Eureka build method no S&G

[m2c1Iw]

Hi Mik,
I was reading a thread on another forum that amoungst the discussion on the merits of fillet vs chine log construction shows a ply canoe being built using inner and outer forms. The reason was to avoid S&G as the builder wanted to keep it bright and didn't like the look of filled holes.

The builder discussed shaping mild bevels to close panel gaps and acheive a fair hull, the outer forms being to hold the shape while the fillets set up.

So this got me thinking for those of us who like to do things the hard way how could this appoach apply to the Eureka.

So a couple of questions:
1. Is it practical on the Eureka hull shape, probably need to rethink stem assembly method I would think.
2. How involved would drawing up some frames be.
3. Would you want to do it.

Another issue is unlike the S&G a strongback would be necessary I would imagine he says while ducking for cover:wink:.

Cheers
Mike

[Daddles]

Ahh my son, we should humour Mik's fetish for stitch and poo but there's no need to carry that into your own builds :wink:

(wednesdays are 'pick on Mik' day ... and so are thursdays and fridays and saturdays and sundays and mondays and tuesdays and ...)

I haven't built the Eureka, but I have built two Mouseboats in stitch and glue. A mate built his Mouseboat with chine logs (as have many others). I don't know that there are many real differences in speed and ease of construction, they're just 'different'. You'll probably find yourself having to tape the seams though, so all you're doing is creating work with the chine log, work that is offset in s & g by having to fair the tape that goes over the inner fillets. You shouldn't need a strong back - just glue the logs to the sides, then glue the mess together, same as you would stitch and glue - though I can see the argument for something like a strongback to make things a bit easier. Unless, of course, you wanted to build the frame, then add the sheets to it, but that's just making unnecessary work.

Richard

why does the abbreviation s & g always feel like something you wouldn't want your mum to catch you doing? :oo:

[bitingmidge]

It's all a fallacious argument (he says carefully :rolleyes:) really.

I built the prototype panels over bulkheads, and the early boats were built similarly as the bilge panel could not be quite resolved in the drawing package Mik was using.

If the motivation for using chinelogs is to prevent holes in the panels, I wonder how he intends to actually clamp them in place without screws? The panels are rather "compound" and I can't see it working at all.

Secondly, it's going to be rather a lot heavier because of the extra timber.

Next; I've actually done it the hard way, and mitred the panels so they fit to within a hair externally, and used about 0.5 mm (or less) copper wire, through 1/16" holes, and unless you're closer than a metre and looking for them AND wearing your glasses, the holes are invisible or near invisible.

No it wasn't worth the effort, and boats with normally butted and filled joints and 6mm holes and cable ties still look perfectly well even finished bright.

Oh, and Mik doesn't have a thing "for" S&G, he just likes to design boats that are easy to build. If it wasn't for the complex panels I reckon he'd have chine logs in in a flash! ;)

Cheers,

P
:D

[m2c1Iw]

It's all a fallacious argument (he says carefully :rolleyes:) really.

:D read carefully as well


I built the prototype panels over bulkheads, and the early boats were built similarly as the bilge panel could not be quite resolved in the drawing package Mik was using.

If the motivation for using chinelogs is to prevent holes in the panels, I wonder how he intends to actually clamp them in place without screws? The panels are rather "compound" and I can't see it working at all.

No..no not using chinelogs that was just part of the discussion. Builder was filleting the joints and using inner and outer frames to support the panels during glue up.


Next; I've actually done it the hard way, and mitred the panels so they fit to within a hair externally, and used about 0.5 mm (or less) copper wire, through 1/16" holes, and unless you're closer than a metre and looking for them AND wearing your glasses, the holes are invisible or near invisible.


Yes I read that in your expansive Eureka thread thanks. If we ignore any aesthetic aspect of S&G for a moment what about any advantage frames may provide in acheiving and holding a fair hull while glueing? Is there a significant difference in build time between the two methods? I also have noted the difficulties some builders have experienced in maintaining a fair hull at the intended dimensions.

As I am about to embark on a build I have been trying to absorb some of the tricks of the trade and wondered if frames are a viable alternative to S&G. I hear you, the answers is no.

Cheers
Mike

[Daddles]

As I am about to embark on a build I have been trying to absorb some of the tricks of the trade and wondered if frames are a viable alternative to S&G. I hear you, the answers is no.

The problems with shape tend to come with designs that haven't been too carefully thought out. No, I don't include the Eureka in that because there's an easy fix to the wee problem a couple of people had. S & G relies on accurately designed panels. One day while we're waiting for the wood to steam, I can share a couple of stories I know. Another problem is panels that are too large (again, not a problem with the Eureka).

Despite my fishing attempt with Mik earlier (need to change the bait, the bugger didn't bite :~), if the Eureka needed something extra, he would have designed it.

The stitch and glue boats I've dealt with (two Mouseboats and a large part of Redback believe it or not) tend to be very flexible creatures before you glue them together and even after that. It's just a matter of carefully eyeballing things to keep them straight at each stage. With the Mouseboats, that final stage was the decking. I simply strapped two long sticks across the boat, one at the front and one at the back, then propped things under the hull to twist it until it was flat. I haven't built a Eureka and I think it's got a flat bum (vs the shallow V on the Mouseboat), but the same issues and techniques will apply. Just fiddle until she looks right, then mix the glue.

Filletting is dead easy and really a non-event though a rather messy one. The tricky bit is the taping - there are some very good ways of making that harder and more expensive than it needs to be. I've tried them all. The only methods I haven't tried are Mik's because I haven't had to tape a seam since I discovered them. The last boat I did actually was a framed boat - that 12 foot dinghy I sold recently wound up having the chines retaped when I repainted her. I've since found out that I used too much glue and ... well, just do it Mik's way.

I slag S & G a bit because it can be amazingly messy when you're the sort of builder I am and because it utterly fails to live up the more outrageous claims made about it. In its place, it's a very good way of building a boat, just not as cheap or easy as a lot of people make out (mind you, I don't find anything hard about planking so what do I know?). Of all the methods, it's the one that depends most on the accuracy of the panels ... which is a worry if the designer is rubbish to start with.

Anyways. Build the Eureka as described. I might even come and hinder if you like :rolleyes:

Richard

[Boatmik]

Howdy Mike and all.

Please don't get the wrong idea here!!!! I am expressing myself only. Somewhat forcefully ... but it is just my idea and I DO say ... do what you want to do and please feel good about it! So... to the Batmobile!

I seem to have to keep repeating myself :-)

I AM A REALLY LAZY BOATBUILDER.

I don't care about those holes that people can't see very easily but worry about so much - it is all too abstract for me.

It is a new fangled attitude too. Traditional boats were held together with things fitted through holes - it was the only way. So after 5 or 10 millenia of building boats with holes, there is a sudden fetish for no holes. What's that all about?

A DIGRESSION ABOUT CEDAR STRIP - TO MAKE SOME POINTS

There is a current article in Woodenboat about building a cedar strip canoe using FISHING LINE THROUGH THOUSANDS OF LITTLE HOLES. They show a close up of a small section showing about 10 strands going over each plank in a real cats cradle. I think it is a stupid, stupid method. Think of threading all those long bits of line through the little holes.

It really doesn't ring my bell at all.

The normal method that people use is staples. Because they don't want any big holes. Staples have really poor holding power so in some places you end up with all these little black dots sort of randomly spread over the hull.

I think it is a better method but the result is more untidy than the aim.

Again it ringeth not my bell.

I use NAILS. I can get a plank on in about a minute - and it is held in place really well. The bloke doing the fishing line thing will still be trying to thread the first bit while trying to stop the plank falling on the ground. One nail for each plank on each frame. Fast furious and dead simple.

Now that is really boatbuilding - DING!

But that is only my bell ringing (as well as anyone who has watched the fool playing with his yards of fishing line). I'll bet it the line leaves little dots and edge grooves in the planks and filler too.

BACK TO S AND G.

For me I think getting the volumes and proportions right on a boat are what give it performance. The same ideas differently applied can make it look great.

And that is my job over. The Eureka will be as adaptable to the method as any other boat.

If the method sucks it is your fault for believing something you read on the internet rather than following the proven method.

If it works, you'll feel like a genius. So it depends on the risks you want to take.

Whatever rings your bells guys!

Now I need to offer some advice.

I echo the Midge's concern - how is the ply held to the temporary structure?

And how often is there control from the frames inside and out.

We know that for fairness of the structure the holes need to be about 150 to 200mm apart for 6mm ply or about 125 With about half that around the stems and where the panels meet edge on.

You would need that type of control.

I know some people are playing with adhesive tape rather than stitching. Tape them up then fillet on the inside. I don't know how this works in practice. I look at is as positive from the point of view that it might potentially cut down on the number of steps dramatically. It may not resolve the edge to edge problem very well.

If it is efficient and reliable - I will like it a lot. If it isn't - it will never find its way into a plan.

Daddles had some good comments. I will talk about them later.

Best wishes
Michael.

[Daddles]

And next time you look at Redback, I challenge you to find all the holes in her where she was stitched/screwed together. Hell, I challenge you to do the same on either of the Mouseboats (the zip ties are still in them, just cut off and taped over) or on Sixpence where all those screws held her together :D

I have one beef with holes - they're something else to fill. Like Mik, I tend to laziness ... which is really weird when you consider what I build :- Therefore, if I can avoid making a hole, I will BUT, if I need to, I don't hesitate to reach for the drill.

And Mik is nowhere near as lazy as he pretends, he's just genuinely economical with his effort. That's not political correctness, just an observation from someone who recognises a fellow sufferer. He puts too much effort into his plans and fielding daft comments from me to be truly lazy.

Richard
who is still looking up a near vertical learning curve when it comes to boat building, but who at least now knows there are steps cut into the cliff if you know where to look :wink:

[Boatmik]

Nah Richard - Writing answers is a good diversion FROM boatbuilding!!!

I'm definitely Lazy

MIK

[Vernr]

Each to his own....I reckon!!

If you want to build a 'work of art' with no holes or stitched together with fine fishing line...go for it!! If you want to build a practicle boat economically and quickly.....go for that as well!!

I for one will be out on the water enjoying my new (albeit imperfect) boat whilst the 'work of art' is still being painstakingly stitched up in the workshop or just sitting waiting for its (now) bored builder to get back to work on it!!

I have built using both S&G and 'nails, frames and logs' methods.......don't have a preferrence.......I tend to trust the designers and build according to the plans but adding a few 'personal touches' along the way. I build boats because I can, I enjoy it and love the satisfaction of 'launching' my own build.......I certainly could not afford the dollars to purchase the equivelent in an 'of the shelf' boat!!

Yep, I am also a 'lazy builder'....can't wait to launch my latest creation and will take every (structurally sound) short cut that I can to bring that launch date on as quickly as I can.

[b.o.a.t.]

Hi Mik,
So this got me thinking for those of us who like to do things the hard way how could this appoach apply to the Eureka.
Cheers
Mike

G'day Mike

I'll firstly assume the build was not a Eureka.
So we are in Hypothetical mode here.

In respect to Eureka, my response is 'why bother?'
Eureka's panels are already well developed & tweaked, the boat will (to about 95%) take the shape determined by the panels. Just needs the three props between gunwales to hold them apart against the flex & spring in the ply. If the panels are cut accurately, the boat will take its proper shape.
Best of all it has a flat bottom so will take proper shape on any flat surface.

Contrast that to the prototyping I do with my kayaks...
I started by doing loose framing but found my panels were not as fair as I had hoped (I use Gregg Carlson's 'Hulls'). As there can be much greater gaps between station points than with Eureka, there is more room for error. Also, if the ply is warped, there is nothing solid against which to force it into proper position.

I switched to a strongback with bulkheads as being easier. My panels aren't as developed as Eureka's, so a solid former, fixed & accurate-ish in 3 dimensions actually makes the job less difficult than free-styling it. Especially at join-the-top-to-the-bottom time.

The strong back allows me to get away with fewer ties as the chines are fixed in alignment with each other at 5 points along the length of the boat.

The other thing I do is put electrical tpe up the inside of the seams, rough glue the chines with Purbond or epoxy dabs every inch or so. Once cured, I remove the ties & have a smooth hull srface to work on & fill & sheath.

cheers
AJ

[Boatmik]

Thanks for that AJ,

With plans I will always be conservative - but with building I tend to be a radical. There is no point bringing something into the world that is the same as everything else.

No marketing advantage and no "Soul". So fails on both scales. Apart from one of my designs that was comprehensively stolen (my Handy Punt is a blown up version of Bolger's Skimmer) I've always tried something a bit new (or a lot new) each time.

In a way the Eureka is quite a conservative boat against this background. Though it has turned into a bit of a Lightweighting platform for some builders - which is right up my alley - love it.

So my point is ... I don't get much of a chance to build these days for various reasons and hearing about different methods etc from people that do good stuff like you is always great! I think this is a good thread to talk about Stitch and Glue alternatives in general.

My feeling is the adhesive taping idea has great promise. For example - boats with little and simple curvature like the PDRacer - it would work a treat.

I've be guessing with some rejigging of the design to make it all filletable out pf plywood (replace the transverse structure that supports the centreboard case with plywood).

Make up the centreboard case and mast step and partner in advance
Precoat ply and sand


Precut ply and add necessary framing to take the deck
Gaffer Tape the hull up
Use a few copper stitches or cable ties to locate the bulkheads, transverse frames in way of the centreboard case and the side air tank faces.
Glue in the Centrecase using the drywall/plasterboard screws
Fillet the lot together.
Make up and fit the mast partner, fair the top of the transoms (where's me belt sander), the mast bulkhead and put the deck on.


Methinks that if you look at the numbered list it could be a 3 day build for that part.

It will be more expensive because you would break into the fourth sheet of ply - but it can be the cheap stuff - like everything but the bottom.

Now I am sure the tape would work in that situation. And would save heaps of time.

Actually - heaps and heaps of time. Add some epoxy, remove quite a lot of timber.

I think it is potentially quite and exciting idea.

Can you imagine how fast the boat would go together if using a precut and precoated kit!? Great for those who are time poor.

Is it extendable?

Though I think with the Eureka the tape wouldn't have enough grunt in the ends of the boat because there is a lot of load on those panels. The Goat and the Rowboat might be OK.

Suddenly flat bottomed boats make even more sense for some builders. Being lazy is the mother of invention.

The Punt - I'd still like to see timber in the corners - those sorts of boats get hard used.

Hmmmmmmm

Michael

[Boatmik]

BTW AJ,

What sort of errors did you find between the software's panel shapes and the real ones.

Midge and I found a weird unfairness in the ends of the most heavily twisted panel - I'd say it was about 20 to 22mm out in the last couple of feet. Part of this is because the Eureka is quite heavily twisted there and the ply deforms in strange and unusual ways that are not understood by computer science.

We did build on a strongback so there was a clear frame of reference for the original shape.

MIK

[b.o.a.t.]

BTW AJ,
What sort of errors did you find between the software's panel shapes and the real ones.
MIK

First time I've been made to sit & think about this properly...

1. "Hulls" omits one of the end points on mirror-imaged panels. Have to nut-out the co-ordinates from the original. 'rithmetic is not my forte. (Balance sheets & engineering calculations leave me cold, even if I can understand the principles behind them.)

2. Mirror & original never -quite- line up when clamped back-to-back. Not hugely different - a few mm here & there. Hence I cut oversize & plane & sand to identical, at a compromise between the shapes marked for the two panels. Could cure this by not cutting out the mirrored panel - just using it as a guide for placement of the original & trace around that.

3. The panel measurements always seem to be slightly narrow when offered up to the fixed bulkheads, even when I can see that I've cut outside the line. Didn't realise this until third or fourth boat when I went to exceptional pains to get my bulkheads right.

4. Interpolation - Hulls assumes a straight line between each coordinate. Adding meat to one panel & subtracting from its adjacent with the fairing batten in between station points doesn't always get it right. Result is ripple along the seams. Haven't found a solution to this yet.

5. my shoddy workmanship with saw, plane & sandpaper makes all errors cumulative, but not visible until sanded & painted....

The boats work well & the buoyancy & stability calculations side of it seems excellent. If people like Midge & the DFWB mob didn't produce & display perfection of workmanship, I would neither know better nor care... :~
cheers
AJ
:U

[Boatmik]

Sounds quite similar to my program - which I quite like. It does things a little bit better than yours on average, but the still plywood refuses to follow computer models when stressed into a curve!

Michael Storer

[Daddles]

If I weld mine up out of quarter inch steel, will it still float? :D

Actually, the initial idea for this was just as a silly comment, but a poofteenth of a second later, the old brain cell fired and I realised it probably would float when you consider displacement vs weight.

So Mik, would a steel plate Eureka float and how heavy a cannon could I fit without needing a snorkle?

Richard

[m2c1Iw]

If I weld mine up out of quarter inch steel, will it still float? :D

Mate haven't you got an assignment or something to do:D

[b.o.a.t.]

If I weld mine up out of quarter inch steel, will it still float? :D


It'd be a right mongrel getting quarter inch steel to take the twists.
Also, while it might float, the payload would likely be less than you.
Better to go 1.5mm stainless & a bigger cannon. A RAAF surplus 20mm Vulcan would be about right. Aim low - the beggars climb unless bolted into an airframe.

Or read James Michener's "Chesapeake" & rig a duck gun. :U

I wonder what a Eureka in stainless would cost. Would never wear out, impervious to UV & star stakes.... hmmmmm.
You've got me thinking now & I shan't sleep well. :~
Curse you for doing this to me !! May the fleas of a thousand camels infest your favouite lounge chair !!

cheers
AJ

[m2c1Iw]

Though I think with the Eureka the tape wouldn't have enough grunt in the ends of the boat because there is a lot of load on those panels. The Goat and the Rowboat might be OK.


So to achieve a more efficient method of construction than S&G we need to come up with something that provides the holding characteristics of wire or cable ties that does not require drilling of the panels.

Duct tape especially the reinforced non stretch variety will work where there is a gentle bend in the panel but at the stems will not hold well or provide the wiggle hear pull there aspect of wire to fair the panels.

Hmmm........there must be a product or system out there somewhere......thinking......thinking

Mike

[Boatmik]

Howdy Mike,

The drilling is not important one way or another. The problem is the time taken to wire and adjust.

But any alternative method has to have a similar level of control as wiring - which is VERY effective in putting a nice shape into the boat.

MIK