Boat Design Forums  |  Boat Design Directory  |  Boat Design Gallery  |  Boat Design Book Store  |  Thanks to Our Site Sponsors

Go Back   Boat Design Forums > Design > Sailboats
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-07-2007, 04:11 PM
drnick's Avatar
drnick drnick is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Rep: 10 Posts: 29
Location: england
sweeping spreaders/moving chainplates

hi guys, i am adapting an old IOR 50' for shorthanded cruising. to stabilise the mast and reduce the need for runners i am intending to sweep the spreaders by about 20 degrees - this necessitates moving the shroud termination aft by about 19" and inboard about 3.3" while reusing the existing spreaders.

my question concerns how extensively i will need to provide extra reinforcement in either the hull or deck to accommodate the moved shroud termination. the accompanying pics provide some detail - i hope they come out, the final pic poorly illustrates the current 'D' rings (arrowed, aluminium construction) and the one of the through deck shows the same pieces either side along with a point 19" aft.

moving the shroud 19" aft places the new termination just to one side of these existing D rings. does all the force that is generated as the shroud comes under load translate into compression through the deck? ie can i simply provide in effect a further 'spreader' at deck level to accomodate the change? or to what extent should i replicate the existing strengthining but shifted 19" aft?
Attached Thumbnails
sweeping spreaders/moving chainplates-shroud-termination.jpg  sweeping spreaders/moving chainplates-starboard-chainplate.jpg  sweeping spreaders/moving chainplates-portdrings.jpg  

sweeping spreaders/moving chainplates-through-deck.jpg  
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 12-07-2007, 04:58 PM
lazeyjack lazeyjack is offline
Previous Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Rep: 0 Posts: 0
hi there I would like to help as alloy is my trade,
do you mean tension, there is no compression except on the mast
You pics are not so clear, if you email me some I will help , whatever you do it is going to need fabrication,
that boat is a not so very well built I can see small throat thickness on fillets, but she has held together!!
you see that big weldment on the boast bottom plates, well if you took that link from your new chainplate to that weldment as it is , how much angle will there be ?
good idea tho sweeping spreaders, runners are really a pain

cheers
Stu
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-07-2007, 08:17 PM
drnick's Avatar
drnick drnick is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Rep: 10 Posts: 29
Location: england
stu, im not a welder so i will leave it to others to comment on the quality of the construction but she should be reasonably well built coming out of a yard that was producing americas cup boats back in the 80s. maybe the small throat thickness was to save money?

if i take the link in the weldment back about 13" it will then be above the last of the large ribs (arrowed in attached pick) and will be in line with the new swept apreaders which come back from the mast at 20 degrees.

the angle now will be approx 11 degrees from vertical, currently the rod coming down to the weldment sits at approx 15 degrees from vertical. the rod will of course now also be projecting away from the horizontal in line amidships axis by 20 degrees.
Attached Thumbnails
sweeping spreaders/moving chainplates-starboard-chainplate.jpg  
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 12-07-2007, 09:00 PM
lazeyjack lazeyjack is offline
Previous Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Rep: 0 Posts: 0
yes a lot of those racers were built save weight, shifting the link rod aft looks fine to me , even if the pull is not strictly in line,

Doing it that way was very good,
Sounds like you know zakkly what you a re doing, sound like you will circumnavigate?
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 12-07-2007, 09:16 PM
drnick's Avatar
drnick drnick is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Rep: 10 Posts: 29
Location: england
stu, you are correct. i am an expert at making it up as i go along the boat is in the usa at the minute - hauled out for the winter. the plan is to fix her up and take her back home to nz, start a family and then teach my kids how to sail - once ive learnt myself!

as for these modifications, im only cribbing from other peoples ideas. i will likely put some extra strenghtening in the deck/coachroof to put my mind at ease. if the attachment to the weldment is forward of the last big rib (as arrowed above) do you think it will be strong enough or will i need to extend the weldment further aft (away from the heads)?
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 12-08-2007, 07:29 AM
CT 249 CT 249 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Rep: 286 Posts: 1,140
Location: Sydney Australia
What design is she????
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 12-08-2007, 09:10 AM
drnick's Avatar
drnick drnick is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Rep: 10 Posts: 29
Location: england
german frers from 1985, originaly built for the owners of amway.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 12-08-2007, 03:37 PM
lazeyjack lazeyjack is offline
Previous Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Rep: 0 Posts: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by drnick;
stu, you are correct. i am an expert at making it up as i go along the boat is in the usa at the minute - hauled out for the winter. the plan is to fix her up and take her back home to nz, start a family and then teach my kids how to sail - once ive learnt myself!

as for these modifications, im only cribbing from other peoples ideas. i will likely put some extra strenghtening in the deck/coachroof to put my mind at ease. if the attachment to the weldment is forward of the last big rib (as arrowed above) do you think it will be strong enough or will i need to extend the weldment further aft (away from the heads)?
my bus was in NZ building alloy yachts
pm me and we can talk, be neat
i just bought a 38 footer, in UK, Finot group, Frers is my fave designer, but i could never afford him
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 12-08-2007, 05:41 PM
drnick's Avatar
drnick drnick is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Rep: 10 Posts: 29
Location: england
stu, im not sure i can afford him either!!
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 12-09-2007, 07:05 AM
Tridente YD Tridente YD is offline
Enrique Mich
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Rep: 10 Posts: 2
Location: Italy / Argentina
DrNick,

I'm not going to make comments about the boat structure.

But I would like to give you some advise regarding the mast.
If you use the same spreaders and change the angle you are going to have less CPW (chainplate width). Doing that you are going to have more mast compresion. And with the angle of the spreaders you can take off the runners but you are going to have a ''new moment'' on the mast. For these two things you problaby need more Inertia in your mast.

Ok, now the probably solution, make the mast SHORTER, make LONGER NEW SPREADERS?? or BOTHS??
Maybe you allready thought this mast issue?

Regards,
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 12-09-2007, 01:47 PM
drnick's Avatar
drnick drnick is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Rep: 10 Posts: 29
Location: england
the distance from the mast centre to the chain plate is 4.55' or 9.1' between the two chain plates. sweeping the spreaders by 20 degrees should by my calculation - cosA . 4.55' = 4.28' reduce the CPW by 0.27' x 2 or aprox 0.55' which i calculate as about 6% of the existing CPW - is that significant??
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 12-11-2007, 07:00 AM
yipster's Avatar
yipster yipster is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Rep: 1027 Posts: 3,269
Location: netherlands
reading some books here its probably a well wired slim light weight racing mast
diamonds and shrouding should not bend that mast onder compression or it may come down
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 12-11-2007, 01:24 PM
drnick's Avatar
drnick drnick is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Rep: 10 Posts: 29
Location: england
the mast section is slim but the mast weight is high, the alloy extrusion is thick walled. under the IOR rating there was no penalty for the reduced mast diameter so they made them thin sectioned to reduce windage - but they made them thick walled and consequently heavy. also the rigging is navtec rod, not wire.
Reply With Quote
Reply



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pivoting Spreaders Scott Carter Sailboats 8 06-20-2007 12:55 PM
Spreaders: Pivot or not Scott Carter Sailboats 2 02-12-2007 10:41 AM
chainplates Lunde Wooden Boat Building and Restoration 0 10-08-2005 02:02 PM
Deck sweeping sails DSmith Sailboats 23 04-26-2005 05:00 PM
sidelights mounted on spreaders? pdq123 Electrical Systems 2 12-29-2004 01:02 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:36 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Web Site Design and Content Copyright ©1999 - 2012 Boat Design Net