Trenails and Iron nails (when and what)

Donnie

Donnie

Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
Forum Moderator
Joined
Aug 21, 2011
Messages
5,114
Points
738

Location
Madison, MS
Ok, so someone needs to come up with a list of when to use wooden treenails and when to use iron nails and where and when to use them. Not only that but what material to use - wood, brass, etc.

I see a broad range of uses here on the forum. If you really want to get into the details, brass is NOT going to be used on a ship anywhere. So, I do know (or think I know) that brass (if used) should be blackened to simulate nails, and also brass particles do not bleed into the wood. I made a bad mistake one time by using annealed steel nails and when I sanded the hull, steel powder got all into the wood grain - not happy about that at all. Never could get it out either.

Maybe an ongoing list. Like this:
Deck Planking - wooden trenails
Hull Planking - wooden trenails OR brass? (but the Wales needs to be taken into consideration too)
POF - All framing - ?
Hatchway frames ?
and the list can go on and on.

I have seen too many variations on all of these. Some new to scratch building want to take the artistic approach, and that can produce very wrong applications. Like the brass looks good, but the brass has to be blackened or whatever. Too much for interpretation I guess. If this thread does good, then maybe I can make a PDF or a chart somewhere on the forum for new folks at scratch building like me that are clueless.
 
It intrigued me all the way through why brass nails are used to 'treenail' the hull. It is seen on models of really professional model builders and I just can't get it. What is the (bright) brass nail doing on the hull when in reality brass was never used for this purpose? Is it a fashion thing or is it something like 'I don't care I am doing it and others will follow anyhow'? Steel or iron is out of question anyhow (thanks God) because the effect Donnie mentioned. I even find the highly visible wooden treenails strange because in reality the builders have done everything to hide the iron nails, using timber dowels on top of the nails in such a way that even its grain matches the grain of the deck plank. Or is the whole highly visible treenail business only there to demonstrate the model builders extra effort to produce tens of thousands of black spots on the hull? And another strange thing which I can't explain to myself, seeing POB builds, where the treenails are produced only where the bulkheads are, so leaving big gaps to the next set of nails in the next bulkhead... this is really strange. The aim of the model building should be to produce a model, which is as similar as possible to the original, isn't it?
János
 
Mmm big question Donnie.
As an example;
English Ships used Treenails predominantly.
French ships used Treenails and nails BELOW the waterline.Nails for everything above.
Now you ask what material,do you want absolute authenticity or are you producing a piece of art?I have seen that some of the best professional modellers choose to represent fixings in unblackened Brass,Copper and even Silver as black fixings against a light wood background is aesthetically unpleasing.

This is no different to representing painted surfaces in different colours of wood or showing ungilded or unpainted wood carvings.

Janos,I do agree that if you do it,it should be done everywhere,not selectively.All or nothing in my eyes

But as they saying goes,everyone is Captain of their ship

Kind Regards

Nigel
 
Last edited:
It seems no matter what I do ( :) ) I usually get chastized anyways . . . somehow a mixture of artistry has gotten mixed in with authenticity. But, who am I to talk about authenticity - it is not me -
 
I just wanted to air my opinion about a subject which has occupied my thoughts for a while, without the slightest intention to be rude or offensive of course - if I was, my apologies.
János
 
Janos. No apologies necessary. That’s what I am seeking is advice and opinions. Actually, my little quirk goes to Zoltan as he is always picking on me about my projects.
 
Donnie and Janos,there is no right and wrong here.Take whichever approach you like.If one was to take a strict authenticity approach to Wooden ship models,then most models could be criticised for how they are portrayed.
I feel the approach adopted by those building military plastic models is not the same as adopted by us in this realm of modelmaking.There will always be a "blend" of art vs accuracy.
When questioned in the shipmodelling DVD,Michael Bezvernhky (Dr Mike) replied to the Australian chap about black nails,he will not use them against light wood because they would look like a "bed of bugs" on the model.
I think details of nails treenails caulking what wood and all other options must be considered as a whole and a mental image built of the model to achieve a cohesive blend that is aesthetically pleasing.How many modellers are now going to build a model of Victory now and paint her stripes off pink just because that is what historians say she looked like?
I guess what I am trying to say Donnie,is if you choose to represent fixings,do so however you like because it is your model,no matter what you do,someone may not like your choice,because you really cannot please everyone,but does that matter?I stopped caring what others thought a while ago,I build to please ME

Kind Regards

Nigel
 
Even a “suggested practice list” would be an issue.
Coming up with a “do and do not” list would open a huge can of worms.

Janos and Nigel gave their views on the matter, which perfectly demonstrate the issue of an agreement as to what to show or not and, when you push this even further… how to show it..

Where do you start, where do you end…
Setting up some written convention pertaining to model ship building in general would send everyone back to what has often been seen as the elitism that existed years ago: as we are sometimes reminded right here in SoS.
There is already an obvious and natural divide between kit builders and building from plans that you would have to have 2 sets of conventions.

To put it bluntly, some people here cannot even accept the fact that some modelers build their ship right side up or upside down. Just imagine if I or anyone else came and told you “you must do this, this way and use this material to do it”.

If you are going to do something, do it right. The problem is that most of us may not have a clue as what is right in the first place: and what is right for me may not be for the modeler next door: although everyone eventually becomes an expert, just as everyone who shows enough model ships becomes a master builder….

G.
 
Last edited:
I’m with Nigel on this, I think often about what is authentic and usually end up doing something that just pleases me or is convenient to the materials at hand and possibly ignores tradition or the ‘right’ way to do something.I am heartened to read that some old real ships were actually quite rough and sometimes not even symmetrical as different ship rights might work on different sides of a vessel having their own ideas about how it should be built Allthough I am in awe of the skill of certain model makers Malcom Darch for one
 
That text got sent before I finished writing, I guess what I am trying to say is that for me there is no right or wrong way, they are after all just models and each one has merit for just existing and showing not only the obvious care and labour that has been put in to it but something more about the choices that the model maker has made and how some of his or her individual personality shows through to the unique object that they have created. Regards Tony
 
it depends on what you personally are trying to show.
any nail or wooden peg would to small to see on a scale model less than 1:32 at the very least it would be a tiny pin point. So, if you are trying to build a "scale" model you would leave off any pegs, bolts, nails etc
If you were going to use a treenail as a mechanical fastener a sliver of wood .010 is pretty worthless.

materials and the medium you are modeling in.
Hold your hand up and look at your finger nail on your little finger and this door would fit comfortability. It has all the rivets, latch, bolts and molded edges. Modeling in 3D you can zoom way in and see every detail. on a wooden ship model you can not do that.
I have moved more into 3D modeling because i can faithfully recreate a historical item, in actual modeling there are limits and fasteners are at that limit, you can not show them in scale.

boiler5.JPG

up close you see the overlapping copper plates and the rivets that hold them together, this is modeling a historic object to exact scale right down to the rivet heads

boiler2.JPG

boilera6.JPG
and here is a real boiler
my point here is yes this can be modeled at a large enough scale or as a 3D model. So if you intend on reproducing an object as a scale historical piece ie a ship model then yes you should reproduce that object right down to the smallest possible detail and below that threshold it should not be shown. it makes the model clunky and odd looking.

DSCN8313.jpg
 
Last edited:
this is an actual planking spike I pulled from an 1840 shipwreck

real spike.jpg

the head of the spike measures 3/4 of an inch at 1;48 scale that is .020

actual spike head.jpg

as for scale on a model the dots above is an average size you would see on a model , below is the actual scale +

dot size.jpg

and here is what planking spikes really look like, which you would never see on a scale model.

real spikes3.jpg

as far as planking spikes on a deck, well they are a little difficult to see on a real deck, as Janos pointed out the shipwrights tried to hide them so they would not be seen.

deck view.jpg
 
it is all about modeling style and those big dots all over the deck.

kingfisher3 scale1.jpg

really here is the size of the nail if you stayed within scale

kingfisher scale2.jpg

and a real deck you do not see hundreds of little dots

real deck.jpg

maybe if you look close you can see the fastener

real deck closeup.jpg

now this does not apply to all ships, boats and yachts sometimes a builder will on purpose high lite fasteners.
 
Because the average builders operates with his / her own artistic licence, every one becomes free to do whatever.
In most cases the representation is just just, part of art piece.
So in the end, there is noting wrong in leaving nails out, but there is something that is just not right when nailing is done wrong:
Just 1 example: 1 over sized nail per plank for deck planking, but this is only my 2 cents.

Most would bypass showing the nails if they knew how many, nails, bolts, treenails were actually used on any ship. And that would bring us back to what was said earlier.... show it all or nothing....
G.
 
I think the problem this discussion revolves around is scale. Most attempts to simulate fasteners are way too large for the scale. Several comments and photos in this string attest to this. I agree that the scale problem is why many attempts to model treenails or spikes look so clunky...or like a bed of bugs as stated. :) To get closer to scale I have used a pointed tool (even here the size and sharpness of the tool needs to be considered...not too sharp...not too deep...the object is to create a dimple of the right scale) to create a dimple or small dot. I poly most of my models as I go and when poly is applied these dimples then show up ever so lightly without being obvious. This makes the question of what modeling material to use...wood, brass, or steel...to model fasteners perchance moot. But then, the question of scale on most models would favor not trying to mark fasteners at all as some have suggested here.

An edit: Please do not let all this suggest not trying to model treenails and spikes...just a discussion to remind us all that we need to go a lot smaller to get closer to scale. That changes what we use for materials. I have not only used the sharp point method but also very thin steel wire...drill a hole...insert wire...clip. It is way more challenging to simulate wood plugs or treenails to scale due to the delicate nature of wood strips that small.
 
Last edited:
Ok, my 2 cents.

Honestly, unless you're constructing a museum piece with true requirements for historical accuracy or that is specifically one of your project's goals, you should just create what pleases you.

It's unfair to judge what an individual does with his or her model, unless of course it is an entry in a competition that is to be judged. This is one of the reasons I enjoy SoS so much. Knowledgeable members always eagerly answer questions when a modeler presents them. And I don't recall any member being judgmental of another member's work. Criticism and feedback is always polite and helpful and for the most part only when it has been asked for.

So I will quote my favorite US President, Abe Lincoln, “You can please some of the people all of the time, you can please all of the people some of the time, but you can't please all of the people all of the time.” Therefore, we should focus our energy on our projects and the thing that give ourselves pleasure.

Humbly, Ken
.
 
Hello

I agree with Ken....We all build models because we like to not because we have to. We build to our own individual tastes and abilities to produce the best representation of the ship or boat we are building. I myself have tried nails in the deck and found, as was previously mentioned, that they do bleed into the the lighter timber.
As for models in competition I ask as to what standard are they to be judged on, as there are a lot of books out there on famous ships that contradict each other and who is to say they are fully accurate....by all means use as a guideline but not as a standard.
Building boats is a form of art and each model is the builders expression of what they see as a finished and complete representation of the boat or ship.

To me tree nails and Nails are a lot of extra work unless you are building a very large scale model of absolute historical accuracy then they will come into play then.

Regards

Rob
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top