Association Forum - Any reports of Hull Delamination?

Assn Members Area · Join

Home.

Association Forum

Ships Store

Cruising

Racing

Technical Tips

Photo Gallery - New

Boat Search - Updated

Manuals & Brochures

Swap Meet

Links

Officer Flag Line & Staff

Bylaws & Constitution

Members Area

Join the Association

Notice:
The advice given on this site is based upon individual or quoted experience, yours may differ.
The Officers, Staff and members of this site only provide information based upon the concept that anyone utilizing this information does so at their own risk and holds harmless all contributors to this site.

Association Forum

Username:	Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

All Forums

Catalina/Capri 25/250 Sailor's Forums

Catalina 25 Specific Forum

Any reports of Hull Delamination?

New Topic

Topic Locked

Printer Friendly

Author

Topic

Page: of 2

cshaw
Captain

Member Avatar

USA
460 Posts

Initially Posted - 11/11/2012 : 12:32:06

We are now all aware of the sad news of "This Side Up"'s demise due to hull delamination, and I recently found out about a similar size/age Cal sailboat in our marina that suffered the same type fate.

So, since Confetti is the fleet leader in age, and has been sailed HARD her whole life, it got me to wondering if this hull delamination issue is common in older, actively sailed, fixed keel boats.

After hurricane Ike hit Galveston Bay a few years ago, I saw a fixed keel Cat 25 that a crane had picked up and set on the ground without a cradle. The foot of the keel and the starboard chine were all that was touching the ground, and the hull was flexed enough that the keel was no longer perpendicular to the hull's lines (it was angled to port by about 20 degrees).

When Confetti was hauled out and placed on her trailer for the trip to Florida from Texas when I retired, while she was hanging in the slings, the hoist operator kicked on the side of the keel and the keel oscillated side to side about 3 inches at the foot, with the hull flexing in the area of the flat runs beside the hull's keel stub out towards the chines for about a foot, and the flat areas just aft of the keel (the latter areas were where TSU and also the Cal I mention both suffered delamination). Confetti had new keel bolts installed about 6 years ago, so there is no "Catalina Smile" induced flexing to be seen, just the hull flexing.

I checked for hull damage to Confetti from what I assumed was flexing over the 36 years I have sailed her, but did not see anything on the inside or outside visually or by tapping on the hull.

But, after finding out about TSU and the Cal, it makes me wonder if anyone on the forum is aware if there have been any other cases of hull delamination ever reported in those areas for fixed keel Cat 25s (or similar boats)????

At least for Confetti, she does not have any athwartships "stiffening stringers" laminated into the hull in those flat areas that get flexed by side loads from the keel. Do any of the later models have any type of stiffening added to strengthen the hull against this type flexing (since I suspect that would, over time, potentially cause the laminations to weaken)? My hull liner is really not bonded to the hull in those area in a way that would provide any meaningful hull stiffening for such side loads.

You can bet Confetti will be getting a VERY close inspection during next spring's haulout, and meanwhile I am also thinking of how to add stiffening stringers inside without creating point load flex points that could actually "cause" delaminations to start..

Thanks!

Chuck

Chuck Shaw
Confetti
Cat 25, hull#1
1976 FK/TR

Edited by - on

Stinkpotter
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

Djibouti
9013 Posts

Response Posted - 11/11/2012 : 14:59:35

Hi Chuck... My "Passage" (used to be mine), an '85 vintage, was an encapsulated lead fin and had no stringers in the hull. I never saw signs of flexing, although I wasn't around when the yard blocker her up on the hard.

I assume you're familiar with the practice of using a small ball-peen hammer to tap on fiberglass to check for delamination... You're looking for a uniform "ping", and a "thud" is a bad sign. Of course, in the immediate area of the keel, the sounds are likely to vary.

Regarding adding stringers, I'd be inclined to ask somebody at Catalina, for exactly the reason you mention. It could be that some flex is preferable to something that will concentrate the stress. An alternative might be to add some layers of roving in the area of the keel sump, being careful to wet them out thoroughly. This could add some strength without changing the structural design.

Whatever... We're trusting you to keep good ol' Hull #1 going strong!

Edited by - on

Voyager
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
5232 Posts

Response Posted - 11/11/2012 : 17:13:12

I'm not going to go looking for trouble on Passage but it would be nice to know whether the hull were compromised or the keel was planning to drop off. I keep my inflatable life raft under the companionway steps just in case I have to abandon ship.
I'd spent plenty of time scraping the hull a few years back, and it always sounded and seemed quite solid. I might try the ball peen hammer test soon to be sure all is well. There are no longitudinal cracks in the hull which might be a tip off. Good luck on Confetti.

Edited by - on

GaryB
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
4275 Posts

Response Posted - 11/11/2012 : 17:14:08

I was under the impression the areas on TSU that de-laminated were where the boat sat on the bunks from the Hydrohoist. I assumed because this area stays wet for long periods of time after the boat is out of the water that might have been what caused the de-lamination.

I wonder if TSU had a keel support for the keel to sit on when it was up on the hoist? If not, could that have caused stress in the keel area or flexing that eventually resulted in the delamination? I'm sure Derek will chime in.

Also, Dolivaw posted a year or so ago his fin keel had movement when it was out of the water but I think they later determined it was not a problem. Maybe that's just normal for these boats.

And finally, my '89 WK does not have any "athwartship" stringers. I've seen pictures of another '88 or '89 on this forum that did have factory 'athwartship" stringers in the keel area and I believe it was on a WK. Not sure why some boats had them and others didn't.

Edited by - GaryB on 11/12/2012 08:56:35

Derek Crawford
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
3312 Posts

Response Posted - 11/11/2012 : 19:19:48

There was no support for the keel when on the hoist. There would need to be a horizontal stringer from aft transverse frame to the forward transverse frame and I'm not sure that this would allow the boat to enter the hoist.

Edited by - on

cshaw
Captain

Members Avatar

USA
460 Posts

Response Posted - 11/12/2012 : 08:13:55

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Stinkpotter
 .... an '85 vintage, was an encapsulated lead fin and had no stringers in the hull. I never saw signs of flexing, .....

Regarding adding stringers, I'd be inclined to ask somebody at Catalina, for exactly the reason you mention. It could be that some flex is preferable to something that will concentrate the stress. An alternative might be to add some layers of roving in the area of the keel sump, being careful to wet them out thoroughly. This could add some strength without changing the structural design.

Whatever... We're trusting you to keep good ol' Hull #1 going strong!
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Hi Dave,

I have been on a lot of Cat 25's through the years, and never have seen any stiffening stringers, but I have seen them a lot on other type boats... thats why I was wondering.... Thanks!

I have never seen or even worried about hull flexing near the keel till the haulout in 2009 to come to Florida. But like you, I have never really ever "looked" for it either. The hull has always "oil cannned" a lot when heeled over and you land on waves on the lee bow, but most boats do that if the seas are rough enough. So I guess it should not surprise me when I saw the flex due to the keel while she was hanging in the slings....

I agree totally on not making any hard "stress points" in the hull. That was what I was trying to say. If I do end up putting any stringers in ( or if I just lay a number of layers of mat and roving in), it would be a taper at all the edges......... I have built stringers in the past using a cardboard or foam tube as a mandrel, and laid up the mat and roving over that. Having the geometery of the stringer working for you allows you to use a LOT less materials to do that than to simply increase the thickness of the hull. But the available volume under the hull liner/cabin sole may dictate that the additional layers would be the only viable approach.

I was planning on also contacting Catalina and speak to an engineer to see what their thoughts were, but wanted to do a bit of homework on what owners had seen first.

And yes, I am working hard to keep Confetti sailing for as long as possible. And my oldest daughter (who has sailed since she was 16 days old) has designs on keeping her sailing after I am pushing up daiseys! <grin>

Thanks for the good inputs!!!

Chuck

Edited by - on

cshaw
Captain

Members Avatar

USA
460 Posts

Response Posted - 11/12/2012 : 08:28:40

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Voyager
 I'm not going to go looking for trouble on Passage but it would be nice to know whether the hull were compromised or the keel was planning to drop off. I keep my inflatable life raft under the companionway steps just in case I have to abandon ship.
I'd spent plenty of time scraping the hull a few years back, and it always sounded and seemed quite solid. I might try the ball peen hammer test soon to be sure all is well. There are no longitudinal cracks in the hull which might be a tip off. Good luck on Confetti.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Thanks for the note! Yes, the ball peen hammer test will most certainly be done pretty extensively!!

I have not seen any cracks or signs of failure inside or out, but delamination is not always easily detected visually.

A buddy of mine used to have a really nice compact self inflating liferaft aboard his GulfStar 36, but it was stolen. Not to distract this thread, which I want to keep focused, but I may start another one before long asking about small compact self inflating liferafts..... I never owned one when sailing off shore in California or Texas, but it would have been smart, (instead I simply borrowed my buddy's) PHRF and the clubs we raced with for the longer off shore races required them, but not for the closer inshore races.

Cheers!

Chuck

Edited by - on

GaryB
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
4275 Posts

Response Posted - 11/12/2012 : 08:48:53

Here's what Dolivaw posted about his keel wobble from his post on keel bolts -->> [url="http://www.catalina-capri-25s.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=24928&SearchTerms=Fellowship"]Keel Bolts[/url]

On the second page he posts:

quote:
Originally posted by Sloop Smitten

Ron,
Just curious but how did you determine the keel has a wobble? At 1900 lbs I think it would take a sizable force to even "wobble" it. The bolts that OJ shows in his picture look like stainless steel that has disintegrated due to a dissimilar material issue. The cast iron studs and nuts tend to disintegrate into a pile of rust which can be somewhat stabilized by coating the accessible surfaces with a rust stabilizer which chemically bonds to the rust. Since oxidation of iron requires oxygen it could be the studs remaining in the sole/keel have more material left than the visible portion. But nobody knows for sure since the studs are virtually impossible to remove..

We noticed the wobble when they had the boat on the lift for a quickhaul last September. It is very minor, but noticeable when they moved the lift with the boat in the cradle. That yard suggested I tighten the bolts. The new yard is telling me that a little flexing of the glass around the keel is normal when the boat heels and when it's on the lift.

Since we can't actually examine the condition of the bolts between the keel and the stud, and since all other evidence implies there isn't a problem with the bolts, he's recommending that we just keep a close eye on the keel for now. If the wobble gets worse, or we get a Catalina smile due to seam separation, or we see any water in the bilge from the keel, then we'll sister in new bolts. Some of the yards I've talked to have also suggested glassing the keel stub and adding backing plates.

Edited by - GaryB on 11/12/2012 08:54:13

cshaw
Captain

Members Avatar

USA
460 Posts

Response Posted - 11/12/2012 : 08:51:53

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by GaryB
 I was under the impression the areas on TSU that de-laminated were where the boat sat on the bunks from the Hydrohoist. I assumed because this area stays wet for long periods of time after the boat is out of the water that might have been what caused the de-lamination.

I wonder if TSU had a keel support for the keel to sit on when it was up on the hoist? If not, could that have caused stress in the keel area or flexing that eventually resulted in the delamination? I'm sure Derek will chime in.

Also, Dolivaw posted a year or so ago his fin keel had movement when it was out of the water but I think they later determined it was not a problem. Maybe that's just normal for these boats.

And finally, my '89 WK does not have any "athwartship" stringers. I've seen pictures of another '88 or '89 on this forum that did have factory 'athwartship" stringers in the keel area and I believe it was on a WK. Not sure why some boats had them and others didn't.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Hi GaryB!

I am not sure what caused TSU's delamination, or even if Derek knows conclusively the actual cause. Till I was told about the Cal that had the delamination (and subsequent leaking) around the area aft of the keel, I also assumed TSU's delamination was due to an accident or improper chocking or stand configuration in a past haulout that had weakened TSU's hull leading to the delamination. But the more I thought about it, and remembered the hull flex I saw on Confetti in the slings and the storm damaged boat's keel flexed way over, and the Cal's hull failure, the more I wondered about whether that is something older fin keel boats need to watch out for......

I do not think I have ever seen a fixed keel boat in the slings with any type of support for the keel while still hanging in the slings? Obviously the boat is set on the keel (on chocks) when put on the hard, and while balanced on the keel the jackstands are setup to keep her balanced. But the approach is usually to have "most" of the weight of the boat sitting on the keel NOT on the jackstands when on the hard.

Thanks for the heads up on Dolivaw's keel! I will do some research on trying to find that thread. I am hoping the flex I saw is not anything out of the ordinary for our boats, but since Confetti is the fleet leader in age and has also been very actively sailed, I do not want to also find out by going down the same path as Derek suffered with TSU that fatigue stress from 36 years of flexing that leads to subsequent delamination sometime later is something that has a non-trivial chance of happening.

Boats of Confetti's vintage also used resins that were subject to blistering. I know many years ago I had to have all the gelcoat removed and a complete Interlux blister treatment (Barrier coats, etc.) done after a long drying period. And I just did another treatment before launching here in Florida in 2010. I also know that those blisters can also lead to delaminations unless treated. So, that rattles around in the back of whats left of my mind that how much potential damage could have been done before the hull was initially sealed back up etc.?

If you run across the pictures of those stringers you mentioned, please let me know where you found them!!!

Thanks!!!

Chuck

Edited by - on

cshaw
Captain

Members Avatar

USA
460 Posts

Response Posted - 11/12/2012 : 09:02:11

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by GaryB
 Here's what Dolivaw posted about his keel wobble:

quote:
Originally posted by Sloop Smitten

Ron,
Just curious but how did you determine the keel has a wobble? At 1900 lbs I think it would take a sizable force to even "wobble" it. The bolts that OJ shows in his picture look like stainless steel that has disintegrated due to a dissimilar material issue. The cast iron studs and nuts tend to disintegrate into a pile of rust which can be somewhat stabilized by coating the accessible surfaces with a rust stabilizer which chemically bonds to the rust. Since oxidation of iron requires oxygen it could be the studs remaining in the sole/keel have more material left than the visible portion. But nobody knows for sure since the studs are virtually impossible to remove..

We noticed the wobble when they had the boat on the lift for a quickhaul last September. It is very minor, but noticeable when they moved the lift with the boat in the cradle. That yard suggested I tighten the bolts. The new yard is telling me that a little flexing of the glass around the keel is normal when the boat heels and when it's on the lift.

Since we can't actually examine the condition of the bolts between the keel and the stud, and since all other evidence implies there isn't a problem with the bolts, he's recommending that we just keep a close eye on the keel for now. If the wobble gets worse, or we get a Catalina smile due to seam separation, or we see any water in the bilge from the keel, then we'll sister in new bolts. Some of the yards I've talked to have also suggested glassing the keel stub and adding backing plates.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Hi GaryB!

Thanks for the quick finding of the thread! That sounds a LOT like the motion I saw with Confetti's keel while in the slings! It was not a huge pendulum motion, but we did get around a 3" swing on the tip of the keel. I had sistered new stainless keel bolts about 6 years ago, and that whole area is nice and tight. We kicked the side of the keel for 30 minutes in the slings, and video'd the hull all around the keel while we had in swinging side to side, to verify the keel was nice and tightly attached, and the flexing was in the hull on each side of the keel (which would obviously have also flexed the hull aft of the keel somewhat).

Amazingly even at close to #2000, its easy to use that mass (and inertia) to get the keel/hull flexing....... You DO have to kick in a coule of times to get it going however!!!

Thanks again!

Chuck

Edited by - on

GaryB
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
4275 Posts

Response Posted - 11/12/2012 : 09:12:55

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by cshaw
 <blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by GaryB
 I was under the impression the areas on TSU that de-laminated were where the boat sat on the bunks from the Hydrohoist. I assumed because this area stays wet for long periods of time after the boat is out of the water that might have been what caused the de-lamination.

I wonder if TSU had a keel support for the keel to sit on when it was up on the hoist? If not, could that have caused stress in the keel area or flexing that eventually resulted in the delamination? I'm sure Derek will chime in.

Also, Dolivaw posted a year or so ago his fin keel had movement when it was out of the water but I think they later determined it was not a problem. Maybe that's just normal for these boats.

And finally, my '89 WK does not have any "athwartship" stringers. I've seen pictures of another '88 or '89 on this forum that did have factory 'athwartship" stringers in the keel area and I believe it was on a WK. Not sure why some boats had them and others didn't.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Hi GaryB!

I am not sure what caused TSU's delamination, or even if Derek knows conclusively the actual cause. Till I was told about the Cal that had the delamination (and subsequent leaking) around the area aft of the keel, I also assumed TSU's delamination was due to an accident or improper chocking or stand configuration in a past haulout that had weakened TSU's hull leading to the delamination. But the more I thought about it, and remembered the hull flex I saw on Confetti in the slings and the storm damaged boat's keel flexed way over, and the Cal's hull failure, the more I wondered about whether that is something older fin keel boats need to watch out for......

I do not think I have ever seen a fixed keel boat in the slings with any type of support for the keel while still hanging in the slings? Obviously the boat is set on the keel (on chocks) when put on the hard, and while balanced on the keel the jackstands are setup to keep her balanced. But the approach is usually to have "most" of the weight of the boat sitting on the keel NOT on the jackstands when on the hard.

Thanks for the heads up on Dolivaw's keel! I will do some research on trying to find that thread. I am hoping the flex I saw is not anything out of the ordinary for our boats, but since Confetti is the fleet leader in age and has also been very actively sailed, I do not want to also find out by going down the same path as Derek suffered with TSU that fatigue stress from 36 years of flexing that leads to subsequent delamination sometime later is something that has a non-trivial chance of happening.

Boats of Confetti's vintage also used resins that were subject to blistering. I know many years ago I had to have all the gelcoat removed and a complete Interlux blister treatment (Barrier coats, etc.) done after a long drying period. And I just did another treatment before launching here in Florida in 2010. I also know that those blisters can also lead to delaminations unless treated. So, that rattles around in the back of whats left of my mind that how much potential damage could have been done before the hull was initially sealed back up etc.?

If you run across the pictures of those stringers you mentioned, please let me know where you found them!!!

Thanks!!!

Chuck
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

I don't think a few minutes hanging in a sling would make much difference but I've always wondered if putting most of the weight of a boat on the keel when stored on the hard is really a good idea. Seems like the weight should be approx. 50/50 between the keel and the stands to somewhat replicate what the boat is subject to when in the water.

I wonder if the weight of the keel "hanging" while TSU was on the Hydrohoist while the bunks were supporting a different portion of the hull caused stress in the area of the bunks that over time caused the delamination.

Also, I've read on this forum that boats will flex when they are on the hard and it takes some time after the boat is back in the water before the boat takes on it's natural shape again. Maybe that caused some of the issue for TSU by going on and off the hoist frequently?

The reason I mentioned the bunks keep the bottom of TSU wet for long periods of time was because of the blistering issue.

I'm trying to find the thread on the stringers. I'm pretty sure it was some pictures of Frank Hoppers "Fellowship" that showed the stringers. His 1st boat did not have them and the '89 did if I remember correctly.

See my post above for a link to Dolivaw's post on the keel wobble.

Edited by - GaryB on 11/12/2012 09:14:13

Stinkpotter
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

Djibouti
9013 Posts

Response Posted - 11/12/2012 : 10:36:19

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by GaryB
 ...I've always wondered if putting most of the weight of a boat on the keel when stored on the hard is really a good idea. Seems like the weight should be approx. 50/50 between the keel and the stands to somewhat replicate what the boat is subject to when in the water.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">...but the keel pulls down on the hull when in the water, and pushes up on it when supporting the hull on the hard. I've wondered about that, but never saw adverse signs in Passage on the hard. The "stub" to which the keel is bolted is pretty much vertical at the joint, which probably helps it carry that load, and also is probably where most of the side-to-side flexing occurs.

Another potential weak spot is the wood core that's glassed in at the base of the stub. Rot in there would promote the "smile" and flexing. It's been discussed here before, as was replacing it with something less susceptible to water damage. Catalina may not have used it in the last few years, but it appeared to be there in my '85.

Edited by - Stinkpotter on 11/12/2012 10:38:41

cshaw
Captain

Members Avatar

USA
460 Posts

Response Posted - 11/12/2012 : 11:53:52

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Stinkpotter
 ..The "stub" to which the keel is bolted is pretty much vertical at the joint, which probably helps it carry that load, and also is probably where most of the side-to-side flexing occurs.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

I can't say about other boats, but the side to side flexing I videotaped in Confetti's hull started about 4-6 inches outboard of where the stub joins the flat bottom of the hull, and went out to about 12-18 inches from the stub with the largest "deflection" in the hull surface happening about 7-8 inches out from the stub.

Edited by - on

wegman
1st Mate

Members Avatar

USA
35 Posts

Response Posted - 11/13/2012 : 00:39:23

I have two comments on points raised in this thread:

1) My understanding is that when a sailboat is on a trailer or on jackstands, most of the weight (80-90%) should rest on the keel. The hull can be damaged ("dimpled") by point loading.
2) The use of a ball peen hammer has been discussed as a means of tapping the hull to discover delamination (also water intrusion/saturation in the cored section of the deck). I would hesitate to use a ball peen hammer for this purpose, for fear of chipping the gelcoat. Instead, I have used the plastic end of a small screwdriver. Perhaps I am too cautious; others may have used a hammer with good results.

Best,
Jerry

Edited by - on

cshaw
Captain

Members Avatar

USA
460 Posts

Response Posted - 11/13/2012 : 06:07:49

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by wegman
 I have two comments on points raised in this thread:

1) My understanding is that when a sailboat is on a trailer or on jackstands, most of the weight (80-90%) should rest on the keel. The hull can be damaged ("dimpled") by point loading.
2) The use of a ball peen hammer has been discussed as a means of tapping the hull to discover delamination (also water intrusion/saturation in the cored section of the deck). I would hesitate to use a ball peen hammer for this purpose, for fear of chipping the gelcoat. Instead, I have used the plastic end of a small screwdriver. Perhaps I am too cautious; others may have used a hammer with good results.

Best,
Jerry
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Hi Jerry!

Assuming your concern is the keel pushing "up" into the hull (or the hull "sagging down" over the keel), I think your comment 1 is shared by a lot of us. But when you look at a boat yard, every fixed keel sailboat is sitting on her keel. The old "wineglass" shaped hull/keel would certainly flex less that a semi flat run/hard chine hull like a Cat 25, but unless you use a scale under each jackstand, the process of setting up on the hard is not a particularly precise science. If you try carrying too much weight on the jackstands, I think thats where you can get into worse point loading trouble since they bear on thinner sctions of the hull with smaller contact areas.

When I tap test things like drywall looking for studs, or the hull, I use a little machinest's ball peen hammer that has a plastic cover molded over one end of the head. A screwdriver handle also works great. Good caution for folks not to cause problems trying to look for problems!!

Thanks for the reply!!!

Chuck

Edited by - on

Stinkpotter
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

Djibouti
9013 Posts

Response Posted - 11/13/2012 : 08:38:24

Regarding hammer choices, I was referring to what my surveyor used. As I recall, the hammer was quite small and he tapped very lightly--it was the sound he was concerned about, not the feel. Chuck and Jerry--I think you're both saying the same thing about loading the jack-stands. As to my commend about the keel pushing up (rather than pulling down) when blocked like that, I presume Catalina engineered the hull with that in mind, since that's also how it was transported.

Edited by - Stinkpotter on 11/13/2012 08:38:52

GaryB
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
4275 Posts

Response Posted - 11/13/2012 : 18:54:20

When you see boats sitting on the hard in the yard you really can't tell how tight they have the stands up against the hull. In my yard most of the boats are a lot bigger and more heavily constructed so they can probably withstand the stands being much tighter against the hull without deflection.

I would think you could tighten the stands up against our hulls up until the point you just start seeing some deflection then back off slightly. I'm thinking if you do it this way and use 5 - 6 stands you might be able to get close to 50/50 weight distribution.

Then again I could just be full of hot air.

This is just for the boat sitting on the hard in a yard (said the Cat in the Hat)! Putting it on a trailer and taking it down the highway brings on another whole set of things to worry about!

Edited by - on

pastmember
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

2402 Posts

Response Posted - 11/13/2012 : 20:26:57

Did I have stringers?

Edited by - on

cshaw
Captain

Members Avatar

USA
460 Posts

Response Posted - 11/14/2012 : 11:03:48

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by pastmember
 
Did I have stringers?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Hi Frank!!!

Looks like it!!!! What was your hull # and year (I think I heard '89) and keel type (I think I heard wing).

I want to contact Catalina and see how many boats were built with that configuration and why.

Many thanks for the images!!!!!

Chuck

Edited by - on

pastmember
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

2402 Posts

Response Posted - 11/14/2012 : 14:54:59

'89 5943

Edited by - on

cshaw
Captain

Members Avatar

USA
460 Posts

Response Posted - 11/14/2012 : 17:28:58

Edited by - on

GaryB
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
4275 Posts

Response Posted - 11/14/2012 : 18:37:00

My '89 is #5862 and does not have those cross-members/stringers (there's another one on the left edge of Frank's pictures above). Seems like that would really stiffen up keel area. I have nothing in that area.

Frank, how far up under the sole did those "stringers" extend? Did they support the sole?

Honestly, Frank's boat is the only one I've seen built like that.

Frank's boat was definitely an '89 wing keel.

Did anyone download all of his pictures before they were pulled off the internet last summer? I had most of them but lost them when my hard drive crashed.

Edited by - on

Tomas Kruska
Admiral

Members Avatar

Czech Republic
522 Posts

Response Posted - 11/15/2012 : 02:26:35

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by GaryB
Did anyone download all of his pictures before they were pulled off the internet last summer? I had most of them but lost them when my hard drive crashed.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Sure I have, this is one of the jewels from my inspiration library

Download link available for next 19 days: http://leteckaposta.cz/168953811

Edited by - on

glivs
Admiral

Members Avatar

USA
822 Posts

Response Posted - 11/15/2012 : 08:58:21

Not sure why Frank's pics just disappeared but...to the topic be careful we are not talking apples and oranges here. My bilge looks like Frank's but my impression was those cross members were to support the cabin sole. I investigated one because the sole was soft underfoot. The cause was the tabbing holding the cross member was poorly done and the cross member was too short to reach the hull. I forced a 2x2 wedge in place to carry the sole, but redoing the tabbing hasn't worked its way up my todo list yet to correct.

Edited by - on

Stinkpotter
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

Djibouti
9013 Posts

Response Posted - 11/15/2012 : 09:29:19

Many aspects of a boat's design are intentionally part of the structure that stiffens the hull. "Stringers" that go from the hull to the deck or sole are generally referred to as a grid, and the overall grid can include bulkheads that make the deck and cabin trunk part of a big box structure--like the unit-body on a car. If Frank's stringers go from the cabin sole all the way down into the keel sump, I'd say someone (presumably Catalina) intended to stiffen the hull around the keel. From this discussion, that sounds like a good idea.

Edited by - Stinkpotter on 11/15/2012 09:29:44

GaryB
Master Marine Consultant

Members Avatar

USA
4275 Posts

Response Posted - 11/15/2012 : 20:31:24

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by glivs
 Not sure why Frank's pics just disappeared but...
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
I don't remember exactly but it seems like the site Frank kept his pictures on closed down or he got tired of paying to keep them on a site.

Who know's, I'm just glad Tomas saved them. Could they be loaded into the Photo Gallery?

Edited by - on

Page: of 2

Topic

New Topic

Topic Locked

Printer Friendly

Jump To:

Association Forum

Notice: The advice given on this site is based upon individual or quoted experience, yours may differ.
The Officers, Staff and members of this site only provide information based upon the concept that anyone utilizing this information does so at their own risk and holds harmless all contributors to this site.