12 replies to this topic

[Bob Bates]

I received your book last week. Decided to build the Curlew, after a little work, laying out the frames went like a breeze. Then I came to the bow and stern pieces and came to a screeching halt. For the life of me I can't figure it out and I have worked with isometric drawings but this just isn't coming to me. Any help would be appreciated. thanks, Bob

[Kudzu]

Not sure what the problem is? It's just like laying out the frames except the points form a curve instead of straight lines. Be more specific, these guys can answer as well as I can probably.

[Hirilonde]

The bow and stern drove me nuts too. I don't think the coordinates in the book work. I gave up and drew it by eye to the over all dimensions.

[Kudzu]

This is the first I have heard that the coordinates are wrong. I know that this method is confusing if your not used to working with it, It can be confusing even when you work with it all the time.

I just read this so I pulled a copy of my book, laid out the bow in my CADsoftware. The red points are the coordinates. I pulled lines or splines between the points this what I got. I don't see a problem with it so if you guys will elaborate maybe we can find what is going on. Not saying I didn't make a mistake but the coordinates seem to work?

[Hirilonde]

The first distraction from being able to visualize the plotting is that the coordinates in the book ard given as X and Y with Z always being 0. This tells the reader that the pieces have length, width and no height. At this point I figured that this was just a continuity issue and decided I really just needed 2 axis to make a plot, so no big deal.

Then when I went to plot the coordinates I got really confused by the replication of the X coordinate. Now looking at your drawing above I am even more confused. The book gives 15 coordinates and you show 11. Probably the most confusing part is that I had no trouble plotting the frames, but even using the same method, and ignoring the discrepancy in the choice of letters for the coordinates it just did not click for me.

Maybe it would help me analyze this if you were to post a drawing like above for the stern piece (not the stern top) for the Curlew and lablel the coordinates. There is just something in the communications process that is not working. I have built houses and boats from plans alone with little if any issue visualizing what I would end up with. But for the life of me I don't see a stern or bow piece coming out of the off-sets in the book in spite of having no trouble with the frames.

[Kudzu]

....The book gives 15 coordinates and you show 11.

Ah-ha! I drew Poco Barta bow. Typical man, I looked at the picture and not the text.

I went back and drew Curlew and found the a problem, there is one missing point.



The turquoise point is 0,0 and for my reference. When I did the layout for Curlew this time I saw the problem really quickly. The coordinate fro the corner for the slot. 3, 1 3/16 is missing from the chart. Without it you get the green line as your layout. When you add the missing point you get the orange dashed line.

What amazes me if that so many Curlews have been built and no one has mentioned this before now. Unless they are just assuming the the 0.0 was the starting point and drawing back to that point. Then it would make sense. That would work, you would just have to add the notch yourself.

I wish this had come up a couple of weeks ago when I was working on the new revised version. I will just add it to the corrections page on the web site.

[Hirilonde]

deleted, did not proof read and it was worded poorly

[Hirilonde]

That works, but it is really the stern that gave me trouble more than the bow. Would you draw out the Curlew stern and locate and label the coordinates? There is still something that I can not pin point that this might help clarify. Also, like I mentioned above, you use the wrong axis in the book for the bow and stern pieces

[Bob Bates]

Thanks to all for your help. I think I finally somewhat understand. I had to also recruit my grandson to help, Isn't that what they'e here for?

[Kudzu]

Coordinates are simply confusing unless you work with them regularly. I work with them off and on and I still can get confused from time to time.

Dave, I did the stern a couple of nights ago and it come out fine for me. I didn't t think to save it. I am in middle of proofing all the offsets in the new book and my eyes hurt. Spent all day on this and still not done. I bet I will be converting numbers in my sleep.

[Hirilonde]

I can't even imagine publishing, proofing or in any way communicating all those coordinates. My head hurts just plotting them.

[Kudzu]

It was amazing to me the mistakes I found. I create a spread sheet to do as much of the conversion as I can. But there is still a dozen ways to mess up, I found at least ten of those ways so far!

First I scan them looking for things that just don't look right. Number getting bigger when they should be smaller. Zero value where there should be number. Those are fairly easy to find.

Then I try to plot the bow and stern since they are the typically the problem areas. A lot of time the mistake I find is me transposing a number on the layout. I have back up and see if I entered it right or it was real error and that takes time. Most times it has been me entering it wrong but I have caught 2 or 3 mistakes too.

What really gets to me is my software works in feet with no inches. For example 3' 6" is 3.5 feet. So I have covert its output to feet and inches. I work in decimal inches because it is easier. When I am done with the offsets I convert the inches from decimal to fractions.

Then convert everything to metric. Metrics are easy to work in but I just can't think in metric and that makes it hard to catch a mistake.

I have LOTS of notes on the spread sheet to remind me what format the input is in, what the conversion is to and the factor to convert by. It's so hard to keep it all straight. There are so many steps I am surprised there are not more mistakes sometimes. By 4 PM yesterday I felt like I had been to the gym and worked out. Totally drained.

Good thing is I don't have a lot left to do today. I think I have one boat left to check? Of course I will never be satisfied that I didn't overlook something! I learned a lot on the last one and I am being more thorough this time. But if I worked on this for another 6 months I would still find something that I 'should' ad or want to change a little. Just yesterday I added another photo to make something clearer. Eventually you just have to give in or go crazy!

[Hirilonde]

What really gets to me is my software works in feet with no inches. For example 3' 6" is 3.5 feet. So I have covert its output to feet and inches. I work in decimal inches because it is easier. When I am done with the offsets I convert the inches from decimal to fractions.

Then convert everything to metric. Metrics are easy to work in but I just can't think in metric and that makes it hard to catch a mistake

Sounds like a good argument for the USA to convert completely to metric to me Yeah, some of us old farts will go through an uncormfortable learning curve, but worth it.

Too bad it would be a bad sales move to just publish in metric.