Buttock not much over 7 > degrees as this will greatly reduce squatting, which soaks up power. > > > > From looking at your sketches it appears you misses all of the above. > > > > David McComber > > d.mccomber@c... > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: ge@e... [mailto:ge@e...] > Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2004 12:36 PM > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: Troller Yacht Ideas > > > > We have a commission to create a new origami power design. We are currently > at the concept stage, and are seeking additional clients interested in > participating in the new design, in the range of 40-50 feet. > > http://www.origamimagic.com/Design/Bradley50/Bradley50.htm > > Greg Elliott > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > > > ADVERTISEMENT > > /S=1705150872:HM/EXP=1085157633/A=2128215/R=0/SIG=10se96mf6/*http:/c ompanion > .yahoo.com> click here > > > > :HM/A=2128215/rand=381569219> > > > > _____ > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > * To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of > Service. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3913|3890|2004-06-01 08:07:26|Gerald Niffenegger|Re: Flame Spray|On the subject of flame spray. Can anyone direct me to a site where products are sold such as guns and wire. I have yet to find a site with prices. Most sites have an e-mail address for a quote. They must be looking for bigger fish to fry than me. The walls are up for my 45'X20' shed with a 15' ceiling. They will slap the roof on this week and no more tarps. Off to the junk yard. There is a yard across the bay that sells stainless per kilo. Many times new valves etc. but always per kilo and yes I would trust my life and the life of my family to used parts from the junk yard. Used parts, using my head and doing it myself allows me to have a 36' boat instead of a 23' boat. Gerald --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gerd" wrote: > Greg, I sure would not go anywhere with an amateur built 3 mm alloy > hull. > > As for starting cost: I just got YAGO going with about 1500 US to > buy the plates for the hull, a big hammer, couple of chinese come- > alongs, clamps and a small ventilated stick welder, on the lawn and > with a borrowed oxy rig. This means I can actually start a 31 footer > anytime it facies me, without any preparation of the site, without > building shelter, from money that leaves hardly a bigger dent in the > budget than some electronic houshold equipment or a multimedia > computer for the kids, knowing that I can get all the rest of the > steel, smaller sheets and profiles and the electrodes and gas as I > go along, from the pocketmoney so to say, until the end of the > steelworks. > > I know from my ealier experiences that it will not stay like that, > and that there will be bigger jumps to make later that may not be > the same in alloy (sandblasting and painting for one thing) but > that's a couple of months away, working only on the weekends. > > I do understand that on the long run, the difference will be smaller > and that - given the proper design with structure and plating > optimized to the point for alloy by a professional and very > experienced designer, preferably welded in best conditions by > professional welders - the alloy-boat can be a better, lighter boat. > But that was not my point. > > Gerd > > The YAGO PROJECT at http;//www.justmueller.com/boats/ > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > > In smaller boat sizes steel is thicker than it needs to be to > provide a corrosion allowance. You may well be able to replace > > thickness for thickness. I've seen a number of 50 foot cats come > out of Oz done in 3mm alloy (1/8") that worked very well. The > > loads on those hulls would likely be much greater than a 30 foot > monohull. > > > > I've built large shelters using plastic poly sheeting for a few > hundred dollars. Very handy for keeping the rain off your tools, > > and the sun off your head. It is a right pain to have to move all > your tools and materials under shelter every time in rains, as it > > does here on the coast more than 200 days of the year. Such a > shelter is all you to build in alloy. There are plans available in > > this group for a low cost inflatable shelter. If you use > reinforced plastic sheeting, the shelter can be used afterwards to > make > > the sails for a junk or gaff rig. > > > > In fact, you can build in alloy outside, as I have already > outlined on this site, without shelter. Only the final welding > needs be > > done under shelter. If anything, alloy is better suited to > outside building than steel, because it does not rust when left > > unprotected. Tools to work alloy are not an extra cost. You will > need woodworking tools to do the interior of your boat, which are > > the same tools your use for alloy. A low powered MIG welder and > Argon is not much different in cost than an Arc welder and Oxy > > torch. MIG wire is cheaper than welding rods. > > > > Usually it is the unknowns that keep people from using a new > material. You are experienced in steel, so it is only natural to > feel > > more comfortable with the material. Ron is the same way. I am > more experienced with wood, and probably feel more comfortable with > > alloy because it can be worked much the same way. Most people > have more experience with wood than steel. Thus, first time > > builders, that have not done a lot of steel work may find that > alloy, not steel is easier to use. > > > > Greg Elliott > > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Gerd" > > To: > > Sent: Monday, May 31, 2004 10:41 AM > > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: re:Flame Spray > > > > > > > Don't know, Greg, probably because: > > > - I can't replace my steel thickness for thickness with alloy > > > - I have to work outside > > > - I like to work with steel and have a good feeling about it > > > - I have no alloy equipment nor experience > > > - I have not got the higher starting sum in cash for materials, > > > tools and shelter > > > > > > That said, I am bginning to discus with some friends here, and It > > > might be that we will start a smaller alloy hull (motor for the > > > river) later this autumn, because I really would like to give it > a > > > try. > > > Been cutting plates all weekend, and steel sure is hot - sweated > off > > > about 2 kg ;-) > > > > > > Gerd > > > The YAGO PROJECT at http://www.justmueller.com/boats/ > > > > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > > > > I was talking with another origami builder of the weekend. His > > > latest quote for steel and alloy in BC had alloy slightly > cheaper, > > > > thickness for thickness. Why not simply build in alloy to > start > > > with? > > > > > > > > Greg Elliott > > > > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > From: "Gerald Niffenegger" > > > > To: > > > > Sent: Monday, May 31, 2004 4:07 AM > > > > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: re:Flame Spray > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here is a site and a lengthy study done for oil platforms: > > > > > http://www.corrosion.com/thermal.html > > > > > The way I read it aluminum provides better protection than > zinc > > > and > > > > > would not require paint? It also states that the zinc coat > needs > > > to be > > > > > applied up to 4 times thicker than aluminum? > > > > > Steve > > > > > Thank you for your input! I am wondering why you didn't coat > the > > > > > entire inside of your boat? The $2,200 figure you mentioned > was > > > for > > > > > wire and gas? > > > > > Thanks > > > > > Gerald > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "silascrosby" > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > I had my 36' flame-sprayed or "metallized" in 1993. I had > the > > > entire > > > > > > exterior from the waterline up done and the inside bilges > and > > > > > > surrounding the windows inside. I used zinc. 10 years > later I > > > have > > > > > > no rust . I topcoated the original Devoe epoxy last year > with > > > > > > another coat of Devoe(Ameron) epoxy purely for cosmetic > fading > > > > > > reasons. At the time it cost about $2200 Can. A fellow on > a 44' > > > > > > steel Brewer boat,'Kodiak', living in Sidney,Vancouver Is. > had > > > the > > > > > > gun and I supplied the acetylene tank. I had it sandblasted > > > earlier > > > > > > in the day ( a hot july day). We sprayed on the 1st coat of > > > epoxy ( > > > > > > according to specs from Artie Bates at Ameron in > Vancouver) on > > > the > > > > > > next day( another hot dry day). Probably by the time it > was all > > > > > > blasted , flame-sprayed and painted I had spent $ 5000 to > > > $6000 can. > > > > > > In retrospect it was worth it for us. A friend had flame > > > sprayed > > > > > > below the waterline and had big problems with blistering > in the > > > > > > first season. Steve. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > > > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- > > > unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- > unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > | 3914|3890|2004-06-01 08:10:53|dreemer1962|Re: Flame Spray|Hi Greg Thickness of 3 mm is enough to keep water out in normal circumstances, but what about puncture and abrasion resistance, some of the main attractions of metal boats? I would like to know more about that reinforced plastic sheeting which can be used for sail making. What kind of sheeting is that then? Can it be sawn? Milan --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > In smaller boat sizes steel is thicker than it needs to be to provide a corrosion allowance. You may well be able to replace > thickness for thickness. I've seen a number of 50 foot cats come out of Oz done in 3mm alloy (1/8") that worked very well. The > loads on those hulls would likely be much greater than a 30 foot monohull. > > I've built large shelters using plastic poly sheeting for a few hundred dollars. Very handy for keeping the rain off your tools, > and the sun off your head. It is a right pain to have to move all your tools and materials under shelter every time in rains, as it > does here on the coast more than 200 days of the year. Such a shelter is all you to build in alloy. There are plans available in > this group for a low cost inflatable shelter. If you use reinforced plastic sheeting, the shelter can be used afterwards to make > the sails for a junk or gaff rig. > > In fact, you can build in alloy outside, as I have already outlined on this site, without shelter. Only the final welding needs be > done under shelter. If anything, alloy is better suited to outside building than steel, because it does not rust when left > unprotected. Tools to work alloy are not an extra cost. You will need woodworking tools to do the interior of your boat, which are > the same tools your use for alloy. A low powered MIG welder and Argon is not much different in cost than an Arc welder and Oxy > torch. MIG wire is cheaper than welding rods. > > Usually it is the unknowns that keep people from using a new material. You are experienced in steel, so it is only natural to feel > more comfortable with the material. Ron is the same way. I am more experienced with wood, and probably feel more comfortable with > alloy because it can be worked much the same way. Most people have more experience with wood than steel. Thus, first time > builders, that have not done a lot of steel work may find that alloy, not steel is easier to use. > > Greg Elliott > http://www.origamimagic.com > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Gerd" > To: > Sent: Monday, May 31, 2004 10:41 AM > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: re:Flame Spray > > > > Don't know, Greg, probably because: > > - I can't replace my steel thickness for thickness with alloy > > - I have to work outside > > - I like to work with steel and have a good feeling about it > > - I have no alloy equipment nor experience > > - I have not got the higher starting sum in cash for materials, > > tools and shelter > > > > That said, I am bginning to discus with some friends here, and It > > might be that we will start a smaller alloy hull (motor for the > > river) later this autumn, because I really would like to give it a > > try. > > Been cutting plates all weekend, and steel sure is hot - sweated off > > about 2 kg ;-) > > > > Gerd > > The YAGO PROJECT at http://www.justmueller.com/boats/ > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > > > I was talking with another origami builder of the weekend. His > > latest quote for steel and alloy in BC had alloy slightly cheaper, > > > thickness for thickness. Why not simply build in alloy to start > > with? > > > > > > Greg Elliott > > > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Gerald Niffenegger" > > > To: > > > Sent: Monday, May 31, 2004 4:07 AM > > > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: re:Flame Spray > > > > > > > > > > Here is a site and a lengthy study done for oil platforms: > > > > http://www.corrosion.com/thermal.html > > > > The way I read it aluminum provides better protection than zinc > > and > > > > would not require paint? It also states that the zinc coat needs > > to be > > > > applied up to 4 times thicker than aluminum? > > > > Steve > > > > Thank you for your input! I am wondering why you didn't coat the > > > > entire inside of your boat? The $2,200 figure you mentioned was > > for > > > > wire and gas? > > > > Thanks > > > > Gerald > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "silascrosby" > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > I had my 36' flame-sprayed or "metallized" in 1993. I had the > > entire > > > > > exterior from the waterline up done and the inside bilges and > > > > > surrounding the windows inside. I used zinc. 10 years later I > > have > > > > > no rust . I topcoated the original Devoe epoxy last year with > > > > > another coat of Devoe(Ameron) epoxy purely for cosmetic fading > > > > > reasons. At the time it cost about $2200 Can. A fellow on a 44' > > > > > steel Brewer boat,'Kodiak', living in Sidney,Vancouver Is. had > > the > > > > > gun and I supplied the acetylene tank. I had it sandblasted > > earlier > > > > > in the day ( a hot july day). We sprayed on the 1st coat of > > epoxy ( > > > > > according to specs from Artie Bates at Ameron in Vancouver) on > > the > > > > > next day( another hot dry day). Probably by the time it was all > > > > > blasted , flame-sprayed and painted I had spent $ 5000 to > > $6000 can. > > > > > In retrospect it was worth it for us. A friend had flame > > sprayed > > > > > below the waterline and had big problems with blistering in the > > > > > first season. Steve. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- > > unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > | 3915|3915|2004-06-01 10:22:29|Phil S.|Aluminum Vs. Steel|Just my humble opinion on both materials, first a wee bit of backround. I was a US Army airframe mechanic for almost 10 years, I have worked and cut more aluminum than I ever care to see again. First off disimilar metal corosion or eletrolysis is nothing to sneeze at, it can turn good metal to junk in a very short time span. In fact recently an 100+ft aluminum crew boat was for sale in Boats and Harbors. It was being sold for scrap because of electrolysis, the boat was only 8 years old. I frankly never want anything to do with aluminum ever again, I have seen what appear to be good welds were actually junk on ex- ray inspection and testing. The company I work for now does NDI Testing and ex-ray along with ASME code welding. To a man the welders say stay away from aluminum, Unless you are prepared to TIG weld it, a slow and tedious form of welding, forget that. I have access to all the welding equipment you could imagine, I will work in steel. Here is why; 1 There are steel boats in the great lakes that are 70 + years old, still working everyday. 2 I can get new "scrap" steel very inexpensively, The large manfacturing shops will sometimes scrap perfectly good sheet steel if it excess for a completed project. 3 Steel corrodes in a visable, predictable manor, once corrosion starts it is easy to deal with, grind and paint or use Corroseal, and paint. 4 I can repair steel almost anywhere, with a simple stick welding set up hooked to the engine alternator. 5 I like the abrasion and holing resistence of steel, bump off a rock( a very real possibility in the 1000 Islands) and you can pound out the dent with a hammer. Aluminum tears a lot easier than steel, even if you double the thickness. 6 Cutting aluminum with a torch makes a mess, cutting it with common wood working tools really sucks, having tried that and ended up with an arm full of shrapenel from the skill saw. 7 There are no aluminum Ice Breakers. There are other reasons but for the most part I just like steel, I plan on cruising a good part of the year up here and might have to go through some ice. The weather in Upstate NY sucks, I will want to go out and cruise around, safe in my nice warm and comfy wheel house and look at the winter wonderland. Good thing about that is there won't be any noisy jet ski's flying about. Just My Humble Opinion Phil| 3916|3901|2004-06-01 12:30:05|SHANE ROTHWELL|Re: New 36' project under way|Alex, Congrats on getting going on your brentboat!! and yes you are lucky to have 'himself' as a good mate & helping you at this time of the year. When I met Brent in January he mentioned being able to fry an egg on the steel in summertime & wanted no part in it. November through March & that was it. Please put me on the buyers list for a set of the video's you are putting together. It looks like i will be starting one in the next few months but have a number of details to confirm b4 I can take the plunge, but I bought the mig last week..... Best Regards, Shane --- dreemer1962 wrote: --------------------------------- Can't wait to see the video, you can put me on the buyers list. Milan --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Alex" wrote: > Well we did it, your friendly moderator has finally started his own > 36 foot steel Brent Swain hull after more than 4 years of putting it > off. We are building in a field behind a welder's shop in Courtenay, > BC. I have to say, having a semi-retired master welder with nearly > 40 years of welding under his belt working in his shop only feet away > from me is - how shall I put it - an immense benefit. When you are > having trouble working that weld puddle, nothing beats having a > skilled welder talking you through it: "okay, slower, slower, no > you're dragging it, keep feeding that rod in, good you've got it." I > make an effort at keeping my hands mitts of the great tools in his > shop, but the temptation is too strong ("Can I pleeeze borrow your 7" > grinder?"). Luckily my welder landlord is good-natured and generous! > > The other great thing is having the designer Brent Swain working with > me -- I'm bloody lucky in that. There are many tips that he has > showed me, things I'd not have thought of until I'd built 20 boats, > which have saved me a lot of trouble. For this reason I am also > documenting as many of these tricks and tips on video which I will > edit into a little movie as a guide to building these boats, as well > as a few things about welding safety, steel handling (to show that > you can build the entire hull without the use of a crane, for > instance), equipment choices, general welding techniques, fitting out > the interiors and a survey of interesting aspects of current boats > afloat. The film is a whole other project in itself and I hope to > have it ready by September. > > Today is day 6 of the project and I am completing the stainless steel > welding on the sheer-pipes (also called bulwark pipes). The project > is at this moment exactly as you see it on the cover photo (took that > yesterday), although you can't see the other half-hull. If I > complete the ss welding (309 rod) of the sheer-pipe on the other half > we may end up pulling both half hulls into shape plus attaching > together on the centreline. That said, I should be welding right > now, not sitting at this computer in the coffee shop, so I'll now bid > you adieu and get on with it! > > Alex To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT --------------------------------- Yahoo! Groups Links To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. ______________________________________________________________________ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca| 3917|3901|2004-06-01 14:19:17|Courtney Thomas|Re: New 36' project under way|Please put me on the video list too ! Appreciatively, Courtney Alex wrote: > Well we did it, your friendly moderator has finally started his own > 36 foot steel Brent Swain hull after more than 4 years of putting it > off. We are building in a field behind a welder's shop in Courtenay, > BC. I have to say, having a semi-retired master welder with nearly > 40 years of welding under his belt working in his shop only feet away > from me is - how shall I put it - an immense benefit. When you are > having trouble working that weld puddle, nothing beats having a > skilled welder talking you through it: "okay, slower, slower, no > you're dragging it, keep feeding that rod in, good you've got it." I > make an effort at keeping my hands mitts of the great tools in his > shop, but the temptation is too strong ("Can I pleeeze borrow your 7" > grinder?"). Luckily my welder landlord is good-natured and generous! > > The other great thing is having the designer Brent Swain working with > me -- I'm bloody lucky in that. There are many tips that he has > showed me, things I'd not have thought of until I'd built 20 boats, > which have saved me a lot of trouble. For this reason I am also > documenting as many of these tricks and tips on video which I will > edit into a little movie as a guide to building these boats, as well > as a few things about welding safety, steel handling (to show that > you can build the entire hull without the use of a crane, for > instance), equipment choices, general welding techniques, fitting out > the interiors and a survey of interesting aspects of current boats > afloat. The film is a whole other project in itself and I hope to > have it ready by September. > > Today is day 6 of the project and I am completing the stainless steel > welding on the sheer-pipes (also called bulwark pipes). The project > is at this moment exactly as you see it on the cover photo (took that > yesterday), although you can't see the other half-hull. If I > complete the ss welding (309 rod) of the sheer-pipe on the other half > we may end up pulling both half hulls into shape plus attaching > together on the centreline. That said, I should be welding right > now, not sitting at this computer in the coffee shop, so I'll now bid > you adieu and get on with it! > > Alex > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > -- s/v Mutiny Rhodes Bounty II lying Oriental, NC WDB5619| 3918|3915|2004-06-01 14:21:50|richytill|Re: Aluminum Vs. Steel|Phil, I have been in the metal trades since 1967 and for the most part I agree. An aluminium deck would be lighter and easier to maintain and I might consider that option if I were to build again. As far as the body of the hull is concerned; steel makes sense. This subject has been reviewed several times but it is worth repeating that steel is obvious and honest in its' nature--aluminum is not. Aluminum can hide a multitude of defects that steel reveals. rt --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Phil S." wrote: > Just my humble opinion on both materials, first a wee bit of backround. I was a US Army > airframe mechanic for almost 10 years, I have worked and cut more aluminum than I ever > care to see again. First off disimilar metal corosion or eletrolysis is nothing to sneeze at, it > can turn good metal to junk in a very short time span. In fact recently an 100+ft aluminum > crew boat was for sale in Boats and Harbors. It was being sold for scrap because of > electrolysis, the boat was only 8 years old. I frankly never want anything to do with > aluminum ever again, I have seen what appear to be good welds were actually junk on ex- > ray inspection and testing. > > The company I work for now does NDI Testing and ex-ray along with ASME code welding. > To a man the welders say stay away from aluminum, Unless you are prepared to TIG weld > it, a slow and tedious form of welding, forget that. I have access to all the welding > equipment you could imagine, I will work in steel. Here is why; > 1 There are steel boats in the great lakes that are 70 + years old, still working everyday. > 2 I can get new "scrap" steel very inexpensively, The large manfacturing shops will > sometimes scrap perfectly good sheet steel if it excess for a completed project. > 3 Steel corrodes in a visable, predictable manor, once corrosion starts it is easy to deal > with, grind and paint or use Corroseal, and paint. > 4 I can repair steel almost anywhere, with a simple stick welding set up hooked to the > engine alternator. > 5 I like the abrasion and holing resistence of steel, bump off a rock( a very real possibility > in the 1000 Islands) and you can pound out the dent with a hammer. Aluminum tears a lot > easier than steel, even if you double the thickness. > 6 Cutting aluminum with a torch makes a mess, cutting it with common wood working > tools really sucks, having tried that and ended up with an arm full of shrapenel from the > skill saw. > 7 There are no aluminum Ice Breakers. > > There are other reasons but for the most part I just like steel, I plan on cruising a good > part of the year up here and might have to go through some ice. The weather in Upstate > NY sucks, I will want to go out and cruise around, safe in my nice warm and comfy wheel > house and look at the winter wonderland. Good thing about that is there won't be any > noisy jet ski's flying about. > Just My Humble Opinion > Phil | 3919|3901|2004-06-01 14:22:17|richytill|Re: New 36' project under way|Shane, MIG on the inside of your boat can be an advantage--but--are you really going to weld the outside of the hull with wire? rt --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, SHANE ROTHWELL wrote: > Alex, > > Congrats on getting going on your brentboat!! and yes > you are lucky to have 'himself' as a good mate & > helping you at this time of the year. When I met Brent > in January he mentioned being able to fry an egg on > the steel in summertime & wanted no part in it. > November through March & that was it. > > Please put me on the buyers list for a set of the > video's you are putting together. > > It looks like i will be starting one in the next few > months but have a number of details to confirm b4 I > can take the plunge, but I bought the mig last > week..... > > Best Regards, > Shane > > > > > --- dreemer1962 wrote: > --------------------------------- > Can't wait to see the video, you can put me on the > buyers list. > > Milan > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Alex" > wrote: > > Well we did it, your friendly moderator has finally > started his own > > 36 foot steel Brent Swain hull after more than 4 > years of putting > it > > off. We are building in a field behind a welder's > shop in > Courtenay, > > BC. I have to say, having a semi-retired master > welder with nearly > > 40 years of welding under his belt working in his > shop only feet > away > > from me is - how shall I put it - an immense > benefit. When you are > > having trouble working that weld puddle, nothing > beats having a > > skilled welder talking you through it: "okay, > slower, slower, no > > you're dragging it, keep feeding that rod in, good > you've got it." > I > > make an effort at keeping my hands mitts of the > great tools in his > > shop, but the temptation is too strong ("Can I > pleeeze borrow your > 7" > > grinder?"). Luckily my welder landlord is > good-natured and > generous! > > > > The other great thing is having the designer Brent > Swain working > with > > me -- I'm bloody lucky in that. There are many tips > that he has > > showed me, things I'd not have thought of until I'd > built 20 boats, > > which have saved me a lot of trouble. For this > reason I am also > > documenting as many of these tricks and tips on > video which I will > > edit into a little movie as a guide to building > these boats, as > well > > as a few things about welding safety, steel handling > (to show that > > you can build the entire hull without the use of a > crane, for > > instance), equipment choices, general welding > techniques, fitting > out > > the interiors and a survey of interesting aspects of > current boats > > afloat. The film is a whole other project in itself > and I hope to > > have it ready by September. > > > > Today is day 6 of the project and I am completing > the stainless > steel > > welding on the sheer-pipes (also called bulwark > pipes). The project > > is at this moment exactly as you see it on the cover > photo (took > that > > yesterday), although you can't see the other > half-hull. If I > > complete the ss welding (309 rod) of the sheer-pipe > on the other > half > > we may end up pulling both half hulls into shape > plus attaching > > together on the centreline. That said, I should be > welding right > > now, not sitting at this computer in the coffee > shop, so I'll now > bid > > you adieu and get on with it! > > > > Alex > > > > To Post a message, send it to: > origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT > > > --------------------------------- > Yahoo! Groups Links > > To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! > Terms of Service. > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca | 3920|3901|2004-06-01 14:23:52|jumpaltair|Re: New 36' project under way|I'd like to be on the video list too.... Thanks, Peter --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, Courtney Thomas wrote: > Please put me on the video list too ! > > Appreciatively, > Courtney > > > > Alex wrote: > > > Well we did it, your friendly moderator has finally started his own > > 36 foot steel Brent Swain hull after more than 4 years of putting it| 3921|3915|2004-06-01 14:57:53|brentswain38|Re: Aluminum Vs. Steel|With the enormous twisting loads on the hull-deck joint , I'd be reluctant to make the hull deck joint the transfer point between aluminium and steel. Making the transition at the deck-cabinside joint would make more sense structurally, and an aluminium cabin would save a lot of weight. I once suggested this as a way to train aluminium workers on new BC ferries , by building them with steel hulls and aluminium superstructures, saving maintenance and huge amounts of fuel while using well proven steel building techniques for the hulls, eliminating most of the liabilities and re-learning proccess. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "richytill" wrote: > Phil, > > I have been in the metal trades since 1967 and for the most part I > agree. An aluminium deck would be lighter and easier to maintain and > I might consider that option if I were to build again. As far as the > body of the hull is concerned; steel makes sense. This subject has > been reviewed several times but it is worth repeating that steel is > obvious and honest in its' nature--aluminum is not. Aluminum can > hide a multitude of defects that steel reveals. rt > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Phil S." > wrote: > > Just my humble opinion on both materials, first a wee bit of > backround. I was a US Army > > airframe mechanic for almost 10 years, I have worked and cut more > aluminum than I ever > > care to see again. First off disimilar metal corosion or > eletrolysis is nothing to sneeze at, it > > can turn good metal to junk in a very short time span. In fact > recently an 100+ft aluminum > > crew boat was for sale in Boats and Harbors. It was being sold for > scrap because of > > electrolysis, the boat was only 8 years old. I frankly never want > anything to do with > > aluminum ever again, I have seen what appear to be good welds were > actually junk on ex- > > ray inspection and testing. > > > > The company I work for now does NDI Testing and ex-ray along with > ASME code welding. > > To a man the welders say stay away from aluminum, Unless you are > prepared to TIG weld > > it, a slow and tedious form of welding, forget that. I have access > to all the welding > > equipment you could imagine, I will work in steel. Here is why; > > 1 There are steel boats in the great lakes that are 70 + years old, > still working everyday. > > 2 I can get new "scrap" steel very inexpensively, The large > manfacturing shops will > > sometimes scrap perfectly good sheet steel if it excess for a > completed project. > > 3 Steel corrodes in a visable, predictable manor, once corrosion > starts it is easy to deal > > with, grind and paint or use Corroseal, and paint. > > 4 I can repair steel almost anywhere, with a simple stick welding > set up hooked to the > > engine alternator. > > 5 I like the abrasion and holing resistence of steel, bump off a > rock( a very real possibility > > in the 1000 Islands) and you can pound out the dent with a hammer. > Aluminum tears a lot > > easier than steel, even if you double the thickness. > > 6 Cutting aluminum with a torch makes a mess, cutting it with > common wood working > > tools really sucks, having tried that and ended up with an arm full > of shrapenel from the > > skill saw. > > 7 There are no aluminum Ice Breakers. > > > > There are other reasons but for the most part I just like steel, I > plan on cruising a good > > part of the year up here and might have to go through some ice. The > weather in Upstate > > NY sucks, I will want to go out and cruise around, safe in my nice > warm and comfy wheel > > house and look at the winter wonderland. Good thing about that is > there won't be any > > noisy jet ski's flying about. > > Just My Humble Opinion > > Phil | 3922|3915|2004-06-01 15:01:22|brentswain38|Re: Aluminum Vs. Steel|Phil Do you have any more info and suggestions on how to hook up an alternator for use as a welder? Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Phil S." wrote: > Just my humble opinion on both materials, first a wee bit of backround. I was a US Army > airframe mechanic for almost 10 years, I have worked and cut more aluminum than I ever > care to see again. First off disimilar metal corosion or eletrolysis is nothing to sneeze at, it > can turn good metal to junk in a very short time span. In fact recently an 100+ft aluminum > crew boat was for sale in Boats and Harbors. It was being sold for scrap because of > electrolysis, the boat was only 8 years old. I frankly never want anything to do with > aluminum ever again, I have seen what appear to be good welds were actually junk on ex- > ray inspection and testing. > > The company I work for now does NDI Testing and ex-ray along with ASME code welding. > To a man the welders say stay away from aluminum, Unless you are prepared to TIG weld > it, a slow and tedious form of welding, forget that. I have access to all the welding > equipment you could imagine, I will work in steel. Here is why; > 1 There are steel boats in the great lakes that are 70 + years old, still working everyday. > 2 I can get new "scrap" steel very inexpensively, The large manfacturing shops will > sometimes scrap perfectly good sheet steel if it excess for a completed project. > 3 Steel corrodes in a visable, predictable manor, once corrosion starts it is easy to deal > with, grind and paint or use Corroseal, and paint. > 4 I can repair steel almost anywhere, with a simple stick welding set up hooked to the > engine alternator. > 5 I like the abrasion and holing resistence of steel, bump off a rock( a very real possibility > in the 1000 Islands) and you can pound out the dent with a hammer. Aluminum tears a lot > easier than steel, even if you double the thickness. > 6 Cutting aluminum with a torch makes a mess, cutting it with common wood working > tools really sucks, having tried that and ended up with an arm full of shrapenel from the > skill saw. > 7 There are no aluminum Ice Breakers. > > There are other reasons but for the most part I just like steel, I plan on cruising a good > part of the year up here and might have to go through some ice. The weather in Upstate > NY sucks, I will want to go out and cruise around, safe in my nice warm and comfy wheel > house and look at the winter wonderland. Good thing about that is there won't be any > noisy jet ski's flying about. > Just My Humble Opinion > Phil | 3923|3890|2004-06-01 15:22:07|ge@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: Flame Spray|Hi Gerd, ho, ho, ho. Lots of people never go anywhere in an amateur built boat, regardless of material! Economical is better than cheap. Otherwise, people that shopped in Wal-mart would all be millionaires. There are lots of solutions to going boating. Here is one that worked for me: I bought one offshore boat in a divorce sale. The couple had broken up from the stress of going offshore and just wanted to dump the boat. I borrowed the money from the bank against the boat, plus extra to make the payments (zero budget impact). I was sailing immediately, and spent the first year sailing locally, and then next two years sailing in California and Mexico. I sold the boat after doing a bunch of fix-ups and ended up with enough cash in my pocket to pay for my next boat outright. Lots of people promote zero down-payment real estate. I simply took their advice and applied it to boats, and got cruising immediately. The 3mm x 50 foot cats are the most successful boats in the charter fleet in Thailand. They do virtually all the diving charters into Myanmar and the Andaman's. I also thought 3mm was light, but one of the owners flew into Vancouver 2 weeks ago and we had him over to dinner. He's researched the boats pretty carefully. I think we forget that small steel boats are usually over-strong, to provide corrosion resistance, which is misleading when we look at alloy. Alloy is plenty strong, and more than anything hull thickness depends on the spacing of the longitudinals, which are not limited in origami. If my schedule permits I'll be doing a passage on this boat from the Philippines to Thailand this fall, so I'll let you know. I spent time with one of the builders last time I was in Thailand. He does one boat every two years, and had just arrived with his latest boat. He spends one year building the boat with a helper in Oz. The next year he spends cruising Oz, Indonesia, and finally to Thailand where he sells the boat into the charter fleet. His cost to completion, fully outfitted is $200,000, and he gets $400,000 for his boats in Thailand. Last I heard he has orders for 3 boats, but he would rather be sailing than building, so he will continue doing only one boat every other year. Still, not a bad return for an amateur builder. Gerd, if I understand you, you are saying that steel is the best way for YOU to build an origami boat. I agree. However, this is no reason to assume that everyone is the same. What I am saying is that everyone is different, and different people have different needs and requirements. For some people steel is best, for others alloy is best. Does this seem reasonable? That for some people steel is a better solution, and for other people alloy is a better solution? If we agree that for some people alloy provides a better solution, then my interest in promoting alloy is to come up with the most economical way for amateurs to build origami boats in alloy. I like the material because it reminds me a lot of plywood. It is clean, you use the same tools, it works and handles much the same, and the MIG welder is like a super strength, super fast glue gun. A lot of people have more experience with plywood than steel, and are probably going to take to alloy faster than experienced steel workers. For many boaters, comfort and performance are equally as important as price. Not everyone wants to take their loved one's boating in the cheapest boat possible. They want mix of economy, comfort, and performance, which may be better addressed by alloy. If we simply look at the cheapest solution in steel, then automatically we limit the appeal of origami, when we should be expanding it. Those people that have worked with steel, but not with alloy, are talking through their hats. We have alloy origami boats out there now, that have been proven offshore. To me, origami makes great looking boats, for a wide range of applications. There are a lot of people that would be very happy with an origami boat, but will decide it is not for them simply because they don't want to deal with steel, and the problems associated with rust. This is why I have laid out how amateurs can build reliable hulls in alloy - to expand the popularity of origami. Best of luck on the new boat. Steel and alloy, they are both great materials. I'm off pouring cement for the next few days, so people are welcome to rubbish alloy for amatuers if they want, without contradiction. Keep in mind, in doing so you are limiting the appeal of origami to only those people willing to build in steel. Lots of boaters know that rust never sleeps. It isn't what they want. They want a metal boat that doesn't rust. If you rubbish alloy for building in origami, they are not going to adopt origami, limiting its acceptance. Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gerd" To: Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2004 12:37 AM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: re:Flame Spray > Greg, I sure would not go anywhere with an amateur built 3 mm alloy > hull. > > As for starting cost: I just got YAGO going with about 1500 US to > buy the plates for the hull, a big hammer, couple of chinese come- > alongs, clamps and a small ventilated stick welder, on the lawn and > with a borrowed oxy rig. This means I can actually start a 31 footer > anytime it facies me, without any preparation of the site, without > building shelter, from money that leaves hardly a bigger dent in the > budget than some electronic houshold equipment or a multimedia > computer for the kids, knowing that I can get all the rest of the > steel, smaller sheets and profiles and the electrodes and gas as I > go along, from the pocketmoney so to say, until the end of the > steelworks. > > I know from my ealier experiences that it will not stay like that, > and that there will be bigger jumps to make later that may not be > the same in alloy (sandblasting and painting for one thing) but > that's a couple of months away, working only on the weekends. > > I do understand that on the long run, the difference will be smaller > and that - given the proper design with structure and plating > optimized to the point for alloy by a professional and very > experienced designer, preferably welded in best conditions by > professional welders - the alloy-boat can be a better, lighter boat. > But that was not my point. > > Gerd > > The YAGO PROJECT at http;//www.justmueller.com/boats/ > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > > In smaller boat sizes steel is thicker than it needs to be to > provide a corrosion allowance. You may well be able to replace > > thickness for thickness. I've seen a number of 50 foot cats come > out of Oz done in 3mm alloy (1/8") that worked very well. The > > loads on those hulls would likely be much greater than a 30 foot > monohull. > > > > I've built large shelters using plastic poly sheeting for a few > hundred dollars. Very handy for keeping the rain off your tools, > > and the sun off your head. It is a right pain to have to move all > your tools and materials under shelter every time in rains, as it > > does here on the coast more than 200 days of the year. Such a > shelter is all you to build in alloy. There are plans available in > > this group for a low cost inflatable shelter. If you use > reinforced plastic sheeting, the shelter can be used afterwards to > make > > the sails for a junk or gaff rig. > > > > In fact, you can build in alloy outside, as I have already > outlined on this site, without shelter. Only the final welding > needs be > > done under shelter. If anything, alloy is better suited to > outside building than steel, because it does not rust when left > > unprotected. Tools to work alloy are not an extra cost. You will > need woodworking tools to do the interior of your boat, which are > > the same tools your use for alloy. A low powered MIG welder and > Argon is not much different in cost than an Arc welder and Oxy > > torch. MIG wire is cheaper than welding rods. > > > > Usually it is the unknowns that keep people from using a new > material. You are experienced in steel, so it is only natural to > feel > > more comfortable with the material. Ron is the same way. I am > more experienced with wood, and probably feel more comfortable with > > alloy because it can be worked much the same way. Most people > have more experience with wood than steel. Thus, first time > > builders, that have not done a lot of steel work may find that > alloy, not steel is easier to use. > > > > Greg Elliott > > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Gerd" > > To: > > Sent: Monday, May 31, 2004 10:41 AM > > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: re:Flame Spray > > > > > > > Don't know, Greg, probably because: > > > - I can't replace my steel thickness for thickness with alloy > > > - I have to work outside > > > - I like to work with steel and have a good feeling about it > > > - I have no alloy equipment nor experience > > > - I have not got the higher starting sum in cash for materials, > > > tools and shelter > > > > > > That said, I am bginning to discus with some friends here, and It > > > might be that we will start a smaller alloy hull (motor for the > > > river) later this autumn, because I really would like to give it > a > > > try. > > > Been cutting plates all weekend, and steel sure is hot - sweated > off > > > about 2 kg ;-) > > > > > > Gerd > > > The YAGO PROJECT at http://www.justmueller.com/boats/ > > > > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > > > > I was talking with another origami builder of the weekend. His > > > latest quote for steel and alloy in BC had alloy slightly > cheaper, > > > > thickness for thickness. Why not simply build in alloy to > start > > > with? > > > > > > > > Greg Elliott > > > > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > From: "Gerald Niffenegger" > > > > To: > > > > Sent: Monday, May 31, 2004 4:07 AM > > > > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: re:Flame Spray > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here is a site and a lengthy study done for oil platforms: > > > > > http://www.corrosion.com/thermal.html > > > > > The way I read it aluminum provides better protection than > zinc > > > and > > > > > would not require paint? It also states that the zinc coat > needs > > > to be > > > > > applied up to 4 times thicker than aluminum? > > > > > Steve > > > > > Thank you for your input! I am wondering why you didn't coat > the > > > > > entire inside of your boat? The $2,200 figure you mentioned > was > > > for > > > > > wire and gas? > > > > > Thanks > > > > > Gerald > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "silascrosby" > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > I had my 36' flame-sprayed or "metallized" in 1993. I had > the > > > entire > > > > > > exterior from the waterline up done and the inside bilges > and > > > > > > surrounding the windows inside. I used zinc. 10 years > later I > > > have > > > > > > no rust . I topcoated the original Devoe epoxy last year > with > > > > > > another coat of Devoe(Ameron) epoxy purely for cosmetic > fading > > > > > > reasons. At the time it cost about $2200 Can. A fellow on > a 44' > > > > > > steel Brewer boat,'Kodiak', living in Sidney,Vancouver Is. > had > > > the > > > > > > gun and I supplied the acetylene tank. I had it sandblasted > > > earlier > > > > > > in the day ( a hot july day). We sprayed on the 1st coat of > > > epoxy ( > > > > > > according to specs from Artie Bates at Ameron in > Vancouver) on > > > the > > > > > > next day( another hot dry day). Probably by the time it > was all > > > > > > blasted , flame-sprayed and painted I had spent $ 5000 to > > > $6000 can. > > > > > > In retrospect it was worth it for us. A friend had flame > > > sprayed > > > > > > below the waterline and had big problems with blistering > in the > > > > > > first season. Steve. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > > > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- > > > unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- > unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > | 3924|3890|2004-06-01 15:26:47|ge@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: Flame Spray|Small boats are routinely made in 3mm alloy and thinner. In a collision, alloy hulls tend to crumple but not leak. Steel hulls tend to crack, especially in colder climates. Steel is best for abrasion on hard rocks, but alloy is all you need for coral. In a collision with a ship, you are most likely to get rolled under, regardless of hull material. Whether 3mm alloy would be sufficient in a boat cannot be determined without knowing the specifics of the boat. In general, hull thickness is determined by the spacing of the longitudinals, which is not limited in origami. Small steel boats are usually build over-strong to provide corrosion resistance. We sailed with a steel 33 footer, build professionally in 1/8" (3mm) steel. This was a fairly new boat (7 years), and when it reached Oz is was blasted and repainted in preparation for being shipped back to Canada. Numerous holes were discovered in the hull below the waterline, where the hull had corroded through. This boat could have sunk without warning at any time. However, building a boat over-strong does not necessarily make it safer. The extra weight can often make it less safe. Sinking by the head is the most common cause of loss in small boats, which is often ignored by promoters of metal boats. There are probably more sailboats in Indonesia than any other place on earth. Maybe more than all countries on earth combined. We have had literally thousands of outrigger canoes come off the beach and sail with us as we passed by some of the remote islands in eastern Indonesia. They all use sails made of the reinforced plastic tarp material. It can be bought in large bolts just like fabric, and sew with a standard sewing machine. One boat we sailed with gave away an old jib they had to an Indonesian gaff rigged timber carrier to replace their headsail. The indo crew promptly cut up the sail cloth to make a sun shade, preferring their plastic sails to dacron (which is also plastic). The tarps do not last as long as dacron, are not as sun resistant, but they are usually good for a couple of years, and when they are retired they form the patterns for the next sails. Ron, on one of his boats built the junk rigged sails from tarp material. I believe Allen Farrell also built China Cloud under tarps, and then sewed these up to make the sails. Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "dreemer1962" To: Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2004 5:10 AM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: re:Flame Spray > Hi Greg > > Thickness of 3 mm is enough to keep water out in normal > circumstances, but what about puncture and abrasion resistance, some > of the main attractions of metal boats? > > I would like to know more about that reinforced plastic sheeting > which can be used for sail making. What kind of sheeting is that > then? Can it be sawn? > > Milan > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > > In smaller boat sizes steel is thicker than it needs to be to > provide a corrosion allowance. You may well be able to replace > > thickness for thickness. I've seen a number of 50 foot cats come > out of Oz done in 3mm alloy (1/8") that worked very well. The > > loads on those hulls would likely be much greater than a 30 foot > monohull. > > > > I've built large shelters using plastic poly sheeting for a few > hundred dollars. Very handy for keeping the rain off your tools, > > and the sun off your head. It is a right pain to have to move all > your tools and materials under shelter every time in rains, as it > > does here on the coast more than 200 days of the year. Such a > shelter is all you to build in alloy. There are plans available in > > this group for a low cost inflatable shelter. If you use > reinforced plastic sheeting, the shelter can be used afterwards to > make > > the sails for a junk or gaff rig. > > > > In fact, you can build in alloy outside, as I have already outlined > on this site, without shelter. Only the final welding needs be > > done under shelter. If anything, alloy is better suited to outside > building than steel, because it does not rust when left > > unprotected. Tools to work alloy are not an extra cost. You will > need woodworking tools to do the interior of your boat, which are > > the same tools your use for alloy. A low powered MIG welder and > Argon is not much different in cost than an Arc welder and Oxy > > torch. MIG wire is cheaper than welding rods. > > > > Usually it is the unknowns that keep people from using a new > material. You are experienced in steel, so it is only natural to feel > > more comfortable with the material. Ron is the same way. I am > more experienced with wood, and probably feel more comfortable with > > alloy because it can be worked much the same way. Most people have > more experience with wood than steel. Thus, first time > > builders, that have not done a lot of steel work may find that > alloy, not steel is easier to use. > > > > Greg Elliott > > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Gerd" > > To: > > Sent: Monday, May 31, 2004 10:41 AM > > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: re:Flame Spray > > > > > > > Don't know, Greg, probably because: > > > - I can't replace my steel thickness for thickness with alloy > > > - I have to work outside > > > - I like to work with steel and have a good feeling about it > > > - I have no alloy equipment nor experience > > > - I have not got the higher starting sum in cash for materials, > > > tools and shelter > > > > > > That said, I am bginning to discus with some friends here, and It > > > might be that we will start a smaller alloy hull (motor for the > > > river) later this autumn, because I really would like to give it a > > > try. > > > Been cutting plates all weekend, and steel sure is hot - sweated > off > > > about 2 kg ;-) > > > > > > Gerd > > > The YAGO PROJECT at http://www.justmueller.com/boats/ > > > > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > > > > I was talking with another origami builder of the weekend. His > > > latest quote for steel and alloy in BC had alloy slightly cheaper, > > > > thickness for thickness. Why not simply build in alloy to start > > > with? > > > > > > > > Greg Elliott > > > > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > From: "Gerald Niffenegger" > > > > To: > > > > Sent: Monday, May 31, 2004 4:07 AM > > > > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: re:Flame Spray > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here is a site and a lengthy study done for oil platforms: > > > > > http://www.corrosion.com/thermal.html > > > > > The way I read it aluminum provides better protection than > zinc > > > and > > > > > would not require paint? It also states that the zinc coat > needs > > > to be > > > > > applied up to 4 times thicker than aluminum? > > > > > Steve > > > > > Thank you for your input! I am wondering why you didn't coat > the > > > > > entire inside of your boat? The $2,200 figure you mentioned > was > > > for > > > > > wire and gas? > > > > > Thanks > > > > > Gerald > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "silascrosby" > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > I had my 36' flame-sprayed or "metallized" in 1993. I had > the > > > entire > > > > > > exterior from the waterline up done and the inside bilges > and > > > > > > surrounding the windows inside. I used zinc. 10 years later > I > > > have > > > > > > no rust . I topcoated the original Devoe epoxy last year > with > > > > > > another coat of Devoe(Ameron) epoxy purely for cosmetic > fading > > > > > > reasons. At the time it cost about $2200 Can. A fellow on a > 44' > > > > > > steel Brewer boat,'Kodiak', living in Sidney,Vancouver Is. > had > > > the > > > > > > gun and I supplied the acetylene tank. I had it sandblasted > > > earlier > > > > > > in the day ( a hot july day). We sprayed on the 1st coat of > > > epoxy ( > > > > > > according to specs from Artie Bates at Ameron in Vancouver) > on > > > the > > > > > > next day( another hot dry day). Probably by the time it was > all > > > > > > blasted , flame-sprayed and painted I had spent $ 5000 to > > > $6000 can. > > > > > > In retrospect it was worth it for us. A friend had flame > > > sprayed > > > > > > below the waterline and had big problems with blistering in > the > > > > > > first season. Steve. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > > > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- > > > unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- > unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > | 3925|3915|2004-06-01 16:59:53|Phil S.|Re: Aluminum Vs. Steel|I have seen it posted several times and one of the guys here at work but a prtable welder with a small gas lawn mower engine and some truck parts, here is a link to one of the descriptions I found on the internet.. http://www.sunnyjohn.com/photos/devices_tools/dt_vw_welder/ Thanks Phil --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" wrote: > Phil > Do you have any more info and suggestions on how to hook up an > alternator for use as a welder? > Brent Swain > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Phil S." > wrote: > > Just my humble opinion on both materials, first a wee bit of > backround. I was a US Army > > airframe mechanic for almost 10 years, I have worked and cut more > aluminum than I ever > > care to see again. First off disimilar metal corosion or > eletrolysis is nothing to sneeze at, it > > can turn good metal to junk in a very short time span. In fact > recently an 100+ft aluminum > > crew boat was for sale in Boats and Harbors. It was being sold for > scrap because of > > electrolysis, the boat was only 8 years old. I frankly never want > anything to do with > > aluminum ever again, I have seen what appear to be good welds were > actually junk on ex- > > ray inspection and testing. > > > > The company I work for now does NDI Testing and ex-ray along with > ASME code welding. > > To a man the welders say stay away from aluminum, Unless you are > prepared to TIG weld > > it, a slow and tedious form of welding, forget that. I have access > to all the welding > > equipment you could imagine, I will work in steel. Here is why; > > 1 There are steel boats in the great lakes that are 70 + years old, > still working everyday. > > 2 I can get new "scrap" steel very inexpensively, The large > manfacturing shops will > > sometimes scrap perfectly good sheet steel if it excess for a > completed project. > > 3 Steel corrodes in a visable, predictable manor, once corrosion > starts it is easy to deal > > with, grind and paint or use Corroseal, and paint. > > 4 I can repair steel almost anywhere, with a simple stick welding > set up hooked to the > > engine alternator. > > 5 I like the abrasion and holing resistence of steel, bump off a > rock( a very real possibility > > in the 1000 Islands) and you can pound out the dent with a hammer. > Aluminum tears a lot > > easier than steel, even if you double the thickness. > > 6 Cutting aluminum with a torch makes a mess, cutting it with > common wood working > > tools really sucks, having tried that and ended up with an arm full > of shrapenel from the > > skill saw. > > 7 There are no aluminum Ice Breakers. > > > > There are other reasons but for the most part I just like steel, I > plan on cruising a good > > part of the year up here and might have to go through some ice. The > weather in Upstate > > NY sucks, I will want to go out and cruise around, safe in my nice > warm and comfy wheel > > house and look at the winter wonderland. Good thing about that is > there won't be any > > noisy jet ski's flying about. > > Just My Humble Opinion > > Phil | 3926|3890|2004-06-01 19:08:32|Gerd|Re: Flame Spray|Greg, quite frankly, I don't give a damn what lots of people do or don't do. I did what I wanted to do most of the time, bought about half a dozen different boats in my life , sailed and sold them, build four steel hulls, helped on dozens of others of all sorts of materials including c-flex, ferro, WEST and several alloy boats, and sailed a lot more boats than all of that together either for fun or for money. All that exclusively occupied my life for almost 20 years, during which time I did nothing but boats one way or the other. Didn't even have time to work, and before you ask, no, didn't make any money in te bank either ;-) I think I have a pretty good and clear idea of what works for me, and will say so - but I do not try to convince everybody else around claiming that I am a professional. A professional designer or builder or welder is not just somebody who has a diploma or built a couple of boats or simply gets paid for what he does - a professional in my mind is somebody who is called a professional by a lot of others for a very long time. I am an amateur and well aware of it. 3 mm steel is overstrong for YAGO, thats right. That's why I like it. I personally would not take "loved ones", as you like to quote so frequently when talking about "cheap" boats, anywhere in a 3 mm alloy hull build buy amateurs like us - THAT, Greg, seems to me outright bad, dangerous and unprofessional advice in a forum for amateur boat construction. That there are light big 3mm alloy cats being built for good re-sale to charterfleets by an amateur in Thailand is for me absolutely of no interest other than anecdotical. Sure they will sail nicely, and the guy seems to have agood life, but I hope you will not hit anything on your trip ;-) I do not think that that means that I am "rubbishing" origami, because I, at this moment, invest MY OWN money (luckily not much of it..) into my own project, build my fifth boat with my own hands, and I am going for Origami. Greg, I sometimes think there are some people here wishing you would do the same, preferably in alloy ;-) Otherwise I repeat, I do think that alloy can produce better, lighter boats - if built either pretty much on the safe and strong side by amateurs (and thus expensive) or optimized for weight/strength/perfomance by professional builders, certified welders, x-rayed and whatever... and there again we are way off budget compared to an amateur steel hull. Please understand, that that I am NOT against alloy. Yes, I want it cheap, because I fail to see what's wrong in taking my loved ones sailing in a cheap boat if there's enough left for good, simple, solid eqipment and some nice food and drink ;-) Your argument that "economical is better than cheap" plus then the old wall-mart-millionaire argument ist just mean. Everybody knows that driving a Ferrari is cheaper in the end than driving a Civic because on the resale you get so much more cash. It's always economically better to be rich. The problem is of course that nobody ever explained that to these dumb idiots that are still running around the wal-marts, trying to make ends meet, and that never understand that they could all be millionaires if they only visited origami-yahoo more often... ;-) Gerd The YAGO PROJECT at http://www.justmueller.com/boats/ --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > Hi Gerd, ho, ho, ho. Lots of people never go anywhere in an amateur built boat, regardless of material! Economical is better than > cheap. Otherwise, people that shopped in Wal-mart would all be millionaires. There are lots of solutions to going boating. Here > is one that worked for me: > > I bought one offshore boat in a divorce sale. The couple had broken up from the stress of going offshore and just wanted to > dump the boat. I borrowed the money from the bank against the boat, plus extra to make the payments (zero budget impact). I was > sailing immediately, and spent the first year sailing locally, and then next two years sailing in California and Mexico. I sold the > boat after doing a bunch of fix-ups and ended up with enough cash in my pocket to pay for my next boat outright. Lots of people > promote zero down-payment real estate. I simply took their advice and applied it to boats, and got cruising immediately. > > The 3mm x 50 foot cats are the most successful boats in the charter fleet in Thailand. They do virtually all the diving charters > into Myanmar and the Andaman's. I also thought 3mm was light, but one of the owners flew into Vancouver 2 weeks ago and we had him > over to dinner. He's researched the boats pretty carefully. I think we forget that small steel boats are usually over-strong, to > provide corrosion resistance, which is misleading when we look at alloy. Alloy is plenty strong, and more than anything hull > thickness depends on the spacing of the longitudinals, which are not limited in origami. If my schedule permits I'll be doing a > passage on this boat from the Philippines to Thailand this fall, so I'll let you know. > > I spent time with one of the builders last time I was in Thailand. He does one boat every two years, and had just arrived with his > latest boat. He spends one year building the boat with a helper in Oz. The next year he spends cruising Oz, Indonesia, and finally > to Thailand where he sells the boat into the charter fleet. His cost to completion, fully outfitted is $200,000, and he gets > $400,000 for his boats in Thailand. Last I heard he has orders for 3 boats, but he would rather be sailing than building, so he > will continue doing only one boat every other year. Still, not a bad return for an amateur builder. > > Gerd, if I understand you, you are saying that steel is the best way for YOU to build an origami boat. I agree. However, this is > no reason to assume that everyone is the same. What I am saying is that everyone is different, and different people have different > needs and requirements. For some people steel is best, for others alloy is best. Does this seem reasonable? That for some people > steel is a better solution, and for other people alloy is a better solution? > > If we agree that for some people alloy provides a better solution, then my interest in promoting alloy is to come up with the most > economical way for amateurs to build origami boats in alloy. I like the material because it reminds me a lot of plywood. It is > clean, you use the same tools, it works and handles much the same, and the MIG welder is like a super strength, super fast glue gun. > A lot of people have more experience with plywood than steel, and are probably going to take to alloy faster than experienced steel > workers. > > For many boaters, comfort and performance are equally as important as price. Not everyone wants to take their loved one's boating > in the cheapest boat possible. They want mix of economy, comfort, and performance, which may be better addressed by alloy. If we > simply look at the cheapest solution in steel, then automatically we limit the appeal of origami, when we should be expanding it. > Those people that have worked with steel, but not with alloy, are talking through their hats. We have alloy origami boats out there > now, that have been proven offshore. > > To me, origami makes great looking boats, for a wide range of applications. There are a lot of people that would be very happy with > an origami boat, but will decide it is not for them simply because they don't want to deal with steel, and the problems associated > with rust. This is why I have laid out how amateurs can build reliable hulls in alloy - to expand the popularity of origami. > > Best of luck on the new boat. Steel and alloy, they are both great materials. I'm off pouring cement for the next few days, so > people are welcome to rubbish alloy for amatuers if they want, without contradiction. Keep in mind, in doing so you are limiting > the appeal of origami to only those people willing to build in steel. Lots of boaters know that rust never sleeps. It isn't what > they want. They want a metal boat that doesn't rust. If you rubbish alloy for building in origami, they are not going to adopt > origami, limiting its acceptance. > > Greg Elliott > http://www.origamimagic.com > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Gerd" > To: > Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2004 12:37 AM > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: re:Flame Spray > > > > Greg, I sure would not go anywhere with an amateur built 3 mm alloy > > hull. > > > > As for starting cost: I just got YAGO going with about 1500 US to > > buy the plates for the hull, a big hammer, couple of chinese come- > > alongs, clamps and a small ventilated stick welder, on the lawn and > > with a borrowed oxy rig. This means I can actually start a 31 footer > > anytime it facies me, without any preparation of the site, without > > building shelter, from money that leaves hardly a bigger dent in the > > budget than some electronic houshold equipment or a multimedia > > computer for the kids, knowing that I can get all the rest of the > > steel, smaller sheets and profiles and the electrodes and gas as I > > go along, from the pocketmoney so to say, until the end of the > > steelworks. > > > > I know from my ealier experiences that it will not stay like that, > > and that there will be bigger jumps to make later that may not be > > the same in alloy (sandblasting and painting for one thing) but > > that's a couple of months away, working only on the weekends. > > > > I do understand that on the long run, the difference will be smaller > > and that - given the proper design with structure and plating > > optimized to the point for alloy by a professional and very > > experienced designer, preferably welded in best conditions by > > professional welders - the alloy-boat can be a better, lighter boat. > > But that was not my point. > > > > Gerd > > > > The YAGO PROJECT at http;//www.justmueller.com/boats/ > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > > > In smaller boat sizes steel is thicker than it needs to be to > > provide a corrosion allowance. You may well be able to replace > > > thickness for thickness. I've seen a number of 50 foot cats come > > out of Oz done in 3mm alloy (1/8") that worked very well. The > > > loads on those hulls would likely be much greater than a 30 foot > > monohull. > > > > > > I've built large shelters using plastic poly sheeting for a few > > hundred dollars. Very handy for keeping the rain off your tools, > > > and the sun off your head. It is a right pain to have to move all > > your tools and materials under shelter every time in rains, as it > > > does here on the coast more than 200 days of the year. Such a > > shelter is all you to build in alloy. There are plans available in > > > this group for a low cost inflatable shelter. If you use > > reinforced plastic sheeting, the shelter can be used afterwards to > > make > > > the sails for a junk or gaff rig. > > > > > > In fact, you can build in alloy outside, as I have already > > outlined on this site, without shelter. Only the final welding > > needs be > > > done under shelter. If anything, alloy is better suited to > > outside building than steel, because it does not rust when left > > > unprotected. Tools to work alloy are not an extra cost. You will > > need woodworking tools to do the interior of your boat, which are > > > the same tools your use for alloy. A low powered MIG welder and > > Argon is not much different in cost than an Arc welder and Oxy > > > torch. MIG wire is cheaper than welding rods. > > > > > > Usually it is the unknowns that keep people from using a new > > material. You are experienced in steel, so it is only natural to > > feel > > > more comfortable with the material. Ron is the same way. I am > > more experienced with wood, and probably feel more comfortable with > > > alloy because it can be worked much the same way. Most people > > have more experience with wood than steel. Thus, first time > > > builders, that have not done a lot of steel work may find that > > alloy, not steel is easier to use. > > > > > > Greg Elliott > > > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Gerd" > > > To: > > > Sent: Monday, May 31, 2004 10:41 AM > > > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: re:Flame Spray > > > > > > > > > > Don't know, Greg, probably because: > > > > - I can't replace my steel thickness for thickness with alloy > > > > - I have to work outside > > > > - I like to work with steel and have a good feeling about it > > > > - I have no alloy equipment nor experience > > > > - I have not got the higher starting sum in cash for materials, > > > > tools and shelter > > > > > > > > That said, I am bginning to discus with some friends here, and It > > > > might be that we will start a smaller alloy hull (motor for the > > > > river) later this autumn, because I really would like to give it > > a > > > > try. > > > > Been cutting plates all weekend, and steel sure is hot - sweated > > off > > > > about 2 kg ;-) > > > > > > > > Gerd > > > > The YAGO PROJECT at http://www.justmueller.com/boats/ > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > > > > > I was talking with another origami builder of the weekend. His > > > > latest quote for steel and alloy in BC had alloy slightly > > cheaper, > > > > > thickness for thickness. Why not simply build in alloy to > > start > > > > with? > > > > > > > > > > Greg Elliott > > > > > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > > From: "Gerald Niffenegger" > > > > > To: > > > > > Sent: Monday, May 31, 2004 4:07 AM > > > > > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: re:Flame Spray > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here is a site and a lengthy study done for oil platforms: > > > > > > http://www.corrosion.com/thermal.html > > > > > > The way I read it aluminum provides better protection than > > zinc > > > > and > > > > > > would not require paint? It also states that the zinc coat > > needs > > > > to be > > > > > > applied up to 4 times thicker than aluminum? > > > > > > Steve > > > > > > Thank you for your input! I am wondering why you didn't coat > > the > > > > > > entire inside of your boat? The $2,200 figure you mentioned > > was > > > > for > > > > > > wire and gas? > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > Gerald > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "silascrosby" > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > I had my 36' flame-sprayed or "metallized" in 1993. I had > > the > > > > entire > > > > > > > exterior from the waterline up done and the inside bilges > > and > > > > > > > surrounding the windows inside. I used zinc. 10 years > > later I > > > > have > > > > > > > no rust . I topcoated the original Devoe epoxy last year > > with > > > > > > > another coat of Devoe(Ameron) epoxy purely for cosmetic > > fading > > > > > > > reasons. At the time it cost about $2200 Can. A fellow on > > a 44' > > > > > > > steel Brewer boat,'Kodiak', living in Sidney,Vancouver Is. > > had > > > > the > > > > > > > gun and I supplied the acetylene tank. I had it sandblasted > > > > earlier > > > > > > > in the day ( a hot july day). We sprayed on the 1st coat of > > > > epoxy ( > > > > > > > according to specs from Artie Bates at Ameron in > > Vancouver) on > > > > the > > > > > > > next day( another hot dry day). Probably by the time it > > was all > > > > > > > blasted , flame-sprayed and painted I had spent $ 5000 to > > > > $6000 can. > > > > > > > In retrospect it was worth it for us. A friend had flame > > > > sprayed > > > > > > > below the waterline and had big problems with blistering > > in the > > > > > > > first season. Steve. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > > > > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- > > > > unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- > > unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > | 3927|3915|2004-06-01 19:22:48|richytill|Re: Aluminum Vs. Steel|Brent, I too have pointed out to a number of people that ferries with steel hulls and aluminum on top would make sense. Just down the road in Gibsons they make aluminium water taxi's; best use of the material, a great product well built, no argument. Some of the aluminium fishboats here have a long history of good service with far less maintainance problems than steel. Tugs are steel for obvious reasons. Both materials work well in context. I am not against the use of aluminum hulls but the years have taught me that steel is more predictable in nature and that has become my personal preference. I wish BC Ferries would apply the materials where they work best too. rt --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" wrote: > With the enormous twisting loads on the hull-deck joint , I'd be > reluctant to make the hull deck joint the transfer point between > aluminium and steel. Making the transition at the deck-cabinside > joint would make more sense structurally, and an aluminium cabin > would save a lot of weight. I once suggested this as a way to train > aluminium workers on new BC ferries , by building them with steel > hulls and aluminium superstructures, saving maintenance and huge > amounts of fuel while using well proven steel building techniques for > the hulls, eliminating most of the liabilities and re-learning > proccess. > Brent Swain > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "richytill" wrote: > > Phil, > > > > I have been in the metal trades since 1967 and for the most part I > > agree. An aluminium deck would be lighter and easier to maintain > and > > I might consider that option if I were to build again. As far as > the > > body of the hull is concerned; steel makes sense. This subject has > > been reviewed several times but it is worth repeating that steel is > > obvious and honest in its' nature--aluminum is not. Aluminum can > > hide a multitude of defects that steel reveals. rt > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Phil S." > > wrote: > > > Just my humble opinion on both materials, first a wee bit of > > backround. I was a US Army > > > airframe mechanic for almost 10 years, I have worked and cut more > > aluminum than I ever > > > care to see again. First off disimilar metal corosion or > > eletrolysis is nothing to sneeze at, it > > > can turn good metal to junk in a very short time span. In fact > > recently an 100+ft aluminum > > > crew boat was for sale in Boats and Harbors. It was being sold > for > > scrap because of > > > electrolysis, the boat was only 8 years old. I frankly never want > > anything to do with > > > aluminum ever again, I have seen what appear to be good welds > were > > actually junk on ex- > > > ray inspection and testing. > > > > > > The company I work for now does NDI Testing and ex-ray along with > > ASME code welding. > > > To a man the welders say stay away from aluminum, Unless you are > > prepared to TIG weld > > > it, a slow and tedious form of welding, forget that. I have > access > > to all the welding > > > equipment you could imagine, I will work in steel. Here is why; > > > 1 There are steel boats in the great lakes that are 70 + years > old, > > still working everyday. > > > 2 I can get new "scrap" steel very inexpensively, The large > > manfacturing shops will > > > sometimes scrap perfectly good sheet steel if it excess for a > > completed project. > > > 3 Steel corrodes in a visable, predictable manor, once corrosion > > starts it is easy to deal > > > with, grind and paint or use Corroseal, and paint. > > > 4 I can repair steel almost anywhere, with a simple stick welding > > set up hooked to the > > > engine alternator. > > > 5 I like the abrasion and holing resistence of steel, bump off a > > rock( a very real possibility > > > in the 1000 Islands) and you can pound out the dent with a > hammer. > > Aluminum tears a lot > > > easier than steel, even if you double the thickness. > > > 6 Cutting aluminum with a torch makes a mess, cutting it with > > common wood working > > > tools really sucks, having tried that and ended up with an arm > full > > of shrapenel from the > > > skill saw. > > > 7 There are no aluminum Ice Breakers. > > > > > > There are other reasons but for the most part I just like steel, > I > > plan on cruising a good > > > part of the year up here and might have to go through some ice. > The > > weather in Upstate > > > NY sucks, I will want to go out and cruise around, safe in my > nice > > warm and comfy wheel > > > house and look at the winter wonderland. Good thing about that is > > there won't be any > > > noisy jet ski's flying about. > > > Just My Humble Opinion > > > Phil | 3928|3915|2004-06-01 19:45:56|Michael Casling|Re: Aluminum Vs. Steel|The problem in BC is that the politicians dumped on the advice that they received from the professionals to the point of slander which was proven when the designer guy won his lawsuit against the ex premier. But try again because we are right back where we started, we need new ferries in BC of a similar design to the current ferries. If they can make the topsides from alloy it will save weight so they can carry more. Maybe this time they will listen and hopefully BC can build the things with out to much interference. I enjoyed the piece written by the ex marine ? about alloy corrosion but we do have a lot of alloy boats in BC some welded some riveted that are doing good work and lasting a long time. Sorry to bore the non BC residents with the ferry saga story but it is about boats and materials and design. Michael ----- Original Message ----- From: richytill To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2004 4:22 PM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Aluminum Vs. Steel Brent, I too have pointed out to a number of people that ferries with steel hulls and aluminum on top would make sense. Just down the road in Gibsons they make aluminium water taxi's; best use of the material, a great product well built, no argument. Some of the aluminium fishboats here have a long history of good service with far less maintainance problems than steel. Tugs are steel for obvious reasons. Both materials work well in context. I am not against the use of aluminum hulls but the years have taught me that steel is more predictable in nature and that has become my personal preference. I wish BC Ferries would apply the materials where they work best too. rt --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" wrote: > With the enormous twisting loads on the hull-deck joint , I'd be > reluctant to make the hull deck joint the transfer point between > aluminium and steel. Making the transition at the deck-cabinside > joint would make more sense structurally, and an aluminium cabin > would save a lot of weight. I once suggested this as a way to train > aluminium workers on new BC ferries , by building them with steel > hulls and aluminium superstructures, saving maintenance and huge > amounts of fuel while using well proven steel building techniques for > the hulls, eliminating most of the liabilities and re-learning > proccess. > Brent Swain > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "richytill" wrote: > > Phil, > > > > I have been in the metal trades since 1967 and for the most part I > > agree. An aluminium deck would be lighter and easier to maintain > and > > I might consider that option if I were to build again. As far as > the > > body of the hull is concerned; steel makes sense. This subject has > > been reviewed several times but it is worth repeating that steel is > > obvious and honest in its' nature--aluminum is not. Aluminum can > > hide a multitude of defects that steel reveals. rt > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Phil S." > > wrote: > > > Just my humble opinion on both materials, first a wee bit of > > backround. I was a US Army > > > airframe mechanic for almost 10 years, I have worked and cut more > > aluminum than I ever > > > care to see again. First off disimilar metal corosion or > > eletrolysis is nothing to sneeze at, it > > > can turn good metal to junk in a very short time span. In fact > > recently an 100+ft aluminum > > > crew boat was for sale in Boats and Harbors. It was being sold > for > > scrap because of > > > electrolysis, the boat was only 8 years old. I frankly never want > > anything to do with > > > aluminum ever again, I have seen what appear to be good welds > were > > actually junk on ex- > > > ray inspection and testing. > > > > > > The company I work for now does NDI Testing and ex-ray along with > > ASME code welding. > > > To a man the welders say stay away from aluminum, Unless you are > > prepared to TIG weld > > > it, a slow and tedious form of welding, forget that. I have > access > > to all the welding > > > equipment you could imagine, I will work in steel. Here is why; > > > 1 There are steel boats in the great lakes that are 70 + years > old, > > still working everyday. > > > 2 I can get new "scrap" steel very inexpensively, The large > > manfacturing shops will > > > sometimes scrap perfectly good sheet steel if it excess for a > > completed project. > > > 3 Steel corrodes in a visable, predictable manor, once corrosion > > starts it is easy to deal > > > with, grind and paint or use Corroseal, and paint. > > > 4 I can repair steel almost anywhere, with a simple stick welding > > set up hooked to the > > > engine alternator. > > > 5 I like the abrasion and holing resistence of steel, bump off a > > rock( a very real possibility > > > in the 1000 Islands) and you can pound out the dent with a > hammer. > > Aluminum tears a lot > > > easier than steel, even if you double the thickness. > > > 6 Cutting aluminum with a torch makes a mess, cutting it with > > common wood working > > > tools really sucks, having tried that and ended up with an arm > full > > of shrapenel from the > > > skill saw. > > > 7 There are no aluminum Ice Breakers. > > > > > > There are other reasons but for the most part I just like steel, > I > > plan on cruising a good > > > part of the year up here and might have to go through some ice. > The > > weather in Upstate > > > NY sucks, I will want to go out and cruise around, safe in my > nice > > warm and comfy wheel > > > house and look at the winter wonderland. Good thing about that is > > there won't be any > > > noisy jet ski's flying about. > > > Just My Humble Opinion > > > Phil To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3929|3915|2004-06-02 00:00:08|fmichael graham|Re: Aluminum Vs. Steel|I concur wholeheartedly. I think that aluminum boatbuilding is best left to the professional builder. I'd sure like to see them "string up" the "professional" who designed the aluminum cat ferries. Nice local knowledge, pal. Mike Michael Casling wrote: The problem in BC is that the politicians dumped on the advice that they received from the professionals to the point of slander which was proven when the designer guy won his lawsuit against the ex premier. But try again because we are right back where we started, we need new ferries in BC of a similar design to the current ferries. If they can make the topsides from alloy it will save weight so they can carry more. Maybe this time they will listen and hopefully BC can build the things with out to much interference. I enjoyed the piece written by the ex marine ? about alloy corrosion but we do have a lot of alloy boats in BC some welded some riveted that are doing good work and lasting a long time. Sorry to bore the non BC residents with the ferry saga story but it is about boats and materials and design. Michael ----- Original Message ----- From: richytill To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2004 4:22 PM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Aluminum Vs. Steel Brent, I too have pointed out to a number of people that ferries with steel hulls and aluminum on top would make sense. Just down the road in Gibsons they make aluminium water taxi's; best use of the material, a great product well built, no argument. Some of the aluminium fishboats here have a long history of good service with far less maintainance problems than steel. Tugs are steel for obvious reasons. Both materials work well in context. I am not against the use of aluminum hulls but the years have taught me that steel is more predictable in nature and that has become my personal preference. I wish BC Ferries would apply the materials where they work best too. rt --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" wrote: > With the enormous twisting loads on the hull-deck joint , I'd be > reluctant to make the hull deck joint the transfer point between > aluminium and steel. Making the transition at the deck-cabinside > joint would make more sense structurally, and an aluminium cabin > would save a lot of weight. I once suggested this as a way to train > aluminium workers on new BC ferries , by building them with steel > hulls and aluminium superstructures, saving maintenance and huge > amounts of fuel while using well proven steel building techniques for > the hulls, eliminating most of the liabilities and re-learning > proccess. > Brent Swain > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "richytill" wrote: > > Phil, > > > > I have been in the metal trades since 1967 and for the most part I > > agree. An aluminium deck would be lighter and easier to maintain > and > > I might consider that option if I were to build again. As far as > the > > body of the hull is concerned; steel makes sense. This subject has > > been reviewed several times but it is worth repeating that steel is > > obvious and honest in its' nature--aluminum is not. Aluminum can > > hide a multitude of defects that steel reveals. rt > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Phil S." > > wrote: > > > Just my humble opinion on both materials, first a wee bit of > > backround. I was a US Army > > > airframe mechanic for almost 10 years, I have worked and cut more > > aluminum than I ever > > > care to see again. First off disimilar metal corosion or > > eletrolysis is nothing to sneeze at, it > > > can turn good metal to junk in a very short time span. In fact > > recently an 100+ft aluminum > > > crew boat was for sale in Boats and Harbors. It was being sold > for > > scrap because of > > > electrolysis, the boat was only 8 years old. I frankly never want > > anything to do with > > > aluminum ever again, I have seen what appear to be good welds > were > > actually junk on ex- > > > ray inspection and testing. > > > > > > The company I work for now does NDI Testing and ex-ray along with > > ASME code welding. > > > To a man the welders say stay away from aluminum, Unless you are > > prepared to TIG weld > > > it, a slow and tedious form of welding, forget that. I have > access > > to all the welding > > > equipment you could imagine, I will work in steel. Here is why; > > > 1 There are steel boats in the great lakes that are 70 + years > old, > > still working everyday. > > > 2 I can get new "scrap" steel very inexpensively, The large > > manfacturing shops will > > > sometimes scrap perfectly good sheet steel if it excess for a > > completed project. > > > 3 Steel corrodes in a visable, predictable manor, once corrosion > > starts it is easy to deal > > > with, grind and paint or use Corroseal, and paint. > > > 4 I can repair steel almost anywhere, with a simple stick welding > > set up hooked to the > > > engine alternator. > > > 5 I like the abrasion and holing resistence of steel, bump off a > > rock( a very real possibility > > > in the 1000 Islands) and you can pound out the dent with a > hammer. > > Aluminum tears a lot > > > easier than steel, even if you double the thickness. > > > 6 Cutting aluminum with a torch makes a mess, cutting it with > > common wood working > > > tools really sucks, having tried that and ended up with an arm > full > > of shrapenel from the > > > skill saw. > > > 7 There are no aluminum Ice Breakers. > > > > > > There are other reasons but for the most part I just like steel, > I > > plan on cruising a good > > > part of the year up here and might have to go through some ice. > The > > weather in Upstate > > > NY sucks, I will want to go out and cruise around, safe in my > nice > > warm and comfy wheel > > > house and look at the winter wonderland. Good thing about that is > > there won't be any > > > noisy jet ski's flying about. > > > Just My Humble Opinion > > > Phil To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links --------------------------------- Post your free ad now! Yahoo! Canada Personals [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3930|3915|2004-06-02 03:13:30|sae140|Re: Aluminum Vs. Steel|Apart from the hidden corrosion issue, and the tearing against sharp objects - and the anti-fouling problems - it seems to me that there are a couple of other issues regarding DIY aluminium hull construction which never seem to get mentioned, bearing in mind the ethos of this site. Within reason, s/h mild steel of various specs can all be welded together without any undue concerns, as it's all gonna be strong enough regardless of what you've sourced, and what you do to it afterwards in the way of welding. It's fairly easy to test for and identify higher carbon steels - but not so with the various aluminium alloys. I don't know of any way of telling 'em apart - so you really need to buy new in order to get yourself a material with known characteristics for any critical applications. Dinghys, hatch covers and suchlike don't present a problem, but for DIY masts and hulls, you're almost certainly gonna have to buy new material. Another issue is that of welding the damned stuff - even some pro welders avoid working with ally, as it can be difficult to weld and gives off naughty fumes too. Amateur builders need to work with materials that he (or she) can join themselves - welding steel to a reasonably high standard can already be testing for the novice - what chance do they have on aluminium ? Some boat-builders have never even attempted welding before they start out, and many may never weld again afterwards - such people need as simple and straightforward a method as possible for pulling their boats together. Although MIG can be certainly be used for aluminium, pulsed AC-TIG is the preferred method for really first-class guaranteed welds, and such machines are not cheap, and the welding rate is very slow by this method. Then there's the issue of shielding gases, whichever method you employ, which can make outdoor boat-building extremely difficult in windy coastal areas. In my opinion, aluminium is a challenging material to weld for the no- previous-welding first-time boatbuilder, and is best left to the professionals and/or those having considerable experience with it. One person's opinion. Colin| 3931|3893|2004-06-02 04:42:41|denis buggy|Re: catamarans|dear Dale tread carefully on this site re catamarans as the only members of this group who do not have any strong views so far are prophets and imanns , I tried to discuss cats and the last advice received was to buy a tent , ! yes a tent and bring it with me to sea , apparently any kind of tent would do . I politely said nothing and decided to observe the site to learn more and read correspondence from those suffering from acute cabin fever and disorientation due to sailing a pendulum on the ocean and staggering on to some wild shore to consume berries mushrooms and various other hallucigens , this activity only interrupted to dispense nautical advice worldwide re fitting tents to catamarans and their love/hate relationship with their various financial advisors . should you wish to study further your interest in cats you can correspond with me at buggy@... and you can check out the following Bowden catamarans Australia , Bruce Roberts has sold me study plans for a 60 foot cat which can be adapted for steel , steel magnolia is for sale reduced today to 200.000 us from heather underwood at heather@... and you can view the classic hull design dilemma with steel cats by looking at mv solstice and mv equinox based in Scotland . on a serious note , there are those who have helped me greatly on this site and I would be grateful for a critical evaluation of mv equinox as I have the scania engines used in this and the facilities to build something similar with my own sailing arrangement mounted on each hull however I do not have full confidence in the design of the planing hull used . regards all denis ----- Original Message ----- From: shorinjin01 To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, May 31, 2004 6:15 AM Subject: [origamiboats] catamarans I just discovered origami boats and this group. I did a search on catamarans, but found nothing. Have any been built using this method? Dale To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3932|3893|2004-06-02 06:12:52|T.H. & V.D. Cain|Re: catamarans|Denis! Just what we need from time to time! A nice light hearted expose (where has the accent key gone?) of the mainstream of the group's posts. Most of us wouldn't have it any other way! Well done. THC -----Original Message----- From: denis buggy [mailto:buggy@...] Sent: Wednesday, 2 June 2004 18:11 To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [origamiboats] catamarans dear Dale tread carefully on this site re catamarans as the only members of this group who do not have any strong views so far are prophets and imanns , I tried to discuss cats and the last advice received was to buy a tent , ! yes a tent and bring it with me to sea , apparently any kind of tent would do . I politely said nothing and decided to observe the site to learn more and read correspondence from those suffering from acute cabin fever and disorientation due to sailing a pendulum on the ocean and staggering on to some wild shore to consume berries mushrooms and various other hallucinogens , this activity only interrupted to dispense nautical advice worldwide re fitting tents to catamarans and their love/hate relationship with their various financial advisors . should you wish to study further your interest in cats you can correspond with me at buggy@... and you can check out the following Bowden catamarans Australia , Bruce Roberts has sold me study plans for a 60 foot cat which can be adapted for steel , steel magnolia is for sale reduced today to 200.000 us from heather underwood at heather@... and you can view the classic hull design dilemma with steel cats by looking at mv solstice and mv equinox based in Scotland . on a serious note , there are those who have helped me greatly on this site and I would be grateful for a critical evaluation of mv equinox as I have the scania engines used in this and the facilities to build something similar with my own sailing arrangement mounted on each hull however I do not have full confidence in the design of the planing hull used . regards all denis ----- Original Message ----- From: shorinjin01 To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, May 31, 2004 6:15 AM Subject: [origamiboats] catamarans I just discovered origami boats and this group. I did a search on catamarans, but found nothing. Have any been built using this method? Dale To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links | 3933|3915|2004-06-02 07:14:30|Gerald Niffenegger|Re: Aluminum Vs. Steel|Watched a program on the Discovery channel about armored cars. They are manufactured from aluminum. As the chassis wears out the box is removed and placed on a new chassis. Some of the boxes have seen 5-6 new chassis. So ..... aluminum is strong enough to haul other peoples money around. Mine is under the mattress. Gerald --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "sae140" wrote: > Apart from the hidden corrosion issue, and the tearing against sharp > objects - and the anti-fouling problems - it seems to me that there > are a couple of other issues regarding DIY aluminium hull > construction which never seem to get mentioned, bearing in mind the > ethos of this site. > > Within reason, s/h mild steel of various specs can all be welded > together without any undue concerns, as it's all gonna be strong > enough regardless of what you've sourced, and what you do to it > afterwards in the way of welding. It's fairly easy to test for and > identify higher carbon steels - but not so with the various aluminium > alloys. I don't know of any way of telling 'em apart - so you really > need to buy new in order to get yourself a material with known > characteristics for any critical applications. Dinghys, hatch covers > and suchlike don't present a problem, but for DIY masts and hulls, > you're almost certainly gonna have to buy new material. > > Another issue is that of welding the damned stuff - even some pro > welders avoid working with ally, as it can be difficult to weld and > gives off naughty fumes too. Amateur builders need to work with > materials that he (or she) can join themselves - welding steel to a > reasonably high standard can already be testing for the novice - what > chance do they have on aluminium ? > Some boat-builders have never even attempted welding before they > start out, and many may never weld again afterwards - such people > need as simple and straightforward a method as possible for pulling > their boats together. > > Although MIG can be certainly be used for aluminium, pulsed AC-TIG is > the preferred method for really first-class guaranteed welds, and > such machines are not cheap, and the welding rate is very slow by > this method. > Then there's the issue of shielding gases, whichever method you > employ, which can make outdoor boat-building extremely difficult in > windy coastal areas. > > In my opinion, aluminium is a challenging material to weld for the no- > previous-welding first-time boatbuilder, and is best left to the > professionals and/or those having considerable experience with it. > > One person's opinion. > > Colin | 3934|3893|2004-06-02 07:58:35|Graeme|Re: catamarans|Lol Hell you should mention cats on the boat building site but carry a bucket of water as you will get ya ass flamed right out off there funny as hell, even though they have a cat or multi hull section all question there go un-answered . But that is what makes the world go around people with different ideas if everything was the same we would be board shi,iteless I guess . Dennis I asked the same question as you a couple of years ago I got a smack in the back of the head and told to move a long nothing to see here lol. That was on a different site so I packed my swag and moved on . But these ppl are kind and friendly with a vast building and sailing experience . Tent I thought it was a caravan they said but, I may be wrong it has happened before, me being wrong that is. Dennis where abouts in oz are you qld or west coast. Graeme -----Original Message----- From: denis buggy [mailto:buggy@...] Sent: Wednesday, 2 June 2004 4:41 PM To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [origamiboats] catamarans dear Dale tread carefully on this site re catamarans as the only members of this group who do not have any strong views so far are prophets and imanns , I tried to discuss cats and the last advice received was to buy a tent , ! yes a tent and bring it with me to sea , apparently any kind of tent would do . I politely said nothing and decided to observe the site to learn more and read correspondence from those suffering from acute cabin fever and disorientation due to sailing a pendulum on the ocean and staggering on to some wild shore to consume berries mushrooms and various other hallucigens , this activity only interrupted to dispense nautical advice worldwide re fitting tents to catamarans and their love/hate relationship with their various financial advisors . should you wish to study further your interest in cats you can correspond with me at buggy@... and you can check out the following Bowden catamarans Australia , Bruce Roberts has sold me study plans for a 60 foot cat which can be adapted for steel , steel magnolia is for sale reduced today to 200.000 us from heather underwood at heather@... and you can view the classic hull design dilemma with steel cats by looking at mv solstice and mv equinox based in Scotland . on a serious note , there are those who have helped me greatly on this site and I would be grateful for a critical evaluation of mv equinox as I have the scania engines used in this and the facilities to build something similar with my own sailing arrangement mounted on each hull however I do not have full confidence in the design of the planing hull used . regards all denis ----- Original Message ----- From: shorinjin01 To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, May 31, 2004 6:15 AM Subject: [origamiboats] catamarans I just discovered origami boats and this group. I did a search on catamarans, but found nothing. Have any been built using this method? Dale To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links | 3935|3915|2004-06-02 08:11:34|Phil S.|Re: Aluminum Vs. Steel|Just to add fuel to this discussion, we here in rochester, NY have our own fast ferry, well sort of. It is an all aluminum built ferry and it is a piece of junk; http://www.rochestertoday.com/news/local/story.aspx?content_id=BA6FFA27-F802 -41F5-9D9A-ED14D544A6E2 The boat recieved severe damage when it bumped into a dock on the delivery trip from Australia, delaying its intended start time. Now it is in a Toronto ship yard with major engine problems, they are talking about loading on a barge and shipping it back to Australia so the engines can be pulled and replaced. I think the whole project is a collosal waste of money, we don't need a ferry to run from Rochester to Toronto, it is only a 4 hour drive, as opposed to an $135 two hour ferry ride. Don't try to tell a politician not to waste money though. If you can look at the picture in the article you will see the thin aluminum skin ripped like tissue paper. Good thing it was above the water line. Phil| 3936|3893|2004-06-02 09:44:48|Gerd|Re: catamarans|It's good to bring that up from time to time, cats have a lot going for them, and if there would be any way to combine the cat-concept with the cheap and simple origami method that would be great. The problem, inparticular with bridge deck cats is that there is an anormous amount of shell-surface around hulls, deck, cockpit and cabins to enclose all this living space, which will penalize any project with high weight material. We have many cruising cats in europe, very popular and not only for charter. One of the best known brands is the Privilege from Jeantot Marine at http://www.jeantot-marine.com/ Just look at their 37, they give a displacement of 6.5 tons, which is not really extra-light for a cat... but if you look at the surfaces it becomes clear that doing that in steel would be very difficult indeed... Actually it would be interesting to do this calculation for a similar boat and tightly optimized steel construction just to see where you would end up, might just do that next winter ;-) Of course this would be a case for alloy, if... see the other thread on that ;-) There also have been several mentions here of the french PROMETA yard, they build in Strongall, thick alloy practically without structure. There is a french singer called Antoine who dropped out of showbizz after his first successes and since lives afloat, first on a Damien, now on a Michel Joubert designed catamaran, 12.50 x 6.5 meter with 12 tons (!) displacement fully loaded for cruising, built by Prometa in thick alloy. That's not really light, and might actually have just been built in light steel or steel/alloy combination, but I guess Joubert would then have had to fear for his reputation ;-) I guess any designer who would publicly announce a steel-cat project can burn his diploma the same day. Thanks God, most of them don't have one to begin with... Joubert is not really known for designing slow boats, have a look at some of the joubert/nivelt designs on the site of PINTA in France: http://www.chantier-pinta.com/prototypes.htm More on Antoine and his 12 ton cat at http://www.antoine- islands.com/francais/antoine/bateaux/bs.htm Gerd The YAGO PROJECT at http;//www.justmueller.com/boats/ --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Graeme" wrote: > > Lol > > Hell you should mention cats on the boat building site but carry a > bucket of water as you will get ya ass flamed right out off there funny > as hell, even though they have a cat or multi hull section all question > there go un-answered . > > But that is what makes the world go around people with different ideas > if everything was the same we would be board shi,iteless I guess . > > Dennis I asked the same question as you a couple of years ago I got a > smack in the back of the head and told to move a long nothing to see > here lol. That was on a different site so I packed my swag and moved on > . > > But these ppl are kind and friendly with a vast building and sailing > experience . > > Tent I thought it was a caravan they said but, I may be wrong it has > happened before, me being wrong that is. > > Dennis where abouts in oz are you qld or west coast. > > > Graeme > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: denis buggy [mailto:buggy@i...] > Sent: Wednesday, 2 June 2004 4:41 PM > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Subject: Re: [origamiboats] catamarans > > dear Dale > tread carefully on this site re catamarans as the only members of this > group who do not have any strong views so far are prophets and imanns > , > I tried to discuss cats and the last advice received was to buy a > tent , ! yes a tent and bring it with me to sea , apparently any > kind of tent would do . > I politely said nothing and decided to observe the > site to learn more and read correspondence from those suffering from > acute cabin fever and disorientation due to sailing a pendulum on the > ocean and staggering on to some wild shore to consume berries mushrooms > and various other hallucigens , this activity only interrupted to > dispense nautical advice worldwide re fitting tents to catamarans and > their love/hate relationship with their various financial advisors . > should you wish to study further your interest in cats you can > correspond with me at buggy@i... and you can check out the > following Bowden catamarans Australia , Bruce Roberts has sold me > study plans for a 60 foot cat which can be adapted for steel , steel > magnolia is for sale reduced today to 200.000 us from heather underwood > at heather@b... and you can view the classic hull > design dilemma with steel cats by looking at mv solstice and mv > equinox based in Scotland . > > on a serious note , there are those who have helped me greatly on this > site and I would be grateful for a critical evaluation of mv equinox > as I have the scania engines used in this and the facilities to build > something similar with my own sailing arrangement mounted on each > hull however I do not have full confidence in the design of the > planing hull used . regards all denis > ----- Original Message ----- > From: shorinjin01 > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Monday, May 31, 2004 6:15 AM > Subject: [origamiboats] catamarans > > > I just discovered origami boats and this group. I did a search on > catamarans, but found nothing. Have any been built using this method? > > Dale > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ADVERTISEMENT > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------- ----- > ------ > Yahoo! Groups Links > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of > Service. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links | 3937|3937|2004-06-02 10:46:09|Scott Carle|alternator driven arc welders|Here are a couple links to howto's on building these. http://mywebpages.comcast.net/t.molnar/Obwelder1.htm http://www.pirate4x4.com/tech/on-boardwelder/ http://www.rockmodified.com/2003/april/welder/welder.html http://www.4x4wire.com/toyota/tech/alternator/ http://www.4wdlinks.com/harryworld/welder.html the first three are homemade jobs and the second two are using alternators to run a comercial welder designed for installing in autos. Scott Carle __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger. http://messenger.yahoo.com/| 3938|3915|2004-06-02 13:25:57|spencerj71|Re: Aluminum Vs. Steel|Phil, I've resisted, but I just can't help weighing in on this. There is no perfect choice, so what it comes down to is what is better for the boat and what is better for the builder. In your case its steel and you make some compelling points, foremost being that you want to save $ on materials. However you make many arguments against aluminum alloy that are not the fault of the material, but are results of the ignorance of the builder. Here are my opinions on some of those points. Electrolysis: This is a big concern with aluminum alloy, as well as steel. I'm sure that the crew boat you spoke of corroded beyond repair becase it was poorly built. Dissimilar metals were not properly isolated, the electrical system was not properly bonded, or maybe they didn't use marine grade alloy. There is no mystery here, if you use the proper alloys, isolate dissimilar metals and install the electrics correctly, you will have a boat that lasts. Keep in mind that you are protecting your steel hull from corrosion by painting it inside and out. This will also help aluminum. Al alloys poor reputation in this regard is mostly the result of builders cutting corners during consturction. Welding: Yes aluminum alloy is less forgiving to weld than steel. It demands proper weld preparation and cleanliness. Again there's no mystery here, by following the proper techniques you can produce consistent, correct MIG and pulsed MIG welds. Many of the problems with "professional" welds result from welders long experienced with steel trying to apply those same techniques to aluminum. In many cases a novice will become a better aluminum welder than a pro, since he doesn't have to unlearn years of experience that doesn't work with aluminum. Great Lakes Boats: Fresh water is a very freindly environment. Its the salt in sea water that makes it an electrolyte, so corrosion on the lakes is much much slower. How many 70 year old ships do you see on the ocean, the environment that the crew boat you mention was in? Aluminum will also benifit from being on fresh water. Look at all the small riveted aluminum boats that you see on the lakes. Aluminum tears easier than steel: This is completely false. The plastic deformation range of aluminum is greater than that of steel. If built to the same strength (the Al hull will be thicker, but lighter), the steel hull is more likely to tear before the aluminum. Also its much easier to hammer out dents in aluminum than in steel. Again look at all the aluminum skiffs and Gruman canoes and how long they last. Cutting aluminum: Cutting aluminum with a torch is just silly. Let me get this straigt, you'd rather use an acetylene set and do lots of grinding than use a circular saw and a planer, or just a band saw? Aluminum is much easier to cut than steel. If you want to cut it with a torch, the correct tool is a plasma arc. As for the "shrapnel", wear a shirt and a face shield and buy a shop vac. Aluminum Ice Breakers: The reason there are no aluminum ice breakers is that the main argument for using aluminum is that it produces a hull about half the weight of steel, and thus a faster or more fuel efficient vessel. This would be a disadvantage for an ice breaker as they use their weight to break the ice. You could certainly make an ice breaker from aluminum, but you'd end up with very thick plates, probably have to carry a lot of ballast and it would be very expensive. This is why it doesn't make sense to build ice breakers and ships out of aluminum alloy. As for small ice breaking capability, a company I once worked for had a small aluminum tug (30') that would break up ice a foot thick. The advantages of aluminum alloy are that it produces a hull of equal strenght that is about half the weight of steel. This is good if you want to go fast, or be more fuel efficient. In the case of a sailboat it means that the keel can be heavier, so you can carry more sail. The other advantege is that aluminum alloy does not corrode in the marine environment as long as it is in the presence of free oxygen (no stangnant water). So a properly built and outfitted boat does not have to be painted. In a sense, its probably better to think of aluminum alloy as an alternative to composite construction than as an alternative to steel. I think we can at least agree to not liking fiberglass and hating jet skis. I look forward to the continuing discussion. - Spencer --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Phil S." wrote: > Just my humble opinion on both materials, first a wee bit of backround. I was a US Army > airframe mechanic for almost 10 years, I have worked and cut more aluminum than I ever > care to see again. First off disimilar metal corosion or eletrolysis is nothing to sneeze at, it > can turn good metal to junk in a very short time span. In fact recently an 100+ft aluminum > crew boat was for sale in Boats and Harbors. It was being sold for scrap because of > electrolysis, the boat was only 8 years old. I frankly never want anything to do with > aluminum ever again, I have seen what appear to be good welds were actually junk on ex- > ray inspection and testing. > > The company I work for now does NDI Testing and ex-ray along with ASME code welding. > To a man the welders say stay away from aluminum, Unless you are prepared to TIG weld > it, a slow and tedious form of welding, forget that. I have access to all the welding > equipment you could imagine, I will work in steel. Here is why; > 1 There are steel boats in the great lakes that are 70 + years old, still working everyday. > 2 I can get new "scrap" steel very inexpensively, The large manfacturing shops will > sometimes scrap perfectly good sheet steel if it excess for a completed project. > 3 Steel corrodes in a visable, predictable manor, once corrosion starts it is easy to deal > with, grind and paint or use Corroseal, and paint. > 4 I can repair steel almost anywhere, with a simple stick welding set up hooked to the > engine alternator. > 5 I like the abrasion and holing resistence of steel, bump off a rock( a very real possibility > in the 1000 Islands) and you can pound out the dent with a hammer. Aluminum tears a lot > easier than steel, even if you double the thickness. > 6 Cutting aluminum with a torch makes a mess, cutting it with common wood working > tools really sucks, having tried that and ended up with an arm full of shrapenel from the > skill saw. > 7 There are no aluminum Ice Breakers. > > There are other reasons but for the most part I just like steel, I plan on cruising a good > part of the year up here and might have to go through some ice. The weather in Upstate > NY sucks, I will want to go out and cruise around, safe in my nice warm and comfy wheel > house and look at the winter wonderland. Good thing about that is there won't be any > noisy jet ski's flying about. > Just My Humble Opinion > Phil | 3939|3890|2004-06-02 13:50:49|brentswain38|Re: Flame Spray|There is no shortage of people who never go anywhere in their profesionally built boat either ,far more people than the number who never leave in amateur built boats, usually because they cost so much ,that they are so busy working to make the payments that they don't have time to leave the dock. Low cost steel boats greatly reduce the likelyhood of this happening.When you buy a boat with a bank loan, you end up paying double the sticker price by the time you've [paid interest.If the price of a boat was always an accurate determination of how good a boat it is, we wouldn''t need consumer reports.Tell Ralph Nader that he didn't need to do all that consumer research. All he ever had to do was read the price tag. Some of the most expensive boats out there are some of the flimsiest and least seaworthy. The British Maritime Safety Board said that a Beneteau was unfit for any offshore use in rough weather, yet those floating marshmallows are some of the most expensive boats out there for their size. If I were to charter a boat for a couple of weeks in sheltered water,I'd definitly prefer an aluminium catamaran. Then I could enjoy the advantages without having to deal with the long term disadvantages. It appears there has been no shortage of trashing steel boats by advocates of aluminium.Whenever you take a shot at steel boatbuilding, expecy a response.Do you have the George Bush attitude that there is one set of rules for you and a different set for everyone else? Many people have told me you'd do a lot better if you'd make an effort to try to sound a lot less like a used car salseman. Aluminium has it's advantages and disadvantages . It's up to the owner to make his own decisions , based on all available info. Here we try to provide all available info ,via open debate ,to help him make an informed decision. If that info collides with your sales pitch; tough shit. The sailor who is putting his life and life savings at risk takes priority over your profitability. The concept of putting people ahead of profits is still alive despite corporate attempts to eradicate it ,and attempts to reduce it's influence by their political lackeys. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > Hi Gerd, ho, ho, ho. Lots of people never go anywhere in an amateur built boat, regardless of material! Economical is better than > cheap. Otherwise, people that shopped in Wal-mart would all be millionaires. There are lots of solutions to going boating. Here > is one that worked for me: > > I bought one offshore boat in a divorce sale. The couple had broken up from the stress of going offshore and just wanted to > dump the boat. I borrowed the money from the bank against the boat, plus extra to make the payments (zero budget impact). I was > sailing immediately, and spent the first year sailing locally, and then next two years sailing in California and Mexico. I sold the > boat after doing a bunch of fix-ups and ended up with enough cash in my pocket to pay for my next boat outright. Lots of people > promote zero down-payment real estate. I simply took their advice and applied it to boats, and got cruising immediately. > > The 3mm x 50 foot cats are the most successful boats in the charter fleet in Thailand. They do virtually all the diving charters > into Myanmar and the Andaman's. I also thought 3mm was light, but one of the owners flew into Vancouver 2 weeks ago and we had him > over to dinner. He's researched the boats pretty carefully. I think we forget that small steel boats are usually over-strong, to > provide corrosion resistance, which is misleading when we look at alloy. Alloy is plenty strong, and more than anything hull > thickness depends on the spacing of the longitudinals, which are not limited in origami. If my schedule permits I'll be doing a > passage on this boat from the Philippines to Thailand this fall, so I'll let you know. > > I spent time with one of the builders last time I was in Thailand. He does one boat every two years, and had just arrived with his > latest boat. He spends one year building the boat with a helper in Oz. The next year he spends cruising Oz, Indonesia, and finally > to Thailand where he sells the boat into the charter fleet. His cost to completion, fully outfitted is $200,000, and he gets > $400,000 for his boats in Thailand. Last I heard he has orders for 3 boats, but he would rather be sailing than building, so he > will continue doing only one boat every other year. Still, not a bad return for an amateur builder. > > Gerd, if I understand you, you are saying that steel is the best way for YOU to build an origami boat. I agree. However, this is > no reason to assume that everyone is the same. What I am saying is that everyone is different, and different people have different > needs and requirements. For some people steel is best, for others alloy is best. Does this seem reasonable? That for some people > steel is a better solution, and for other people alloy is a better solution? > > If we agree that for some people alloy provides a better solution, then my interest in promoting alloy is to come up with the most > economical way for amateurs to build origami boats in alloy. I like the material because it reminds me a lot of plywood. It is > clean, you use the same tools, it works and handles much the same, and the MIG welder is like a super strength, super fast glue gun. > A lot of people have more experience with plywood than steel, and are probably going to take to alloy faster than experienced steel > workers. > > For many boaters, comfort and performance are equally as important as price. Not everyone wants to take their loved one's boating > in the cheapest boat possible. They want mix of economy, comfort, and performance, which may be better addressed by alloy. If we > simply look at the cheapest solution in steel, then automatically we limit the appeal of origami, when we should be expanding it. > Those people that have worked with steel, but not with alloy, are talking through their hats. We have alloy origami boats out there > now, that have been proven offshore. > > To me, origami makes great looking boats, for a wide range of applications. There are a lot of people that would be very happy with > an origami boat, but will decide it is not for them simply because they don't want to deal with steel, and the problems associated > with rust. This is why I have laid out how amateurs can build reliable hulls in alloy - to expand the popularity of origami. > > Best of luck on the new boat. Steel and alloy, they are both great materials. I'm off pouring cement for the next few days, so > people are welcome to rubbish alloy for amatuers if they want, without contradiction. Keep in mind, in doing so you are limiting > the appeal of origami to only those people willing to build in steel. Lots of boaters know that rust never sleeps. It isn't what > they want. They want a metal boat that doesn't rust. If you rubbish alloy for building in origami, they are not going to adopt > origami, limiting its acceptance. > > Greg Elliott > http://www.origamimagic.com > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Gerd" > To: > Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2004 12:37 AM > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: re:Flame Spray > > > > Greg, I sure would not go anywhere with an amateur built 3 mm alloy > > hull. > > > > As for starting cost: I just got YAGO going with about 1500 US to > > buy the plates for the hull, a big hammer, couple of chinese come- > > alongs, clamps and a small ventilated stick welder, on the lawn and > > with a borrowed oxy rig. This means I can actually start a 31 footer > > anytime it facies me, without any preparation of the site, without > > building shelter, from money that leaves hardly a bigger dent in the > > budget than some electronic houshold equipment or a multimedia > > computer for the kids, knowing that I can get all the rest of the > > steel, smaller sheets and profiles and the electrodes and gas as I > > go along, from the pocketmoney so to say, until the end of the > > steelworks. > > > > I know from my ealier experiences that it will not stay like that, > > and that there will be bigger jumps to make later that may not be > > the same in alloy (sandblasting and painting for one thing) but > > that's a couple of months away, working only on the weekends. > > > > I do understand that on the long run, the difference will be smaller > > and that - given the proper design with structure and plating > > optimized to the point for alloy by a professional and very > > experienced designer, preferably welded in best conditions by > > professional welders - the alloy-boat can be a better, lighter boat. > > But that was not my point. > > > > Gerd > > > > The YAGO PROJECT at http;//www.justmueller.com/boats/ > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > > > In smaller boat sizes steel is thicker than it needs to be to > > provide a corrosion allowance. You may well be able to replace > > > thickness for thickness. I've seen a number of 50 foot cats come > > out of Oz done in 3mm alloy (1/8") that worked very well. The > > > loads on those hulls would likely be much greater than a 30 foot > > monohull. > > > > > > I've built large shelters using plastic poly sheeting for a few > > hundred dollars. Very handy for keeping the rain off your tools, > > > and the sun off your head. It is a right pain to have to move all > > your tools and materials under shelter every time in rains, as it > > > does here on the coast more than 200 days of the year. Such a > > shelter is all you to build in alloy. There are plans available in > > > this group for a low cost inflatable shelter. If you use > > reinforced plastic sheeting, the shelter can be used afterwards to > > make > > > the sails for a junk or gaff rig. > > > > > > In fact, you can build in alloy outside, as I have already > > outlined on this site, without shelter. Only the final welding > > needs be > > > done under shelter. If anything, alloy is better suited to > > outside building than steel, because it does not rust when left > > > unprotected. Tools to work alloy are not an extra cost. You will > > need woodworking tools to do the interior of your boat, which are > > > the same tools your use for alloy. A low powered MIG welder and > > Argon is not much different in cost than an Arc welder and Oxy > > > torch. MIG wire is cheaper than welding rods. > > > > > > Usually it is the unknowns that keep people from using a new > > material. You are experienced in steel, so it is only natural to > > feel > > > more comfortable with the material. Ron is the same way. I am > > more experienced with wood, and probably feel more comfortable with > > > alloy because it can be worked much the same way. Most people > > have more experience with wood than steel. Thus, first time > > > builders, that have not done a lot of steel work may find that > > alloy, not steel is easier to use. > > > > > > Greg Elliott > > > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: "Gerd" > > > To: > > > Sent: Monday, May 31, 2004 10:41 AM > > > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: re:Flame Spray > > > > > > > > > > Don't know, Greg, probably because: > > > > - I can't replace my steel thickness for thickness with alloy > > > > - I have to work outside > > > > - I like to work with steel and have a good feeling about it > > > > - I have no alloy equipment nor experience > > > > - I have not got the higher starting sum in cash for materials, > > > > tools and shelter > > > > > > > > That said, I am bginning to discus with some friends here, and It > > > > might be that we will start a smaller alloy hull (motor for the > > > > river) later this autumn, because I really would like to give it > > a > > > > try. > > > > Been cutting plates all weekend, and steel sure is hot - sweated > > off > > > > about 2 kg ;-) > > > > > > > > Gerd > > > > The YAGO PROJECT at http://www.justmueller.com/boats/ > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > > > > > I was talking with another origami builder of the weekend. His > > > > latest quote for steel and alloy in BC had alloy slightly > > cheaper, > > > > > thickness for thickness. Why not simply build in alloy to > > start > > > > with? > > > > > > > > > > Greg Elliott > > > > > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > > From: "Gerald Niffenegger" > > > > > To: > > > > > Sent: Monday, May 31, 2004 4:07 AM > > > > > Subject: [origamiboats] Re: re:Flame Spray > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Here is a site and a lengthy study done for oil platforms: > > > > > > http://www.corrosion.com/thermal.html > > > > > > The way I read it aluminum provides better protection than > > zinc > > > > and > > > > > > would not require paint? It also states that the zinc coat > > needs > > > > to be > > > > > > applied up to 4 times thicker than aluminum? > > > > > > Steve > > > > > > Thank you for your input! I am wondering why you didn't coat > > the > > > > > > entire inside of your boat? The $2,200 figure you mentioned > > was > > > > for > > > > > > wire and gas? > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > Gerald > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "silascrosby" > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > I had my 36' flame-sprayed or "metallized" in 1993. I had > > the > > > > entire > > > > > > > exterior from the waterline up done and the inside bilges > > and > > > > > > > surrounding the windows inside. I used zinc. 10 years > > later I > > > > have > > > > > > > no rust . I topcoated the original Devoe epoxy last year > > with > > > > > > > another coat of Devoe(Ameron) epoxy purely for cosmetic > > fading > > > > > > > reasons. At the time it cost about $2200 Can. A fellow on > > a 44' > > > > > > > steel Brewer boat,'Kodiak', living in Sidney,Vancouver Is. > > had > > > > the > > > > > > > gun and I supplied the acetylene tank. I had it sandblasted > > > > earlier > > > > > > > in the day ( a hot july day). We sprayed on the 1st coat of > > > > epoxy ( > > > > > > > according to specs from Artie Bates at Ameron in > > Vancouver) on > > > > the > > > > > > > next day( another hot dry day). Probably by the time it > > was all > > > > > > > blasted , flame-sprayed and painted I had spent $ 5000 to > > > > $6000 can. > > > > > > > In retrospect it was worth it for us. A friend had flame > > > > sprayed > > > > > > > below the waterline and had big problems with blistering > > in the > > > > > > > first season. Steve. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > > > > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- > > > > unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- > > unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > | 3940|3915|2004-06-02 13:58:27|brentswain38|Re: Aluminum Vs. Steel|Yesterday I was talking to a guy who worked building coast guard boats in Victoria with steel hulls riveted to aluminium superstructures. That was years ago and they are still going strong, no problems. Brent --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "richytill" wrote: > Brent, I too have pointed out to a number of people that ferries with > steel hulls and aluminum on top would make sense. Just down the road > in Gibsons they make aluminium water taxi's; best use of the > material, a great product well built, no argument. Some of the > aluminium fishboats here have a long history of good service with far > less maintainance problems than steel. Tugs are steel for obvious > reasons. Both materials work well in context. I am not against the > use of aluminum hulls but the years have taught me that steel is more > predictable in nature and that has become my personal preference. I > wish BC Ferries would apply the materials where they work best > too. rt > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" > wrote: > > With the enormous twisting loads on the hull-deck joint , I'd be > > reluctant to make the hull deck joint the transfer point between > > aluminium and steel. Making the transition at the deck-cabinside > > joint would make more sense structurally, and an aluminium cabin > > would save a lot of weight. I once suggested this as a way to train > > aluminium workers on new BC ferries , by building them with steel > > hulls and aluminium superstructures, saving maintenance and huge > > amounts of fuel while using well proven steel building techniques > for > > the hulls, eliminating most of the liabilities and re-learning > > proccess. > > Brent Swain > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "richytill" > wrote: > > > Phil, > > > > > > I have been in the metal trades since 1967 and for the most part > I > > > agree. An aluminium deck would be lighter and easier to maintain > > and > > > I might consider that option if I were to build again. As far as > > the > > > body of the hull is concerned; steel makes sense. This subject > has > > > been reviewed several times but it is worth repeating that steel > is > > > obvious and honest in its' nature--aluminum is not. Aluminum can > > > hide a multitude of defects that steel reveals. rt > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Phil S." > > > > wrote: > > > > Just my humble opinion on both materials, first a wee bit of > > > backround. I was a US Army > > > > airframe mechanic for almost 10 years, I have worked and cut > more > > > aluminum than I ever > > > > care to see again. First off disimilar metal corosion or > > > eletrolysis is nothing to sneeze at, it > > > > can turn good metal to junk in a very short time span. In fact > > > recently an 100+ft aluminum > > > > crew boat was for sale in Boats and Harbors. It was being sold > > for > > > scrap because of > > > > electrolysis, the boat was only 8 years old. I frankly never > want > > > anything to do with > > > > aluminum ever again, I have seen what appear to be good welds > > were > > > actually junk on ex- > > > > ray inspection and testing. > > > > > > > > The company I work for now does NDI Testing and ex-ray along > with > > > ASME code welding. > > > > To a man the welders say stay away from aluminum, Unless you > are > > > prepared to TIG weld > > > > it, a slow and tedious form of welding, forget that. I have > > access > > > to all the welding > > > > equipment you could imagine, I will work in steel. Here is why; > > > > 1 There are steel boats in the great lakes that are 70 + years > > old, > > > still working everyday. > > > > 2 I can get new "scrap" steel very inexpensively, The large > > > manfacturing shops will > > > > sometimes scrap perfectly good sheet steel if it excess for a > > > completed project. > > > > 3 Steel corrodes in a visable, predictable manor, once > corrosion > > > starts it is easy to deal > > > > with, grind and paint or use Corroseal, and paint. > > > > 4 I can repair steel almost anywhere, with a simple stick > welding > > > set up hooked to the > > > > engine alternator. > > > > 5 I like the abrasion and holing resistence of steel, bump off > a > > > rock( a very real possibility > > > > in the 1000 Islands) and you can pound out the dent with a > > hammer. > > > Aluminum tears a lot > > > > easier than steel, even if you double the thickness. > > > > 6 Cutting aluminum with a torch makes a mess, cutting it with > > > common wood working > > > > tools really sucks, having tried that and ended up with an arm > > full > > > of shrapenel from the > > > > skill saw. > > > > 7 There are no aluminum Ice Breakers. > > > > > > > > There are other reasons but for the most part I just like > steel, > > I > > > plan on cruising a good > > > > part of the year up here and might have to go through some ice. > > The > > > weather in Upstate > > > > NY sucks, I will want to go out and cruise around, safe in my > > nice > > > warm and comfy wheel > > > > house and look at the winter wonderland. Good thing about that > is > > > there won't be any > > > > noisy jet ski's flying about. > > > > Just My Humble Opinion > > > > Phil | 3941|3915|2004-06-02 14:07:11|brentswain38|Re: Aluminum Vs. Steel|Our fast cats had trouble with engines supplied by Detroit Diesel Allison which were a disaster. My clients also had a lot of trouble dealing with Detroit Dieseel Allison which I'd warned the BC government about at the time they were being given the contract. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Phil S." wrote: > Just to add fuel to this discussion, we here in rochester, NY have our own fast ferry, well > sort of. It is an all aluminum built ferry and it is a piece of junk; > > http://www.rochestertoday.com/news/local/story.aspx? content_id=BA6FFA27-F802 > -41F5-9D9A-ED14D544A6E2 > > The boat recieved severe damage when it bumped into a dock on the delivery trip from > Australia, delaying its intended start time. Now it is in a Toronto ship yard with major > engine problems, they are talking about loading on a barge and shipping it back to > Australia so the engines can be pulled and replaced. > > I think the whole project is a collosal waste of money, we don't need a ferry to run from > Rochester to Toronto, it is only a 4 hour drive, as opposed to an $135 two hour ferry ride. > Don't try to tell a politician not to waste money though. > > If you can look at the picture in the article you will see the thin aluminum skin ripped like > tissue paper. Good thing it was above the water line. > Phil | 3942|3915|2004-06-02 14:08:19|spencerj71|Re: Aluminum Vs. Steel|I agree with you on the viability of that ferry, but I think you are confused as to why the hull ripped. Aluminum is chosed for these boats because they need to be light to go fast. They are made as thin and light as is safe to with stand the forces of the seas. There would be no way to make a vessel of that size and speed out of steel, so I don't see how you can use that as an argument against aluminum. The only choices for high speed vessels are aluminum alloy and composites, not steel, the boat just ends up being too heavy. I think what you want to say is that you don't think Rochester and Toronto need a high speed ferry. I think I agree with you on this. What's more important is why did New York State allow this boat to be built overseas when there are plenty of compotent builders in the U.S., even in New York? At least they didn't make it a social welfare program like the BC disaster. As for the location of the rip and the quality of the vessel. Yes, high speed boats are more susceptible to damage because they need to be built very light for the speed. I can gaurantee that the hull is thicker below the waterline (as it would be on steel). As for the quality and reliability of high output diesel engines...that's a whole other discussion. - Spencer --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Phil S." wrote: > Just to add fuel to this discussion, we here in rochester, NY have our own fast ferry, well > sort of. It is an all aluminum built ferry and it is a piece of junk; > > http://www.rochestertoday.com/news/local/story.aspx? content_id=BA6FFA27-F802 > -41F5-9D9A-ED14D544A6E2 > > The boat recieved severe damage when it bumped into a dock on the delivery trip from > Australia, delaying its intended start time. Now it is in a Toronto ship yard with major > engine problems, they are talking about loading on a barge and shipping it back to > Australia so the engines can be pulled and replaced. > > I think the whole project is a collosal waste of money, we don't need a ferry to run from > Rochester to Toronto, it is only a 4 hour drive, as opposed to an $135 two hour ferry ride. > Don't try to tell a politician not to waste money though. > > If you can look at the picture in the article you will see the thin aluminum skin ripped like > tissue paper. Good thing it was above the water line. > Phil | 3943|3915|2004-06-02 14:13:28|spencerj71|Re: Aluminum Vs. Steel|DDA and MTU are the same company. The reality of high speed ferries are that they need to be very light in order to go fast. This means light aluminum hulls and high output diesels. The sacrifice is reliability. If you want high speed (and maybe you don't) you have to take the trade-offs. Ironically, MTU probably has the best track record in the high output, medium speed diesel market. - Spencer --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" wrote: > Our fast cats had trouble with engines supplied by Detroit Diesel > Allison which were a disaster. My clients also had a lot of trouble > dealing with Detroit Dieseel Allison which I'd warned the BC > government about at the time they were being given the contract. > Brent Swain > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Phil S." > wrote: > > Just to add fuel to this discussion, we here in rochester, NY have > our own fast ferry, well > > sort of. It is an all aluminum built ferry and it is a piece of > junk; > > > > http://www.rochestertoday.com/news/local/story.aspx? > content_id=BA6FFA27-F802 > > -41F5-9D9A-ED14D544A6E2 > > > > The boat recieved severe damage when it bumped into a dock on the > delivery trip from > > Australia, delaying its intended start time. Now it is in a Toronto > ship yard with major > > engine problems, they are talking about loading on a barge and > shipping it back to > > Australia so the engines can be pulled and replaced. > > > > I think the whole project is a collosal waste of money, we don't > need a ferry to run from > > Rochester to Toronto, it is only a 4 hour drive, as opposed to an > $135 two hour ferry ride. > > Don't try to tell a politician not to waste money though. > > > > If you can look at the picture in the article you will see the thin > aluminum skin ripped like > > tissue paper. Good thing it was above the water line. > > Phil | 3944|3944|2004-06-02 14:20:40|Gerd|arc and ccd - stupid question|As I am happily snapping digital images and recording video of the assembling of my hull, does naybody know if a direct hit of the arc damages the chip of the cameras??? Gerd| 3945|3893|2004-06-02 14:21:39|brentswain38|Re: catamarans|There is absolutly no reason not to build a catamaran out of aluminium using the origami method. Where there is a straight run amidships, you wouldn't have the stiffness that the more curved sections of a monohull would give, but this could be made up by putting in more longitudinals. With the many years of trouble free and maintenance free use Eric Tabarly got out of his Pen Duick trimaran,and it's racing succcesses, I've always wondered why alloy isn't the prefered material for multihulls.While it is no where near as strong and reliable as steel, it's far tougher and more reliable that the extremely expensive materials many modern multihulls are made of and far more suitable for the charter industry. It's also much easier to work with and repair. The guys who sell the high tech expensive goop must be some salesmen. I've also wondered why the charter business has been so slow to catch onto metal boats in general. A friend who was chartering a steel boat in the Charlottes said to me," People walk right by my boat to charter the "Maple Leaf"( a large very traditionalwooden schooner) I said to him" When they finish their season they have a full winter of maintenance work ahead of them to get ready for next summer, while you have only play time. In dollars per hour averaged thru the whole year you could charge half as much and still make far more money per hour of work. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gerd" wrote: > It's good to bring that up from time to time, cats have a lot going > for them, and if there would be any way to combine the cat-concept > with the cheap and simple origami method that would be great. > > The problem, inparticular with bridge deck cats is that there is an > anormous amount of shell-surface around hulls, deck, cockpit and > cabins to enclose all this living space, which will penalize any > project with high weight material. > > We have many cruising cats in europe, very popular and not only for > charter. One of the best known brands is the Privilege from Jeantot > Marine at http://www.jeantot-marine.com/ > Just look at their 37, they give a displacement of 6.5 tons, which > is not really extra-light for a cat... but if you look at the > surfaces it becomes clear that doing that in steel would be very > difficult indeed... Actually it would be interesting to do this > calculation for a similar boat and tightly optimized steel > construction just to see where you would end up, might just do that > next winter ;-) > > Of course this would be a case for alloy, if... see the other thread > on that ;-) > > There also have been several mentions here of the french PROMETA > yard, they build in Strongall, thick alloy practically without > structure. There is a french singer called Antoine who dropped out > of showbizz after his first successes and since lives afloat, first > on a Damien, now on a Michel Joubert designed catamaran, 12.50 x 6.5 > meter with 12 tons (!) displacement fully loaded for cruising, built > by Prometa in thick alloy. > That's not really light, and might actually have just been built in > light steel or steel/alloy combination, but I guess Joubert would > then have had to fear for his reputation ;-) I guess any designer > who would publicly announce a steel-cat project can burn his diploma > the same day. Thanks God, most of them don't have one to begin > with... > > Joubert is not really known for designing slow boats, have a look at > some of the joubert/nivelt designs on the site of PINTA in France: > http://www.chantier-pinta.com/prototypes.htm > More on Antoine and his 12 ton cat at http://www.antoine- > islands.com/francais/antoine/bateaux/bs.htm > > Gerd > The YAGO PROJECT at http;//www.justmueller.com/boats/ > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Graeme" wrote: > > > > Lol > > > > Hell you should mention cats on the boat building site but carry a > > bucket of water as you will get ya ass flamed right out off there > funny > > as hell, even though they have a cat or multi hull section all > question > > there go un-answered . > > > > But that is what makes the world go around people with different > ideas > > if everything was the same we would be board shi,iteless I guess . > > > > Dennis I asked the same question as you a couple of years ago I > got a > > smack in the back of the head and told to move a long nothing to > see > > here lol. That was on a different site so I packed my swag and > moved on > > . > > > > But these ppl are kind and friendly with a vast building and > sailing > > experience . > > > > Tent I thought it was a caravan they said but, I may be wrong it > has > > happened before, me being wrong that is. > > > > Dennis where abouts in oz are you qld or west coast. > > > > > > Graeme > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: denis buggy [mailto:buggy@i...] > > Sent: Wednesday, 2 June 2004 4:41 PM > > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > Subject: Re: [origamiboats] catamarans > > > > dear Dale > > tread carefully on this site re catamarans as the only members of > this > > group who do not have any strong views so far are prophets and > imanns > > , > > I tried to discuss cats and the last advice received was to > buy a > > tent , ! yes a tent and bring it with me to sea , apparently > any > > kind of tent would do . > > I politely said nothing and decided to observe the > > site to learn more and read correspondence from those suffering > from > > acute cabin fever and disorientation due to sailing a pendulum > on the > > ocean and staggering on to some wild shore to consume berries > mushrooms > > and various other hallucigens , this activity only interrupted to > > dispense nautical advice worldwide re fitting tents to > catamarans and > > their love/hate relationship with their various financial > advisors . > > should you wish to study further your interest in cats you can > > correspond with me at buggy@i... and you can check out the > > following Bowden catamarans Australia , Bruce Roberts has sold me > > study plans for a 60 foot cat which can be adapted for steel , > steel > > magnolia is for sale reduced today to 200.000 us from heather > underwood > > at heather@b... and you can view the classic hull > > design dilemma with steel cats by looking at mv solstice and mv > > equinox based in Scotland . > > > > on a serious note , there are those who have helped me greatly on > this > > site and I would be grateful for a critical evaluation of mv > equinox > > as I have the scania engines used in this and the facilities to > build > > something similar with my own sailing arrangement mounted on > each > > hull however I do not have full confidence in the design of the > > planing hull used . regards all denis > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: shorinjin01 > > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > Sent: Monday, May 31, 2004 6:15 AM > > Subject: [origamiboats] catamarans > > > > > > I just discovered origami boats and this group. I did a search > on > > catamarans, but found nothing. Have any been built using this > method? > > > > Dale > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > ADVERTISEMENT > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ - > ----- > > ------ > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of > > Service. > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: > > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > Yahoo! Groups Links | 3946|3915|2004-06-02 14:30:36|brentswain38|Re: Aluminum Vs. Steel|I aggree with much of what you say except a couple of points. Aluminium does have to be painted , antifouling below the water and , if you plan to cruise the tropics, a light colour above the waterline. Bare aluminium in the sun quicly gets hot enough to fry eggs on and can severely burn skin. Aluminium tears and gouges much easier than steel and ahs far less abrasion resistance.Drive a sharp chisel into aluminium then try it with a piece of steel.Aluminium welds ,regardless of how well done ,have far more liabilities than steel welds. Brent --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "spencerj71" wrote: > Phil, > > I've resisted, but I just can't help weighing in on this. There is > no perfect choice, so what it comes down to is what is better for the > boat and what is better for the builder. In your case its steel and > you make some compelling points, foremost being that you want to save > $ on materials. However you make many arguments against aluminum > alloy that are not the fault of the material, but are results of the > ignorance of the builder. Here are my opinions on some of those > points. > > Electrolysis: This is a big concern with aluminum alloy, as well as > steel. I'm sure that the crew boat you spoke of corroded beyond > repair becase it was poorly built. Dissimilar metals were not > properly isolated, the electrical system was not properly bonded, or > maybe they didn't use marine grade alloy. There is no mystery here, > if you use the proper alloys, isolate dissimilar metals and install > the electrics correctly, you will have a boat that lasts. Keep in > mind that you are protecting your steel hull from corrosion by > painting it inside and out. This will also help aluminum. Al alloys > poor reputation in this regard is mostly the result of builders > cutting corners during consturction. > > Welding: Yes aluminum alloy is less forgiving to weld than steel. It > demands proper weld preparation and cleanliness. Again there's no > mystery here, by following the proper techniques you can produce > consistent, correct MIG and pulsed MIG welds. Many of the problems > with "professional" welds result from welders long experienced with > steel trying to apply those same techniques to aluminum. In many > cases a novice will become a better aluminum welder than a pro, since > he doesn't have to unlearn years of experience that doesn't work with > aluminum. > > Great Lakes Boats: Fresh water is a very freindly environment. Its > the salt in sea water that makes it an electrolyte, so corrosion on > the lakes is much much slower. How many 70 year old ships do you see > on the ocean, the environment that the crew boat you mention was in? > Aluminum will also benifit from being on fresh water. Look at all > the small riveted aluminum boats that you see on the lakes. > > Aluminum tears easier than steel: This is completely false. The > plastic deformation range of aluminum is greater than that of steel. > If built to the same strength (the Al hull will be thicker, but > lighter), the steel hull is more likely to tear before the aluminum. > Also its much easier to hammer out dents in aluminum than in steel. > Again look at all the aluminum skiffs and Gruman canoes and how long > they last. > > Cutting aluminum: Cutting aluminum with a torch is just silly. Let > me get this straigt, you'd rather use an acetylene set and do lots of > grinding than use a circular saw and a planer, or just a band saw? > Aluminum is much easier to cut than steel. If you want to cut it > with a torch, the correct tool is a plasma arc. As for > the "shrapnel", wear a shirt and a face shield and buy a shop vac. > > Aluminum Ice Breakers: The reason there are no aluminum ice breakers > is that the main argument for using aluminum is that it produces a > hull about half the weight of steel, and thus a faster or more fuel > efficient vessel. This would be a disadvantage for an ice breaker as > they use their weight to break the ice. You could certainly make an > ice breaker from aluminum, but you'd end up with very thick plates, > probably have to carry a lot of ballast and it would be very > expensive. This is why it doesn't make sense to build ice breakers > and ships out of aluminum alloy. As for small ice breaking > capability, a company I once worked for had a small aluminum tug > (30') that would break up ice a foot thick. > > The advantages of aluminum alloy are that it produces a hull of equal > strenght that is about half the weight of steel. This is good if you > want to go fast, or be more fuel efficient. In the case of a > sailboat it means that the keel can be heavier, so you can carry more > sail. The other advantege is that aluminum alloy does not corrode in > the marine environment as long as it is in the presence of free > oxygen (no stangnant water). So a properly built and outfitted boat > does not have to be painted. In a sense, its probably better to > think of aluminum alloy as an alternative to composite construction > than as an alternative to steel. > > I think we can at least agree to not liking fiberglass and hating jet > skis. > > I look forward to the continuing discussion. > > - Spencer > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Phil S." > wrote: > > Just my humble opinion on both materials, first a wee bit of > backround. I was a US Army > > airframe mechanic for almost 10 years, I have worked and cut more > aluminum than I ever > > care to see again. First off disimilar metal corosion or > eletrolysis is nothing to sneeze at, it > > can turn good metal to junk in a very short time span. In fact > recently an 100+ft aluminum > > crew boat was for sale in Boats and Harbors. It was being sold for > scrap because of > > electrolysis, the boat was only 8 years old. I frankly never want > anything to do with > > aluminum ever again, I have seen what appear to be good welds were > actually junk on ex- > > ray inspection and testing. > > > > The company I work for now does NDI Testing and ex-ray along with > ASME code welding. > > To a man the welders say stay away from aluminum, Unless you are > prepared to TIG weld > > it, a slow and tedious form of welding, forget that. I have access > to all the welding > > equipment you could imagine, I will work in steel. Here is why; > > 1 There are steel boats in the great lakes that are 70 + years old, > still working everyday. > > 2 I can get new "scrap" steel very inexpensively, The large > manfacturing shops will > > sometimes scrap perfectly good sheet steel if it excess for a > completed project. > > 3 Steel corrodes in a visable, predictable manor, once corrosion > starts it is easy to deal > > with, grind and paint or use Corroseal, and paint. > > 4 I can repair steel almost anywhere, with a simple stick welding > set up hooked to the > > engine alternator. > > 5 I like the abrasion and holing resistence of steel, bump off a > rock( a very real possibility > > in the 1000 Islands) and you can pound out the dent with a hammer. > Aluminum tears a lot > > easier than steel, even if you double the thickness. > > 6 Cutting aluminum with a torch makes a mess, cutting it with > common wood working > > tools really sucks, having tried that and ended up with an arm full > of shrapenel from the > > skill saw. > > 7 There are no aluminum Ice Breakers. > > > > There are other reasons but for the most part I just like steel, I > plan on cruising a good > > part of the year up here and might have to go through some ice. The > weather in Upstate > > NY sucks, I will want to go out and cruise around, safe in my nice > warm and comfy wheel > > house and look at the winter wonderland. Good thing about that is > there won't be any > > noisy jet ski's flying about. > > Just My Humble Opinion > > Phil | 3947|3915|2004-06-02 14:32:15|Michael Casling|Re: Aluminum Vs. Steel|Spencer, what you said, all of it makes sense to me. I have decided there are some things I can do, and some it is best left to the pros. Welding is something I get the pros to do. I find if I do all the design and planning work and pay the welder I get satisfactory results. This is the way the farm equipment gets built and keeps running. On the plan list for me is wheels for the cradle to pull the sailboat out of the puddle and patches to the aluminum hull fishing boat. I will pay the pros to do the work and not worry. I will work on the stuff that I can. When I sold tin boats it was easy to tell the cheap units from the good ones. The cheap ones had much more shiny alloy which I believe has something to do with the nickel content. The cheap ones would split more easily and last about 10 to 20 years depending on use, the good ones would last a lifetime almost regardless of use. I used to tell folks to watch the movie Deliverance so see how well an aluminum canoe performed. The information on corrosion and paint and anodes is well documented and if followed an aluminum boat will last as long as me, if someone ignores the rules then they may have a problem but I would not change because of their mistakes. Michael ----- Original Message ----- From: spencerj71 To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2004 10:25 AM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Aluminum Vs. Steel Phil, I've resisted, but I just can't help weighing in on this. There is no perfect choice, so what it comes down to is what is better for the boat and what is better for the builder. In your case its steel and you make some compelling points, foremost being that you want to save $ on materials. However you make many arguments against aluminum alloy that are not the fault of the material, but are results of the ignorance of the builder. Here are my opinions on some of those points. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3948|3948|2004-06-02 14:32:43|spencerj71|Stress Concentration|I have never built an origami boat (have built a 20' alloy center- console), but I am interested in doing so. It seems to me that the end of the hard chine (and end of the weld) is the very definition of a stress concentration. Has anyone experienced cracking in this area, or have any advice with regards to stress relief, or am I concerned for nothing? This is the best group for metal boat building, oragami or not. Thanks for any advice. - Spencer| 3949|3915|2004-06-02 14:41:44|spencerj71|Re: Aluminum Vs. Steel|I agree with your points. You do need to paint the bottom and bare metal does get hot. Also any Al deck would need to be painted with non-skid or it will be like a skating rink when wet. Yes, Al is less abrasion resistent than steel. I was discussing tearing. Yes, mild steel welds are the full strenth of the parent material while Al welds are not and for sure aluminum is trickier to weld than steel, however for the size of these boats and the plating thicknesses that should be used, I don't think the welds are a liability. What concerns me with some of the discussions in this group is the notion that origami boats don't need internal framing. To me this is ludicrious. While the hull maybe strong enough without frames to resist the bending and twisting forces of the waves, local loads from waves or rocks can cause much greater damage without frames to reduce the size of the panels. Do people really build these boats without frames? --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" wrote: > I aggree with much of what you say except a couple of points. > Aluminium does have to be painted , antifouling below the water > and , if you plan to cruise the tropics, a light colour above the > waterline. Bare aluminium in the sun quicly gets hot enough to fry > eggs on and can severely burn skin. > Aluminium tears and gouges much easier than steel and ahs far less > abrasion resistance.Drive a sharp chisel into aluminium then try it > with a piece of steel.Aluminium welds ,regardless of how well > done ,have far more liabilities than steel welds. > Brent > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "spencerj71" > wrote: > > Phil, > > > > I've resisted, but I just can't help weighing in on this. There is > > no perfect choice, so what it comes down to is what is better for > the > > boat and what is better for the builder. In your case its steel > and > > you make some compelling points, foremost being that you want to > save > > $ on materials. However you make many arguments against aluminum > > alloy that are not the fault of the material, but are results of > the > > ignorance of the builder. Here are my opinions on some of those > > points. > > > > Electrolysis: This is a big concern with aluminum alloy, as well as > > steel. I'm sure that the crew boat you spoke of corroded beyond > > repair becase it was poorly built. Dissimilar metals were not > > properly isolated, the electrical system was not properly bonded, > or > > maybe they didn't use marine grade alloy. There is no mystery > here, > > if you use the proper alloys, isolate dissimilar metals and install > > the electrics correctly, you will have a boat that lasts. Keep in > > mind that you are protecting your steel hull from corrosion by > > painting it inside and out. This will also help aluminum. Al > alloys > > poor reputation in this regard is mostly the result of builders > > cutting corners during consturction. > > > > Welding: Yes aluminum alloy is less forgiving to weld than steel. > It > > demands proper weld preparation and cleanliness. Again there's no > > mystery here, by following the proper techniques you can produce > > consistent, correct MIG and pulsed MIG welds. Many of the problems > > with "professional" welds result from welders long experienced with > > steel trying to apply those same techniques to aluminum. In many > > cases a novice will become a better aluminum welder than a pro, > since > > he doesn't have to unlearn years of experience that doesn't work > with > > aluminum. > > > > Great Lakes Boats: Fresh water is a very freindly environment. > Its > > the salt in sea water that makes it an electrolyte, so corrosion on > > the lakes is much much slower. How many 70 year old ships do you > see > > on the ocean, the environment that the crew boat you mention was > in? > > Aluminum will also benifit from being on fresh water. Look at all > > the small riveted aluminum boats that you see on the lakes. > > > > Aluminum tears easier than steel: This is completely false. The > > plastic deformation range of aluminum is greater than that of > steel. > > If built to the same strength (the Al hull will be thicker, but > > lighter), the steel hull is more likely to tear before the > aluminum. > > Also its much easier to hammer out dents in aluminum than in > steel. > > Again look at all the aluminum skiffs and Gruman canoes and how > long > > they last. > > > > Cutting aluminum: Cutting aluminum with a torch is just silly. > Let > > me get this straigt, you'd rather use an acetylene set and do lots > of > > grinding than use a circular saw and a planer, or just a band saw? > > Aluminum is much easier to cut than steel. If you want to cut it > > with a torch, the correct tool is a plasma arc. As for > > the "shrapnel", wear a shirt and a face shield and buy a shop vac. > > > > Aluminum Ice Breakers: The reason there are no aluminum ice > breakers > > is that the main argument for using aluminum is that it produces a > > hull about half the weight of steel, and thus a faster or more fuel > > efficient vessel. This would be a disadvantage for an ice breaker > as > > they use their weight to break the ice. You could certainly make > an > > ice breaker from aluminum, but you'd end up with very thick plates, > > probably have to carry a lot of ballast and it would be very > > expensive. This is why it doesn't make sense to build ice breakers > > and ships out of aluminum alloy. As for small ice breaking > > capability, a company I once worked for had a small aluminum tug > > (30') that would break up ice a foot thick. > > > > The advantages of aluminum alloy are that it produces a hull of > equal > > strenght that is about half the weight of steel. This is good if > you > > want to go fast, or be more fuel efficient. In the case of a > > sailboat it means that the keel can be heavier, so you can carry > more > > sail. The other advantege is that aluminum alloy does not corrode > in > > the marine environment as long as it is in the presence of free > > oxygen (no stangnant water). So a properly built and outfitted > boat > > does not have to be painted. In a sense, its probably better to > > think of aluminum alloy as an alternative to composite construction > > than as an alternative to steel. > > > > I think we can at least agree to not liking fiberglass and hating > jet > > skis. > > > > I look forward to the continuing discussion. > > > > - Spencer > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Phil S." > > wrote: > > > Just my humble opinion on both materials, first a wee bit of > > backround. I was a US Army > > > airframe mechanic for almost 10 years, I have worked and cut more > > aluminum than I ever > > > care to see again. First off disimilar metal corosion or > > eletrolysis is nothing to sneeze at, it > > > can turn good metal to junk in a very short time span. In fact > > recently an 100+ft aluminum > > > crew boat was for sale in Boats and Harbors. It was being sold > for > > scrap because of > > > electrolysis, the boat was only 8 years old. I frankly never want > > anything to do with > > > aluminum ever again, I have seen what appear to be good welds > were > > actually junk on ex- > > > ray inspection and testing. > > > > > > The company I work for now does NDI Testing and ex-ray along with > > ASME code welding. > > > To a man the welders say stay away from aluminum, Unless you are > > prepared to TIG weld > > > it, a slow and tedious form of welding, forget that. I have > access > > to all the welding > > > equipment you could imagine, I will work in steel. Here is why; > > > 1 There are steel boats in the great lakes that are 70 + years > old, > > still working everyday. > > > 2 I can get new "scrap" steel very inexpensively, The large > > manfacturing shops will > > > sometimes scrap perfectly good sheet steel if it excess for a > > completed project. > > > 3 Steel corrodes in a visable, predictable manor, once corrosion > > starts it is easy to deal > > > with, grind and paint or use Corroseal, and paint. > > > 4 I can repair steel almost anywhere, with a simple stick welding > > set up hooked to the > > > engine alternator. > > > 5 I like the abrasion and holing resistence of steel, bump off a > > rock( a very real possibility > > > in the 1000 Islands) and you can pound out the dent with a > hammer. > > Aluminum tears a lot > > > easier than steel, even if you double the thickness. > > > 6 Cutting aluminum with a torch makes a mess, cutting it with > > common wood working > > > tools really sucks, having tried that and ended up with an arm > full > > of shrapenel from the > > > skill saw. > > > 7 There are no aluminum Ice Breakers. > > > > > > There are other reasons but for the most part I just like steel, > I > > plan on cruising a good > > > part of the year up here and might have to go through some ice. > The > > weather in Upstate > > > NY sucks, I will want to go out and cruise around, safe in my > nice > > warm and comfy wheel > > > house and look at the winter wonderland. Good thing about that is > > there won't be any > > > noisy jet ski's flying about. > > > Just My Humble Opinion > > > Phil | 3950|3915|2004-06-02 14:42:24|Michael Casling|Re: Aluminum Vs. Steel|I think the government geniuses got stuck on going fast mode thinking, rather than carrying capacity. So when they thought fast they thought catamarans and when the other folks told them they would not perform if they had to carry a lot of weight, they did not listen. So the motors got overworked and they reduced the loads and they had lots of problems. You guys were closer to it than me. This same design stuff has to apply to the cruising boats where carrying capacity becomes important as you have stated more than once. Gerrs book on the nature of boats also discusses it well. On interest income and rates and loans. People who understand interest collect it, people who don't, pay it. Michael ----- Original Message ----- From: brentswain38 To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2004 11:06 AM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Aluminum Vs. Steel Our fast cats had trouble with engines supplied by Detroit Diesel Allison which were a disaster. My clients also had a lot of trouble dealing with Detroit Dieseel Allison which I'd warned the BC government about at the time they were being given the contract. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Phil S." wrote: > Just to add fuel to this discussion, we here in rochester, NY have our own fast ferry, well > sort of. It is an all aluminum built ferry and it is a piece of junk; > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3951|3948|2004-06-02 14:46:40|Gerd|Re: Stress Concentration|Spencer, I have not yet pulled the hull together for good, but have tried tentatively to make the edges join on the first half-hull that I have cut out. There seems to be no notable stress at the dart-end. Some resistance yes, but I expect that to be dstributed over the entire panel and all along the weld. I think that in corners where several welds meet, even if the plate is otherwise flat, you would have a lot more stress due to the welding itself than to the fact that you "force" the sheet some. Every steelboat is full of such places, for example around the bow, the transom-deck-hull corner aft etc. and I have not heard of any problems with that. Gerd the YAGO PROJECT at http://www.justmueller.com/boats/ --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "spencerj71" wrote: > I have never built an origami boat (have built a 20' alloy center- > console), but I am interested in doing so. It seems to me that the > end of the hard chine (and end of the weld) is the very definition of > a stress concentration. Has anyone experienced cracking in this > area, or have any advice with regards to stress relief, or am I > concerned for nothing? > > This is the best group for metal boat building, oragami or not. > > Thanks for any advice. > > - Spencer | 3952|3948|2004-06-02 14:50:58|spencerj71|Re: Stress Concentration|Gerd, Yes, I was concerned about the end of the weld, or where welds cross. As noted in other discussions, this would centainly be of more concern for an alloy boat. Good to hear that the plates were happy to take the shape. Thanks for your response. - Spencer --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gerd" wrote: > Spencer, I have not yet pulled the hull together for good, but have > tried tentatively to make the edges join on the first half-hull that > I have cut out. There seems to be no notable stress at the dart- end. > Some resistance yes, but I expect that to be dstributed over the > entire panel and all along the weld. I think that in corners where > several welds meet, even if the plate is otherwise flat, you would > have a lot more stress due to the welding itself than to the fact > that you "force" the sheet some. Every steelboat is full of such > places, for example around the bow, the transom-deck-hull corner aft > etc. and I have not heard of any problems with that. > > Gerd > > the YAGO PROJECT at http://www.justmueller.com/boats/ > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "spencerj71" > wrote: > > I have never built an origami boat (have built a 20' alloy center- > > console), but I am interested in doing so. It seems to me that > the > > end of the hard chine (and end of the weld) is the very definition > of > > a stress concentration. Has anyone experienced cracking in this > > area, or have any advice with regards to stress relief, or am I > > concerned for nothing? > > > > This is the best group for metal boat building, oragami or not. > > > > Thanks for any advice. > > > > - Spencer | 3953|3915|2004-06-02 14:59:43|Phil S.|Re: Aluminum Vs. Steel|Spencer; You make some good points, Like you said much of the argument in favor of steel over aluminum is the nut holding the electrode. I will be building much of the hull outside in a notoriously windy area, so stick welding is going to be the way to go, Inside I will use my MIG rig. I really don't want to build in Aluminum, I am sick of the stuff. The other point brought up earlyer still holds, I can get known grades of steel second hand, inexpensively. I know of no sources in my area for Marine Grade Aluminum, so transportation costs would add more expenses to the boat. Like I said You and Greg bring up some good points but for me they wouldn't out weigh the benefits of building in steel. Phil| 3954|3915|2004-06-02 15:11:29|spencerj71|Re: Aluminum Vs. Steel|Phil, I think steel is an excellent boat building material. Where are you building the boat? I gather you are up in the thousand islands? How big of a boat? Any pictures yet? I'm orginally from up on the lakes (Oswego). I try to make it back up as much as I can. I wish there was more pro boat builders on the lakes. Good luck with the build. - Spencer --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Phil S." wrote: > Spencer; > You make some good points, Like you said much of the argument in favor of steel over > aluminum is the nut holding the electrode. I will be building much of the hull outside in a > notoriously windy area, so stick welding is going to be the way to go, Inside I will use my > MIG rig. I really don't want to build in Aluminum, I am sick of the stuff. The other point > brought up earlyer still holds, I can get known grades of steel second hand, inexpensively. > I know of no sources in my area for Marine Grade Aluminum, so transportation costs > would add more expenses to the boat. > > Like I said You and Greg bring up some good points but for me they wouldn't out weigh > the benefits of building in steel. > Phil | 3955|3915|2004-06-02 15:12:45|Gerd|Re: Aluminum Vs. Steel|Ha! I was wating to bring the subject of the frameless origami up for some time ;-) > What concerns me with some of the discussions in this group is the > notion that origami boats don't need internal framing. To me this is ludicrious. Actually this is a misconception in many minds I think, and is really a bit misleading if always mentioned together as "frameless origami" hull, as we are really talking about 2 entirely different things here: 1) Origami is a frameless _assembly_ method in that it does not require frames to set up the hull, nor jig nor supports nor even ground etc... thus reducing cost and labour significantly. 2) Metal boats may be designed with or without frames or stringers or whatever, this is just a design choice for transverse and longitudinal support & structuring. There are metal boats without any apparent structure, there are boats with just stringers, there are boats with skins welded to only frames, only stringers or to both... If any of these boats would be build using the origami method, then the structure as designed would be added _after_ the hull is build _without_ frames. Finally, in some assembly methods you _need_ regularly spaces frames for construction if you want to produce a fair hull, and tehn simply leave them in - in origami frames my be less because you would place them only where needed. I think we all agree by now that hull-skins should be welded only to stringers, not to frames, because that lets the plating follow a natural curve - if there are frames, these will only touch the stringers, not the skin. In the BS designs for example, bulkheads are fixed to tabs welded onto stringers and - I do believe - play a structural role. On my boat I have a thinner skin (3mm) and very light interior arrangements so I will add some strategical structural frames - AFTER the hull is build. These are just different options of the same thing really. There is another discussion as to the utility of creating hard points in form of frames as opposed to a more flexible design that favors longitudinal structure - but that really applies to all metal- boats and is not specific to "origami". Gerd| 3956|3915|2004-06-02 15:15:07|richytill|Re: Aluminum Vs. Steel|Phil, have you considered the advantages of using stick welding on the outside of the hull as opposed to MIG? rt --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "spencerj71" wrote: > Phil, > > I think steel is an excellent boat building material. > > Where are you building the boat? I gather you are up in the thousand > islands? How big of a boat? Any pictures yet? I'm orginally from > up on the lakes (Oswego). I try to make it back up as much as I > can. I wish there was more pro boat builders on the lakes. > > Good luck with the build. > > - Spencer > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Phil S." > wrote: > > Spencer; > > You make some good points, Like you said much of the argument in > favor of steel over > > aluminum is the nut holding the electrode. I will be building much > of the hull outside in a > > notoriously windy area, so stick welding is going to be the way to > go, Inside I will use my > > MIG rig. I really don't want to build in Aluminum, I am sick of > the stuff. The other point > > brought up earlyer still holds, I can get known grades of steel > second hand, inexpensively. > > I know of no sources in my area for Marine Grade Aluminum, so > transportation costs > > would add more expenses to the boat. > > > > Like I said You and Greg bring up some good points but for me they > wouldn't out weigh > > the benefits of building in steel. > > Phil | 3957|3893|2004-06-02 15:18:08|denis buggy|Re: catamarans|dear graeme re where am i from . I am from the land of your second wave of criminals , thieves of bread and rabbits from their lordships estates, the first group of criminals owned the ships and the estates . thankfully we now own the ships and estates and merely export beer and software to your great country now . , however we had a national celebration a shortwhile ago when the state of Victoria requested a worldwide search for a worthy statue to grace their capital and with much ministerial mirth and satisfaction we transported without charge a giant unused and un loved and hidden from view statue of queen victoria from the bowels of one of our museums . the said queen had a generous streak and gave the same amount to the Battersea dogs and cats home as she gave to the starving in our country 100 stg while her army and servants exported twice the food needed to feed the six million who died during the great hunger. regards denis ----- Original Message ----- From: Graeme To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2004 12:58 PM Subject: RE: [origamiboats] catamarans Lol Hell you should mention cats on the boat building site but carry a bucket of water as you will get ya ass flamed right out off there funny as hell, even though they have a cat or multi hull section all question there go un-answered . But that is what makes the world go around people with different ideas if everything was the same we would be board shi,iteless I guess . Dennis I asked the same question as you a couple of years ago I got a smack in the back of the head and told to move a long nothing to see here lol. That was on a different site so I packed my swag and moved on . But these ppl are kind and friendly with a vast building and sailing experience . Tent I thought it was a caravan they said but, I may be wrong it has happened before, me being wrong that is. Dennis where abouts in oz are you qld or west coast. Graeme -----Original Message----- From: denis buggy [mailto:buggy@...] Sent: Wednesday, 2 June 2004 4:41 PM To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [origamiboats] catamarans dear Dale tread carefully on this site re catamarans as the only members of this group who do not have any strong views so far are prophets and imanns , I tried to discuss cats and the last advice received was to buy a tent , ! yes a tent and bring it with me to sea , apparently any kind of tent would do . I politely said nothing and decided to observe the site to learn more and read correspondence from those suffering from acute cabin fever and disorientation due to sailing a pendulum on the ocean and staggering on to some wild shore to consume berries mushrooms and various other hallucigens , this activity only interrupted to dispense nautical advice worldwide re fitting tents to catamarans and their love/hate relationship with their various financial advisors . should you wish to study further your interest in cats you can correspond with me at buggy@... and you can check out the following Bowden catamarans Australia , Bruce Roberts has sold me study plans for a 60 foot cat which can be adapted for steel , steel magnolia is for sale reduced today to 200.000 us from heather underwood at heather@... and you can view the classic hull design dilemma with steel cats by looking at mv solstice and mv equinox based in Scotland . on a serious note , there are those who have helped me greatly on this site and I would be grateful for a critical evaluation of mv equinox as I have the scania engines used in this and the facilities to build something similar with my own sailing arrangement mounted on each hull however I do not have full confidence in the design of the planing hull used . regards all denis ----- Original Message ----- From: shorinjin01 To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, May 31, 2004 6:15 AM Subject: [origamiboats] catamarans I just discovered origami boats and this group. I did a search on catamarans, but found nothing. Have any been built using this method? Dale To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3958|3915|2004-06-02 15:19:05|richytill|Re: Aluminum Vs. Steel|If I were to build a catamaran--it would be aluminium. rt --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gerd" wrote: > Ha! I was wating to bring the subject of the frameless origami up > for some time ;-) > > > What concerns me with some of the discussions in this group is the > > notion that origami boats don't need internal framing. To me this > is ludicrious. > > Actually this is a misconception in many minds I think, and is > really a bit misleading if always mentioned together as "frameless > origami" hull, as we are really talking about 2 entirely different > things here: > 1) Origami is a frameless _assembly_ method in that it does not > require frames to set up the hull, nor jig nor supports nor even > ground etc... thus reducing cost and labour significantly. > 2) Metal boats may be designed with or without frames or stringers > or whatever, this is just a design choice for transverse and > longitudinal support & structuring. There are metal boats without > any apparent structure, there are boats with just stringers, there > are boats with skins welded to only frames, only stringers or to > both... If any of these boats would be build using the origami > method, then the structure as designed would be added _after_ the > hull is build _without_ frames. > > Finally, in some assembly methods you _need_ regularly spaces frames > for construction if you want to produce a fair hull, and tehn simply > leave them in - in origami frames my be less because you would place > them only where needed. > > I think we all agree by now that hull-skins should be welded only to > stringers, not to frames, because that lets the plating follow a > natural curve - if there are frames, these will only touch the > stringers, not the skin. > > In the BS designs for example, bulkheads are fixed to tabs welded > onto stringers and - I do believe - play a structural role. On my > boat I have a thinner skin (3mm) and very light interior > arrangements so I will add some strategical structural frames - > AFTER the hull is build. These are just different options of the > same thing really. > > There is another discussion as to the utility of creating hard > points in form of frames as opposed to a more flexible design that > favors longitudinal structure - but that really applies to all metal- > boats and is not specific to "origami". > > Gerd | 3959|3915|2004-06-02 15:32:08|spencerj71|Re: Aluminum Vs. Steel|Gerd, Thanks for clearing that up for me. That is what I usually refer to as free-form construction methods. I think that only welding to the stringers works when you have adaquate plate thickness to take local loads, or closely spaced stringers. As I mentioned before, I think that boats with small panels take less damage from groundings, docks, collisions, etc, but there is definitely something to be said for allowing the boat to flex. How are the bulkheads made watertight if only welded to tabs off of stringers? - Spencer --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gerd" wrote: > Ha! I was wating to bring the subject of the frameless origami up > for some time ;-) > > > What concerns me with some of the discussions in this group is the > > notion that origami boats don't need internal framing. To me this > is ludicrious. > > Actually this is a misconception in many minds I think, and is > really a bit misleading if always mentioned together as "frameless > origami" hull, as we are really talking about 2 entirely different > things here: > 1) Origami is a frameless _assembly_ method in that it does not > require frames to set up the hull, nor jig nor supports nor even > ground etc... thus reducing cost and labour significantly. > 2) Metal boats may be designed with or without frames or stringers > or whatever, this is just a design choice for transverse and > longitudinal support & structuring. There are metal boats without > any apparent structure, there are boats with just stringers, there > are boats with skins welded to only frames, only stringers or to > both... If any of these boats would be build using the origami > method, then the structure as designed would be added _after_ the > hull is build _without_ frames. > > Finally, in some assembly methods you _need_ regularly spaces frames > for construction if you want to produce a fair hull, and tehn simply > leave them in - in origami frames my be less because you would place > them only where needed. > > I think we all agree by now that hull-skins should be welded only to > stringers, not to frames, because that lets the plating follow a > natural curve - if there are frames, these will only touch the > stringers, not the skin. > > In the BS designs for example, bulkheads are fixed to tabs welded > onto stringers and - I do believe - play a structural role. On my > boat I have a thinner skin (3mm) and very light interior > arrangements so I will add some strategical structural frames - > AFTER the hull is build. These are just different options of the > same thing really. > > There is another discussion as to the utility of creating hard > points in form of frames as opposed to a more flexible design that > favors longitudinal structure - but that really applies to all metal- > boats and is not specific to "origami". > > Gerd | 3960|3915|2004-06-02 15:40:47|Gerd|Re: Aluminum Vs. Steel|Spencer, re watertight bulkheads: that's like the rest, an option. I personally can't really see why I would want them or how then to install watertight doors and so on. I always relied on a strong hull and good hatches. Gerd --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "spencerj71" wrote: > Gerd, > > Thanks for clearing that up for me. That is what I usually refer to > as free-form construction methods. > > I think that only welding to the stringers works when you have > adaquate plate thickness to take local loads, or closely spaced > stringers. As I mentioned before, I think that boats with small > panels take less damage from groundings, docks, collisions, etc, but > there is definitely something to be said for allowing the boat to > flex. > > How are the bulkheads made watertight if only welded to tabs off of > stringers? > > - Spencer > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gerd" wrote: > > Ha! I was wating to bring the subject of the frameless origami up > > for some time ;-) > > > > > What concerns me with some of the discussions in this group is > the > > > notion that origami boats don't need internal framing. To me > this > > is ludicrious. > > > > Actually this is a misconception in many minds I think, and is > > really a bit misleading if always mentioned together as "frameless > > origami" hull, as we are really talking about 2 entirely different > > things here: > > 1) Origami is a frameless _assembly_ method in that it does not > > require frames to set up the hull, nor jig nor supports nor even > > ground etc... thus reducing cost and labour significantly. > > 2) Metal boats may be designed with or without frames or stringers > > or whatever, this is just a design choice for transverse and > > longitudinal support & structuring. There are metal boats without > > any apparent structure, there are boats with just stringers, there > > are boats with skins welded to only frames, only stringers or to > > both... If any of these boats would be build using the origami > > method, then the structure as designed would be added _after_ the > > hull is build _without_ frames. > > > > Finally, in some assembly methods you _need_ regularly spaces > frames > > for construction if you want to produce a fair hull, and tehn > simply > > leave them in - in origami frames my be less because you would > place > > them only where needed. > > > > I think we all agree by now that hull-skins should be welded only > to > > stringers, not to frames, because that lets the plating follow a > > natural curve - if there are frames, these will only touch the > > stringers, not the skin. > > > > In the BS designs for example, bulkheads are fixed to tabs welded > > onto stringers and - I do believe - play a structural role. On my > > boat I have a thinner skin (3mm) and very light interior > > arrangements so I will add some strategical structural frames - > > AFTER the hull is build. These are just different options of the > > same thing really. > > > > There is another discussion as to the utility of creating hard > > points in form of frames as opposed to a more flexible design that > > favors longitudinal structure - but that really applies to all > metal- > > boats and is not specific to "origami". > > > > Gerd | 3961|3915|2004-06-02 16:23:11|Phil S.|Re: Aluminum Vs. Steel|Hi Spencer; I live just south of Rochester, on what used to be a working horse farm, I got smart and quit before the market completely went south. I have family that own a cottage on the Saint Lawrence and try to spend as much time as I can up there. I love the Great Lakes, yeah the waters cold but nothing here considers you part of it's diet. Before I go see the world again I want to see what is right here. There is so much to explore just off of Lake Ontario it will probably take me years to see it all. Besides I can cruise the finger lakes that are connected to the canal system and see the gorges around Ithaca. Right now my plan is to buy Brent's 40 footer plans and build it as a Power Cruiser (Troller Yacht). Who knows in 6 months or so I may want to build something different. The one thing I am sure of is it will be Origami and it will be in steel. You aren't missing much in the way of weather, Oswego had one storm that dumped something like 4 feet of snow on it. --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "spencerj71" wrote: > Phil, > > I think steel is an excellent boat building material. > > Where are you building the boat? I gather you are up in the thousand > islands? How big of a boat? Any pictures yet? I'm orginally from > up on the lakes (Oswego). I try to make it back up as much as I > can. I wish there was more pro boat builders on the lakes. > > Good luck with the build. > > - Spencer | 3962|3915|2004-06-02 16:27:46|Phil S.|Re: Aluminum Vs. Steel|rt yes I will have too, but for the small parts built in the shop I will use my MIG set up. Phil --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "richytill" wrote: > Phil, have you considered the advantages of using stick welding on > the outside of the hull as opposed to MIG? rt > | 3963|3944|2004-06-02 18:11:10|jim dorey|Re: arc and ccd - stupid question|well, a laser is just light, you get cataracts from plain old light, it depends on what's hit. i don't think the answer can be found here, maybe an electronics usenet group, but i don't believe that an arc from the distance needed to prevent spatter on the lens will be a problem, camera still working? Gerd wrote: > As I am happily snapping digital images and recording video of the > assembling of my hull, does naybody know if a direct hit of the arc > damages the chip of the cameras??? > Gerd -- http://www.skaar.101main.net http://www.PetitionOnline.com/spcdvd/ http://www.petitiononline.com/impjapan/petition-sign.html? moderator of wildsteam@yahoogroups.com DOM and proud!!!| 3964|3893|2004-06-02 18:56:31|fmichael graham|Re: catamarans|Denis: I am also interested in discussions on metal cats. I am often told that it can't be done with steel, yet, I have seen pictures of a 60+ foot steel cat that was built in Australia. I know that if I owned a cat, my wife would be more inclined to sail off-shore. She still isn't comfortable with a "buried toe-rail". Mike denis buggy wrote: dear Dale tread carefully on this site re catamarans as the only members of this group who do not have any strong views so far are prophets and imanns , I tried to discuss cats and the last advice received was to buy a tent , ! yes a tent and bring it with me to sea , apparently any kind of tent would do . I politely said nothing and decided to observe the site to learn more and read correspondence from those suffering from acute cabin fever and disorientation due to sailing a pendulum on the ocean and staggering on to some wild shore to consume berries mushrooms and various other hallucigens , this activity only interrupted to dispense nautical advice worldwide re fitting tents to catamarans and their love/hate relationship with their various financial advisors . should you wish to study further your interest in cats you can correspond with me at buggy@... and you can check out the following Bowden catamarans Australia , Bruce Roberts has sold me study plans for a 60 foot cat which can be adapted for steel , steel magnolia is for sale reduced today to 200.000 us from heather underwood at heather@... and you can view the classic hull design dilemma with steel cats by looking at mv solstice and mv equinox based in Scotland . on a serious note , there are those who have helped me greatly on this site and I would be grateful for a critical evaluation of mv equinox as I have the scania engines used in this and the facilities to build something similar with my own sailing arrangement mounted on each hull however I do not have full confidence in the design of the planing hull used . regards all denis ----- Original Message ----- From: shorinjin01 To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, May 31, 2004 6:15 AM Subject: [origamiboats] catamarans I just discovered origami boats and this group. I did a search on catamarans, but found nothing. Have any been built using this method? Dale To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links --------------------------------- Post your free ad now! Yahoo! Canada Personals [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3965|3915|2004-06-02 19:24:42|richytill|Re: Aluminum Vs. Steel|Phil, sounds good. rt --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Phil S." wrote: > rt > yes I will have too, but for the small parts built in the shop I will use my MIG set up. > Phil > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "richytill" wrote: > > Phil, have you considered the advantages of using stick welding on > > the outside of the hull as opposed to MIG? rt > > | 3966|3966|2004-06-02 20:20:53|Sean Flynn|Mig welding hull|I'm new to this forum but I saw Rich's comment to Shane about not using a MIG welder on the outside of the hull but it was fine for the inside. Why is this? Is it just because amateurs might not be able to get good penetration on their welds for the exterior or is there another deeper reason? I was thinking a MIG would be ideal to help the welding go alot faster! (plus I already have a MIG welder and know how to work it so that option works for me :) ) Sean| 3967|3967|2004-06-02 20:44:55|Sean Flynn|Welding with an alternator|I have a few sites tucked away about welding with an alternator: This is the most informative site: http://mywebpages.comcast.net/t.molnar/Obwelder1.htm How to make a TIG welder with an alternator (it's a long thread on a message board so keep going to find the schematics that accompany the photos) http://www.turbomustangs.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=8872 How to weld with batteries: http://rockmodified.com/2003/april/welder/welder.html A company that makes panels that simplify the process: http://www.premierpowerwelder.com/specs/ppwspecs.html How to make a box that can weld with an alternator and provide 120Vdc (good for drills and grinders) like the PPW mentioned above at home (the NAPA parts don't match our UAP/NAPA here in Vancouver so I don't know about that - if anyone figures those part numbers, I'd love to find out!) http://www.pirate4x4.com/tech/on-boardwelder/index.html Sean| 3968|3915|2004-06-02 21:35:55|Graeme|Re: Aluminium Vs. Steel|You really can,t blame a boat because some nit wit tried to park it on a dock they are not made for that type of abuse. I have noticed some simple things about boats if you have a NO good motor usually you have a NO good boat. Good motor = good boat. I have a friend his name for his boat was............ The xxxxxxx Boat because the motor was 30 year old putt putt but hell it a heap of fun as long as you where not trying to start it . They are making new U.S Warships in Australia at Austral ship yards is in Fremantle they are going to be made out of ALLOY in a trimaran config . Regards Graeme -----Original Message----- From: Phil S. [mailto:newbarndesign@...] Sent: Wednesday, 2 June 2004 8:12 PM To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Subject: [origamiboats] Re: Aluminum Vs. Steel Just to add fuel to this discussion, we here in rochester, NY have our own fast ferry, well sort of. It is an all aluminum built ferry and it is a piece of junk; http://www.rochestertoday.com/news/local/story.aspx?content_id=BA6FFA27- F802 -41F5-9D9A-ED14D544A6E2 The boat recieved severe damage when it bumped into a dock on the delivery trip from Australia, delaying its intended start time. Now it is in a Toronto ship yard with major engine problems, they are talking about loading on a barge and shipping it back to Australia so the engines can be pulled and replaced. I think the whole project is a collosal waste of money, we don't need a ferry to run from Rochester to Toronto, it is only a 4 hour drive, as opposed to an $135 two hour ferry ride. Don't try to tell a politician not to waste money though. If you can look at the picture in the article you will see the thin aluminum skin ripped like tissue paper. Good thing it was above the water line. Phil To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links| 3969|3893|2004-06-02 21:41:17|Graeme|Re: catamarans|Denis Thanks for your great gift I am sure Steve Bracks will cherish that fine gift lol what else could one ask for except an esky full of the cold beer that you make. On behalf of the pigeons of Victoria thanks for the statue What great hunger I missed it must have been out at that time Graeme -----Original Message----- From: denis buggy [mailto:buggy@...] Sent: Thursday, 3 June 2004 3:17 AM To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [o dear graeme re where am i from . I am from the land of your second wave of criminals , thieves of bread and rabbits from their lordships estates, the first group of criminals owned the ships and the estates . thankfully we now own the ships and estates and merely export beer and software to your great country now . , however we had a national celebration a shortwhile ago when the state of Victoria requested a worldwide search for a worthy statue to grace their capital and with much ministerial mirth and satisfaction we transported without charge a giant unused and un loved and hidden from view statue of queen victoria from the bowels of one of our museums . the said queen had a generous streak and gave the same amount to the Battersea dogs and cats home as she gave to the starving in our country 100 stg while her army and servants exported twice the food needed to feed the six million who died during the great hunger. regards denis ----- Original Message ----- From: Graeme To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2004 12:58 PM Subject: RE: [origamiboats] catamarans Lol Hell you should mention cats on the boat building site but carry a bucket of water as you will get ya ass flamed right out off there funny as hell, even though they have a cat or multi hull section all question there go un-answered . But that is what makes the world go around people with different ideas if everything was the same we would be board shi,iteless I guess . Dennis I asked the same question as you a couple of years ago I got a smack in the back of the head and told to move a long nothing to see here lol. That was on a different site so I packed my swag and moved on . But these ppl are kind and friendly with a vast building and sailing experience . Tent I thought it was a caravan they said but, I may be wrong it has happened before, me being wrong that is. Dennis where abouts in oz are you qld or west coast. Graeme -----Original Message----- From: denis buggy [mailto:buggy@...] Sent: Wednesday, 2 June 2004 4:41 PM To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [origamiboats] catamarans dear Dale tread carefully on this site re catamarans as the only members of this group who do not have any strong views so far are prophets and imanns , I tried to discuss cats and the last advice received was to buy a tent , ! yes a tent and bring it with me to sea , apparently any kind of tent would do . I politely said nothing and decided to observe the site to learn more and read correspondence from those suffering from acute cabin fever and disorientation due to sailing a pendulum on the ocean and staggering on to some wild shore to consume berries mushrooms and various other hallucigens , this activity only interrupted to dispense nautical advice worldwide re fitting tents to catamarans and their love/hate relationship with their various financial advisors . should you wish to study further your interest in cats you can correspond with me at buggy@... and you can check out the following Bowden catamarans Australia , Bruce Roberts has sold me study plans for a 60 foot cat which can be adapted for steel , steel magnolia is for sale reduced today to 200.000 us from heather underwood at heather@... and you can view the classic hull design dilemma with steel cats by looking at mv solstice and mv equinox based in Scotland . on a serious note , there are those who have helped me greatly on this site and I would be grateful for a critical evaluation of mv equinox as I have the scania engines used in this and the facilities to build something similar with my own sailing arrangement mounted on each hull however I do not have full confidence in the design of the planing hull used . regards all denis ----- Original Message ----- From: shorinjin01 To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, May 31, 2004 6:15 AM Subject: [origamiboats] catamarans I just discovered origami boats and this group. I did a search on catamarans, but found nothing. Have any been built using this method? Dale To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links | 3973|3944|2004-06-03 00:29:44|Johan de Bruin|Re: arc and ccd - stupid question|If it is all 100% electronic, there will be no damage at all. Just watch out for heat & splatter by getting way to close. Johan --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gerd" wrote: > As I am happily snapping digital images and recording video of the > assembling of my hull, does naybody know if a direct hit of the arc > damages the chip of the cameras??? > Gerd | 3974|3944|2004-06-03 03:24:06|Gerd|Re: arc and ccd - stupid question|Thanks for the answers, but I am still not so sure. I remember having seen warnings not to point some cameras directly into the sun as the ccd can be damaged or saturated due to overexposure, not being able to detect new electrons or something like that... Gerd --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Johan de Bruin" wrote: > If it is all 100% electronic, there will be no damage at all. Just > watch out for heat & splatter by getting way to close. > > Johan > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gerd" wrote: > > As I am happily snapping digital images and recording video of the > > assembling of my hull, does naybody know if a direct hit of the > arc > > damages the chip of the cameras??? > > Gerd | 3975|3975|2004-06-03 04:41:06|romaxcn_23|31' Southern Cross 1981|Dear Sir, Direct from the owner we have for sale 31' Southern Cross 1981 "Carribbee" is a Sailors Dream machine with superb stable offshore saling yacht. She has had a barrier coast completed, brand new Yanmar engine in 1999 w/current hours @ 101. All standing rigging and running rigging in good condition. All exterior wood has just had a going over. "Caribbee" is a factory finished vessel, a Sailors true definition of a bluewater vessel in a proven package. She is a vessel pitched to sailors whose idea of saling equal island hopping or long passages to anywhere you see fit. Vessel is in good condition and located in USA . Photos available at http://www.maritimecentral.com/Yachts/All_categories/m/1657/0/ . Please do not hesitate to contact us for further information. I wait for your reply. Best regard. Loran Raul Str Sabinelor nr 5 Bl.E4 sc.B ap 12 Tulcea, n/a 820119 RO Tel : +040 722702393 email:romaxcn_23@y...| 3976|3966|2004-06-03 07:15:16|denis buggy|Re: Mig welding hull|Sean your shielding gas will blow away even in a draughty shed and your welds will have to be ground off as they will oxidise into mush . Denis ----- Original Message ----- From: Sean Flynn To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, June 03, 2004 1:20 AM Subject: [origamiboats] Mig welding hull I'm new to this forum but I saw Rich's comment to Shane about not using a MIG welder on the outside of the hull but it was fine for the inside. Why is this? Is it just because amateurs might not be able to get good penetration on their welds for the exterior or is there another deeper reason? I was thinking a MIG would be ideal to help the welding go alot faster! (plus I already have a MIG welder and know how to work it so that option works for me :) ) Sean To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3977|3977|2004-06-03 10:16:06|audeojude|Steel Catamaran|I have thought about a steel catamaran concept before but it needs to be big to get over the weight penalty. :) I came up with a rough design using 30,000 gallon tanks of the kind they store propane and natural gas in. I will copy some of the ideas I have emailed others about for this here and see what you think. :) This will be alittle disjointed as I'm copying portions of emails that I have previously explored the concept in. I have uploaded the images i created for the design to a new folder in the files section called steel catamaran Here is the begining of the idea My goal with my design isn't for a boat to sail on a regular basis but a home to move. with living space and work shop space. Industrial quality finish as opposed to yacht finih. As Indistructable as I can build it. It would have full size power plants and large capacity fuel tanks. You could jack it up out of the water (as much as 10 feet out of the water if needed) for extended periods of time and live that way and use it as a base station to explore an area in with a smaller say 20 foot aux boat. Any of the 4 to 6 steel legs (spuds) in the up position could be used as masts for large junk rig sails. I would expect that it would be slow. In the 5 to 7 knot range The steel catamaran barge concept is just that a concept. I'm not trying to prove it can't be done :) lots of people have said that already. But I haven't seen any referances to people doing it and failing either. Or doing it and it being unusable. I'm trying to be innovative and prove that it can be done. The exercise in and of itself is worth the time and effort. :) If no one tilted at windmills where would the world be? I'm trying to find a way to make it work. I'm not going to spend money on it unless on paper I can make it work both technically and cost wise. What I don't understand is why it is automatically assumed that it is nuts to do? We build very heavy and slow monos all the time. Multihulls are light and fast and give more space. But what if you built heavy multihull. You lose speed. Ok, so what! If you can build a heavy multi hull in significantly less time and for less cost and you trade that for speed is that an ok trade? Multihull people then say "but it can sink since it isnt foam and glass". Well mono's sink all the time. Big multi with each hull broke up into at least 4 compartments that can be entirely sealed with dogging doors both entry and going from compartment to compartment would be hell to sink compared to most monos. I looked up those propane tanks. a 30,000 gallon tank is 9.5 ft in diameter, 64 ft long. used I have seen price ranges from 3,000 to 15,000 dollars. I don't have weight on it yet. They probably are excedingly heavy since they are specked to safely contain 250lbs per square inch of pressure. what if it could be done? how about three of those 64 foot tanks tied together. Forget about building a bridge deck all together. Just those three tanks contains approx 960 sqft of floor space assuming that you build a interior deck where you have 5 ft of width between the outer walls of the tank. A lot of your mecanicals and tanks will fit under that with big access hatches to give easy access. Then build three or four 5 ft wide cat walks along the top of the beams connecting the three hulls and put in lots of webbing between those. you've got a huge flat very low windage area now. Mabye build one small pilot cabin on the center hull 2/3 of the way to the front to pilot from. I think for my application that steel would be the best material. I wouldnt be running from bad weather. but rather just act as raft if caught. 64 x 30 is hard to tip. probably have several dagger boards for keel and just pull them up and just have u-shaped or half round hulls in water. should act as very stable raft. Just design it so that there are many sealed compartments and all designed to survive large waves breaking over it for worst case. should have relatively shallow draft. Under 4 ft. near land run it into shallow water, river, marsh or other sheltered place and lift hull out of water so that it acts like a very tough house on pilings. water goes under it. ok next email expands on details a bit more as we worked on idea being able to lift the boat up out of the water on a seriously stable leg system has several advantages. 1. forget dry dock costs. You can go somewhere with even a mild tidal range and get her totally out of the water and easily accessable to 100% of the hull for maintenance. even if no tidal range you could lift her out of the water enough to get a dinghy under her and do maintenance. 2. if you lift her out of the water for large portions of the year as you are based somewhere and operate out of your smaller tender then your periods between repainting the hull will be greatly extended. 3. storms will be less of a threat when not at sea as you can lift her above the storm surge. she will big and heavy enough to be stable on the legs at this size also in bad winds. (this part needs some numbers run but I think it is a reasonable assumption up front) thats it exactly a sail assited motorraft or a motor assited sailing raft :) lol but yes that is the idea. Its a home that moves on the water. lets figure here. (im going back to imperial units for a bit) our volume is approx 21,737 cubic ft for one of the hulls at 64 ft long and 9.5 ft in diameter with hemispherical ends. multiply that by 64.1 lbs per cubic ft(weight of sea water) gives 1,393,341.7 lbs total displacement for one hull totally submerged. THis would be the 4.75 ft draft displacement figure for both hulls together or 696 tons displacement (ok im weirded out here. could you check these figures for me because this doesn't sound right. this thing is going to float like an empty eggshell.) ok at two feet of draft one cylinder has 47,837 lbs of displacement. both hulls would displace 95,675.66 lbs or 47 tons at one ft draft it would displace 34,357.6 lbs for both hulls. or about 17 tons. 3 ft of draft gives us 85560.68 lbs per hull or 171121.36 lbs displacement for both hulls or 85 tons (i figured tons by dividing lbs displacement by 2000.) so say totally build and loaded to the gills maybe 50 or 60 tons should give us a draft of around 2.5 feet or 3/4 of a meter. i used volume calculater at the following webpage. http://grapevine.abe.msstate.edu/~fto/tools/vol/partoutcyl.html for partial volumes and http://grapevine.abe.msstate.edu/~fto/tools/vol/outcylinder.html for volume of total cylinder. I have to get dry weight of these tanks. or at least metal thickness so i can calculate weight. hmm 5 mm steel plate 29.83 ft circumferance and 64 ft long weighs 6961 kilograms 3/16 inch plate would be 6630 kilograms http://www.mesteel.com/cgi-bin/w3-msql/goto.htm?url=/info/carbon/convert/metalcalculator/metalcalculator_kg.htm I used this calculator to figure this so converting to lbs the heavier of them for 5mm sheet steel would give us 15346.38 lbs for one hull sheet that size 30692.76 lbs for both hulls add in middle pod using all the steel in one tank and you get 46038 lbs or about 23 tons lets just double that and call it the finished vessal. ( i know this is rough but this is just a for instance) so we are weighing in at 46 tons. Using the partial volume of a cylinder calculater from earlier to figure draft gives about a 1.5 ft draft for each hull carrying half that tonnage. just looking at the calculator as I added draft it looks as if for roughly every additional inch of draft you get roughly another 2.5 tons of displacement per hull or thereabouts. ok my mind is bent. I'm going to take a break on this today. I have to do all this again on paper rather than free handing it here. It seems like it should not be that light. i mean we are talking a draft of only 1.5 feet (18 inches) 48 cm or half a mmeter? thats insane. I must have made an error in my figures. If this is true then your wetted surface is going to be very minimal and your length to width at the water line is going to be about 16 to 1. I hate to say this but if you put a shaped bow on this thing it should be fairly easy to push. with a small long fin keel or some dagger boards for directional stability you really could sail it. at 50 tons with 2 hp per ton displacement two auto diesels should push her really well. you would have about 4 hp per ton actually if you used a couple small volkswagon diesels. HULL SPEED = 1.34*lwl^.5 i know this is for mono's so it is not going to be very accurate for a cat configuration with a 16/1 waterline ratio but it would give a hull speed of 10.72 knots with 2 to 3 hp per ton displacement. i pulled that formula from this page http://hometown.aol.com/bristolyht/screen.html another email here in your description of concept one did you mean to take and create one ovoid section out of two pieces of tank or to put two ovoid sections of tank one on top of the other between the hulls? I think that concept two would be easier to build with 3 or four sections of tank turned 90 degrees to the hull and cut on the contour of the hull. and attached so that they would be a little over a meter from the waterline of the hull. which would extend them about a meter and a half to two meters above the top of the hull decks. You could then even tie these togeter longitudinally with further sections between them going for and aft. All those curves being welded together would most likey give increadable strength. just use a plasma cutter to cut them apart and a crane to lift into position and tack together. If you had it all layed out and cut beforehand a crane for one or two days at most would get all the major hull pieces tacked together and ready for full welds at your convience. if my calculations from earlier were correct you top height above water would be about approx 12ft or just less than 4 meters tall, 18 meters long? and about 9 meters wide so we have three tanks giving us a 18 by 9 by 4 meter structure drawing about a 1/2 meter to 3/4 meters of water. ( im just thinking that a little wider would be more stable though) say about 12 meters wide. 64 / 3 = about 21 ft per section with 4.5 ft overlap at both ends so 21-(4.5+4.5) = 12 ft between hulls so 9.5+9.5+12= 31 ft wide just some more musings :) more musings on spud/mast system basically the masts would penitrate a welded in well all the way thru the hull and be tied into a reinforced bulk head. You would not dismount them. They would simply be winched straight up and down. say 50 ft round or squared steel tube. This gives you about a 10 foot bury thru the hull.steel cable attached at the top and bottom of mast to pull it up or down. Probably on the same winch. while one spools out the other spools in. (spool with seperator in middle. You would have a heavy raised lip say 6 to 12 inches high where the mast comes thru the partners/hull/deck level that you can put 1 inch or better steel pins thru the mast to hold it in place vertically up or down once it is in place. (could be some other method but something that will hold mast that is not the winch after it is where you want it. Maybe even a friction fitting. your hand winches would be capable of doing the job. No one winch would have to support the whole weight of the vessal. if you had 6 poles you could divide the weight of the vessal by 6 and then add a bit back for a safety margin. one of the barge winches was rated to 90 tons... this would be overkill. Acually just take and put a small electric auxillary motor on that for normal usage and use it manually if there is no power for some reason. In the mast position you would have 40 ft unstayed masts. if you used junk rig on it you wouldnt even have to dismount the sails when going to leg down mode. because of the design the boom and full battens would just rest in a fore and aft brackets above the deck and be lashed down. None of the rig on a junk rig is attached anywhere to the mast except the head and then on the deck. It just has some ropes at each batten that circle the mast and slide up and down freely. One person can handle multiple junk rigs with ease from the cockpit. That is one of the major selling points. A small woman can handle a two masted 35 footer by herself on watch in bad weather if it is properly set up. Because you only have 40 ft masts you are going to lose some of the wind higher up but you will make up with that in that junk rigs tend to carry about 20% more totall sail area safely than a comparable bermudan rig. I'm thinking the legs of mast will be on the order of 12 inches in diameter heavy steel or 12 inches square. That heavy weight aloft is why I was thinking wider is better. Raft stability concept. Not sure but your probably looking at about 1500 lbs per mast. because of leg mode they would be heavier than normal steel masts.| 3978|3901|2004-06-03 12:36:53|SHANE ROTHWELL|Re: Mig vs Stick welding = Saving Time!|Hi RT, I really do not see why you have concerns about MIG welding. Sure, in wind there is the concern that the sheilding gas is blown away & the result is a mess of a weld. that is why for exterior work you use flux cored wire which is exactly the same as stick welding exept it's a LOT easier to produce a good quality weld than stick welding (which is closer to an art form) for detailing work etc i will use gas & the mig process as it's cleaner & produces a nice weld, for outside i will go fluxcore. there is the issue of having to haul the machine around & with a spool of wire it it it's about 100 lbs, but with a decent dolly it's not a big deal in light of the fact that the welding is much faster (and cleaner) than stick welding. true, i am going to have to 'fly' the machine up top, but i figure a galvo wire & turnbuckle on which i can slide the whole rig, with dolly, will save a lot of time. just weld pipe or whatever to the hull fore & aft, maybe one amidships to hang the wire on & away we go. Dont' know who, but noticed that someone had recently mentioned that 'exterior welds with a mig will just turn into goo'. I suppose if you were to use gas and be sure to have the gas envelope compromised in the wind, producing chewing gum welds, that statment might be correct. however, we are at least assuming that someone who is building their own boat, investing the money etc just might take the time to research the process and make damned sure that the work they do is done properly. but to say that a mig is incapable of doing good work only proves that fact that a little bit of information can be dangerous. A MIG is an extremely versatile bit of machinery. you can do the mig process (using gas), or the TIG process (aluminum & gas), or you can use flux core (self shielding exactly the same as stick welding only the flux is on the inside, not the outside). it's also much faster and much cleaner. material cost is virtually identical to stick but production cost is less as you use about 99% of the material with a mig but only about 80-85% of the material with stick, machine cost is similar (I have a miller 175). the only disadvantage i can see is (maybe) it cant be run off of an alternator and therefore need shore power or a great big generator to run it when cruising but have not done the research on this and if i need something can always buy a $100 little buzz box. in the mean time i should save at least 200 hours in building. Stick welding is very rapidly becoming a thing of the past for industry. considering that deposition rates of about 10:1 it only makes sence for a novice like me to go for mig. At the same time, Brent and others use an AC buzz box and swear by them. it's a technology (and artform) they are comfortable with. Brent also has many years of experience welding as opposed to my big 30 hours of welding in the course i took at BCIT. So while a good stick welder can produce a very decent product with stick, it would take me a considerable amount of time to get up to speed on stick, whereas i am pretty comfy now after not a lot of time with my little mig, and i have the versatility of the machine as well (though overhead welding with fluxcored is still a challenge for me) sorry to go on, but you did ask..... Shane --- richytill wrote: --------------------------------- Shane, MIG on the inside of your boat can be an advantage--but--are you really going to weld the outside of the hull with wire? rt --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, SHANE ROTHWELL wrote: > Alex, > > Congrats on getting going on your brentboat!! and yes > you are lucky to have 'himself' as a good mate & > helping you at this time of the year. When I met Brent > in January he mentioned being able to fry an egg on > the steel in summertime & wanted no part in it. > November through March & that was it. > > Please put me on the buyers list for a set of the > video's you are putting together. > > It looks like i will be starting one in the next few > months but have a number of details to confirm b4 I > can take the plunge, but I bought the mig last > week..... > > Best Regards, > Shane > > ______________________________________________________________________ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca| 3979|3890|2004-06-03 13:35:32|ge@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: Flame Spray|We joined this site to expand the body of knowledge about what is possible in origami. Origami techniques for amateur construction in steel are well understood and documented. What has been lacking in origami is techniques that will allow amateur builders to use this method to build alloy boats. So, for the past year we have been experimenting with different building techniques to allow amateur builders to reliably build boats in alloy. We freely publish our results and techniques and made them public domain. For those people that prefer steel, origami is a good solution for amateur construction. For those people that prefer alloy, origami is a good solution for amateur construction. Our findings confirm that experienced steel workers are not automatically great alloy workers. They continue to think of alloy as steel, and make mistakes that they blame on the alloy, rather than their lack of experience. This leads to false notions about alloy. For steel welders the significant difference are: 1. Preparation - unlike stick welding, the material to be joined must be clean. 2. Reflexes - welding alloy is a different motion than welding steel. 3. Evaluation - a bad alloy weld superficially looks like a great steel weld. We found that alloy techniques and methods are more like wood than they are like steel. Experienced wood workers could well find that origami building in alloy is more natural than building in steel. We found: 1. Alloy boats can be reliably tacked outside, without shelter, even in the rain. Work will progress faster if done under shelter, and final welding must be sheltered from the weather. Plastic tarps can be used to build low cost shelters. 2. Amateurs can learn to tack alloy in less than a day (usually a few minutes). High quality, high strength final welding takes practice, and is best done by hiring a professional welder. 3. The methods for producing fair origami shapes in alloy are much the same as in steel. Alloy is easier to form, but moves more during welding. To allow for this, many small tacks preferred to a few large tacks. Parts should be tacked full length with small "button" tacks, prior to strengthening joints with larger tacks. Welding longitudinals on the flat, prior to pulling the hull/deck to shape is the fastest method, and produces the fairest results. Longitudinals placed close to edges help create fair seams, correcting for small cutting errors String, used for sighting in strategic locations provides a quick reference point, to correct for level, angles, symmetry and twist, with minimal measuring. 4. Woodworking tools are much the same tools used to work alloy. Alloy is best cut with low cost, carbide tipped, wood cutting blades. It is fast, no grinding is required, and leaves the alloy ready for welding. A $5, 7x24 carbide blade will cut about 100 feet of 3/8" alloy before it needs sharpening/replacing. Allowing the blade to chatter while cutting will dull it quickly. Plasma cutting leaves an edge that must be removed prior to welding. 5. A carbide tipped milling blade on an angle grinder is the fastest way to shape and fit alloy, and prepare it for welding. These cost about $70, and will probably need to be sharpened/replaced 2-3 times when building a boat. You can fit alloy with a milling blade perhaps 100 times faster than with a grinding/sanding disk. Grinding/sanding disks are only required for final finishing. History shows that the difference between impossible and possible is knowledge. Armed with sufficient information, any amateur with sufficient skills to take a boat offshore,and keep it running in a remote location, will be more than capable of building a boat ashore, with the resources that are available, in any material that they choose. Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com| 3980|3977|2004-06-03 13:46:56|Gerd|Re: Steel Catamaran|Lots of great ideas, but one thing is sure: you would have a fantastic Cp ;-) Gerd| 3981|3977|2004-06-03 13:54:57|Bill Jaine|Re: Steel Catamaran|I could see a James Warren type design being built out of steel quite handily. Bill Port Hope. Canada -----Original Message----- From: audeojude [mailto:audeojude@...] Sent: 3-Jun-04 10:15 AM To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Subject: [origamiboats] Steel Catamaran I have thought about a steel catamaran concept before but it needs to be big to get over the weight penalty. :) I came up with a rough design using 30,000 gallon tanks of the kind they store propane and natural gas in. I will copy some of the ideas I have emailed others about for this here and see what you think. :) This will be alittle disjointed as I'm copying portions of emails that I have previously explored the concept in. I have uploaded the images i created for the design to a new folder in the files section called steel catamaran --- Incoming mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.693 / Virus Database: 454 - Release Date: 31/05/2004 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.693 / Virus Database: 454 - Release Date: 31/05/2004 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]| 3982|3915|2004-06-03 15:20:52|brentswain38|Re: Aluminum Vs. Steel|In 24 years of building origami boats I've never put a transverse frame in one, and they have never had a problem from lack of transverse frames, despite weeks of pounding on a lee shore on the west coast of Baja in 8 ft swells , a collision with a freighter in Gibralter, pounding accross 200 meters of Fijian coral reef in a large swell,, an 8 knot T-bone collision with a steel barge,pounding on a rocky lee shore over night sveral times in the same boat, a 5 knot collision with a reef which stopped the boat dead, breaking thru 1/4 mile of five inch thick ice, a single season passage thru the northwest passage, and a 14 knot collision with a log boom. Transeverse frames were invented to hold wooden planks together ,and have no place on small metal sailing craft where they serve no usefull purpose. Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "spencerj71" wrote: > I agree with your points. You do need to paint the bottom and bare > metal does get hot. Also any Al deck would need to be painted with > non-skid or it will be like a skating rink when wet. > > Yes, Al is less abrasion resistent than steel. I was discussing > tearing. > > Yes, mild steel welds are the full strenth of the parent material > while Al welds are not and for sure aluminum is trickier to weld than > steel, however for the size of these boats and the plating > thicknesses that should be used, I don't think the welds are a > liability. > > What concerns me with some of the discussions in this group is the > notion that origami boats don't need internal framing. To me this is > ludicrious. While the hull maybe strong enough without frames to > resist the bending and twisting forces of the waves, local loads from > waves or rocks can cause much greater damage without frames to reduce > the size of the panels. > > Do people really build these boats without frames? > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" > wrote: > > I aggree with much of what you say except a couple of points. > > Aluminium does have to be painted , antifouling below the water > > and , if you plan to cruise the tropics, a light colour above the > > waterline. Bare aluminium in the sun quicly gets hot enough to fry > > eggs on and can severely burn skin. > > Aluminium tears and gouges much easier than steel and ahs far > less > > abrasion resistance.Drive a sharp chisel into aluminium then try it > > with a piece of steel.Aluminium welds ,regardless of how well > > done ,have far more liabilities than steel welds. > > Brent > > > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "spencerj71" > > wrote: > > > Phil, > > > > > > I've resisted, but I just can't help weighing in on this. There > is > > > no perfect choice, so what it comes down to is what is better for > > the > > > boat and what is better for the builder. In your case its steel > > and > > > you make some compelling points, foremost being that you want to > > save > > > $ on materials. However you make many arguments against aluminum > > > alloy that are not the fault of the material, but are results of > > the > > > ignorance of the builder. Here are my opinions on some of those > > > points. > > > > > > Electrolysis: This is a big concern with aluminum alloy, as well > as > > > steel. I'm sure that the crew boat you spoke of corroded beyond > > > repair becase it was poorly built. Dissimilar metals were not > > > properly isolated, the electrical system was not properly bonded, > > or > > > maybe they didn't use marine grade alloy. There is no mystery > > here, > > > if you use the proper alloys, isolate dissimilar metals and > install > > > the electrics correctly, you will have a boat that lasts. Keep > in > > > mind that you are protecting your steel hull from corrosion by > > > painting it inside and out. This will also help aluminum. Al > > alloys > > > poor reputation in this regard is mostly the result of builders > > > cutting corners during consturction. > > > > > > Welding: Yes aluminum alloy is less forgiving to weld than > steel. > > It > > > demands proper weld preparation and cleanliness. Again there's > no > > > mystery here, by following the proper techniques you can produce > > > consistent, correct MIG and pulsed MIG welds. Many of the > problems > > > with "professional" welds result from welders long experienced > with > > > steel trying to apply those same techniques to aluminum. In many > > > cases a novice will become a better aluminum welder than a pro, > > since > > > he doesn't have to unlearn years of experience that doesn't work > > with > > > aluminum. > > > > > > Great Lakes Boats: Fresh water is a very freindly environment. > > Its > > > the salt in sea water that makes it an electrolyte, so corrosion > on > > > the lakes is much much slower. How many 70 year old ships do you > > see > > > on the ocean, the environment that the crew boat you mention was > > in? > > > Aluminum will also benifit from being on fresh water. Look at > all > > > the small riveted aluminum boats that you see on the lakes. > > > > > > Aluminum tears easier than steel: This is completely false. The > > > plastic deformation range of aluminum is greater than that of > > steel. > > > If built to the same strength (the Al hull will be thicker, but > > > lighter), the steel hull is more likely to tear before the > > aluminum. > > > Also its much easier to hammer out dents in aluminum than in > > steel. > > > Again look at all the aluminum skiffs and Gruman canoes and how > > long > > > they last. > > > > > > Cutting aluminum: Cutting aluminum with a torch is just silly. > > Let > > > me get this straigt, you'd rather use an acetylene set and do > lots > > of > > > grinding than use a circular saw and a planer, or just a band > saw? > > > Aluminum is much easier to cut than steel. If you want to cut it > > > with a torch, the correct tool is a plasma arc. As for > > > the "shrapnel", wear a shirt and a face shield and buy a shop vac. > > > > > > Aluminum Ice Breakers: The reason there are no aluminum ice > > breakers > > > is that the main argument for using aluminum is that it produces > a > > > hull about half the weight of steel, and thus a faster or more > fuel > > > efficient vessel. This would be a disadvantage for an ice > breaker > > as > > > they use their weight to break the ice. You could certainly make > > an > > > ice breaker from aluminum, but you'd end up with very thick > plates, > > > probably have to carry a lot of ballast and it would be very > > > expensive. This is why it doesn't make sense to build ice > breakers > > > and ships out of aluminum alloy. As for small ice breaking > > > capability, a company I once worked for had a small aluminum tug > > > (30') that would break up ice a foot thick. > > > > > > The advantages of aluminum alloy are that it produces a hull of > > equal > > > strenght that is about half the weight of steel. This is good if > > you > > > want to go fast, or be more fuel efficient. In the case of a > > > sailboat it means that the keel can be heavier, so you can carry > > more > > > sail. The other advantege is that aluminum alloy does not > corrode > > in > > > the marine environment as long as it is in the presence of free > > > oxygen (no stangnant water). So a properly built and outfitted > > boat > > > does not have to be painted. In a sense, its probably better to > > > think of aluminum alloy as an alternative to composite > construction > > > than as an alternative to steel. > > > > > > I think we can at least agree to not liking fiberglass and hating > > jet > > > skis. > > > > > > I look forward to the continuing discussion. > > > > > > - Spencer > > > > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Phil S." > > > > wrote: > > > > Just my humble opinion on both materials, first a wee bit of > > > backround. I was a US Army > > > > airframe mechanic for almost 10 years, I have worked and cut > more > > > aluminum than I ever > > > > care to see again. First off disimilar metal corosion or > > > eletrolysis is nothing to sneeze at, it > > > > can turn good metal to junk in a very short time span. In fact > > > recently an 100+ft aluminum > > > > crew boat was for sale in Boats and Harbors. It was being sold > > for > > > scrap because of > > > > electrolysis, the boat was only 8 years old. I frankly never > want > > > anything to do with > > > > aluminum ever again, I have seen what appear to be good welds > > were > > > actually junk on ex- > > > > ray inspection and testing. > > > > > > > > The company I work for now does NDI Testing and ex-ray along > with > > > ASME code welding. > > > > To a man the welders say stay away from aluminum, Unless you > are > > > prepared to TIG weld > > > > it, a slow and tedious form of welding, forget that. I have > > access > > > to all the welding > > > > equipment you could imagine, I will work in steel. Here is why; > > > > 1 There are steel boats in the great lakes that are 70 + years > > old, > > > still working everyday. > > > > 2 I can get new "scrap" steel very inexpensively, The large > > > manfacturing shops will > > > > sometimes scrap perfectly good sheet steel if it excess for a > > > completed project. > > > > 3 Steel corrodes in a visable, predictable manor, once > corrosion > > > starts it is easy to deal > > > > with, grind and paint or use Corroseal, and paint. > > > > 4 I can repair steel almost anywhere, with a simple stick > welding > > > set up hooked to the > > > > engine alternator. > > > > 5 I like the abrasion and holing resistence of steel, bump off > a > > > rock( a very real possibility > > > > in the 1000 Islands) and you can pound out the dent with a > > hammer. > > > Aluminum tears a lot > > > > easier than steel, even if you double the thickness. > > > > 6 Cutting aluminum with a torch makes a mess, cutting it with > > > common wood working > > > > tools really sucks, having tried that and ended up with an arm > > full > > > of shrapenel from the > > > > skill saw. > > > > 7 There are no aluminum Ice Breakers. > > > > > > > > There are other reasons but for the most part I just like > steel, > > I > > > plan on cruising a good > > > > part of the year up here and might have to go through some ice. > > The > > > weather in Upstate > > > > NY sucks, I will want to go out and cruise around, safe in my > > nice > > > warm and comfy wheel > > > > house and look at the winter wonderland. Good thing about that > is > > > there won't be any > > > > noisy jet ski's flying about. > > > > Just My Humble Opinion > > > > Phil | 3983|3948|2004-06-03 15:24:29|brentswain38|Re: Stress Concentration|Gerd Scoreing the plate halfway thru 15 cm or so beyond the end of the cut with a grinder and tapping this area with the hammer, being careful not to leave hammer marks there ,will make the transition from chine to round more gradual. This can be done after the seam is pulled together , or any time before painting. I've never had any problems there as the intact metal ahead of the seam is 100% strength. Brent --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gerd" wrote: > Spencer, I have not yet pulled the hull together for good, but have > tried tentatively to make the edges join on the first half-hull that > I have cut out. There seems to be no notable stress at the dart- end. > Some resistance yes, but I expect that to be dstributed over the > entire panel and all along the weld. I think that in corners where > several welds meet, even if the plate is otherwise flat, you would > have a lot more stress due to the welding itself than to the fact > that you "force" the sheet some. Every steelboat is full of such > places, for example around the bow, the transom-deck-hull corner aft > etc. and I have not heard of any problems with that. > > Gerd > > the YAGO PROJECT at http://www.justmueller.com/boats/ > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "spencerj71" > wrote: > > I have never built an origami boat (have built a 20' alloy center- > > console), but I am interested in doing so. It seems to me that > the > > end of the hard chine (and end of the weld) is the very definition > of > > a stress concentration. Has anyone experienced cracking in this > > area, or have any advice with regards to stress relief, or am I > > concerned for nothing? > > > > This is the best group for metal boat building, oragami or not. > > > > Thanks for any advice. > > > > - Spencer | 3984|3915|2004-06-03 15:33:20|brentswain38|Re: Aluminum Vs. Steel|Transverse framiing increases the dammage from rocks, docks and collisions by giving plating a hard point to stretch against, thus increasing the likelihood of holing.Plating adds far less than longitudinals which are arcs ,which have to be compressed on end for denting to occur. Brent --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "spencerj71" wrote: > Gerd, > > Thanks for clearing that up for me. That is what I usually refer to > as free-form construction methods. > > I think that only welding to the stringers works when you have > adaquate plate thickness to take local loads, or closely spaced > stringers. As I mentioned before, I think that boats with small > panels take less damage from groundings, docks, collisions, etc, but > there is definitely something to be said for allowing the boat to > flex. > > How are the bulkheads made watertight if only welded to tabs off of > stringers? > > - Spencer > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gerd" wrote: > > Ha! I was wating to bring the subject of the frameless origami up > > for some time ;-) > > > > > What concerns me with some of the discussions in this group is > the > > > notion that origami boats don't need internal framing. To me > this > > is ludicrious. > > > > Actually this is a misconception in many minds I think, and is > > really a bit misleading if always mentioned together as "frameless > > origami" hull, as we are really talking about 2 entirely different > > things here: > > 1) Origami is a frameless _assembly_ method in that it does not > > require frames to set up the hull, nor jig nor supports nor even > > ground etc... thus reducing cost and labour significantly. > > 2) Metal boats may be designed with or without frames or stringers > > or whatever, this is just a design choice for transverse and > > longitudinal support & structuring. There are metal boats without > > any apparent structure, there are boats with just stringers, there > > are boats with skins welded to only frames, only stringers or to > > both... If any of these boats would be build using the origami > > method, then the structure as designed would be added _after_ the > > hull is build _without_ frames. > > > > Finally, in some assembly methods you _need_ regularly spaces > frames > > for construction if you want to produce a fair hull, and tehn > simply > > leave them in - in origami frames my be less because you would > place > > them only where needed. > > > > I think we all agree by now that hull-skins should be welded only > to > > stringers, not to frames, because that lets the plating follow a > > natural curve - if there are frames, these will only touch the > > stringers, not the skin. > > > > In the BS designs for example, bulkheads are fixed to tabs welded > > onto stringers and - I do believe - play a structural role. On my > > boat I have a thinner skin (3mm) and very light interior > > arrangements so I will add some strategical structural frames - > > AFTER the hull is build. These are just different options of the > > same thing really. > > > > There is another discussion as to the utility of creating hard > > points in form of frames as opposed to a more flexible design that > > favors longitudinal structure - but that really applies to all > metal- > > boats and is not specific to "origami". > > > > Gerd | 3985|3893|2004-06-03 15:36:58|brentswain38|Re: catamarans|It would take a large cat to make steel an option, but a 60 footer would be big enough to make it practical. Brent --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, fmichael graham wrote: > Denis: > I am also interested in discussions on metal cats. I am often told that it can't be done with steel, yet, I have seen pictures of a 60+ foot steel cat that was built in Australia. I know that if I owned a cat, my wife would be more inclined to sail off-shore. She still isn't comfortable with a "buried toe-rail". > Mike > > > denis buggy wrote: > dear Dale > tread carefully on this site re catamarans as the only members of this group who do not have any strong views so far are prophets and imanns , > I tried to discuss cats and the last advice received was to buy a tent , ! yes a tent and bring it with me to sea , apparently any kind of tent would do . > I politely said nothing and decided to observe the site to learn more and read correspondence from those suffering from acute cabin fever and disorientation due to sailing a pendulum on the ocean and staggering on to some wild shore to consume berries mushrooms and various other hallucigens , this activity only interrupted to dispense nautical advice worldwide re fitting tents to catamarans and their love/hate relationship with their various financial advisors . should you wish to study further your interest in cats you can correspond with me at buggy@i... and you can check out the following Bowden catamarans Australia , Bruce Roberts has sold me study plans for a 60 foot cat which can be adapted for steel , steel magnolia is for sale reduced today to 200.000 us from heather underwood at heather@b... and you can view the classic hull design dilemma with steel cats by looking at mv solstice and mv equinox based in Scotland . > on a serious note , there are those who have helped me greatly on this site and I would be grateful for a critical evaluation of mv equinox as I have the scania engines used in this and the facilities to build something similar with my own sailing arrangement mounted on each hull however I do not have full confidence in the design of the planing hull used . regards all denis > ----- Original Message ----- > From: shorinjin01 > To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > Sent: Monday, May 31, 2004 6:15 AM > Subject: [origamiboats] catamarans > > > I just discovered origami boats and this group. I did a search on > catamarans, but found nothing. Have any been built using this method? > > Dale > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ADVERTISEMENT > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------- > Yahoo! Groups Links > > a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ > > b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats- unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > --------------------------------- > Post your free ad now! Yahoo! Canada Personals > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3986|3977|2004-06-03 15:49:14|brentswain38|Re: Steel Catamaran|Sounds like a reasonable idea . It looks like you've done your homework. Could it be possible that the cynics are selling real estate, or trying to justify their own real estate debts? Brent Swain --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "audeojude" wrote: > I have thought about a steel catamaran concept before but it needs to > be big to get over the weight penalty. > > :) > > I came up with a rough design using 30,000 gallon tanks of the kind > they store propane and natural gas in. I will copy some of the ideas I > have emailed others about for this here and see what you think. :) > > This will be alittle disjointed as I'm copying portions of emails that > I have previously explored the concept in. I have uploaded the images > i created for the design to a new folder in the files section called > steel catamaran > > > Here is the begining of the idea > > My goal with my design isn't for a boat to sail on a > regular basis but a home to move. with living space > and work shop space. Industrial quality finish as > opposed to yacht finih. As Indistructable as I can > build it. It would have full size power plants and > large capacity fuel tanks. You could jack it up out of > the water (as much as 10 feet out of the water > if needed) for extended periods of time and live that > way and use it as a base station to explore an area in > with a smaller say 20 foot aux boat. Any of the 4 to 6 > steel legs (spuds) in the up position could be used as masts > for large junk rig sails. I would expect that it would > be slow. In the 5 to 7 knot range > > The steel catamaran barge concept is just that a concept. I'm not > trying to prove it can't be done :) lots of people > have said that already. But I haven't seen any > referances to people doing it and failing either. Or > doing it and it being unusable. I'm trying to be > innovative and prove that it can be done. The exercise > in and of itself is worth the time and effort. :) If > no one tilted at windmills where would the world be? > I'm trying to find a way to make it work. I'm not > going to spend money on it unless on paper I can make > it work both technically and cost wise. > > What I don't understand is why it is automatically > assumed that it is nuts to do? We build very heavy and > slow monos all the time. Multihulls are light and fast > and give more space. But what if you built heavy > multihull. You lose speed. Ok, so what! If you can > build a heavy multi hull in significantly less time > and for less cost and you trade that for speed is that > an ok trade? Multihull people then say "but it can > sink since it isnt foam and glass". Well mono's sink > all the time. Big multi with each hull broke up into > at least 4 compartments that can be entirely sealed > with dogging doors both entry and going from > compartment to compartment would be hell to sink > compared to most monos. > > I looked up those propane tanks. a 30,000 gallon tank > is 9.5 ft in diameter, 64 ft long. used I have seen > price ranges from 3,000 to 15,000 dollars. I don't > have weight on it yet. They probably are excedingly > heavy since they are specked to safely contain 250lbs > per square inch of pressure. > > what if it could be done? how about three of those 64 > foot tanks tied together. Forget about building a > bridge deck all together. Just those three tanks > contains approx 960 sqft of floor space assuming that > you build a interior deck where you have 5 ft of width > between the outer walls of the tank. A lot of your > mecanicals and tanks will fit under that with big > access hatches to give easy access. Then build three > or four 5 ft wide cat walks along the top of the beams > connecting the three hulls and put in lots of webbing > between those. you've got a huge flat very low windage > area now. Mabye build one small pilot cabin on the > center hull 2/3 of the way to the front to pilot from. > > I think for my application that steel would be the > best material. I wouldnt be running from bad weather. > but rather just act as raft if caught. 64 x 30 is hard > to tip. probably have several dagger boards for keel > and just pull them up and just have u-shaped or half > round hulls in water. should act as very stable raft. > Just design it so that there are many sealed > compartments and all designed to survive large waves > breaking over it for worst case. should have > relatively shallow draft. Under 4 ft. near land run it > into shallow water, river, marsh or other sheltered > place and lift hull out of water so that it acts like > a very tough house on pilings. water goes under it. > > > ok next email expands on details a bit more as we worked on idea > > being able to lift the boat up out of the water on a > seriously stable leg system has several advantages. > 1. forget dry dock costs. You can go somewhere with > even a mild tidal range and get her totally out of the > water and easily accessable to 100% of the hull for > maintenance. even if no tidal range you could lift her > out of the water enough to get a dinghy under her and > do maintenance. > 2. if you lift her out of the water for large portions > of the year as you are based somewhere and operate out > of your smaller tender then your periods between > repainting the hull will be greatly extended. > 3. storms will be less of a threat when not at sea as > you can lift her above the storm surge. she will big > and heavy enough to be stable on the legs at this size > also in bad winds. (this part needs some numbers run > but I think it is a reasonable assumption up front) > > > thats it exactly a sail assited motorraft or a motor > assited sailing raft :) lol but yes that is the idea. > Its a home that moves on the water. > > lets figure here. (im going back to imperial units for > a bit) our volume is approx 21,737 cubic ft for one of > the hulls at 64 ft long and 9.5 ft in diameter with > hemispherical ends. multiply that by 64.1 lbs per > cubic ft(weight of sea water) gives 1,393,341.7 lbs > total displacement for one hull totally submerged. > THis would be the 4.75 ft draft displacement figure > for both hulls together or 696 tons displacement (ok > im weirded out here. could you check these figures for > me because this doesn't sound right. this thing is > going to float like an empty eggshell.) > > ok at two feet of draft one cylinder has 47,837 lbs of > displacement. both hulls would displace 95,675.66 lbs > or 47 tons > > at one ft draft it would displace 34,357.6 lbs for > both hulls. or about 17 tons. > > 3 ft of draft gives us 85560.68 lbs per hull or > 171121.36 lbs displacement for both hulls or 85 tons > (i figured tons by dividing lbs displacement by 2000.) > > so say totally build and loaded to the gills maybe 50 > or 60 tons should give us a draft of around 2.5 feet > or 3/4 of a meter. > > i used volume calculater at the following webpage. > http://grapevine.abe.msstate.edu/~fto/tools/vol/partoutcyl.html > for partial volumes > and > http://grapevine.abe.msstate.edu/~fto/tools/vol/outcylinder.html > for volume of total cylinder. > > I have to get dry weight of these tanks. or at least > metal thickness so i can calculate weight. > hmm 5 mm steel plate 29.83 ft circumferance and 64 ft > long weighs 6961 kilograms > > 3/16 inch plate would be 6630 kilograms > > http://www.mesteel.com/cgi-bin/w3-msql/goto.htm? url=/info/carbon/convert/metalcalculator/metalcalculator_kg.htm > I used this calculator to figure this > > so converting to lbs the heavier of them for 5mm sheet > steel would give us 15346.38 lbs for one hull sheet > that size 30692.76 lbs for both hulls add in middle > pod using all the steel in one tank and you get 46038 > lbs or about 23 tons lets just double that and call it > the finished vessal. ( i know this is rough but this > is just a for instance) so we are weighing in at 46 > tons. Using the partial volume of a cylinder > calculater from earlier to figure draft gives about a > 1.5 ft draft for each hull carrying half that tonnage. > > just looking at the calculator as I added draft it > looks as if for roughly every additional inch of draft > you get roughly another 2.5 tons of displacement per > hull or thereabouts. ok my mind is bent. I'm going to > take a break on this today. I have to do all this > again on paper rather than free handing it here. It > seems like it should not be that light. i mean we are > talking a draft of only 1.5 feet (18 inches) 48 cm or > half a mmeter? thats insane. I must have made an error > in my figures. If this is true then your wetted > surface is going to be very minimal and your length to > width at the water line is going to be about 16 to 1. > I hate to say this but if you put a shaped bow on this > thing it should be fairly easy to push. with a small > long fin keel or some dagger boards for directional > stability you really could sail it. > > at 50 tons with 2 hp per ton displacement two auto > diesels should push her really well. you would have > about 4 hp per ton actually if you used a couple small > volkswagon diesels. > HULL SPEED = 1.34*lwl^.5 i know this is for mono's so > it is not going to be very accurate for a cat > configuration with a 16/1 waterline ratio but it would > give a hull speed of 10.72 knots with 2 to 3 hp per > ton displacement. i pulled that formula from this page > http://hometown.aol.com/bristolyht/screen.html > > > another email here > > in your description of concept one did you mean to > take and create one ovoid section out of two pieces of > tank or to put two ovoid sections of tank one on top > of the other between the hulls? > > > I think that concept two would be easier to build with > 3 or four sections of tank turned 90 degrees to the > hull and cut on the contour of the hull. and attached > so that they would be a little over a meter from the > waterline of the hull. which would extend them about a > meter and a half to two meters above the top of the > hull decks. You could then even tie these togeter > longitudinally with further sections between them > going for and aft. All those curves being welded > together would most likey give increadable strength. > > just use a plasma cutter to cut them apart and a crane > to lift into position and tack together. If you had it > all layed out and cut beforehand a crane for one or > two days at most would get all the major hull pieces > tacked together and ready for full welds at your > convience. > > > if my calculations from earlier were correct you top > height above water would be about approx 12ft or just > less than 4 meters tall, 18 meters long? and about 9 > meters wide > > so we have three tanks giving us a 18 by 9 by 4 meter > structure drawing about a 1/2 meter to 3/4 meters of > water. ( im just thinking that a little wider would be > more stable though) say about 12 meters wide. > > > 64 / 3 = about 21 ft per section with 4.5 ft overlap > at both ends so 21-(4.5+4.5) = 12 ft between hulls so > 9.5+9.5+12= 31 ft wide > > just some more musings :) > > > more musings on spud/mast system > > basically the masts would penitrate a welded in well > all the way thru the hull and be tied into a > reinforced bulk head. You would not dismount them. > They would simply be winched straight up and down. say > 50 ft round or squared steel tube. This gives you > about a 10 foot bury thru the hull.steel cable > attached at the top and bottom of mast to pull it up > or down. Probably on the same winch. while one spools > out the other spools in. (spool with seperator in > middle. You would have a heavy raised lip say 6 to 12 > inches high where the mast comes thru the > partners/hull/deck level that you can put 1 inch or > better steel pins thru the mast to hold it in place > vertically up or down once it is in place. (could be > some other method but something that will hold mast > that is not the winch after it is where you want it. > Maybe even a friction fitting. your hand winches would > be capable of doing the job. No one winch would have > to support the whole weight of the vessal. if you had > 6 poles you could divide the weight of the vessal by 6 > and then add a bit back for a safety margin. one of > the barge winches was rated to 90 tons... this would > be overkill. Acually just take and put a small > electric auxillary motor on that for normal usage and > use it manually if there is no power for some reason. > In the mast position you would have 40 ft unstayed > masts. if you used junk rig on it you wouldnt even > have to dismount the sails when going to leg down > mode. because of the design the boom and full battens > would just rest in a fore and aft brackets above the > deck and be lashed down. None of the rig on a junk rig > is attached anywhere to the mast except the head and > then on the deck. It just has some ropes at each > batten that circle the mast and slide up and down > freely. One person can handle multiple junk rigs with > ease from the cockpit. That is one of the major > selling points. A small woman can handle a two masted > 35 footer by herself on watch in bad weather if it is > properly set up. Because you only have 40 ft masts you > are going to lose some of the wind higher up but you > will make up with that in that junk rigs tend to carry > about 20% more totall sail area safely than a > comparable bermudan rig. I'm thinking the legs of mast > will be on the order of 12 inches in diameter heavy > steel or 12 inches square. That heavy weight aloft is > why I was thinking wider is better. Raft stability > concept. Not sure but your probably looking at about > 1500 lbs per mast. because of leg mode they would be > heavier than normal steel masts. | 3987|3890|2004-06-03 15:55:32|brentswain38|Re: Flame Spray|Greg You'll find that putting a symetrical, pre cut deck on a well built, symetrical hull will make symetry a forgone conclusion, no string neccessary, and twist will be geometrically impossible. Brent --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > We joined this site to expand the body of knowledge about what is possible in origami. Origami techniques for amateur construction > in steel are well understood and documented. What has been lacking in origami is techniques that will allow amateur builders to use > this method to build alloy boats. > > So, for the past year we have been experimenting with different building techniques to allow amateur builders to reliably build > boats in alloy. We freely publish our results and techniques and made them public domain. For those people that prefer steel, > origami is a good solution for amateur construction. For those people that prefer alloy, origami is a good solution for amateur > construction. > > Our findings confirm that experienced steel workers are not automatically great alloy workers. They continue to think of alloy as > steel, and make mistakes that they blame on the alloy, rather than their lack of experience. This leads to false notions about > alloy. > > For steel welders the significant difference are: > > 1. Preparation - unlike stick welding, the material to be joined must be clean. > 2. Reflexes - welding alloy is a different motion than welding steel. > 3. Evaluation - a bad alloy weld superficially looks like a great steel weld. > > We found that alloy techniques and methods are more like wood than they are like steel. Experienced wood workers could well find > that origami building in alloy is more natural than building in steel. > > We found: > > 1. Alloy boats can be reliably tacked outside, without shelter, even in the rain. Work will progress faster if done under shelter, > and final welding must be sheltered from the weather. Plastic tarps can be used to build low cost shelters. > > 2. Amateurs can learn to tack alloy in less than a day (usually a few minutes). High quality, high strength final welding takes > practice, and is best done by hiring a professional welder. > > 3. The methods for producing fair origami shapes in alloy are much the same as in steel. Alloy is easier to form, but moves more > during welding. To allow for this, many small tacks preferred to a few large tacks. Parts should be tacked full length with small > "button" tacks, prior to strengthening joints with larger tacks. Welding longitudinals on the flat, prior to pulling the hull/deck > to shape is the fastest method, and produces the fairest results. Longitudinals placed close to edges help create fair seams, > correcting for small cutting errors String, used for sighting in strategic locations provides a quick reference point, to correct > for level, angles, symmetry and twist, with minimal measuring. > > 4. Woodworking tools are much the same tools used to work alloy. Alloy is best cut with low cost, carbide tipped, wood cutting > blades. It is fast, no grinding is required, and leaves the alloy ready for welding. A $5, 7x24 carbide blade will cut about 100 > feet of 3/8" alloy before it needs sharpening/replacing. Allowing the blade to chatter while cutting will dull it quickly. Plasma > cutting leaves an edge that must be removed prior to welding. > > 5. A carbide tipped milling blade on an angle grinder is the fastest way to shape and fit alloy, and prepare it for welding. These > cost about $70, and will probably need to be sharpened/replaced 2-3 times when building a boat. You can fit alloy with a milling > blade perhaps 100 times faster than with a grinding/sanding disk. Grinding/sanding disks are only required for final finishing. > > History shows that the difference between impossible and possible is knowledge. Armed with sufficient information, any amateur with > sufficient skills to take a boat offshore,and keep it running in a remote location, will be more than capable of building a boat > ashore, with the resources that are available, in any material that they choose. > > Greg Elliott > http://www.origamimagic.com | 3988|3890|2004-06-03 16:25:20|Courtney Thomas|Re: Flame Spray|Greg, Thank you for sharing your experience. Any sources for HOWTO do "high strength/quality alloy FINAL welding" ? What are the barriers for amateurs ? I have a MIG/TIG/stick Miller welder and am motivated to be able to do this. Appreciatively, Courtney ge@... wrote: > We joined this site to expand the body of knowledge about what is possible in origami. Origami techniques for amateur construction > in steel are well understood and documented. What has been lacking in origami is techniques that will allow amateur builders to use > this method to build alloy boats. > > So, for the past year we have been experimenting with different building techniques to allow amateur builders to reliably build > boats in alloy. We freely publish our results and techniques and made them public domain. For those people that prefer steel, > origami is a good solution for amateur construction. For those people that prefer alloy, origami is a good solution for amateur > construction. > > Our findings confirm that experienced steel workers are not automatically great alloy workers. They continue to think of alloy as > steel, and make mistakes that they blame on the alloy, rather than their lack of experience. This leads to false notions about > alloy. > > For steel welders the significant difference are: > > 1. Preparation - unlike stick welding, the material to be joined must be clean. > 2. Reflexes - welding alloy is a different motion than welding steel. > 3. Evaluation - a bad alloy weld superficially looks like a great steel weld. > > We found that alloy techniques and methods are more like wood than they are like steel. Experienced wood workers could well find > that origami building in alloy is more natural than building in steel. > > We found: > > 1. Alloy boats can be reliably tacked outside, without shelter, even in the rain. Work will progress faster if done under shelter, > and final welding must be sheltered from the weather. Plastic tarps can be used to build low cost shelters. > > 2. Amateurs can learn to tack alloy in less than a day (usually a few minutes). High quality, high strength final welding takes > practice, and is best done by hiring a professional welder. > > 3. The methods for producing fair origami shapes in alloy are much the same as in steel. Alloy is easier to form, but moves more > during welding. To allow for this, many small tacks preferred to a few large tacks. Parts should be tacked full length with small > "button" tacks, prior to strengthening joints with larger tacks. Welding longitudinals on the flat, prior to pulling the hull/deck > to shape is the fastest method, and produces the fairest results. Longitudinals placed close to edges help create fair seams, > correcting for small cutting errors String, used for sighting in strategic locations provides a quick reference point, to correct > for level, angles, symmetry and twist, with minimal measuring. > > 4. Woodworking tools are much the same tools used to work alloy. Alloy is best cut with low cost, carbide tipped, wood cutting > blades. It is fast, no grinding is required, and leaves the alloy ready for welding. A $5, 7x24 carbide blade will cut about 100 > feet of 3/8" alloy before it needs sharpening/replacing. Allowing the blade to chatter while cutting will dull it quickly. Plasma > cutting leaves an edge that must be removed prior to welding. > > 5. A carbide tipped milling blade on an angle grinder is the fastest way to shape and fit alloy, and prepare it for welding. These > cost about $70, and will probably need to be sharpened/replaced 2-3 times when building a boat. You can fit alloy with a milling > blade perhaps 100 times faster than with a grinding/sanding disk. Grinding/sanding disks are only required for final finishing. > > History shows that the difference between impossible and possible is knowledge. Armed with sufficient information, any amateur with > sufficient skills to take a boat offshore,and keep it running in a remote location, will be more than capable of building a boat > ashore, with the resources that are available, in any material that they choose. > > Greg Elliott > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > -- s/v Mutiny Rhodes Bounty II lying Oriental, NC WDB5619| 3989|3977|2004-06-03 17:01:24|Phil S.|Re: Steel Catamaran|Actually I think your idea is really cool, I saw a guy in Alaska take one of the burned out tugs from Yutana Tug and Barge. Looks like it was a cool house, but I think it was just a "Liv-a-barge". I had thought about finding an old deck barge to put a house on and push it around with a small tug. After looking at a bunch of junk barges I decided against it, I was worried about my small children (At the time) falling off too. I think your propane tanks would be really heavy, not to mention the problem of residual chemicals. I could do a quick check and see how thick a 60" 250psi tank would have to be. Off the top of my head between 5/8" and 3/4", I just did up a drawing for a 36" tank at 175 psi and wall thickness was 1/2". Phil| 3990|3948|2004-06-03 17:02:46|Gerd|Re: Stress Concentration|Thanks for the tip, Brent ;-) what I am wondering right now is should I first try to join the darts, and then the vertical cut, or try to bring the verticals together as far as possible and then adjust the darts? Any difference due to the fact that there are 2 darts on my design? Gerd --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" wrote: > Gerd > Scoreing the plate halfway thru 15 cm or so beyond the end of the > cut with a grinder and tapping this area with the hammer, being > careful not to leave hammer marks there ,will make the transition > from chine to round more gradual. This can be done after the seam is > pulled together , or any time before painting. I've never had any > problems there as the intact metal ahead of the seam is 100% strength. > Brent > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gerd" wrote: > > Spencer, I have not yet pulled the hull together for good, but have > > tried tentatively to make the edges join on the first half-hull > that > > I have cut out. There seems to be no notable stress at the dart- > end. > > Some resistance yes, but I expect that to be dstributed over the > > entire panel and all along the weld. I think that in corners where > > several welds meet, even if the plate is otherwise flat, you would > > have a lot more stress due to the welding itself than to the fact > > that you "force" the sheet some. Every steelboat is full of such > > places, for example around the bow, the transom-deck-hull corner > aft > > etc. and I have not heard of any problems with that. > > > > Gerd > > > > the YAGO PROJECT at http://www.justmueller.com/boats/ > > > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "spencerj71" > > wrote: > > > I have never built an origami boat (have built a 20' alloy center- > > > console), but I am interested in doing so. It seems to me that > > the > > > end of the hard chine (and end of the weld) is the very > definition > > of > > > a stress concentration. Has anyone experienced cracking in this > > > area, or have any advice with regards to stress relief, or am I > > > concerned for nothing? > > > > > > This is the best group for metal boat building, oragami or not. > > > > > > Thanks for any advice. > > > > > > - Spencer | 3991|3915|2004-06-03 17:03:49|Gerd|frames|I understand your point, I was just wondering if you consider your bulkheads on tabs to stringers as structural transverses, similar - but maybe softer - to frames? Gerd --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" wrote: > Transverse framiing increases the dammage from rocks, docks and > collisions by giving plating a hard point to stretch against, thus > increasing the likelihood of holing.Plating adds far less than > longitudinals which are arcs ,which have to be compressed on end for > denting to occur. > Brent > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "spencerj71" > wrote: > > Gerd, > > > > Thanks for clearing that up for me. That is what I usually refer > to > > as free-form construction methods. > > > > I think that only welding to the stringers works when you have > > adaquate plate thickness to take local loads, or closely spaced > > stringers. As I mentioned before, I think that boats with small > > panels take less damage from groundings, docks, collisions, etc, > but > > there is definitely something to be said for allowing the boat to > > flex. > > > > How are the bulkheads made watertight if only welded to tabs off of > > stringers? > > > > - Spencer > > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Gerd" wrote: > > > Ha! I was wating to bring the subject of the frameless origami up > > > for some time ;-) > > > > > > > What concerns me with some of the discussions in this group is > > the > > > > notion that origami boats don't need internal framing. To me > > this > > > is ludicrious. > > > > > > Actually this is a misconception in many minds I think, and is > > > really a bit misleading if always mentioned together > as "frameless > > > origami" hull, as we are really talking about 2 entirely > different > > > things here: > > > 1) Origami is a frameless _assembly_ method in that it does not > > > require frames to set up the hull, nor jig nor supports nor even > > > ground etc... thus reducing cost and labour significantly. > > > 2) Metal boats may be designed with or without frames or > stringers > > > or whatever, this is just a design choice for transverse and > > > longitudinal support & structuring. There are metal boats without > > > any apparent structure, there are boats with just stringers, > there > > > are boats with skins welded to only frames, only stringers or to > > > both... If any of these boats would be build using the origami > > > method, then the structure as designed would be added _after_ the > > > hull is build _without_ frames. > > > > > > Finally, in some assembly methods you _need_ regularly spaces > > frames > > > for construction if you want to produce a fair hull, and tehn > > simply > > > leave them in - in origami frames my be less because you would > > place > > > them only where needed. > > > > > > I think we all agree by now that hull-skins should be welded only > > to > > > stringers, not to frames, because that lets the plating follow a > > > natural curve - if there are frames, these will only touch the > > > stringers, not the skin. > > > > > > In the BS designs for example, bulkheads are fixed to tabs welded > > > onto stringers and - I do believe - play a structural role. On my > > > boat I have a thinner skin (3mm) and very light interior > > > arrangements so I will add some strategical structural frames - > > > AFTER the hull is build. These are just different options of the > > > same thing really. > > > > > > There is another discussion as to the utility of creating hard > > > points in form of frames as opposed to a more flexible design > that > > > favors longitudinal structure - but that really applies to all > > metal- > > > boats and is not specific to "origami". > > > > > > Gerd | 3992|3977|2004-06-03 17:07:45|denis buggy|Re: Steel Catamaran|DEAR AUDEOJUDE excellent contribution to the dreams of many , you have stated the thoughts of what I now know through the trade press and web to be a large shift in the vision of what a human being hopes to achieve by going to sea in a boat with his / her family and making the unselfish compromises which allow a family to have a safe and comfortable holiday and a second home which can be also used by the extended family , friends , business promotion get to know you (while fishing for the take home monster fish look what daddy caught ) and merely mooring in a beautiful place sheltered for the night while the barbecue does its work and the various toys surf boards bikes and showers and twin heads allow a pleasant mellow feeling that things are right in the world at that moment while the family go about their thing in a truly privileged environment , it seems unnatural to those who wish to extract a extra solitary knot or two of speed from a cramped and lonely boat that there is another view which thankfully holds no prejudice against them or any other type of boat . you may wish to study a good site which reflects much of your ideas try john shuttleworth yacht designs and in particular his aerorig sails cat and you will also see a stress analysis of the spaceframe used to keep the show together . frameless orgami take note fresh air will not do to hold a multi hull together . thanks for the courageously expressed dream many have shared your road quietly . regards denis ----- Original Message ----- From: audeojude To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, June 03, 2004 3:14 PM Subject: [origamiboats] Steel Catamaran I have thought about a steel catamaran concept before but it needs to be big to get over the weight penalty. :) I came up with a rough design using 30,000 gallon tanks of the kind they store propane and natural gas in. I will copy some of the ideas I have emailed others about for this here and see what you think. :) This will be alittle disjointed as I'm copying portions of emails that I have previously explored the concept in. I have uploaded the images i created for the design to a new folder in the files section called steel catamaran Here is the begining of the idea My goal with my design isn't for a boat to sail on a regular basis but a home to move. with living space and work shop space. Industrial quality finish as opposed to yacht finih. As Indistructable as I can build it. It would have full size power plants and large capacity fuel tanks. You could jack it up out of the water (as much as 10 feet out of the water if needed) for extended periods of time and live that way and use it as a base station to explore an area in with a smaller say 20 foot aux boat. Any of the 4 to 6 steel legs (spuds) in the up position could be used as masts for large junk rig sails. I would expect that it would be slow. In the 5 to 7 knot range The steel catamaran barge concept is just that a concept. I'm not trying to prove it can't be done :) lots of people have said that already. But I haven't seen any referances to people doing it and failing either. Or doing it and it being unusable. I'm trying to be innovative and prove that it can be done. The exercise in and of itself is worth the time and effort. :) If no one tilted at windmills where would the world be? I'm trying to find a way to make it work. I'm not going to spend money on it unless on paper I can make it work both technically and cost wise. What I don't understand is why it is automatically assumed that it is nuts to do? We build very heavy and slow monos all the time. Multihulls are light and fast and give more space. But what if you built heavy multihull. You lose speed. Ok, so what! If you can build a heavy multi hull in significantly less time and for less cost and you trade that for speed is that an ok trade? Multihull people then say "but it can sink since it isnt foam and glass". Well mono's sink all the time. Big multi with each hull broke up into at least 4 compartments that can be entirely sealed with dogging doors both entry and going from compartment to compartment would be hell to sink compared to most monos. I looked up those propane tanks. a 30,000 gallon tank is 9.5 ft in diameter, 64 ft long. used I have seen price ranges from 3,000 to 15,000 dollars. I don't have weight on it yet. They probably are excedingly heavy since they are specked to safely contain 250lbs per square inch of pressure. what if it could be done? how about three of those 64 foot tanks tied together. Forget about building a bridge deck all together. Just those three tanks contains approx 960 sqft of floor space assuming that you build a interior deck where you have 5 ft of width between the outer walls of the tank. A lot of your mecanicals and tanks will fit under that with big access hatches to give easy access. Then build three or four 5 ft wide cat walks along the top of the beams connecting the three hulls and put in lots of webbing between those. you've got a huge flat very low windage area now. Mabye build one small pilot cabin on the center hull 2/3 of the way to the front to pilot from. I think for my application that steel would be the best material. I wouldnt be running from bad weather. but rather just act as raft if caught. 64 x 30 is hard to tip. probably have several dagger boards for keel and just pull them up and just have u-shaped or half round hulls in water. should act as very stable raft. Just design it so that there are many sealed compartments and all designed to survive large waves breaking over it for worst case. should have relatively shallow draft. Under 4 ft. near land run it into shallow water, river, marsh or other sheltered place and lift hull out of water so that it acts like a very tough house on pilings. water goes under it. ok next email expands on details a bit more as we worked on idea being able to lift the boat up out of the water on a seriously stable leg system has several advantages. 1. forget dry dock costs. You can go somewhere with even a mild tidal range and get her totally out of the water and easily accessable to 100% of the hull for maintenance. even if no tidal range you could lift her out of the water enough to get a dinghy under her and do maintenance. 2. if you lift her out of the water for large portions of the year as you are based somewhere and operate out of your smaller tender then your periods between repainting the hull will be greatly extended. 3. storms will be less of a threat when not at sea as you can lift her above the storm surge. she will big and heavy enough to be stable on the legs at this size also in bad winds. (this part needs some numbers run but I think it is a reasonable assumption up front) thats it exactly a sail assited motorraft or a motor assited sailing raft :) lol but yes that is the idea. Its a home that moves on the water. lets figure here. (im going back to imperial units for a bit) our volume is approx 21,737 cubic ft for one of the hulls at 64 ft long and 9.5 ft in diameter with hemispherical ends. multiply that by 64.1 lbs per cubic ft(weight of sea water) gives 1,393,341.7 lbs total displacement for one hull totally submerged. THis would be the 4.75 ft draft displacement figure for both hulls together or 696 tons displacement (ok im weirded out here. could you check these figures for me because this doesn't sound right. this thing is going to float like an empty eggshell.) ok at two feet of draft one cylinder has 47,837 lbs of displacement. both hulls would displace 95,675.66 lbs or 47 tons at one ft draft it would displace 34,357.6 lbs for both hulls. or about 17 tons. 3 ft of draft gives us 85560.68 lbs per hull or 171121.36 lbs displacement for both hulls or 85 tons (i figured tons by dividing lbs displacement by 2000.) so say totally build and loaded to the gills maybe 50 or 60 tons should give us a draft of around 2.5 feet or 3/4 of a meter. i used volume calculater at the following webpage. http://grapevine.abe.msstate.edu/~fto/tools/vol/partoutcyl.html for partial volumes and http://grapevine.abe.msstate.edu/~fto/tools/vol/outcylinder.html for volume of total cylinder. I have to get dry weight of these tanks. or at least metal thickness so i can calculate weight. hmm 5 mm steel plate 29.83 ft circumferance and 64 ft long weighs 6961 kilograms 3/16 inch plate would be 6630 kilograms http://www.mesteel.com/cgi-bin/w3-msql/goto.htm?url=/info/carbon/convert/metalcalculator/metalcalculator_kg.htm I used this calculator to figure this so converting to lbs the heavier of them for 5mm sheet steel would give us 15346.38 lbs for one hull sheet that size 30692.76 lbs for both hulls add in middle pod using all the steel in one tank and you get 46038 lbs or about 23 tons lets just double that and call it the finished vessal. ( i know this is rough but this is just a for instance) so we are weighing in at 46 tons. Using the partial volume of a cylinder calculater from earlier to figure draft gives about a 1.5 ft draft for each hull carrying half that tonnage. just looking at the calculator as I added draft it looks as if for roughly every additional inch of draft you get roughly another 2.5 tons of displacement per hull or thereabouts. ok my mind is bent. I'm going to take a break on this today. I have to do all this again on paper rather than free handing it here. It seems like it should not be that light. i mean we are talking a draft of only 1.5 feet (18 inches) 48 cm or half a mmeter? thats insane. I must have made an error in my figures. If this is true then your wetted surface is going to be very minimal and your length to width at the water line is going to be about 16 to 1. I hate to say this but if you put a shaped bow on this thing it should be fairly easy to push. with a small long fin keel or some dagger boards for directional stability you really could sail it. at 50 tons with 2 hp per ton displacement two auto diesels should push her really well. you would have about 4 hp per ton actually if you used a couple small volkswagon diesels. HULL SPEED = 1.34*lwl^.5 i know this is for mono's so it is not going to be very accurate for a cat configuration with a 16/1 waterline ratio but it would give a hull speed of 10.72 knots with 2 to 3 hp per ton displacement. i pulled that formula from this page http://hometown.aol.com/bristolyht/screen.html another email here in your description of concept one did you mean to take and create one ovoid section out of two pieces of tank or to put two ovoid sections of tank one on top of the other between the hulls? I think that concept two would be easier to build with 3 or four sections of tank turned 90 degrees to the hull and cut on the contour of the hull. and attached so that they would be a little over a meter from the waterline of the hull. which would extend them about a meter and a half to two meters above the top of the hull decks. You could then even tie these togeter longitudinally with further sections between them going for and aft. All those curves being welded together would most likey give increadable strength. just use a plasma cutter to cut them apart and a crane to lift into position and tack together. If you had it all layed out and cut beforehand a crane for one or two days at most would get all the major hull pieces tacked together and ready for full welds at your convience. if my calculations from earlier were correct you top height above water would be about approx 12ft or just less than 4 meters tall, 18 meters long? and about 9 meters wide so we have three tanks giving us a 18 by 9 by 4 meter structure drawing about a 1/2 meter to 3/4 meters of water. ( im just thinking that a little wider would be more stable though) say about 12 meters wide. 64 / 3 = about 21 ft per section with 4.5 ft overlap at both ends so 21-(4.5+4.5) = 12 ft between hulls so 9.5+9.5+12= 31 ft wide just some more musings :) more musings on spud/mast system basically the masts would penitrate a welded in well all the way thru the hull and be tied into a reinforced bulk head. You would not dismount them. They would simply be winched straight up and down. say 50 ft round or squared steel tube. This gives you about a 10 foot bury thru the hull.steel cable attached at the top and bottom of mast to pull it up or down. Probably on the same winch. while one spools out the other spools in. (spool with seperator in middle. You would have a heavy raised lip say 6 to 12 inches high where the mast comes thru the partners/hull/deck level that you can put 1 inch or better steel pins thru the mast to hold it in place vertically up or down once it is in place. (could be some other method but something that will hold mast that is not the winch after it is where you want it. Maybe even a friction fitting. your hand winches would be capable of doing the job. No one winch would have to support the whole weight of the vessal. if you had 6 poles you could divide the weight of the vessal by 6 and then add a bit back for a safety margin. one of the barge winches was rated to 90 tons... this would be overkill. Acually just take and put a small electric auxillary motor on that for normal usage and use it manually if there is no power for some reason. In the mast position you would have 40 ft unstayed masts. if you used junk rig on it you wouldnt even have to dismount the sails when going to leg down mode. because of the design the boom and full battens would just rest in a fore and aft brackets above the deck and be lashed down. None of the rig on a junk rig is attached anywhere to the mast except the head and then on the deck. It just has some ropes at each batten that circle the mast and slide up and down freely. One person can handle multiple junk rigs with ease from the cockpit. That is one of the major selling points. A small woman can handle a two masted 35 footer by herself on watch in bad weather if it is properly set up. Because you only have 40 ft masts you are going to lose some of the wind higher up but you will make up with that in that junk rigs tend to carry about 20% more totall sail area safely than a comparable bermudan rig. I'm thinking the legs of mast will be on the order of 12 inches in diameter heavy steel or 12 inches square. That heavy weight aloft is why I was thinking wider is better. Raft stability concept. Not sure but your probably looking at about 1500 lbs per mast. because of leg mode they would be heavier than normal steel masts. To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Links a.. To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/origamiboats/ b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] | 3993|3977|2004-06-03 17:24:27|spencerj71|Re: Steel Catamaran|I got curious and looked on-line. A 30,000 gallon tank has a 15/16" wall thickness. - Spencer --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Phil S." wrote: > Actually I think your idea is really cool, I saw a guy in Alaska take one of the burned out > tugs from Yutana Tug and Barge. Looks like it was a cool house, but I think it was just a > "Liv-a-barge". I had thought about finding an old deck barge to put a house on and push > it around with a small tug. After looking at a bunch of junk barges I decided against it, I > was worried about my small children (At the time) falling off too. > > I think your propane tanks would be really heavy, not to mention the problem of residual > chemicals. I could do a quick check and see how thick a 60" 250psi tank would have to > be. Off the top of my head between 5/8" and 3/4", I just did up a drawing for a 36" tank at > 175 psi and wall thickness was 1/2". > > Phil | 3994|3370|2004-06-03 18:29:03|Courtney Thomas|Re: new 37' design|Brent, I have a Rhodes designed boat that has 10.25' beam, skeg rudder, cutaway forefoot, and about a 50' keel stepped mast, very high righting coef, and satisfying directional stability. She's not metal, though I hope to join you origami fortunates in time, nor is she a racer [definitely a cruiser] but a sistership won the Newport to Bermuda race in 2000, so she moves along. Based on my poor experience vis-a-vis yours, I can happily second the motion regarding your below referenced scantlings. Cordially, Courtney brentswain38 wrote: > Richard > I took the proportions of my first boat ,a pipe dream from the > book Skenes elements of yacht design, increased the waterline, filled > out the bow lines and fined down the aft lines to improve directional > stability and balance , which made for a huge improvement.As a > spencer 35 has 9ft6 inch beam and a beamy boat has 12 ft beam I > settled on 10 ft 6 inches as a happy medium.As excessive beam > destroys directional stability and ultimate self righting ability, > and I'd had enough of boats with no directional stability ,after the > pipe dream, I made directional stability a priority.As the inboard > rudder was a total pain in the ass when it came to complicating the > hell out of self steering and inside steering, and drastically > increasing the price and vulnerability of such parts,I was keen to go > for an outboard rudder.No regrets.In New Zealand I had pulled the > keel hung rudder off the pipe dream and gave her a skeg hung rudder > six feet further aft without changing the balance under sail in any > way. I liked that arrangement, and having found that full length > keels made for poor balance and directional stability( The centre of > lateral resistance moves, according to speed, a percentage of the > keel length)The rig of the pipe dream was a little short for a fully > loaded cruising boat. Over the years owners of the 36 kept saying > they would go higher with the rig . When they started putting 46 to > 47 ft sticks in they said" That seems about right." > Brent Swain > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "richytill" wrote: > >>Brent, given that no concept or design occurs in a vacuum--where >> > did > >>you gather design features for the 36' for example? Lyle Hess >>obviously patterned the Bristol Channel Cutter more directly from >>historic lines of that design so it is easy to research the purpose >>of the breed. Dockside drifters looking at "My Island" guess at >> > the > >>origins--some see the influence of the Sweedish Scampi, others a >>Vertue or something. I tell them--it's origami. Your description >> > of > >>the needs for Pacific cruising hints at research into what works >> > out > >>there. Are there any strong links to specific historic craft? rt >> >> >> >>--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "brentswain38" >> wrote: >> >>>Extending the waterline means a plumb stem which means very >>> > little > >>>buildup in reserve buoyancy when the ends go into a sea. This >>> > would > >>>mean a tendency for the bow to go thru a sea like a submarine(wet >>>boat). This has been common with the plumb bow modern boats which >>>take a lot of green water over the decks , unlike the older >>> > designs > >>>which have a rapid buildup of buoyancy in the ends above the >>>waterline,when they try to go into a headsea.Clipper bows have >>> > very > >>>little buoyancy foreward, and consequently drive into a headsea >>> >>intil >> >>>the water reaches the deck, then stop suddenly as if they've hit >>> > a > >>>wall. Rounded bows cruise smoothly thru a headsea , without >>> > slowing > >>>significantly >>> My first boat had deep V sections foreward which pounded in a >>> >>head >> >>>sea far more than my current boat , which has more U shaped >>>sections.When beating into a strong tradewind from Vanuatu to >>> > Fiji, > >>>the sides of the V pounded like hell, slamming down into >>> > headseas. > >>A >> >>>bit of round there would have greatly improved the situation, as >>>experience has since proven. >>> The flat, bedpan shaped sections which Jeff advocates was one >>> > of > >>>the causes of the capsizes in the fastnet race, as was explained >>> > in > >>>the book " Seaworthiness, the Forgotten Factor", by Marchage.Flat >>>sections tend to follow the surface of the waves , like a >>>raft,resulting in a snappy motion, whereas deep deadrise sections >>>tend to be more stable, ignoreing the shape of the water's >>> > surface > >>to >> >>>a greater degree.Added buoyancy midships tends to be offset >>> >>somewhat >> >>>by room for greater tankage and storage there, lower down in the >>> >>hull. >> >>> Low displacement figures are an short term illusion in offshore >>>cruising yachts.A boat designed to be sailed totally empty will >>>suffer a greater performance loss when loaded with the >>> > neccessities > >>>of a long ocean voyage, far more loss than one which is designed >>> >>for >> >>>a heavier displacement. I understand that Jeff cruises the >>> > Atlantic > >>>side of the planet , where distances between sources of supplies >>> >>are >> >>>tiny compared with the Pacific.Thus it's totally understandable >>> >>that >> >>>he would completely fail to understand cruising realities in >>> > other > >>>parts of the world. >>> One criticism I can make of the design is that a wide stern >>> >>makes >> >>>for poor hull balance and poor directional stability. This is >>>explained in the section on balance in my book.The extra room aft >>> >>is >> >>>houseboat priorities, at the expense of cruising priorities.I've >>>sailed a couple of boats across the Pacific which had >>> > excessively > >>>wide sterns and the resulting poor hull balance ,and having to >>>constantly fight the helm, or the inability of any kind of self >>>steering to keep her on course , and the need to sail under >>> >>canvased >> >>>to keep her on course certainly wasn't worth the extra room >>> > aft.If > >>I >> >>>wanted a boat with houseboat priorities I'd buy a house boat. >>> It's good to hear that the design has a wheelhouse option. >>> >>Sitting >> >>>in the driving rain in an open cockpit in order to "Look Trendy" >>> > is > >>a >> >>>sucker's game.To the experienced cruiser, it would only make you >>> >>look >> >>>like a fool. >>> Brent Swain >>> >>> >>>--- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, "Jeff Halpern/ Laurie Burr" >>> wrote: >>> >>>>With all due respect, while there is a lot to like about the >>>> >>>preliminary >>> >>>>design for the new LB 37 footer, one thing that strikes me is >>>> >>that >> >>>she ends >>> >>>>up with an extremely deep canoe body with a very deep vertical >>>> >>>center of >>> >>>>buoyancy. This of course results from the design having a very >>>> >>high >> >>>>displacement for its waterline length (3,000 to 5,000 lbs >>>> > higher > >>>than would >>> >>>>be normal for a more modern offshore cruiser of this length) >>>> >>>carried on >>> >>>>comparatively quite narrow waterline beam. >>>> >>>>There are a number of serious negatives to a canoe body that is >>>> >>>this deep >>> >>>>such as a tendancy to roll through a very wide roll angle >>>> >>compared >> >>>to a more >>> >>>>moderately shallow canoe body. Similarly because the vertical >>>> >>>center of >>> >>>>gravity would likely so much higher above the vertical center >>>> > of > >>>buoyancy >>> >>>>and because it would take a pretty large heel angle for the >>>> >>center >> >>>of >>> >>>>buoyancy to shift to leeward, this boat would have >>>> > substantially > >>>less form >>> >>>>stability and ballast stability than a boat with a shallower >>>> >>canoe >> >>>body. >>> >>>>In terms of sailing ability, the deep canoe body would reduce >>>> > the > >>>span of >>> >>>>the foils for any given draft and so would require larger keel >>>> >>and >> >>>rudder >>> >>>>areas and therefore produce greater frictional drag. This means >>>> > a > >>>compromise >>> >>>>in windward performance and the need to carry more sail area, >>>> >>which >> >>>given >>> >>>>the comparatively low inherent stability of of this hull form, >>>> >>>would mean a >>> >>>>boat that would be hard pressed to stand to its rig especially >>>> > in > >>a >> >>>stiffer >>> >>>>breeze. >>>> >>>>Another negative of this high displacement for the waterline >>>> >>length >> >>>and >>> >>>>waterline beam, is the need to carry a lot of displacement out >>>> >>into >> >>>the ends >>> >>>>of the boat. It is not the end of the world to carry a fair >>>> >>amount >> >>>of >>> >>>>displacement aft as this can help with surfing conditions but >>>> >>>carrying the >>> >>>>displacement forward means colliding with a chop with much >>>> >>greater >> >>>impacts >>> >>>>than is the norm on more modern, finer bowed craft, and also >>>> >>>carrying the >>> >>>>displacement forward results in 'U' shaped sections that are >>>> > more > >>>likely to >>> >>>>pound in a seaway than more Vee'd sections. >>>> >>>>While I am not trying to trash this design, in the spirit of >>>> > being > >>>>constructive, I would suggest if your goal is to carry a >>>> >>>displacement in the >>> >>>>16,500 lb range, that you stretch the waterline length to >>>> > perhaps > >>>34 to 35 >>> >>>>feet (which of course would also produce a longer boat) and >>>> >>perhaps >> >>>increase >>> >>>>the beam by a foot or so. This would allow a much sweeter set >>>> > of > >>>lines and >>> >>>>produce a boat that has lower drag, is more stable, has a more >>>> >>>comfortable >>> >>>>motion, is faster and more seaworthy. While there may be >>>> > slightly > >>>higher >>> >>>>costs for the hull, the longer span of the keel may permit less >>>> >>>ballast and >>> >>>>allow a greater carrying capacity slighly offsetting the >>>> >>increased >> >>>hull >>> >>>>costs. All other costs should be similar or lower as the lower >>>> >>drag >> >>>of the >>> >>>>longer boat may permit a smaller engine and sail plan. >>>> >>>>Respectfully, >>>>Jeff >>>> > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > -- s/v Mutiny Rhodes Bounty II lying Oriental, NC WDB5619| 3995|3995|2004-06-03 20:53:26|Sean Flynn|Mig Welding|> that is why for exterior work you use flux cored wire > which is exactly the same as stick welding exept it's > a LOT easier to produce a good quality weld than stick > welding (which is closer to an art form) As Shane has said, flux cored wire is what you should be using while MIG welding outside. It will become impractical in the same wind conditions that a stick welder will be as both flux cored Mig (FCAW) and Stick (SMAW) are both using the gas created by the flux to shield the weld. I've heard the argument that you can't MIG weld with gas (GMAW) outside repeatedly but it is a rule that can be broken - if you are careful and are aware of the limitations. I've done several large projects outside in my car port (roof and two walls created by the presence of the house) without much troubles from the wind. It is more rare but if the weather is right, I can work in the driveway also. If there is alot of wind, I have to put the gas away and go to flux-core or tackle a different aspect of the project (cutting, shaping, grinding, painting, etc) but most conditions I can get by with minimal shelter. Maybe I have great luck with the weather or maybe my yard is well protected. Thinking recently, over the past 2 months in Vancouver, I have been working outside every weekend on a few different projects, MIG welding with gas and welding from sun-up to sun-down on Saturday and Sunday. In that time I think I have had to grind out maybe 5 or 6 welds that were porous. You can usually feel the gust of wind hit you and hear the bubbles come to the surface in the weld and see them out of the corner of your eye so you can stop welding right away to fix your problem before you drag the gas bubbles along with your weld. A minute or two with the grinder and the bead is gone and I pick up where I left off. I think that the time I saved by using MIG over stick allowed me to fix those welds at a very leisurely rate while enjoying a beer and still be ahead of the game. Of course, if I had just gone to the store and gotten come flux-core wire, I might have been even farther ahead of the game but I'm lazy and the store is a long ways away and I might have gotten stuck in traffic so who knows. :) That and I hate chipping slag - one of the main reasons that had me wanting to be able to weld some method other than stick. Sean| 3996|3996|2004-06-04 01:15:53|Alex|Bare hull shell complete!|I've now got a hull shell, as you can see from the new group cover photo, on the 7th day of work. Total time spent: 30 hours. I knew it could be done, I just didn't believe it until it happened right before me! Much of the work was done by Brent in sweltering heat while I fiddled around with video equipment, stopping every now and then to pass him more rods, a tool, the cutting torch, or to block up the hull as it developed more rocker. It was incredible how it really turned from a two dimensional piece of plate into a nice full, 3-D hull with a what seemed like very few cranks of the handle on the chain come-along. It has been an interesting time attempting to be both film-maker and boatbuilder, but I think we have some excellent footage that provides technical tricks that only an experienced boatbuilder like Brent would know (this is about his 33rd boat). Sometimes he worked so fast that I missed subtle things, but many of the things I missed are covered Brent's book meaning that the film and the book should work well together. When another hull starts (Brent may be available for a September start if someone is interested) I'll film that too and fill in the gaps. Tomorrow we'll be pre-fabricating the decks, and should get them into place as well. Not much time to get over to the internet cafe to upload photos, but I will update the cover photo when we have the decks on completely. Alex| 3997|3997|2004-06-04 01:46:04|jhwaalkes|nesting dory|I have been lurking after finding this site, bought Brents book. Lots of very good information. I had inquired of Brent regarding one of his 31' boats that was for sale on e-bay, after looking at the concept I decided a larger one would suit my desires better as I currently own a 31' made of dead vegitation. Now my question, Brent mentioned a nesting design. My local heating ventilating supplier stocks galv metal sheets in 14 ga 4'X 8' and sometimes or can get 5'X 10' sheets. I would like to start with the smaller dory and a nesting one sounds like just the project. I own a selection of older welding rigs from a AC buzz box, & a wire feed 110V made in UK to a old 200amp gas fired that still runs fine. Not being a welder I just patch things together. The gas welder was supposed to make me some $ in the winter thawing pipes. But as the weather rarely gets that cold even here in Anchorage, Ak.. used it to build a couple of tlrs. Any ideas or Brent will the 14ga be heavy enough? if you have this design I would like to buy it. Thanks in advance. John| 3998|3996|2004-06-04 01:58:14|Graeme|Re: Bare hull shell complete!|Alex How long did it take to get to that stage in hours total. Graeme -----Original Message----- From: Alex [mailto:northcanoe@...] Sent: Friday, 4 June 2004 1:15 PM To: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com Subject: [origamiboats] Bare hull shell complete! I've now got a hull shell, as you can see from the new group cover photo, on the 7th day of work. Total time spent: 30 hours. I knew it could be done, I just didn't believe it until it happened right before me! Much of the work was done by Brent in sweltering heat while I fiddled around with video equipment, stopping every now and then to pass him more rods, a tool, the cutting torch, or to block up the hull as it developed more rocker. It was incredible how it really turned from a two dimensional piece of plate into a nice full, 3-D hull with a what seemed like very few cranks of the handle on the chain come-along. It has been an interesting time attempting to be both film-maker and boatbuilder, but I think we have some excellent footage that provides technical tricks that only an experienced boatbuilder like Brent would know (this is about his 33rd boat). Sometimes he worked so fast that I missed subtle things, but many of the things I missed are covered Brent's book meaning that the film and the book should work well together. When another hull starts (Brent may be available for a September start if someone is interested) I'll film that too and fill in the gaps. Tomorrow we'll be pre-fabricating the decks, and should get them into place as well. Not much time to get over to the internet cafe to upload photos, but I will update the cover photo when we have the decks on completely. Alex To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com Yahoo! Groups Links| 3999|3890|2004-06-04 02:22:49|ge@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: Flame Spray|Hi Brent. I agree. Once the decks is on, if it is true, and the hull is true, everything will be true. The problem for us was to ensure that everything stayed symmetrical as the deck was installed in 6 pieces. Our concern was that small alignment errors, coupled with the elasticity of the material, could cumulatively add up so that the two side were not symmetrical. My inspiration for using string was John Hutton. I'd always admired the lines of his boats, and the curves he achieved using a couple of pieces of string to keep things lined up. Part of my work was to see if we couldn't expand on these ideas to minimize the amount of measuring, using visual aids and the mark one eye ball in place of a tape measure. regards, Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "brentswain38" To: Sent: Thursday, June 03, 2004 12:55 PM Subject: [origamiboats] Re: re:Flame Spray > Greg > You'll find that putting a symetrical, pre cut deck on a well built, > symetrical hull will make symetry a forgone conclusion, no string > neccessary, and twist will be geometrically impossible. > Brent > > > --- In origamiboats@yahoogroups.com, wrote: > > We joined this site to expand the body of knowledge about what is > possible in origami. Origami techniques for amateur construction > > in steel are well understood and documented. What has been lacking > in origami is techniques that will allow amateur builders to use > > this method to build alloy boats. > > > > So, for the past year we have been experimenting with different > building techniques to allow amateur builders to reliably build > > boats in alloy. We freely publish our results and techniques and > made them public domain. For those people that prefer steel, > > origami is a good solution for amateur construction. For those > people that prefer alloy, origami is a good solution for amateur > > construction. > > > > Our findings confirm that experienced steel workers are not > automatically great alloy workers. They continue to think of alloy as > > steel, and make mistakes that they blame on the alloy, rather than > their lack of experience. This leads to false notions about > > alloy. > > > > For steel welders the significant difference are: > > > > 1. Preparation - unlike stick welding, the material to be joined > must be clean. > > 2. Reflexes - welding alloy is a different motion than welding > steel. > > 3. Evaluation - a bad alloy weld superficially looks like a great > steel weld. > > > > We found that alloy techniques and methods are more like wood than > they are like steel. Experienced wood workers could well find > > that origami building in alloy is more natural than building in > steel. > > > > We found: > > > > 1. Alloy boats can be reliably tacked outside, without shelter, > even in the rain. Work will progress faster if done under shelter, > > and final welding must be sheltered from the weather. Plastic > tarps can be used to build low cost shelters. > > > > 2. Amateurs can learn to tack alloy in less than a day (usually a > few minutes). High quality, high strength final welding takes > > practice, and is best done by hiring a professional welder. > > > > 3. The methods for producing fair origami shapes in alloy are much > the same as in steel. Alloy is easier to form, but moves more > > during welding. To allow for this, many small tacks preferred to a > few large tacks. Parts should be tacked full length with small > > "button" tacks, prior to strengthening joints with larger tacks. > Welding longitudinals on the flat, prior to pulling the hull/deck > > to shape is the fastest method, and produces the fairest results. > Longitudinals placed close to edges help create fair seams, > > correcting for small cutting errors String, used for sighting in > strategic locations provides a quick reference point, to correct > > for level, angles, symmetry and twist, with minimal measuring. > > > > 4. Woodworking tools are much the same tools used to work alloy. > Alloy is best cut with low cost, carbide tipped, wood cutting > > blades. It is fast, no grinding is required, and leaves the alloy > ready for welding. A $5, 7x24 carbide blade will cut about 100 > > feet of 3/8" alloy before it needs sharpening/replacing. Allowing > the blade to chatter while cutting will dull it quickly. Plasma > > cutting leaves an edge that must be removed prior to welding. > > > > 5. A carbide tipped milling blade on an angle grinder is the > fastest way to shape and fit alloy, and prepare it for welding. These > > cost about $70, and will probably need to be sharpened/replaced 2-3 > times when building a boat. You can fit alloy with a milling > > blade perhaps 100 times faster than with a grinding/sanding disk. > Grinding/sanding disks are only required for final finishing. > > > > History shows that the difference between impossible and possible > is knowledge. Armed with sufficient information, any amateur with > > sufficient skills to take a boat offshore,and keep it running in a > remote location, will be more than capable of building a boat > > ashore, with the resources that are available, in any material that > they choose. > > > > Greg Elliott > > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > | 4000|3890|2004-06-04 02:22:50|ge@easysoftwareinc.com|Re: Flame Spray|Hi Courtney, I am no expert. I looked for info on the Internet, took out videos from the library, and pestered every alloy welder I could find for help learning. I found the following: The most common welding problems are caused by: 1. Dirty, contaminated weld zone - porosity. 2. Too little heat, too slow wire speed - cold welds, incomplete penetration.. Every alloy welder has different information, lots of it contradictory. Automotive and aircraft welding can be misleading, as the material may be thinner. Some of the strongest welds I have seen were done by welders that were self taught, with no training or certification other that what they learned from other welders and from trial and error. The only way to learn to weld alloy is to practice, practice, practice. The only way to really judge if you are doing good welds is to coupon test your work. For those not familiar with a coupon, cut 6" of welded material into 1" strips at right angles to the weld. Throw away the pieces on the end. Bend 2 samples to see when they break, one in one direction, the other in the other direction. I'm not happy until I see 180 degrees. The other 2 samples, cut a shallow notch along the surface of the weld on one side on one piece, and the other side on the other piece. Bend away from the notch until it breaks. Look for porosity or incomplete penetration. Don't use cutting wax anywhere in your shop. SS wire brush the weld area immediately prior to welding. Keep the brushes clean with acetone/zylene. Don't use your blades, brushes on anything other than alloy. Use a skill saw or milling blade to gouge the welds to get the correct geometry. In general you want a 90 degree angle to weld into, similar to a fillet weld. The major problem we saw is that in general the voltage and wire speed guides on the miller welder and elsewhere are at best minimums, and typically result in cold welds with no strength. If the edges of the weld are not flush with the material, with a bright, shiny 1/8" margin feathered on the edges, you are probably doing a cold weld. If you see a ridge at the edge of the welds where it meets the parent material, or their is no bright margin, you probably have a cold weld with no strength. You want a nice, even margin on both sides. Some people pre-heat (warm, not hot), but this can introduce new problems, as moisture is a no-no when final welding, as it produces porosity. (porosity is caused by contamination of the weld by anything containing hydrogen - like water, oil, grease, wax, solvents). I sometimes clamp a practice piece to the job to be welded, to preheat while setting up the machine. You should practice to set up the machine prior to starting any new weld/position, and coupon test until you can do the weld reliably. However, when you are learning to weld, when you turn up the voltage and wire speed, the welds are so fast that you cannot see what is happening. The temptation is to turn down the voltage and wire speed while learning. DON'T DO THIS. Practice with thick wire, high voltage and high wire speed, and CONCENTRATE, until you can produce even, flat welds flowed in smoothly at the margins, that pass a bend and nick test, with no porosity. When you are first learning don't even try and weld a joint. Spend time just running an even bead, with proper margins, until it is second nature. Then move on to fillet welds. Leave butt welds to the experts, until you have lots of practice. If you do this, at high speed, you will develop a reflex for welding alloy, where your hand and eye will weld without your brain thinking about it. It will probably take a couple of weeks or more with regular practice, but once you have it, what seemed impossible when you first started will be almost automatic. The faster you practice, the easier it gets at slightly slower speeds. You control distortion in alloy by using small tacks to secure a part along its length, prior to using heavier tacks. You do not turn down the heat. For really short welds, use even more heat, to ensure you don't get a cold weld. Use short tacks to locate the stop and starts for your welds. Gouge out suspect tacks (the cold ones made outside, without cleaning, while it was raining, etc.) as you are final welding using he milling blade. I think of welding alloy more like soldering. When you are soldering, the melted solder will flow outward, ahead of the solder wire, when the heat is right and the material clean. This is what you see in alloy welding. When it is right, the melted alloy flows out ahead of the wire, and you move the wire into this "puddle". As the puddle fills to the brim of the parent material, you move ahead. You get voids when the puddle slides around one side of the wire as you are moving, and with practice your hand backtracks to pick up the puddle before your brain even registers that it has happened. If the alloy globs ahead of the wire when you are welding, you are probably welding too cold. Hope this helps. Other people will have other information, and in the end you need to find what works for you. Greg Elliott http://www.origamimagic.com . ----- Original Message ----- From: "Courtney Thomas" To: Sent: Thursday, June 03, 2004 2:38 PM Subject: Re: [origamiboats] Re: re:Flame Spray > Greg, > > Thank you for sharing your experience. > > Any sources for HOWTO do "high strength/quality alloy FINAL welding" ? > > What are the barriers for amateurs ? > > I have a MIG/TIG/stick Miller welder and am motivated to be able to do this. > > Appreciatively, > > Courtney > > > > > ge@... wrote: > > > We joined this site to expand the body of knowledge about what is possible in origami. Origami techniques for amateur construction > > in steel are well understood and documented. What has been lacking in origami is techniques that will allow amateur builders to use > > this method to build alloy boats. > > > > So, for the past year we have been experimenting with different building techniques to allow amateur builders to reliably build > > boats in alloy. We freely publish our results and techniques and made them public domain. For those people that prefer steel, > > origami is a good solution for amateur construction. For those people that prefer alloy, origami is a good solution for amateur > > construction. > > > > Our findings confirm that experienced steel workers are not automatically great alloy workers. They continue to think of alloy as > > steel, and make mistakes that they blame on the alloy, rather than their lack of experience. This leads to false notions about > > alloy. > > > > For steel welders the significant difference are: > > > > 1. Preparation - unlike stick welding, the material to be joined must be clean. > > 2. Reflexes - welding alloy is a different motion than welding steel. > > 3. Evaluation - a bad alloy weld superficially looks like a great steel weld. > > > > We found that alloy techniques and methods are more like wood than they are like steel. Experienced wood workers could well find > > that origami building in alloy is more natural than building in steel. > > > > We found: > > > > 1. Alloy boats can be reliably tacked outside, without shelter, even in the rain. Work will progress faster if done under shelter, > > and final welding must be sheltered from the weather. Plastic tarps can be used to build low cost shelters. > > > > 2. Amateurs can learn to tack alloy in less than a day (usually a few minutes). High quality, high strength final welding takes > > practice, and is best done by hiring a professional welder. > > > > 3. The methods for producing fair origami shapes in alloy are much the same as in steel. Alloy is easier to form, but moves more > > during welding. To allow for this, many small tacks preferred to a few large tacks. Parts should be tacked full length with small > > "button" tacks, prior to strengthening joints with larger tacks. Welding longitudinals on the flat, prior to pulling the hull/deck > > to shape is the fastest method, and produces the fairest results. Longitudinals placed close to edges help create fair seams, > > correcting for small cutting errors String, used for sighting in strategic locations provides a quick reference point, to correct > > for level, angles, symmetry and twist, with minimal measuring. > > > > 4. Woodworking tools are much the same tools used to work alloy. Alloy is best cut with low cost, carbide tipped, wood cutting > > blades. It is fast, no grinding is required, and leaves the alloy ready for welding. A $5, 7x24 carbide blade will cut about 100 > > feet of 3/8" alloy before it needs sharpening/replacing. Allowing the blade to chatter while cutting will dull it quickly. Plasma > > cutting leaves an edge that must be removed prior to welding. > > > > 5. A carbide tipped milling blade on an angle grinder is the fastest way to shape and fit alloy, and prepare it for welding. These > > cost about $70, and will probably need to be sharpened/replaced 2-3 times when building a boat. You can fit alloy with a milling > > blade perhaps 100 times faster than with a grinding/sanding disk. Grinding/sanding disks are only required for final finishing. > > > > History shows that the difference between impossible and possible is knowledge. Armed with sufficient information, any amateur with > > sufficient skills to take a boat offshore,and keep it running in a remote location, will be more than capable of building a boat > > ashore, with the resources that are available, in any material that they choose. > > > > Greg Elliott > > http://www.origamimagic.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > s/v Mutiny > Rhodes Bounty II > lying Oriental, NC > WDB5619 > > > > > To Post a message, send it to: origamiboats@yahoogroups.com > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: origamiboats-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > |