Transverse frame calculation

So, notwithstanding all the false structural philosophy and ignoring poor quality detailing, I’ll address your costings/build time then.

Firstly, I’m shocked at the lack of any detail, secondly the lack of any attempt at being professional in your approach to your claim about being cheaper, by listed out in a way a child would if asked what he wants to take with him when going camping.

Before we embark (pun intended). Your are providing a design/method for someone to build their own boat, on the cheap. Great no problems with that. But, I can see immediately from your reply below, that you have zero regard for the nature of the sea, the whole environment and the safety of those onboard. Safety is paramount, the No.1 issue that must be addressed by anyone thinking about going to sea, period!

If there is one aspect of the boat any boat, that must be high quality, it is penetrations through the hull. The area is submerged in a corrosive sea environment 24/7 and must be of the highest quality you can pay for, bar none. Buying from a scrap yard, how do you know grade of metal it is, how it was manufactured, how long will the service life be, if I have to god forbid replace it…where do I get another exactly the same??

So, no price for the welding rod. No price for the gas consumables. No price for the electricity used, no price for driving around shop to shop finding these cheap bits….etc etc.

Ok, let me get this straight. You say 90 hours to build. Steel costs $8,000.

You say it costs you $17,000.

So, that is $17,000 less material $8,000 = $9,000.

Lets look at the chap who took 350 hours. His time is free, right?...since that is your whole MO.

If you are advocating others to build their boat on the cheap, for near free, then the new owner has just lost $9,000. Since if they are building it themselves, because their time is free (which is your whole M.O.), they have just lost $9,000, by paying YOU to build. I thought this was DIY???

This equates to you charging $100 per hour. Well, I think professional boat builders who build these boats would not charge $100/ph….yet you seem to think your costs are cheaper?

Why would someone buy cheap plans, then pay a $100/ph for you to build it?..what is it about $100/ph that is cheap?


As for the rest, no real hours logged at all, just guesses and the appearance of being easy. Since when:

Why go to all the trouble to save money, when clearly your clients are buying brand new and have it professionally installed?

Are you serious? Dirty, smelly old used carpet, in a brand new boat, a persons DREAM…you are advocating putting in dirty old smelly carpet, to save money.

The list below is not a cheap method of boating. It is just cheap. Cheap, dirty and smelly. Some dream, when each time you go onboard you have to replace the naphthalene and open the windows.

I asked the question to establisih what the total costs are, you have given none, just more words of bit and pieces. You can't even provide a total list of everything, as a minimium, for a customer, to go on board. You preface everything with “you” or "I"...i thought this was about them and thier savings:

How does this help someone?...how does someone living thousands ofmiles away know what these costs are and if it assist them. The replies are all about you, not what the real costs are. I asked the question since for someone with so many boats, some 100 plus as you keep maintaining, you would have a good firm grip on all the costs and man hours required, as the bare minimum to go to sea. Yet all you provide is:

Building a boat on the cheap may sound nice. But the approach taken by anyone wishing to do so, they must know from the outset what the TOTAL cost will be. If they do not know the TOTAL costs and TOTAL man hours required, how on earth can anyone say wow, look how much money I have saved??



So, I’ll take that $17,000, for just your work…and buy a ready made second hand, since everything on your boats are cheap second hand, why not buy a ready made second hand boat, for $16,000. Yup, A saving of $1000, and it is ready to go..no hassles, immediate sailing. With the saving of $1,000, why not buy some nice deck shoes.

http://www.boatquest.com/Sail/Manufacturer/Category/25-35/111655/Feet/USD/1/boats_pictures.aspx

or splash out on $20,000…yup just for an extra $3,000 you can get:

http://www.boatquest.com/Sail/Manufacturer/Category/Length/110481/Feet/USD/1/boats_pictures.aspx

or something a bit more luxurious at $26,900 or $29,000

http://www.boatquest.com/Sail/Manufacturer/Category/Length/112454/Feet/USD/1/boats_pictures.aspx

http://www.boatquest.com/Sail/Manufacturer/Category/Length/108874/Feet/USD/1/boats_pictures.aspx

Even the more expensive $29,000, that is only $12,000 more than JUST a hull made by you.

But if you really think those are way way too expensive, because to go sailing one must be rich, how about this for $5,500. That is less than the raw material costs of you boat.:

http://www.boatquest.com/Sail/Manufacturer/Category/Length/90381/Feet/USD/1/boats_pictures.aspx

If you’re advocating a dream…can’t be better than $5,500…surely???..or too cheap, ok, how about $7,900, still less than raw material costs.

http://www.boatquest.com/Sail/Manufacturer/Category/Length/114486/Feet/USD/1/boats_pictures.aspx

they even had a steel 35footer…was there yesterday, but now it is gone. It was sold for £7,500, and was only 5 years old.

So, im still trying to understand what the message is??

Buy cheap plans, to build a cheap boat. A boat with no regard to structural or fabrication aspects. Also, no guidance on TOTAL costs at the end of the project nor TOTAL hours required.

Given the fact that what you are pushing…a cheap sailing dream...starting, yes starting at $17,000, for YOU to build for THEM, just the hull mind you, no outfitting, electrics, machinery, piping etc etc…why would anyone wishing to SAVE money, not go and buy a ready made second hand for CHEAPER??...i don't get it.

 

Correct me if I am wrong but didn't you just describe traverse frames made out of pipe?

 

Brent
As usual frantically looking for spin...... You are the main party using the individual component arguments remember.........The phenominally strong conic section,........the phenominally strong longitudinal which is always in compression............the plate with tensile strength of....... ad infinitum.


We've been offering to look at the whole bloody boat every time.
Put your design where your mouth is.

Your response is this mindless spin and dishonesty. Its very similar to the tactics used by grubby politicians. Deflect all the blame take all the credit put positive spin on anything bad and negative spin on anything good that puts the opposition in a good light.

Once again to illustrate why your hulls are weak, and just how they will fail can easily be addressed by giving lines or offsets to one of the professionals completely privately, just we can post the pictures of the collapsed structure and the loads . The two cases would be properly framed to GL or ISO and your design. Easy.

But you'll never ever do it will you.
By now you know you are wrong. Your boats are weaker than they should be.

So you just keep jumping sideways, avoiding the real debate and trying to confuse.

A recap...
Wrong about the longitudinals being curved and always in compression(Myth)
Wrong about conic sections imparting phenominal strenth (not there)
You are ignorant about the failure modes of a hull at sea
Your boats are weak becausue they are inadequately framed and detailed.( impact, pressure, weld fatigue, redundancy )

Now we want to show you and the world just how weak your non-framing method is relative to a properly framed hull of the same design.

So stop shouting "look at this distraction"

 

"look at this distraction"

Again this is typical and what we expect from your caliber. Since this is a either a lie on your part or you don't read the posts before coming out with this sort of spin.




So the balls in your court. Are you going to say or do anything sensible?.

 

One diagonal pipe at either end of the cabin side eliminates the need for a whole bunch of frames, and is far stronger, quicker and simpler. No standard flat bar frame, cantilevered at the hull deck joint, could ever give that kind of strength. That is my point. There are lighter and easier ways of doing things with better results..

 

Ok:
how much stronger?
How much quicker?.....define quicker
How much simplier?.....define simplier

So:
What is the strength of your pipe arrangement?
What is the strength of a "standard flat bar frame" arrangement?

Since to make such bold statements you will know the answer to these very simple questions. Otherwise, how can you make such a statement?

Please provide the facts to support your claim.

 

SS pipe nipples in BC scrapyards are almost all type 316 stainless , the best in the world, as pulp mill s wont take anything but, and 316 is stamped on most of the nipples and ball valves here.
$17,000 was not just a hull, but hull, decks, cabin cockpit wheelhouse keel rudder, skeg ,tanks, lifelines, engine mounts, handrails, hatches, bow roller, mooring bits, inside steering , windvane ,thru hulls , etc etc. This is where you make a big mistake in assuming the steelwork is no more than the hull on a fibreglass boat. In a fibreglass boat , once you have the hull and decks, you have to go shopping for all that stuff, at huge expense. Thus the steel work finished is a lot further along than a fibreglass hull and decks. It makes claims that steelwork done is a small percentage of the finished boat, a fibreglass reference to a steel boat, and thus grossly inacurate.
A good example is cleats , $40 for stainless cleats for a fibreglass boat that cost under a dollar welded down on a steel boat, with zero chance of the caulking ( welding) working loose and leaking. Ditto with most of the rest of the deck hardware.
As
As I've pointed out many times to your blindness, I charge $30 an hour a fraction the cost of shop time , which is closer to $100 an hour, which you advocate.
I count time on my own boat as playtime, hobby time, as I advocate in my book. Work you do yourself is money in your pocket, work you lay someone else to do is money in their pocket( or in your case, in your pocket, which is your whole reason for your debate, and your attempts to discourage anyone from doing anything resourceful)
Winston Bushnell , after a cricumnavigation built one of my 36 footers in his back yard doing his own work. By the time he launched her, he had $14000 in her, by the time he was heading for Hawaii he had $17,000 in her. He did a circle Pacific tour in her via Guam Kosrae, Ponape, Japan Aleutians and back to BC. He sold her and built one of my 26 footers which he sailed thru the NW passage, then sold that one to build another of my 36 footers,which he is currently cruising in. His daughter built one of my 26 footers..
Given the wide variation in prices , posting them would be pointless. Today , one guy in Texas was quoted $7500 for the steel for a 40 footer and another in Alberta was quoted $10,000 for the steel for a 31. I give people their options as to what is possible, an dhow to save money, and how resourceful they choose to be is up to them. Very few put new engines in.
Pointing out the huge amount of salvageable wood and other materials available for free, is not a heinous crime, unless one is in the business of screwing them out of their cruising funds to fill one's own pockets, selling them expensive new stuff, as my strongest critics are. That is their main motivation.
The laundromat does a great job on carpet if you pick a relatively clean piece to begin with.
I have a lot of friends and clients, some very experienced , who looked at used boats on the cheap. After years of looking at the garbage for sale they have all concluded that the only way to get what they wanted was to build their own Brentboat, with a bit of help from me.
When someone asks me what the total cost is, I ask them "How much do you have? That is what it will cost." If one has a lot of money,or believes he has a lot of money, then he will spend a lot of money . Those who have little money seem to get the job done with far less.
Me? I get $30 n hour however long it takes. I work with the owner, encouraging him to do as much of his own work as possible. I work for those who are planning to build their own boat, are not too sure of themselves, and work alongside them to a point where they feel they can finish the rest. Sometimes I drop back to jump start them for a few hours.
No shop can compete with that , which is why I piss them of so much. ( with glee)

 

Ad Hoc (and peers),

That is the hardest data you will ever get!

Never will Brent stop drivelling every thread to death when steel building is the topic, NEVER.

 

If that one line is the best childish criticism you can come up with, then I take that to mean you concede the debate.

 

So, let me see, SS316, is that:

Stainless Steel Austenitic 316 S16 (passive)
Or
Stainless Steel – Austenitic 316 S16 (active)

Assuming it is 316. If it is not 316 it could be:

Stainless Steel Austenitic 18%Cr 8%Ni (passive)
Stainless Steel – Martenistic 13%Cr (passive)
Stainless Steel – Martenistic 13%Cr (active)
Stainless Steel – Martenistic 13%Cr (active)
or
Stainless Steel – Ferritic (active)

The reason why this is important, which, yet again, your caviller attitude to safety and design is that each has a very different electrical potential when immersed in sea water. Which means corrosion!

Stainless Steel Austenitic 316 S16 (passive), for example has a potential of -90mV and 316 S16 (active) is -180mV.

Mild carbon steel has an electrical potential of -610mV. That is a difference of 430mV at best and 520mV at worst.



Any dissimilar metals in contact in a corrosive environment like the sea, requires an electrical potential difference of no more than 100mV, to minimise corrosion. But, when using a steel hull you can get away with being up to 250mV, ONLY, IF the design is very good and care and attention paid to the assembly.

So, clearly you have no regard to corrosion and its effects onboard.

Now, you are resorting to deception and misdirection again.

INCORRECT. You did not provide a proper list. If you want someone to assume more than you have given, you have to supply the TOTAL data. It is YOUR list NOT mine.

Your fully comprehensive list is given thus:

The suddenly this fully comprehensive list grows into thus:

Can you please define "...etc etc...", what that means in terms of structure for welding and man hours?

What ever is or is not included in YOUR list, you are still charge $100/ph to build a boat. You call $100/ph CHEAP??????

You call a finished STELL WORK ONLY boat with a cost of $17, 000 CHEAPER than those COMPLETE BOATS up for sale I provide, which are LESS than $17,000??


This sums up your whole MO.

You are clearly delusion if you think a bare steel boat costing $17,000 is cheaper than a completed finished boat for less than $17,000. Those boats above are FINISHED, repeat FINISHED COMPLETED, not just a bare steel hull that needs, machinery, electrics, communications, auxiliary systems and outfitting.

YOUR bare steel boat, are you getting the rest for free, to make your $17,000 cheaper??

So, you cannot provide ANY detailed figures on man hours, or costs for your boats. Yet you claim to know so much about them and have so many built.

The only thing cheap here is the talk.

 

Does that also mean, since you are unable to provide simple hard facts and figures of TOTAL man hours and TOTAL COSTS for a bare minimum for anyone to build one of YOUR designs, and how much STRONGER your pipe is to a standard frame, this is your way of conceding to debate too?

 

So, an anchor on a fibre glass boat is more expensive than an anchor on a steel boat?

The mast on a fibreglass boat is more expensive than a mast on a steel boat?

The lifejackts on a fibreglass boat is more expensive than on a steel boat?

The radios on a fibreglass boat are more expensive than on a steel boat??

The engine on a fibreglass boat is more expensive than on a steel boat??

So, when you went to buy your cheap smelly used carpet, the owner said, are you putting it on a steel boat or a fibreglass boat, and charged you less, because it is a steel boat?

 

Don't to worry Pierre, Brent wrote so much about nothing that he doesn't know where he stand.
I realy think the guy has a serius problem.
His boat, as looking at some pictures are an averages quarter of a million dollars, full of electronics, all wood interior, brass and bronze galore inside, rigging up to date. All that on a crappy hull.
He seams to contradict without thought anyone who say something.
Buying the surplus epoxy is an old trick, which never existed, but it is on all books about amateur boatbuilding.
He use all the tricks of every writers before him publishing books for amateurs.
Now he put frames, after the origami frameless, now he is for the poor sailor, but his client spend countless. Go figure.
He goes so far that he said the mistake of design is the fault of the owner.
That a nice guy who stand behind his clients.
I am sorry but the guy is full of crap to the hair.
He is a welder, but boy is an ignorant on boat design and construction.
Ho well, if he doesn't existed, we will have to invent him
Daniel

 

dskira it seems to me that scrounging around and buying all used, junk yard and surplus stuff for a boat gets you a brand new used boat before its in the water. A boat that is complete with items well into their marine lifespan seems like a waste of labor unless you do not value your time. Seems to me you could buy a used boat for a lot less and have the same thing with a better resale value.

I wonder if Brent counts all those hours scrounging and shopping in the hours to build? From what I have seen that accounts for as many as a third of the hours in this type of build. Another problem is the time spent figuring out how to make scrounged items work in the design. Sort of a hodge-poge of cobbled items.

I have know several people who built boats on the cheap and they never added up the true hours it took. These boats often sell for little more than the owner invested. All those skilled hours at a zero dollar rate.

I think the justification of "These sailors could never afford these types of boats without building" goes right out the window when you look at used boats and the lost income from other pursuits.

The only thing dumber than most boat people are horse people when it comes to a sense of worth.

 

That's another structural wince factor for me.

I wonder how you calculated the loads. I suspect it's another customer tested structure. In previous posts you just gave the compressive strength of the tube based on wall thickness.
You'd never heard of Euler and even before you can apply Euler you need a load.

Those pipes are the mast compression posts supporting the mast step. But it can also end up carrying a big load induced by pressure on deck. They don't support the hull topsides at all since there's no connection. They land on the hull plate directly ( not on a frame) with a small doubler and their load will be transferred to the already stressed chine which is a poor design for robust longevity. The chine welds are stress raisers and weak points as it is.

Those chines look vulnerable and the promo vids they sell show them being welded up by Brent and Alex with the chine on the ground, Brent welds with vegetation crap and moisture all around the weld. I couldn't believe it.

How many of your chine welds actually crack after welding as soon as you put a bit of stress on them when you fabricate like that? I reckon they all would eventually with a few good stress cycles, or even one good stress cycle.