Help with finding the right tool

[pwaterman]

This is my first post as a new member so please forgive me if my jargon is a bit off.

I sincerely hope that the communal sharing of the pains and joy of wooden boat ownership makes the pains less painful and the joys more joyful for one and all!

So here is where I would welcome opinions;

You will hopefully see from the pictures that the construction of my “project” Aramis is a bit out of the ordinary, perhaps even experimental. Probably not a successful experiment in this case, as only 10 were built!
http://i956.photobucket.com/albums/ae45/ltu1558/Woodenboat%20posts/Aramis_stem.jpg

(http://www.woodenboat.com/forum/http://i956.photobucket.com/albums/ae45/ltu1558/Woodenboat%20posts/Aramis_stem.jpg)
(http://www.woodenboat.com/forum/[IMG]http://i956.photobucket.com/albums/ae45/ltu1558/Woodenboat%20posts/Aramis_stem.jpg)[IMG]http://i956.photobucket.com/albums/ae45/ltu1558/Woodenboat%20posts/Aramis_hull_detail.jpg (http://www.woodenboat.com/forum/%5BIMG%5Dhttp://i956.photobucket.com/albums/ae45/ltu1558/Woodenboat%20posts/Aramis_stem.jpg)
(http://www.woodenboat.com/forum/http://i956.photobucket.com/albums/ae45/ltu1558/Woodenboat%20posts/Aramis_stem.jpg)
I believe the build technique is known as “half-moon”; narrow planks, with concave and convex forms top and bottom built up in a mold and copper nailed from the top. There are no frames, so the construction is more akin to one of those funny plastic monocoque boats that keep running into me. The hull is probably designed to flex under righting moment and sail loads, with the flex taken up through pivoting in the interlocking plank joints. See attached diagram.

[IMG]http://i956.photobucket.com/albums/ae45/ltu1558/Woodenboat%20posts/AramisHull1.jpg
(http://www.woodenboat.com/forum/http://i956.photobucket.com/albums/ae45/ltu1558/Woodenboat%20posts/Aramis_stem.jpg)
After some major hull work in 2007 to replace a lot of rot that was carefully concealed under fiberglass and resin (yuck!), I find that I am still taking on water through some of the seams. I have an idea what to about this, but would welcome opinions on whether it makes sense. I am also hesitating on the right tool to use to realize my suggested repair.

There seems to be no caulking in the original build, so water tightness was achieve through swelling alone – the hull is mahogany.

I suspect the cause of the leaking seams is two-fold.

Firstly, the hull may have dried out too much during the hull repairs and the planks are failing to swell to their original dimensions.

Secondly, during the repair some partial frames were fitted inside to support new planks. These frames do not go down on to the keel. [The frames seemed essential, as it is evidently very difficult to insert interlocking planks like the originals. This could only be done in a keel-up build. The frames support the square cut scarfed planks that were inserted as part of the repair work]. Consequently, any hull flex in the regions of the frames is focused to the base of the frame rather than being taken up in all of the adjacent seams.

Not surprisingly, my big leaks are along the garboard strake where the righting moment of 650kgs of lead fights with the hydrostatic force on the hull. See diagram

[IMG]http://i956.photobucket.com/albums/ae45/ltu1558/Woodenboat%20posts/AramisHull2.jpg

(http://www.woodenboat.com/forum/[IMG]http://i956.photobucket.com/albums/ae45/ltu1558/Woodenboat%20posts/Aramis_stem.jpg)

Most of the seams are far too tight to get in any caulking cotton, certainly not with any wheel or iron that I have found to date. Moreover, the construction would seem to make it difficult to pries open the seams with a dumb iron.

My plan of attack, and here I would welcome guidance, is as follows.

I am considering veeing out all of the below water seams: say with a 60 degree vee to a depth of about 1/4inch. This should allow me to get in some cotton or perhaps oakum where the seams are slackest. I would then pay the vee´d seam with a flexible seam sealant.

This raises the following questions:



Does the cotton and/or oakum make sense as a belt-and-braces measure in addition to the sealant? I have a lot of seams, as the planks are only 2 inches wide. I reckon >200m of seam below the water, on a 9.3m LOL!




There is the inevitable emotive question on the choice of sealant. Natural such as Davis Slick Seam, traditional lead putty, or modern rubbery stuff? I believe that I will get a lot more movement than on a clinker (lapstrake in the US?) or carvel construction on to frames.




What tool do I use to vee the seams? A power router, even a palm one, would seem a dangerous option. I have looked at plough-planes, router-planes, or molding planes, but it is not clear to me that these could cut a controlled vee along a seam.




Is there an alternative to this madness?


Any advice (other than “you should have had a survey done”, or “buy a house with a nice big wood burning stove”) would be welcome.

Many thanks in advance.


Philip

[Ian McColgin]

I do not think I'd try to make notches to hold any seam caulking of any sort. It's quite contrary to the heart of tight seam construction where wood on wood contact is essential to the hull's essentially monocoque engineering.

Some serious evaluation of the repairs done and the extent of the improvizational pseudo ribs will be necessary. It's quite possible that this approach is part of the leakage problem to the extent that it makes two conflicting structures. You might need to extract them and make planks that fit in tightly with just slightly off parallel sides so it's a really tight fit and then edge nail in both directions.

I can't tell if the change in planking down near the bilge is original or the result of choises made during repairs. How these two lines of planking come together is likely important. Is there a stem to stern bilge stringer in there or is that lowest line of planks essentially the stringer or what?

Once you have the hull repaired wood it and then prime with a flexable epoxy sealer like Gluvit (US propriatary brand) this sealer will not prevent moisture uptake as the boat reswells but will make a bridge over the crack at each seam so your final finish won't craze along those lines.

Garboards always get a wringing. Since she was originally a sort of monocoque engineering, I'd start by trying to understand how the garboard to keel attachment was done - rebated in or what? - and how the floors distribute the keel loads through several planking layers. You might well consider the chainplates as well and think about the sort of web that the Herreschoff's pioneered for some of their light boats with highly loaded rigs.

More pix and we hope you get somehow the insights it will take to make this all work. She's a lovely looking hull, from what we can see.

G'luck

[Peerie Maa]

Does she have any frames crossing the keel where the ballast hangs on the hull? If there are none there I would seek advice about sizing and fitting some. Similarly is there any structure spreading the rigging loads and mast compressive thrust?

[RFNK]

It does seem pretty unusual for a boat of this size to be strip planked and edge-nailed (no glue?) without any frames! Even in lightly built boats with frames it's not uncommon to see seams opening up when the boat is heeled where the floors meet the planking in a line. As Nick says, you really need to look at installation of at least some frames to `cross this divide' and I think looking at something like a few ring frames in the area of the mast would be very wise. It sounds like you're really looking at new strip planking in the troublesome areas - you're really going to need frames to fasten these new planks to at least. One technique that's been used a bit in the past for carvel and strip planking is splining. These are thin wedge shaped strips of wood that are glued in-between planks to seal seams. However, if the rest of the boat's planks are going to move a bout a bit then it's possible that the splines would split away or cause splitting of the adjacent planks so it's a method you'd only consider if you could get the whole hull very tight and stable. To form the tapered groove for the wedges (splines), you use a splining saw blade in a power saw. These don't seem to be sold anywhere so it's a matter of getting a sparsely toothed blade for a small power saw and shaping the teeth to suit. The grooves are cut by running the saw along battens. Rick

[RFNK]

By the way, the links to your attachments don't work. Rick

[wizbang 13]

I can't see a thing... links not working

[wizbang 13]

sounds like the boat was built for glassing over

[pwaterman]

Thanks for the inputs.

I am trying to post some additional info. and comments but cannot get attachments working.

I have been forced to delete the attachments in the original post because of upload-quotas. I am finding is impossible to squeeze any legible diagrams or photos in to 19.5kb !

I'll try later.

Philip

[RFNK]

You need to put your photos on a photo hosting site such as Photobucket. Then you just paste the link into your thread and Bob's your uncle. Rick

[pwaterman]

Firstly thanks Rick for the Photobucket tip. The images are now linked in the original post.

Thanks to all for the inputs.

Here is an example of a repair where a semi-rib was inserted.
(http://www.woodenboat.com/forum/IMG]http://i956.photobucket.com/albums/ae45/ltu1558/Woodenboat%20posts/Aramis_repair.jpg)http://i956.photobucket.com/albums/ae45/ltu1558/Woodenboat%20posts/Aramis_repair.jpg
I agree with Ian that some of the repairs have compromised the hull design. The guy that did this work did not appreciate the monocoque nature of the construction. I am not sure that I can remove the ribs. Some are expoxied and screwed across 10 or more planks.

The rib in this photo is not causing problems as it terminates above the waterline. But let’s see if the paint stays on the adjacent seam!

I do not have any photos of the interior, however, from memory, there is a sort of ladder construction along the keel as in this sketch.
http://i956.photobucket.com/albums/ae45/ltu1558/Woodenboat%20posts/Keel.jpg

(http://i956.photobucket.com/albums/ae45/ltu1558/Woodenboat%20posts/Keel.jpg)
All of the planking seen in the previously sent picture is original. I believe that the change in the plank direction coincides with the end of the cross-members in the above sketch and therefore more or less with the worst of the leaks.

In spite of this appearing to be the Achilles heel, the boat has sailed for more than 40-years, so the design must have worked once.

It is true that the keel weight seems to be hanging on the seams along the line where the plank direction changes.

In fact the main keel member is quite substantial, probably 12x10in in cross-section and running most of the length of the hull. This should transfer any torsion in to the hull along its entire length. Although without proper ribs, the torsion is transmitted from seam to seam which does seem a strange design choice. I wonder what Richard Carlson (the designer) had in mind.

The chain-plate fixing and bracing amidships is like this:
http://i956.photobucket.com/albums/ae45/ltu1558/Woodenboat%20posts/Chainplates.jpg
In fact you can see the chain-plate through this tricky repair. Note the state of the seams where the chainplate has been working them.
http://i956.photobucket.com/albums/ae45/ltu1558/Woodenboat%20posts/Aramis_hull_repair_chainplate.jpg
The seams will open if the shrouds are over-tightened, however, I suspect this is partly due to some remaining rot in the planks where the last two upper-shroud chain-plates bolts pass. In any case, she sails well with a relatively slack lateral rigging tension – the mast is hollow spruce.

I believe that 8 of the 10 vessels made (approx. 1966-1968) went to the US, so if any members are aware of others having survived, I would love to make contact with their owners.

The boat was known as a Carlson Gallart 30. Built buy Gallart in Arenys del Mar near Barcelona in Spain.

Thanks again for your interest.

Philip

[wizbang 13]

Yes ,I would glass the boat, pretty heavily.

[Ian McColgin]

Honestly those repairs don't look good from here but the pix may not tell all. The upper replacements are short and don't appear scarfed with a bevel. You wouldn't see it from here but I'm interpolating from the bevels on the lower that are a bit short but are one acceptable scarf in conventioal planking. Frankly, not acceptable in a monocoque structure.

I'd not glass the hull, at least not without some serious research into the original engineering. For example, what have you in the way of interior furniture? Clearly that ring frame structure partners to step is lovely. Are there other bits of bulkhead and such that amount to frame stations?

Regardless of anything else you might do, I'd yank out the old repairs and any other bad wood and put things in right. There may be some moments of challenge in getting the new to follow some of the curves and you may have to make the new planks a bit thick and fair them in. Each end should be a 12:1 bevel along the face - not as the short scarfs are done in the picture. It's easy enough to plane out the ends of the new. Making the surface on the existing planks is most easily done with a japanese pull saw to kerf out guide lines and a slick to make the bevel right.

As mentioned above, the sides should be just shy of parallel, wider by 1/64" or so on outside, to make a tight fit. Edge nail with copper headless and countersunk.

Look at the floors. Are they really bolted to the wood of the keel or are they just holding the cabin sole up? How are the keel bolts laid out? These are important clues to understanding the engineering and thus having a chance of getting the repair right.

I like to assume that previous owners had some good ideas and am generally reluctant to reject their work, but this is troubling at best. G'luck.

[pwaterman]

Thanks Ian.

Unfortunately, the repairs were done under my ownership (but not by me) before I lost my wooden boat virginity so to speak.

I really struggled to find anyone in Spain to even touch the hull.

Whilst, with hindsight, the repairs have caused problems, at least they got rid of the rot. For example here you can see the extent of the work:
http://i956.photobucket.com/albums/ae45/ltu1558/Woodenboat%20posts/Aramis_major_repair.jpg

This repair is almost undetectable from the outside.

Part of the rotten transom had to be retained and a strengthened with new planking. There was a fear that the hull shape would be lost if the whole stern frame was removed.

The lesson I learned was that wooden boat builders do not necessarily make good restorers. In this case, I think the guy approached it from a "how would I have done this" point of view, rather that "what did the designer and original builder intend".

In terms of interior bulkheads, there are three that I have marked in this rather poor picture taken from the original brochure. (I do have the layout plans, but not with me at the moment.)

http://i956.photobucket.com/albums/ae45/ltu1558/Woodenboat%20posts/Aramis_bulkheads.jpg

The bulkhead astern of the mast is integrated with a substantial and beautifully sculpted cross-brace. This appears to be where most of the "squashing" loads are taken.

I will examine the floor. Certainly the backbone formed by the ladder cross members shown in my earlier diagram is critical to the way loads are transferred in to the hull.

I have noticed that since the repairs, the cabin sole panels, that sit loosely on the cross members do rock a bit - they didn't before. So there are some stressed members in there somewhere.

This may be due to over-caulking. Some of the really bad seams were caulked with an iron during the repair work. So there may have be distortion of the hull once the planks had taken water.

I am stripping the hull (again!) in April and will undoubtedly have some planks to replace. I´ll give your suggested method a try.

Thanks and regards

Philip

[Ian McColgin]

Now the boat is looking more familiar and better and better. I think she's an enlarged evolution of Ray Carlson's highly successful 24' MORC sloop, the Cutlass. Gallart made most of the ones sold in the US and I sailed one back in the early '60's.

The cove and bead of the thin planks was NOT to allow the hull to shift back and forth - that would destroy the utility of the nails - but rather, as with modern strip building, simply the very easiest way to make the seams tight with all those changing bevels.

As I think about it, I wonder if doing repairs with nearly parallel sided strip planks, I might well be inclined to epoxy rather than edge nail. If so I'd use the very thinnest formulation of a glue (not sealer like CPES) as the seam should come out tightly enough that really there's no room for fillers.

The structure does not need frames. Not designed for them.

The garboard to keel connection is really key and given the boat's general condition, the keel needs a very careful survey. How well it can hold the fastenings at the garboards is really key. I'd probe the keel to be sure it's sound everywhere and I'd invest in plenty of CPES to fully stabilize it for the foreseeable future. I think more and more that the keel timber-keel fin-floors-planking connections are the heart of getting leakage under control. Whether this means you really need to drop the keel to really figure it out I don't know. If the tops of the keel bolts don't show deterioration and if you don't have signs of work-crazing at the fin to hull joint, I'd be tempted to try a season without dropping the keel, just to avoid the work.

Extrapolating from my memory of the Cutlass and the Setauket 28, these are terrific boats. I never felt scared in one in any weather. They are small enough that the sea can't really breach them and, absent a lee shore, in the worst you just strike everything, trail drouges over the stern, button up and hang on below till it's over.

G'luck

[boattruck]

Waterman, Your boat seems to have many of the age related problems that Lapworth 36's have, get in touch with Allen at the L36 website, he is well versed in some of the repairs you are working on and will have some valuable input, Cheers, BT

[pwaterman]

Thanks I´ll track down the L36 info.

And yes Ian, the Carlson 30 is known for being a grown-up Cutlass.

You can see the parentage if you compare the following Cutlass information with the brochure and photos previously sent:

http://i956.photobucket.com/albums/ae45/ltu1558/Woodenboat%20posts/Cutlass.jpg

You may find this picture informative (its quite hi-res so you can zoom about a bit):

http://i956.photobucket.com/albums/ae45/ltu1558/Woodenboat%20posts/Aramis_fin.jpg

It does look horribly weak where the fin joins the hull. You would think the fin would wobble about all over the place. I have checked the bolts!

In fact the seams close to the fin join are not problematic. If you look at the seams in the center towards the top of the picture, you will see two with caulking hanging out. These are the big leakers. They coincide with the termination of the inner cross-braces.

In any case when she comes out in April, I will try and understand what is going on between the main keel member inside and the sculpted filler between the fin-keel and hull.

I´ll re-post once I know more.

Thanks to every one for their interest.

Philip

[RFNK]

The argument that it's been okay for 40 years so it should continue to be okay, the old guys knew what they were doing etc. is a common one but, in my opinion, a poor one. These boats were built to be light for performance. The timber is getting old - it does not grow stronger with age! The edge nails will have been working and many of them are sure to be loose. The seams are opening up and just sealing them up is not going to improve the integrity of the boat. You need to brace this hull, either from the inside or the outside, as you can't re-glue the nailed seams. This means you either use structural glassing, such as a couple of layers of double-bias glass after you've replaced all suspect planking etc., or you install new frames, preferably using a ring-frame arrangement to spread the loads of the ballast and rig. It's crazy to assume that these boats were designed to last a hundred years - they weren't. But, they can be made to last by incorporating some new structural components. If this was my boat, I'd work out where the loads are and install ring frames accordingly. I'd be trying to stiffen the hull - call me old-fashioned but I'm not keen on sailing across the sea with the keel waving in the breeze! Because you have a lot of open seams but narrow planks, suspect repairs etc., I'd get the hull as stiff as you can - splining your bad seams should help - remove anything that could be rotten or hold water, and then proceed to treat the hull like a modern strip-planked hull and sheath it with two layers of double-bias. You'll need to seal the interior with resin if you do that too. Rick

[Ian McColgin]

Rather than caulking, I'd be inclined to router-reef such big seams as have been caulked and epoxy in soft wood splines. Actually, NOT router as you have those bronze nails all over. The right circular saw blade would be safe. The caulking is a problem, not a solution, because it destroys the monocoque integrity.

Don't the floors land on a plane that runs diagonally across several seams as they travel along the boat? No doubt age did get things to shrink and open up but once you get back to wood on wood contact she should be happy.

It's impossible to tell without touching but is that wood on the hull's keel member all good? From the pic it looks a little punkey around that joint and will need something sooner or later.

I disagree with RFNK about sheathing the hull - at least at first blush. If however it really needs sheathing - after you clean out any rot etc and saturate the hull with CPES - then I'd for sure make it just epoxied on wood, maybe dual diagonal each layer being something like 1/8", adding 1/4" total. She'll float about the same, as the added weight will be more than off-set by less water take up. I don't generally favor glass as the sheets are harder to apply well, utterly annoying to repair, and tend to hide traveling trouble prior to massive delamination. Diagonal wood is easy and unskilled to apply, though astoundingly tedious. It's very easy to fix a gouge should you take a rock. And even if one part starts to pry out, the strips around it will likely stay fine.

G'luck

[Bob Cleek]

This type of strip planking had a brief bit of popularity and then died... due to the problems described. I'm not familiar with this particular model, but the technique was to lay up a hull with strips over a form, often with lower quality softwood, and then sheath the whole shebang with fibreglass. It was used for "short runs" on production boats, essentially by building a plug and then glassing it, rather than using the plug to make an expensive mold which would only be justified if the design was to be produced in larger numbers. Back then, it was damn near impossible to build and sell wooden boats, as the fibreglass fad was in full flower. Outfits that couldn't justify the molding investments tried this approach. As has been described, repairs are nearly impossible. (Back then, many actually believed that fibreglass would last forever, so they didn't think about repairs.) This seems to be a nice design, but unfortunately, it was executed in a manner which did not contemplate longevity.

[pwaterman]

Thanks Bob Rick and Ian.

The sheathing question has been much on my mind. Certainly thin planking, epoxied diagonally across the lay of the old planks, has its attraction - I guess a bit like Spirit Yachts are building today.

Finding someone competent to cut and glue the planks, such as to retain the hull shape would be a challenge in Spain - unless someone out their knows differently.

I agree its never ever going to be as new. Although I don't believe she was built as a racer, the hull and sail plan are clearly sporty, so as Rick says, longevity might not have been high in the list of design priorities.

The big issue with sheathing would be cost. [I am not sure whether Gentlemen Sailors are allowed to talk about such things where a wooden boat is concerned!]

I have a boat that is effectively worthless in its market, of no or negligible historical value, and has already cost a small fortune in renovation. I have to balance this with the "duty of care" I have inherited from previous owners, designer and builder.

This is why I am really keen to find out if any of the other 9 built are still sailing. If most of them are not, then this would suggest that I need to take a radical (and expensive) approach to avoid the same fate.

Alternatively, I could throw in the towel - I am not sure I could do this are there is already too much of my blood, sweat and tears in her timbers - or just enjoy her with an over-active bilge pump and the niggle that one day I might not recover from an inadvertent broach!

Philip

[RFNK]

Well, if you sort of cold mould over it all I'd be worried you'll just create a soggy sandwich, at least in the area of the lower topsides. It looks like quite a nice boat. If you do the work yourself, there's not much cost really in laminating up some new frames to strengthen the loaded areas and doing some repairs to planking and seams. There isn't really all that much cost in structural sheathing either. Glass is quite cheap, epoxy's a bit dear but that's the major cost. You end up with a pretty good boat for not too much money, if you do the work yourself.

By the way, I agree with Ian re that planking where the fin is fastened. It might be worth ripping a plank or two out of that area to see what it's really like down there, if you haven't already done so.

Rick

[Ian McColgin]

I've helped with a couple of wood sheathings and examined a few dozen. It's almost impossible to screw it up so long as the tedium doen't get you. Rot in existing wood must be eliminated. Sometimes it's cost-effective to inject CPES.

(Brand plug here. I've tried GitRot and thinned West and they do not work the same way. They'll penetrate about half as far as CPES, which is not bad, but have no ability to displace moisture. One major risk of injecting rather than removing is that you can leave a sort of rot starter kit that will really travel before it's noticable a few years later. This is far far more likely with products I'm familiar with other than CPES.)

Laying down diagonal strips is easy as somewhere between 30 and 45 degrees off verticle, starting at the center and moving out, will generally lie flat. One guy made a nifty tool rather like a marking gauge but with a knife blade. He'd tack the new strip closely to the old, zip cut the edge, and then fit. Fast and accurate.

G'luck

[pwaterman]

Ian

In your opinion would I have to drop the keel if I was to sheath?

Thanks

Philip

[Ian McColgin]

Absolutely drop the keel for sheathing. It will be easier to make the garboard area right and give a chance to make sure the keel timbers are perfect.

Check with an architect maybe but I'd be inclined to thin the keel timbers down enough that the sheathing layers can be part of the flat that the fin butts up against.

Given the boat's small size, I'd think about yanking the engine, emptying the tanks, and moving loose stuff like batteries, and then rolling her over for the sheathing. It's so much easier to work on her inverted that it's worth a little work to get her there.

G'luck
G'luck