17th Century Battle Station

Have learned to never say "final" version of anything when it comes to scratch building. Here is Prototype 6 of the Robinson Hatch. I ended up redrawing the entire thing from scratch. The outer frame is now back to the original Staudt designed size, all the geometry is consistent, and the nail heads are properly scaled. Now when we make these in Doc's awesome wood they should come out very nice.

IMG_0456.JPG
Prototype 5 on top... Prototype 6 on bottom
 
One other thought: The hatch framed are going to be rosewood. To CNC or laser cut them as one piece will require wide billets and lots of waste of expensive stock. Not to mention historic inaccuracy. The frames would have been made of 4 pieces, with half lap joints at the corners. Want to give it a go?
 
DocBlake said:
I like it Mike! Hope the redraft wasn’t too stressful. Are you going to work on the redesign of upper outboard planking as we discussed?
Click to expand...

Hi Dave. The hatch was easy. As was the changes you asked for on the outer planking. I still need to chop the great wale where it spans the gun port and adjust the treenail alignment to better match the frames. We are making good progress now!!

IMG_0458.JPG
 
Today we prototyped Doc's idea of this moulding/sheer trim rail just below the gunwale. We wanted to keep it simple but have some decorative effect to brighten things up a bit. So we ran some basswood through the CNC machine and came up with a couple prototypes. The final version will be in swiss pear.

IMG_0464.JPG
The sheer trim is 3/16" x 3/16". It has a single 1/16" channel machined down the middle that is 3/32" deep. The gunwale has been widened to sit flush with the sheer trim.

IMG_0465.JPG
In this prototype, we tried two 1/32" channels.

IMG_0466.JPG
Here are the two prototypes together. We are leaning towards the simpler single channel version.
 
Peglegreg said:
I like the double. It's add more character, if you ask me.
Greg
Click to expand...
If you mean the double channels, I would agree ..... I also think, that the old ship designer would not make the "channels" so deep, deeper channels are reducing the stability of the rail and for the lifetime of the wood it is also not good, due to rain- or seawater could stand there with the possibility of faster rotting.
My two cents
 
I think you should not round the edges, the thickness of the wood in the edges is strongly reduced, which weaken the stability....I do not think, that the old shipwrights would have done this. I would go with the right version with CNC cut.....only my 2 cents

Any opinion by somebody else? Interested to read other 2 cents
 
Thanks Uwe and Greg. Agree the CNC square edge one looks best. The round edge one is too modern looking. Greg, can you please show me how this timber butt joint might look? I can draw it and etch it on there to add some detail. Just a diaganol line across the corner? Thanks for the help.
 
mrshanks said:
Thanks Uwe and Greg. Agree the CNC square edge one looks best. The round edge one is too modern looking. Greg, can you please show me how this timber butt joint might look? I can draw it and etch it on there to add some detail. Just a diaganol line across the corner? Thanks for the help.
Click to expand...

G'day
Please excuse my rough drawing, I done it on my phone and it's a bit hard to draw a straight line.
There were NO 45 degrees mitre joints in the frames only butt joints.
20180321_124504.jpg
Generally on the longest edge, the timber goes the full size and on the shortest side the timbers butt to the other member at 90 degrees.
I was told this year's ago by a person whom has written so many books on periods ships. He's a walking talking encyclopedia on old sailing ship's.
:eek:
Havagooday and happymodeling
Greg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top