Simon

The capboard is 100mm X 19mm, scarfed pieces to get the required length. It is made from the same wood as the keel, glued and screwed as you say. If the keel were plywood, perhaps you could through bolt (and glue) it to a hardwood runner underneath the keel. So many options, picking one is probably harder than making whatever you choose.

Richard, according to the PC plans the keel is made from _two_ layers of 12x 1" (3/4" dressed) laminated together with a capboard on top, making a T shape. The lower deck is screwed to the top of the T. I made mine from smaller width pieces, my website (www below) gives a drawing of the layup and a not very good picture of the complete keel.

Yeah, I suppose we're talking about availability and cost constraints here. Hmm, I suppose you could build the middle layer of a three layer plywood keel slightly smaller so that a track of solid wood could be built in between the two outer layers, screwed into these outer layers from the side. That would solve the plywood endgrain problem without resorting to a box structure. Alternatively a capboard (as on the Pocket Cruiser ) would add some strength, but would require through bolts to deal with the endgrain issue. The ply can be screwed to this. My personal opinion is that if possible the keel should be layed up from solid wood - this can be done without 1 x 12 planks by staggering butt joints along the length. I think this is a better solution to the problem and should be done unless its completely impossible - in which case the box keel should certainly be considered as one possible solution.

Yes I suppose it would go some way towards it, providing you were taking the boat out of the water and draining/airing the keel on a regular basis. What would be the benefit of such a keel though? I would imagine that the price difference would be quite small compared to a solid one, especially with the epoxy encapsualtion. It would certainly be more difficult to construct. The principal advantage of this type of construction is it has a high rigidity for its weight. I'd have thought that durability would be higher on the list of priorities that rigidity - and the weight factor would , presumably, be countered by the addition of ballast?

Sounds tricky, but not impossible. You would have to scarf the plywood parts to get the length, as I don't think a butt jont would be adequate for the job. The hollow cavity inside the completed keel would be vulnerable to rot. The benefit of such a design would be light weight for the strength, this is not neccesarily a good thing for a keel. The hollow section could be filled with ballast I suppose?

... brick s#!thouse? That's the proverbial over here, wander what it is in NZ, or US? The PC keel is only two layers (of 19mm=38mm=1 1/2"), and it has the extra width of this mod and more. Mind you it has a 4"x19mm capboard on top. Can't say how the use of plywood v hardwood would affect the strength though.

I'd be intersted to see a mermaid climb up that one Good idea though - I'm thinking along similar lines.

I'm going to put those plastic screw in access hatches into mine. By all acounts its a good idea to have ventialation in there when the boat is stored and possibly this would allow for emergency last minute decisions for backing plates or whatever. If you were to do this, I expect you'd want to cut the holes and glue them in (?) before installing the seat backs on the boat. I should mention that I won't be using floatation (just air) and maybe that would get in the way of any work that could be done in there.

Good answer! I love the symmetry - the seat lockers aren't quite interior, and they aren't quite exterior, so they don't get fully glassed, and they don't get left fully unglassed. Yep, a layer of glass coming a couple of inches up the wall is what they'll get. Thanks :)

I'm going to glass the topsides and the cockpit, but the cabin interior will just be painted - what are people's views on whether the lockers should be glassed inside or not? Thanks in advance, Simon.

If you are heading in that direction you might as well call in at Perth - I'll meet you at Fremantle dock. What time should I pick you up?

I picked up a copy of this book, written by Emiliano Marino, a couple of weeks ago. I reckon this most be the most comprehensive book on the subject I've ever seen - maybe to comprehensive! The book has a very large number of beautiful illustrations by Christine Erikson, which go a long way towards making the authors explainations understandable. The book begins with the construction of a ditty bag (ala the Marlinspike Sailor) in order to aquire the skills needed to handsew a sail. Various stitches and techniques are shown including those required for sewing in grommets, laying in rope seams and reinforcing stress points. This is a precursor to the main theme, i.e. sailmaking, but also a recurring subtheme, as sailcare and bagmaking go hand in hand we are told. A very large middle part of the book discusses rig types. These are too numerous to mention, but obviously including gaffers, bermudans, lugrigs and the increasingly popular (or at least discussed) junkrigs. The author is a big fan of the junk rig and considers it to be quite under-rated. There is chapter on the theory of sails, which deals with a difficult subject for the none physicist in quite easy language. This chapter also covers subjects such as sail trim, shape and material choices. Throughout the book the author reveals his love of traditional materials, rigs and construction, and yet is not limited by this passion. Further chapters detail thoughts on sail design, including copying an existing rig and adapting an old sail from a different boat. "Quick and dirty" methods for sail design are presented, although it is clear after reading the book that there is little to be accomplished (in the authors opinion) by being quick and dirty. Indeed his "quick and dirty" method looks quite time consuming although, perhaps less so than a purpose built racing rig whose every seam is designed to the last stitch. The book rounds off quite nicely with chapters on buying new and used sails and finally sail handling and trimming. Overall I would recomend this book to those that are interested in a comprehensive reference on sailmaking from (but not confined to) a traditional viewpoint. My only criticism of the book is that the sheer volume of information presented here could make it hard to answer simple questions with simple answers, but then that is the nature of the subject, so I can hardly complain! This truely is a tradesman's reference - for an apprentice sailmaker - but there is much to learn for us amateurs too! [attachment over 4 years old deleted by admin]

I have to laugh at the irony, when I notice that you guys are spelling the words litre, metre (and I presume centre) in the new, logical and 'easy' way as liter, meter and center - we here in Aus are stuck in the old fashioned, illogical and difficult way. The irony being that I've been sitting here berating you guys for being difficult :lol: :P

The imperial system has never caused me any particular problems, but I would definitely say that the metric system is superior in every aspect. Those who prefer the imperial system have inevitably been brought up on it, but not all who have been brought up on it prefer it. The rest of us tolerate this as ecentricity. I'd be keen to hear from any one who has a reason for liking it other than "it just seems right" or somesuch. How about buying some graph paper with 5mm squares?

A long time coming :oops: Check out the whole thing (www below) or just the update at www.maths.uwa.edu.au/~scolling/boat/page4.html The pics are pretty low res, but that blurry brownish thing is the boat. I'm afraid web design is not my forte ... :?

Funny, I can click on it and it opens straight up - I can't get onto your webpage though :? So, there's no extension of the keel then? And the rear portion is just attached with a few gussets glued around the transom? Doesn't seem _super_ strong to me, but I guess you haven't compromised the integrity of the original hull so what's the worst that can happen ...

Fantastic! 8) It looks much longer than the standard weekender, you've sure manged to pack the features in there, I especially like the binical and the cabin top decking. I tried to get to your webpage, but it just came up with a blank screen, is that me, or you?

Nah, that's Jake. Is that dinghy a Devlin design?

Sigh .... wish I had a barn ... :roll: [/i]

The painting/finishing issue is probably worthy of a whole other thread, but just for completness of this one, I'd be interested to here your take on Devlin's view of dark/light paint, in particular for topsides. He has done plenty of tests and is firmly of the opinion that dark colours should be avoided upstairs, since they have significantly shorter lifespan in the sun. I don't suppose that's ever stopped anyone whose built their own boat from painting it their favourite colour, especially if its parked undercover for the large part of its life, but it is something to think about. In particular for me, since I would like to paint large parts of my boat a dark green (I've heard called "British Racing Green"). We'll have to see ....

Thanks Barry, I suppose it can't hurt to paint the black stuff a little higher than the actual waterline and then refine it after a season or so by painting over the top of the graphite at a lower point. Then again maybe I'll just paint the whole lot with paint. At the current rate of progress I'll have plenty of time to think about it anyway. :roll:

Thanks Phil, I guess the UV won't be so much of a problem underneath the boat - it looks pretty swish as well. Did you guess the waterline, or is there some technique used to work it out? 8)

Hey Phil, I really like the idea of the graphite. What ratio of graphite to epoxy mixture did you use? Where did you source the graphite from?