Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

67244Scaling designs - Re: [bolger] Scaled-down Single-handed Schooner

Expand Messages
  • Susanne@comcast.net
    Jan 9, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      A few notes on Lazlo's project.

      Making things fit your needs is often a driving force behind design-modifications.
      If you embark on the effort to build a boat - small or large - it better match your circumstances. 
      Phil would of course counsel caution as to unintended consequences - which can indeed be surprising.
      Here, in this example, there seems little reason for grand concerns. 

      But Lazlo's case offers both inspiration to get on with realizing your ambitions in good detail, while suggesting several comments to  add to the picture on such modifications by others:

      1.)  In many cases, whether doing a smaller or a larger project, time is typically at a premium in the endeavor of building your own boat, from how much you can spent of the project per week or month, to how much overall you will find yourself investing before you get to enjoy the launching.  Lazlo is lucky to have the garage and thus a very short 'commute' to the job, being able to 'steal' a few minutes here and there, in addition to scheduling dedicated hours to great effectiveness.
          Modifying the plans has clearly taken its own share of time, here apparently part of the fun Lazlo (and we all) should have planning and building the project.  But this is time invested in not building her.

      2.)  Modifications such as the 94%-scale example is less prone to this, but, say, scaling to 107% can indeed cascade to affect both the materials' budget along with the likely man-hours to possibly astonishing/aggravating extends.  Proportional scaling - in all dimensions - will throw off the often intentional maximization of efficient (US-standard!) ply-sheet use, with 4'1" dimensions becoming 'heart-breakers'.  Even if ply-sheet-numbers are less relevant per cost-item than man-hours, doing additional work per assembly-step does add up as well.

      3.) The CLC ply-sheet joining gadget is clearly a time-saver over scarfing, but it inherently does throw off any ply-sheet layout-based design by the loss in sheet-length/width per joint, the same way the much more labor-intensive scarfing does.  After having done a bunch of modified 'Payson-Joints' in 1/4", 3/8" and 1/2" during my on-going project, the Payson-Joint will require more care to arrive at a uniform surface-topography, but will use all of each sheet's length and width, with the losses measured in power-planing shavings and dust, not surface-are in inches or centimeters.

      4.) Phil has had his fair share of thinking about and designing boats that can by design be built in smaller spaces than their final size suggests is possible.  Beyond his various 'modular' types, together, we did for instance #646 DOUBLE EAGLE, a 40'x20' catamaran, which was built one hull at a time, plus the connecting structure/cabin in a much narrower and lower 48' long shop.  (She is also known as 'Great Sea' out of Alaska).
          In some designs not explicitly drawn for modular construction, working around a bulkhead and working with additional (massive ?) butt-joints a 'tail' or 'bow' could be added after the mass of the structure was completed 'inside'.  Cosmetics can be addressed quite 'ruthlessly' to good results, as you learn the ins and outs of doing good finish on smaller and larger areas on the emerging craft.

      5.) Finally, building all the smaller bits and pieces, incl. spars, boards and rudders etc. in a modest space to highest plausible degree of finish, this might allow having to plan on the 'full-size' foot-print of the project only for a limited period of time.  
           For starters, this would suggest using a nearby industrial space that offers climate-control and security for a cost acceptable for a few weeks/months. 
           If that is not doable, and she has to be done at home - do check your local laws on any of these (!) - , based on what we've heard from people who've done any of these options ( and more !), you could then do the 'mad' assembly 
      - outside alongside of the house under light temporary cover with tools and epoxy in/on a rolling chest over-nighting 'inside',
      - in the back-yard under more solid but temporary cover, after pricing the hourly-rate of a crane to help her 'jump' over the house (install the ballast later...),
      - bump out the garage-door opening, by opening the unit itself (stored overhead or unhinged) and then inserting a perfectly-fitted 'plug'/'bump-out' in just 1" plywood that adds a few more feet in length to match the un-modified design, but does so without requiring building-permits or quickly raising grief with unsympathetic neighbors.  Add insulation as necessary match your season.      
      Folks have done boats in rather improbable places, whether in a motel-room, or a 4-story walk-up Manhattan loft (big window + crane !)  

      Now back to my project...

      Susanne Altenburger, PB&F

      ----- Original Message -----
      Sent: Friday, December 30, 2011 7:18 AM
      Subject: [bolger] Scaled-down Single-handed Schooner


      Hi everyone. I'm building a 94% scale version of Bolger's Single-handed (His & Hers) schooner. The full-size model is too big for my garage. It's scaled in all 3 dimensions, not just length, to preserve the lines. While I was at it, I also converted the scantlings to stitch and glue and designed carbon fiber masts.

      Over the Christmas break I put together a website describing the design changes and the build so far. It's at http://www.morocz.com/BoatBuilding/SchoonerBuild.htm  . Since I got a lot of my inspiration to actually do this build from lurking on this list, especially from Susan Davis' posts and pictures, I thought I'd share the results so far with the group. Expected launch date is Spring 2012.

      Happy New Year to all,


      PS - click on the image for a larger view

    • Show all 22 messages in this topic