New, new and new

Discussion in 'Metal Boat Building' started by yofish, May 1, 2014.

  1. yofish

    yofish Previous Member

    The little green machine works fine (by luck) because with .047 there is plenty of headroom left which, because of its duty limitations I'll seldom use. There is no synergic functions here - the drive motor voltage is independent as far as I can tell. The whole idea was avoid too much monkey-motion. I have a Miller PSA-2 and a WC-24's that I could have used but that was contrary to the plan. Given how little I'll use it, adjusting wire speed on the box is no biggie.

    I hate out of shop work myself but I live across the Bay in the summer and people are always bugging me......and, I have too many fisherman friends that I like to help out. Having seined for years in LCI, I feel their pain!

    Wow! What a world we live in! That I make a statement that 'I don't suffer tools' (replace the first letter in the last word) and it gets chopped. Amazing. I wasn't even directing it to anyone just making a general statement. I suppose if a guy was bored he could test the algorithm for vulnerabilities.

    Yes, I use butts for the longs. I understand the method of using water lines but how does that work with slotted transverse frames? I see a problem in getting the right dimension (length of bar) fore and aft between stations. The tension that the bar has to be in would be tough, I think, to control as you were folding it up? With using butts, the only things in tension are the bottom plates. Everything else is static - a skeleton wanting for a skin. When I visualize, I like that concept - an uninterrupted framework that wants to be covered. I can visualize using water lines but I can't visualize how to easily do it. I can dig using diags, but it seems like a lot of work and does not comport with my visualization of uninterruption. I can certainly understand how much stronger that would be because of being more or less perpendicular to hull plates. BUT! I think that too much work for the average schmo skiff. I'm quite aware that I may have my head stuffed with cabbage but so far, so good on things working out. For sure, curved elements like chine flats, sheer flats and longs (as I'm doing) burn serious material. That is a real negative. But then there is the materials over time thang, no?

    Kevin, I'm not clear what you mean by - "If I understand your current method is to design the bottom hull panels (and topside?) with a straight line from keel to chine? and a second line from chine to sheer?"

    "Then working fore and aft from about amidships, you put the panels AND the framing together working from the middle "outward"? Yes, but it's not linear. you don't just go to the next station and zip it up but have done a little work on the station ahead of that one in concert. You can't get too far ahead with welding the V (the frames won't fit) but you can't get too far behind either (the V will gap). You have to push the longs down to the hull plates and sometimes, either from the outside or inside, push or pull the hull plating to the longs. This sequencing is especially important when you get to the 'where's the beef' part towards the bow. Also very important is to keep the transverse elements vertical! Man, if you don't do that there is hell to pay. The skiff in the pics had a deck pitched aft with that angle broke at the tops of the frames and it stayed in a plane.

    This method allows the sheets to lay to the framing drawn?" Correct. That is, if you mean that the frames and longs land on lines marked on the hull plates? Like I said, it's tough to trust the machine but so far I've been so impressed that I'm recklessly emboldened.

    Funny you bring it up but have Delft free version on my computer. I just couldn't get behind the approach. Like any old brain, I stick with what I know. As I understand it, Delft uses a mesh to control surface geometry and ProSurf is NURBS and thus is more discretely controllable. I think what turned me off, right off, is that it does not have a default for a hard chined boat. Also, when it 'unfolded' geometry, it did everything together and not discrete surfaces. This is what I experienced, I'm sure (?) that there are ways to do what I wanted it to do but I just wasn't willing to spend the time to figure it out. I think the most important thing for me is that ProSurf can really surface model in the true sense. It is specific to boats, yes, but I think you may have seen a sculpture that I did for an artist friend over at the green site? If Delft can do that, I'm ears. The ability to join together infinitely extensible surfaces is very cool. ProSurf can do what a very expensive surface modeling program can do, it just won't anticipate what you want it to do and do it automatically. If you wanted to take the time, you could model ANY three dimensional surface in ProSurf. Can you tell I'm big on PS?
     
  2. Kevin Morin
    Joined: May 2013
    Posts: 83
    Likes: 10, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 72
    Location: Kenai, AK

    Kevin Morin Junior Member

    design/build sequence for welded aluminum skiffs

    Yofish, I did notice the butts as longs layout doesn't nest as well as some other arrangements where the curves are (like diagonals) 'flatter' so they lay together closer on the blank, somewhat saving material.

    I've not done the diagonals frame approach but if I understand it correctly they'd notch into the transverse like any other long, and they'd be tacked/hung into their slots by a coupled dimes at the upper most/inner most edges. Then when the plate is placed down, if the hull is inverted or pulled up if the hull is upright- they can be pulled/clamped pushed to the plate as easily as any other long in a notched transverse frame.

    In regards my questions about the body section plans layout- I was asking about the design of the transverse frames outer edges. Are they a straight line from the keel edge to the inner chine? Or is that line along the outer edge of the transverse frame a camber? is there bulge to the bottom and topsides panels outward? I was learning if your design method used straight lines between the keel and chine then from the chine to sheer OR: if those lines were convex/bulged/cambered outward from the keel plane?

    [​IMG]

    here is a body plan of a little 14'er and the sections show the bulge/camber/convex line I'm asking about. Keel to inner chine - not straight, then outer chine to sheer- not straight. I was trying to find out if you're drawing these lines, in the body plan, as straight or as (very slight) curves- shown here?

    I think I see the tack up, work flow you're describing. But the main point I was making was that you're not going from the stern to the bow OR working from the bow aft- instead you're working more or less from amidships toward both ends?

    I'm not suggesting that is even frame by even frame, but in the general work; you balance the framing tack up around a midships beginning? That is totally unique in my experience, I've always worked from stern to bow on the bottom then from the bow to stern on the topsides.

    Regarding D'ship, the mesh is on the surface but you are correct it is a mesh not NUBS on the surface until you fair the mesh to obtain them. The method is to push/pull the mesh, then align the mesh into a series of rows of points then 'fair' them into NURBS.

    I do realize it's not an interface that appeals to everyone, but it was so close to Rhino's mesh and surface manipulation that it seemed obvious, after the time I'd spent in that application. (not that I'm a RhinoPro by any means)

    The hard chine default is another item, D'ship's default takes several steps of selection then invoking a hard chine command to convert their default to hard chine, but after a few models I often work from an existing file so I don't see the 'new' model much.

    In D'ship you have to make separate surfaces into individual layers to get them to be separate developed plates/shapes. If you don't separate the mesh into individual layers- not separate pieces to unfold. The unfold feature does have stress areas, and the fairing using both surface irregularities and Bezier curves on the surfaces are all there, they're just invoked and worked with in slightly different work flows than PSurf.

    None of these less expensive marine surface design packages have the 'suite' of all tools like MaxSurf's extensive and expansive set of expensive software tools. But then you can buy a new diesel double cab for a full version of those high end 'do-it-all' packages. There you can model then develop and clean up tool tolerances, make notches, and nesting, add holes and equipment allowances and then export to a cutting table in half dozen versions of G code. But you pay for the more extensive application.

    D'Ship can do the column's patterns easily but Rhino is where I'd work on something like that, or even SketchUP has plenty of horsepower to do those long sweet curves.

    I've found after teaching CAD for years that interface or HMI/look and feel is the key to comfortable use. Some people prefer methods of one programmer over another. If the work gets done, it really doesn't matter what application is used to do it. The only time it matters is in cost for features used.

    Cheers,
    Kevin Morin
    Kenai
     
  3. Mr Efficiency
    Joined: Oct 2010
    Posts: 10,278
    Likes: 989, Points: 113, Legacy Rep: 702
    Location: Australia

    Mr Efficiency Senior Member

    That 14 footer does not look to be developable ?
     
  4. Kevin Morin
    Joined: May 2013
    Posts: 83
    Likes: 10, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 72
    Location: Kenai, AK

    Kevin Morin Junior Member

    Mr. Efficiency,
    here is a screen shot of the Delftship outlines of the development of that skiff.

    [​IMG]

    I did a small clean up of one or two edges as the program seems to have issues with decks intersection sides in some cases but these are the outputs used to cut. The transom is in halves, as are the stern 'step' parts shown in halves- with more numbers than sheet.

    [​IMG]

    she turned out fair and fairly close to her lines, for a 2.5mm 5052 hull. I'd have preferred using 5086 but that alloy wasn't handy at the time I cut this skiff's hull. MIG welding was this thin was something I should have practiced more to do, but it went OK, but not as small as the welds should have been.

    [​IMG]

    I did add some additional convex shapes to the various panels' original layouts by adding a little more curvature to the ends of the transom verticals, and a small amount of the bow stem.

    I did not try to model the bow piece I cut into the hull after she was tacked up.

    [​IMG]

    she worked out as the software showed it would? I did the layout scaling by hand, using a grid on the plates, then battened with extrusions and cut with a jig saw as the material was thin.

    [​IMG]

    final skiff w/ her paint job and locker covers.

    Cheers,
    Kevin Morin
     
  5. yofish

    yofish Previous Member

    Kevin, I too thought the bottom 'undevelopable'. This based on how I would anticipate ProSurf would handle it. Not to say that ProSurf couldn't do it by having an extra row in the bottom plate nurbs that was not a knuckle and could be massaged outward. Otherwise, starting with the default hard chine surface modeling module, I can (pretty much?) guarantee that it would not on its own describe the bottom geometry as in your drawing. Here is a screenshot of the project bow-on split amidships, showing butts in blue and the collision bulkhead in red, all the rest of the lines are the surface nurb rows and columns which have to be toggled on in order to see the outward shape of the boat in this view. In the side view the interior rows and columns are toggled off. The side view has the One bug I have about Prosurf is that it does not export in DXF the hull cut colors which would really help to dig them out of a drawing. I hope this answers your other questions.

    BTW, that a handsome looking finished project!
     

    Attached Files:

  6. yofish

    yofish Previous Member

    Kevin, looking at your plate development, does not Dship output stations etc? This is what I'd send to the cutter, the interior markings for frames and butts would be done in felt pen. This is direct from Prosurf, no need to manipulate other than perhaps to annotate or color code for the cutter.
     

    Attached Files:

  7. Kevin Morin
    Joined: May 2013
    Posts: 83
    Likes: 10, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 72
    Location: Kenai, AK

    Kevin Morin Junior Member

    developed shapes

    Yofish, yes, I had the mesh of the bottom expanded to several rows of nodes/knots and they were faired long-wise and transversely to make this slight bulge or convex shape.

    I was asking above how you were handling that aspect and what I understand is that in your designs (I think I see that in the body plan above?) you're using straight lines where I'm used cambered lines?

    I've been in the habit of exporting the intersections/hull cuts as three separate files and if I added some diagonals for cutting I'd export them separately as well, then nesting them in Acad is pretty simple. I don't even recall if the lines come through in color- I don't think so but can't recall?

    Yes D'ship will export xverse frames but I was asking about was the design process of 'judging' or rule of thumb for the bulge shown in the body plan above- the one that looks 'UN-developable'.

    I used to do this with ruling lines off a conic projection (thankfully days gone by as long as their are PC's) but I don't have more than my past experiences to guide this and I was asking if you had a method?

    The affect of this tiny convex addition is a very small change in the outline curvatures, that is the developed shape of a panel with the bulge would be just outside (not unfortunately uniformly or evenly) the curves of a panel that did not have the transverse sections' subtle convexity. Just trying to learn from others if you were doing something to gauge those shapes in body plan?

    I find in thinner materials that the bow sections are pretty fair due to the tension form pulling in the 'orange peel' but the after sections tend to be distorted from just one or two 'hot ' welds. So to help fight weld distortion I've been in the habit of cupping or tensioning the outer surface by cambering the transverse jig or permanent frames.

    It may not be good practice as I could probably drop wire size and fillet sizes way down to make more proportional weld and avoid contraction distortion? But, I've done it this way when building by eye for so long that when I began to draw on the PC it was automatic to try to 'estimate' the curvatures- so I asked as its been a headache for me.

    Cheers,
    Kevin Morin
    Kenai
     
  8. yofish

    yofish Previous Member

    Kevin, my method is to let the program dictate the convexity - I only manipulate the surface edges, even the chine flat is an independant surface and not a knuckle row in the bottom. The picture is not clear enough to show the convexity in the collision bulkhead but it's there as you can see in this DWG. However the program calculates that I'll never know but I do know that everything comes together as it should. This holds true for all surfaces as the side panels will show the same, especially toward the bow. The only straight lines I've seen PS produce is a two point polyline, Even lines that appear straight have numerous points, reflecting curvature.

    I need to edit my 'I think I know'. In fact, one will find lines that have multiple points and are straight in PS. My apologies, BONGO was entirely WRONGO.

    Even though I've only done two this way I must say that any problem that I've encountered was from operator error. It's rather shocking how 'right-on' it is.
     

    Attached Files:

  9. yofish

    yofish Previous Member

    OK, after an interlude of assorted and various tangents I'm actually putting the concept to the test. One of the tangents was my ancient HP 36" plotter deciding to get owly but she righted herself so off we go....The first pic is of my nominal shop; 20 X 40 with a 10 X 16 tool room off to the starboard, a door under the antlers there. It houses my beloved and almost worthless 1973 Atlas lathe from Seward Fish. But as a smart man once told me, 'any lathe is better than no lathe.' The back door leads to the 10 X 20 office. I am embarrassed that I have never cleared my *** out of it long enough to have someone put down cement - but it works.

    So we move to dear Brian, the best cut-out guy I've ever worked with, who miraculously returned after a failed (not because of him) boat repair (fiberglass outfit) adventure in Seward, cutting out parts. Lordy, that's the part where these old knees appreciates his youthful knees abundantly. The knees, the back and the saw in a completely unnatural relationship to one another have taken a toll.

    So what's left is all kind of obvious and dry; we transfer the patterns from the paper plots by pouncing then connect the dots with a baton. Let the first generation of a part lead to the second but no further. I've gone 'round with scribe vs. sharpie but in the end I'm with Mr. sharpie because the pressure of a metal stylus against the baton distorts. This is something that the youthful guy gently corrected the old guy in his thinking. Brian says, "Hey, I just remove the black, or leave the black depending, so what's the diff? And, he's right. It is quite true that as you get old you become less flexible, and not just physically. Being around youth is (well, at least maybe) an elixir.

    To Kevin, I assume you've been out of harms way? When we drove back from ANC on the 20th we didn't know about the fire. When we popped out of Cooper Landing it was astounding with the pyrocumulonimbus clouds! Breathtaking. We stopped at the Troopers in Soldotna because the way south looked bad but the fire generated winds moved the bad parts aloft. I moved here in ’69 with the Swanson River fire, which is nothing in comparison.

    Last, how in the hell does one put pics where they want them, as in between explanations? Every other forum I use has that is a direct and obvious feature.
     

    Attached Files:

  10. Kevin Morin
    Joined: May 2013
    Posts: 83
    Likes: 10, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 72
    Location: Kenai, AK

    Kevin Morin Junior Member

    Layout and Cutting

    Yofish, we're well North of the burn area and with the last few days of rain (here) I expect it will be contained in the next week or so?

    I don't use paper to do the layouts as I feel the grid method is just as fast when all is said and done? I do use proportional cross section battens to fair the points on the take off grid that I do in CAD. The scaling process is then 'faired' by the batten correcting any measuring & layout errors resulting in a clean curve.

    As to marking for a cut, I prefer to use the black permanent marker pen to make a line next to the batten, then I follow with a tungsten and cut the line next to the batten, which I don't find moves during this line scribing. Then I end up with a shiny, extra fine line, in a black background and that seems to give best/good visibility and allows the sawyer to follow the line as accurately as he's able. I usually use the Halogen lights at the cut to increase visibility and help the sawyer with either a vacuum or blow out air to clear chips.

    I then dress these cut edges, along their length, with a Vixen file to get the cut edge finish I prefer to weld and so far at least, I make good wages doing this work over having the hull cut by NC. My problem to date w/NC is the handling costs not the cutting costs.

    I seem to get a cost per foot of cut but the cartage and re-palleting of the material makes the net service much more than layout and cut wages? If a metal supplier were to provide the materials from their own stock, AND the cutting services in house, then packaged the cut boat into a flat wrapped package for shipment: Maybe that would be more affordable? But so far, I've not had cut service quotes low enough (total cartage + handling + repack) to accept the service as cost effective?

    (I generally don't use framing to tack up the hull form and then fit what I want inside after the hull is up.)

    I don't leave any images online as attachments as a rule or thumb. I have my images hosted at Photobucket, but there are lots of online/cloud storage services. Then as I'm typing the text of the post I put the link to this online service's file listing and the site displays the image. At the menu bar above is an icon of a yellow square with a mountain in it (?) and I think that will allow an image insert?

    My inserts, like the one below, begin with [ IMG ] but I added spaces so it will not be 'read' as an image link. Then they close with [ / IMG ] therefore the link to the "http://site_address_URL.jpg" is in between the two [] 'limiters' of the character string, this set of end characters allows the BBC software to display that image from the link not a stored file here at this site.

    [​IMG]

    This image file is actually stored at Photobucket.com site in my 'library' not on this site and is linked using the [ IMG ] and the end [ / IMG ] bracketing text ( I added the spaces so they will show up as text.)

    Cheers,
    Kevin Morin
    Kenai, AK
     
  11. yofish

    yofish Previous Member

    Down the road a bit....

    So here we are actually putting the Legos together. 16 hrs of cut out for Brian with me helping, hovering and even making last minute changes. The only thing not cut is the deck and the euro-swimstep-transom as no curves are involved thus no need for the computer. The stage shown in these pics was one hour of me and the clients kid who wanted to have a part in snapping the Legos together.

    Kevin, thanks for the explanation of how to do the pictures. I'm a slug and won't do that! I'm spoiled because all the other forums I frequent have a much simpler and more direct way. Absent that, I'll explain by pointing to the first pic which shows the sequence of tacking the framing in. 2 is blind (not slotted for the longs) but the two aft of it are. The longs are 1/4" x 3" rec. bar. The slots are cut oversize vertically so a wedge can be inserted to drive the bar down to the hull plating - shown in third pic. The transverse frames do not extend to the side plates, that is unnecessary to do for any structural reason and can be 'pieced in' if one wishes to make a station watertight. It also makes fitting the decks a hell of a lot easier. And what is that makes vertical welds on side plates so damned visible? The reason 2 is not slotted is that forward of it the longs are so curved that they can't be bullied into place and thus are cut.

    I think I mentioned earlier my loathing of hull stiffener. I like this method (maybe) only for that! Oh, also notice that the limbers were forgot to be cut in the bars at the frames; just little V's that do that duty nicely. Of course, we assume that they are unnecessary anyway unless she gets holed.

    So far so good. I did encounter some minor problems that may be plotter related but nothing serious.

    Kevin, I'm with you on the cost/benefit of having someone cut. AK COP & BRASS does outstanding work but they are PRICEY. My plaz efforts have been across the board but frankly, I know that I haven't spent enough time at finding the right vendor. So, I pay Brian $30 an hour to cut = $480. I'm happy, he's happy. I like supporting the local economy.

    BTW, I don't know if you've looked at the Everlast site for awhile but it's kind of gotten hilarious. While I'm doing this skiff I've had side jobs. Right now I'm doing a roller install on a nose-picker for a young man that I've known since he was born (only reason I'm doing it) and that damn little welder really impresses me.
     

    Attached Files:

  12. Kevin Morin
    Joined: May 2013
    Posts: 83
    Likes: 10, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 72
    Location: Kenai, AK

    Kevin Morin Junior Member

    Skiff Build Progress

    Yofish, pics are great, if small! I'd have enjoyed more zoom with less pixelation but still got the basics clearly enough.

    If your fitter can layout and cut for 500 then you've got a gold mine there! I'd have paid twice that and been happy for that amount of work!

    Green Welder site was talking apples to oranges, steel videos were used to substitute for aluminum so I haven't been back. If we're not on the same song sheet there's not much to discuss. Might as well conflate steel with aluminum, "Yep they're metals alright!" "Hey! look at the time... I gotta go."

    They're a little defensive there about their products so not much to learn from those who have that much less experience than even an old guy like me. I'll stick with the Red MIG and Blue TIG until I see reason to change.

    Looking forward to the (next) assembly pictures, I'm getting tempted to drive down and visit the shop and see her myself, weather's sure nice enough to make that a nice day.

    Cheers,
    Kevin Morin
    Kenai
     
  13. yofish

    yofish Previous Member

    After the day job, I stood up the last two stations. I'm two-blocked until I can find my ratchet straps that will pull over the last frame on split pipe to protect them. The first pic is 'hey! remember to stick the longs in before you get too frisky!'. I'm embarrassed to say that I've forgotten to. I'm pleased that the tops of the stations are nuts on (ok, one is out a 1/16th, damn you Brian) and the longs are tracking shape. The only puzzle is that somehow they started 3/16ths inboard of layout then ended up on; hmmmm.

    I realize that I've forgotten to give some important particulars. The Bottom plate is .190. The frames, decks and sides are .160. These could all be .125 but frankly, at the stage of my down-slope career, I just don't want the hassle. I've already said what the longs were and they could certainly be skimpier but I know the client and that fact dictated a little more beef. The frames could be lightened but as the chap from down under said, "Why?" The 20 pounds, to me, isn't worth the effort but it does look cool in all those SpecMar plans. As one can see, the frames are slotted for 1/8" wall, 1" x 2" rec. tube. Power is to be a new, unproven Merc 115 4 stroke that weighs 50# less than it's antecedent. I care less what flavor the client wants. I'm a Yammy guy myself but will change in a heartbeat should something better come along. All I know is that an outboard motor is WORST investment (if you could call it that) that a person could ever possibly make.

    About the picture size - I started a thread about me blowing up early pre-1898 Mauser actions that got rather involved with so many pics (large) that I exceeded the limit and had to delete early pics to make room for the later. That was a bummer, since then I've kept them smaller. Not that this thread would ever meet the threshold but that's what I do now. In the case of the Mausers it was important to show detail, I thought. If there is anything in particular, I'd be happy to accommodate.

    Kevin, c'mon down.
     

    Attached Files:

  14. Kevin Morin
    Joined: May 2013
    Posts: 83
    Likes: 10, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 72
    Location: Kenai, AK

    Kevin Morin Junior Member

    Deck Frame

    Yofish, that's an interesting choice of deck frame longs. If I understand you're using rectangular tubing extrusion? Not sure I see the reasoning for the "2nd angle" that is I've done a couple decks and angles seemed to do the job so doubling the angle- using rectangular box tube seems like you had a reason for the box stock?

    Yes attachments seem to have their own rules on most of the phpBB type of Forum sites? I use the online or cloud service so the images are handy to manipulate size, crop, edit and all that- before linking. That way I can show a bigger image in the text of the post, mostly to do illustrations not as important with images but then I usually try for the 800x600 rough size.

    I find that I have to almost always fiddle with the light settings in my 'automatic' camera so I usually take the raw photos and edit the lighting or brightness and color hues and sometime sharpen them up a bit in Photoshop. Then I tend to save them to a smaller size than the camera takes say about 800 wide. That will usually fit in most Forums as an linked image, not all of course but most, and I only read a few and post at fewer.

    Lightening holes in the frames are not as clear to me either, I mean lots of times I see them, then do a quick calculation of the wt saved, material is still purchased, and the total wt is often so small that I'm confused why the effort was spent? I know if the parts are cut NC, the cost may be low to get precision holes, and perhaps some designs are so critical for wt they contribute to the design's performance. But most of my designs seem to end up with about 400 to 800 deck load, so why was I spending time lightening the frames?

    Yes, I agree with you about outboard engines; I don't want to start whining about my (poor) impression of outboards' values versus costs! I know they're more and more 'economical' and 'reliable' but then I'm really happiest with a converted rolling vehicle inboard or a marine diesel so I'll just have to accept that I'm behind the times.

    I may be down to see the skiff, if I'm fast enough and she's not gone before I get there? I need some stuff from Redden/Gear Shed and there's no other way to get it but come to the store myself.

    We'll see how this project goes, I'm helping a young friend make a little hydro from dead plant parts and goop, I need to come to the Gear Shed to get epoxy components.

    Cheers,
    Kevin Morin
    Kenai
     

  15. yofish

    yofish Previous Member

    I finally finished the day job and found the straps to pull up the bow. Then I borrowed the neighbor to help put the chines on. I now know that something happened either in plotting or my chopping up the plate developments because there are discrepancies in butt ends matching width wise. Not enough to cry about but still irritating. Except for the these small issues, so far so good. All the longs banged down where they belonged with a nice edge-to-surface contact.

    Kevin, my reasoning behind the tube is 'two cords are better than one', stiffer and easier to weld around for watertight areas and the same weight as 1/4 x 1 x 2 angle. I've used both. I realize that plug welding on 1/8" is not the best idea but I notice a lot of builders use it for this.

    I have one more commitment across the Bay and then I'll be able to devote more time to this project.

    The last pic is trippy and messes with the head for the reflections.
     

    Attached Files:

Forum posts represent the experience, opinion, and view of individual users. Boat Design Net does not necessarily endorse nor share the view of each individual post.
When making potentially dangerous or financial decisions, always employ and consult appropriate professionals. Your circumstances or experience may be different.