A Dutch Fluyt in shell first, reconstructing the "Ghost ship" scale 1:36

In “Oostvoornse Meer”(Lake) lies the 17th century wreck (OVM12) of a large seagoing Dutchman. And there you can clearly see that the frames lie against each other. The Witte Zwaan is a small ship and there I do not think it is important that the parts lie against each other, but the bigger the ship gets the more important the stiffness is. I think it has to do with that. It is known that the keel was concave or convex according to the cargo. And especially the frames around the keel have to fit together to provide extra strength.
The expansion of the wood when it was launched was actually desirable, partly due to the fact that when a wooden ship was first launched it was as leaky as a basket. It was therefore important to operate the pumps in the early days until the ship was watertight due to the expansion of the wood.

Part of the wreckage OVM12:
OVM12 foto.jpgOVM12 tek.jpg

When you look to the drawings of Blom and Dik of the seven Provinciën, you see that those timbers also placed to each other at the floor. Why did these constructors did this? Are they wrong or is it normal when you build a big seagoing vessel? When you look to a longboat, you see the frames much more separated.
Maybe the specialist here like @Ab Hoving can tell us more about this subject.
 
Steef66 said:
In “Oostvoornse Meer”(Lake) lies the 17th century wreck (OVM12) of a large seagoing Dutchman. And there you can clearly see that the frames lie against each other. The Witte Zwaan is a small ship and there I do not think it is important that the parts lie against each other, but the bigger the ship gets the more important the stiffness is. I think it has to do with that. It is known that the keel was concave or convex according to the cargo. And especially the frames around the keel have to fit together to provide extra strength.
The expansion of the wood when it was launched was actually desirable, partly due to the fact that when a wooden ship was first launched it was as leaky as a basket. It was therefore important to operate the pumps in the early days until the ship was watertight due to the expansion of the wood.

Part of the wreckage OVM12:
View attachment 458096View attachment 458097

When you look to the drawings of Blom and Dik of the seven Provinciën, you see that those timbers also placed to each other at the floor. Why did these constructors did this? Are they wrong or is it normal when you build a big seagoing vessel? When you look to a longboat, you see the frames much more separated.
Maybe the specialist here like @Ab Hoving can tell us more about this subject.
Click to expand...

Nice these wrecks in het Oostvoornse Meer. There is also a fluit which I used for this reconstruction OVM 8 it has a 3d model in sketch fab.

I think again as with so much other construction details on these ships is that a lot was up to the builder of the ship and we can find a lot of different construction options in reality.
 
Last edited:
There are so many interesting builds I missed and this is certainly one of them. Went through the log in a hurry and will be watching! I will read the whole thing after I'm done with reading doc's behemoth of a thread ROTF

I never heard of this particular style of building a ship's hull and it's so different from all the more traditional methods that makes it so intriguing. And the fact that You're able to reconstruct it from photoes of a half sunken, half decayed wreck. I'm impressed!
 
Nowhere in the descriptions of Dutch shipbuilding methods is explicitly stated that the frame parts must lie rigidly against each other. Van Yk says that the 'Sitters' (or first futtocks) should have the same width as the floors and second futtocks. In practice, it would have been rare for them to fit exactly between the other parts, given the irregular shapes in which curved wood was supplied. The builders were not so concerned in this respect. You can spot that carelessness in every wreckfind available.
I also don't know whether the method against sagging, suggested by Steef would have had much effect in reality. That problem was only (partly) solved after the introduction of the so-called Seppings construction, slanted knees in the hold, a method Seppings probably copied from a Dutch invention by William May at the end of the 18th century (see my book Message in a Model).
Schermafbeelding 2024-07-10 om 09.31.49.png
Model MC 0112 Rijksmuseum

It makes little sense to cite Blom and Dik as sources. Both work from their own interpretations. Blom, for example, inserts extra pieces of wood everywhere between his frame parts to fill the gaps, a practice he supports with nothing. Dik leaned heavily on the Hohenzollernmodel for the design of his 7 Provincien. Beautiful looking drawings are not always a guarantee for the truth.
 
Ab Hoving said:
Nowhere in the descriptions of Dutch shipbuilding methods is explicitly stated that the frame parts must lie rigidly against each other. Van Yk says that the 'Sitters' (or first futtocks) should have the same width as the floors and second futtocks. In practice, it would have been rare for them to fit exactly between the other parts, given the irregular shapes in which curved wood was supplied. The builders were not so concerned in this respect. You can spot that carelessness in every wreckfind available.
I also don't know whether the method against sagging, suggested by Steef would have had much effect in reality. That problem was only (partly) solved after the introduction of the so-called Seppings construction, slanted knees in the hold, a method Seppings probably copied from a Dutch invention by William May at the end of the 18th century (see my book Message in a Model).
View attachment 458251
Model MC 0112 Rijksmuseum

It makes little sense to cite Blom and Dik as sources. Both work from their own interpretations. Blom, for example, inserts extra pieces of wood everywhere between his frame parts to fill the gaps, a practice he supports with nothing. Dik leaned heavily on the Hohenzollernmodel for the design of his 7 Provincien. Beautiful looking drawings are not always a guarantee for the truth.
Click to expand...
Thanks Ab, there is a part in the book of Yk where I found something that hints to this subject. I don't fully understand it, but it looks like he said that these timbers fit exactly in between the others. Page 79. What do you understand out of these words, for me it is sometimes not easy to understand the meaning of it.

yk.jpg
 
Ab Hoving said:
They certainly have to fit. But nothing is said about how tight the fit should be. If that was an item it would have been mentioned.
But who am I?
Click to expand...
Hi Ab @Ab Hoving , many thanks for your addition. This is what I have seen from the several wrecks I have looked at.
Regarding the space between the frames from an engineering point of view it won't make a major difference in strength as the whole hull is build as a sandwich construction.

I think we can conclude the only regularity is irregularity.
 
More liggers and zitters are added.
The more forward and aft the more the shape of the zitters and liggrrs will change.
To copy the shape of the hull I use this easy cope tool.
Copy the shape of the hull.
20240712_171530.jpg

And trace it on the wood.
20240712_171628.jpg

The loggers in the bow section I made slightly thicker to create additional strength in the bow of the ship.
20240712_181236.jpg
20240712_181229.jpg

The shell of the hull is already taking some shape.
20240712_181221.jpg
 
Maarten said:
More liggers and zitters are added.
The more forward and aft the more the shape of the zitters and liggrrs will change.
To copy the shape of the hull I use this easy cope tool.
Copy the shape of the hull.
View attachment 458784

And trace it on the wood.
View attachment 458785

The loggers in the bow section I made slightly thicker to create additional strength in the bow of the ship.
View attachment 458788
View attachment 458787

The shell of the hull is already taking some shape.
View attachment 458786
Click to expand...
It is admirable and interesting how you always find ‘suitable damaged beams’.;) Nice work, Maarten.
Regards, Peter
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top