New picture of bad gluing by me Haha

Right. To give it some numbers, a 2 degree out-of-square plank would narrow a 6" wide model to 5.996" (4/1000" narrower). Heck, 5 degrees out of square would only go to 5.977"m about half a millimeter. And that's at the maximum width, with less difference elsewhere, and the ONLY change would be the width. I can see no world where that would matter (except for those that would say, only during construction photos and not afterwards, "Oh, I see you didn't get that square!"

Wouldn't it widen the hull. The planks would sit on the diagonal from front corner of the bulkhead one side to the back corner on the other (less fairing).
 
Wouldn't it widen the hull. The planks would sit on the diagonal from front corner of the bulkhead one side to the back corner on the other (less fairing).
It depends on the angle and mostly on the bulkhead thickness, but yes, you're right, small angles would actually widen the total width. I took a simplistic approach. And it does get a bit more complicated when considering that. With this example and a 0.25" bulkhead, width actually increases up to 4", then reduces after that. Highlighting how little all of this really changes.

For the above example, say a 2 degree error, the side to the back corner would narrow by about 0.002", the other side would narrow by the same 0.002" but the thickness of the bulkhead (say 0.25" for this example) would extend out further by 0.009". Making the ship lop-sided, one side being 0.002" narrower, the other being 0.007" wider. Even at 7 degrees, the difference side-to-side is under 1/32". Again, I doubt the difference would be noticeable or would in any way affect the construction.

Yeah, I'm an engineer, and had to make myself a spreadsheet. My wife hates that. Most of you probably do to. But it's my lot in life.

Wanna see a graph? :rolleyes:
 
Of course, it would also make a plywood underdeck unlikely to fit nicely without trimming. Whether that's a problem might depend on the particular model?
Again, the width changes by a tiny amount. Of course, if the off-kilter bulkhead is used as a visible bulkhead, that could be visible. Actually, one of the bulkheads on my Ragusian Carrack ended up crooked and IS visible as an above-deck wall. And off by about the 2 degrees above, or more, I'd say. I never noticed the difference, until cutting deck pieces, but it's there. I also cannot see any error in the end result with my eyes, although I could measure it. But that's kind of worst case.
 
I was considering loosening the bulkheads and regluing them to the false keel with square beading on each side of each bulkhead so that they are square would that be a good idea or any other suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
 
I was considering loosening the bulkheads and regluing them to the false keel with square beading on each side of each bulkhead so that they are square would that be a good idea or any other suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

Well that's how I do it when the slots are sloppy. It works well. make sure the extra bits are well clear of the planking zone tho.
 
Of course, it would also make a plywood underdeck unlikely to fit nicely without trimming. Whether that's a problem might depend on the particular model?
You are correct Smithy... On this model the sub-deck has slots that mate with the bulkhead "ears" or tabs. If a bulkhead is mis-aligned the deck will not fit properly. Of course, one could remove the interferences and go on with life. That is unless one wants to do it the proper way and fix the mistake.
...henry
 
My initial thought is: Why bother? While it's nice that bulkheads are square to the keel, having them off a bit will not change the contour by any real amount. (By my measurements, the bulkhead is less than 2% off, so width would be affected by less than 0.1%). Strength will not be affected. They will be covered, so no way to see the error after completion. And any fixed result may not be as strong. So, I wouldn't bother changing it. But then I'm lazy.
Exactly my thoughts--you'll want to do a lot of fairing anyway.
 
Hi, just logged in and saw this stream. If it's PVA or any resin based aliphatic or epoxy glue, just wave a hair dryer with a nozzle at any offending joints and apply slight pressure, the glue will start to plasticise and move and then when it's in the position that you want blow cold air over it and it will quickly set again and retain it's position. Low heat will not work for CA glues because they are cross-linked and you need very high temperatures
 
My initial thought is: Why bother? While it's nice that bulkheads are square to the keel, having them off a bit will not change the contour by any real amount. (By my measurements, the bulkhead is less than 2% off, so width would be affected by less than 0.1%). Strength will not be affected. They will be covered, so no way to see the error after completion. And any fixed result may not be as strong. So, I wouldn't bother changing it. But then I'm lazy.
It's more than just about hull width and shape. Some bulkhead affect the outer features of the ship such as bulkheads, side galleries, and steps in the bulwark rails, not to mention it would make fitting a false deck with slots for the frames impossible. Also, sloppy bulkhead positioning can create a twist in the hull. Setting the framework as perfectly as possible forms the basis for the fitment of many things later on. Use small wood blocks glued to the false keel and bulkheads to keep them perpendicular as the glue dries. I would not accept leaving that bulkhead if it were my model.

Use reinforcement blocks to preserve bulkhead alignment.
1733009501209.png

ALWAYS use a keel clamp to prevent hull twist as you begin first planking.
1733009757932.png

Example of hull twist... it SUCKS and cannot be corrected later:
1733009940998.png
 
Last edited:
I loosened all the bulkheads and dry fitted the deck on top of the bulkheads and then glued them so that they are fingers crossed square to the false keel when dried. I haven't glued the deck as I need to remove and plank.

17330761311374712736503562155376.jpg
 
Back
Top