65- by 32-foot catamaran 3200sqft of living space

Patience, the Romex story is coming. First, in the name of scrupulous, or perhaps ridiculous, accuracy I want to do a little nit picking. None of this may alter anyone’s conclusions, or is it intended to, but again it’s accuracy that is first in my mind.

I made a lengthy post on materials used and construction I observed on the “Hawaiian”. I want to clarify and add a few things.

1) I noted in a couple of posts that it is literally the case that every piece of lumber used on the boat started as a 2x4. The smaller pieces are cut from 2x4s and the larger pieces are glued up with an epoxy paste and fastened together with screws. The lumber used is rated for a limited structural application; it is, as I observed and my photos indicate, STUD grade. In an absolute sense the lumber is not “substandard” and it is suitable for a defined limited use in homebuilding. You should decide whether or not you think it is appropriate for the use observed here. I did not render such an opinion in my posts. Take a look at the Western Wood Products reference I cited in the post and you will find a detailed description of the standards applied, and the structural properties of this and other grades. As for the plywood in the hulls, as I described it is 3/8 C-D Sheathing Exposure 1. People commonly call this type of material CDX but this is not a plywood grade. None of the panels are or would be marked C-X as suggested by one poster, because such a marking is not used. BTW the deck plywood appears to be 19/32 C-D sheathing. I say “appears” because I could see only a few grade marks for this plywood. I will show some of these in a future post. One area that may be a higher grade is the forward sloping cabin top. If you look at the cabin photos I posted in post # 1607 you will see the underside of this area that displays what looks to be a C grade face. I suppose it is possible that this is C-D plywood with the D face outward but extending the benefit of the doubt maybe this is a better grade used in this area.

2) I want to say three further things about lumber and generally how they may apply to this discussion. First, is that even with STUD grade lumber a very experienced and discriminating carpenter could find some individual pieces in a unit of 2x4s that are likely to be stronger and more appropriate for certain uses than others. That doesn’t mean it was done here, and again both the species and the grain structure matter to how strong each piece is going to be. Second, construction lumber is graded for its structural properties not for how it looks. A clean looking knot free piece of STUD grade lumber can be considerably weaker than a tight knotted #2 or better piece of the same or superior species. Thus, the mere presence of knots and other visible defects is not an indication that the wood is cheap, weak or substandard. Third, I mentioned that the WWPA grades Douglas fir lumber as generally stronger in pretty much all respects over Hem Fir. Some will also know that Doug Fir has been used successfully for boat building on the west coast for generations. I should also note that both of the major local lumber yards here in town (These are big time wholesale/ retail concerns. ) that supply builders in a wide area had as of my last visit, Friday, multiple units of KD #1 & Btr Douglas fir 2x4s. (BTW tons of other lumber was also available. I didn’t see any KD Hem-Fir STUD grade on offer at either place.) My point is that were one to want a far superior piece of lumber in the immediate area it wouldn’t be that difficult to find, provided, of course, that you have the money.

3) With some moderate degree of certainty I can say a few things about the fiberglass reinforcement of the boat. The hulls above the waterline are reinforced with glass fabric tape or cut strips of fabric about 6 inches wide along the seams between the plywood sheets. A close up look reveals the texture of glass cloth around the perimeter of the plywood sheets. In the center of the sheets the texture suggests that only a layer of epoxy and paint have been applied. I didn’t see any evidence that chopper cut mat (CSM) was used anywhere on the exterior of the boat as described by a poster here. Of course it could be covered with fabric in places but I don’t think it was used, because the layup looks very thin and in some places so minimally wetted with epoxy that the texture of the fabric can be felt. The exterior surface of the cabin and decks is covered with a layer of fiberglass fabric. It laps over the gunwales and on to the upper Hull surface for maybe 8-10 inches. The sloping forward surface of the cabin may be an exception. The partial profile of the support beams that define the layout of this surface are visible and do not appear covered. Most other areas of the deck and cabin are quite obviously covered because you can see and feel the texture. There are bubbles, blisters and inconsistencies on various areas of the deck

4) Observers of my posted photos of the Hawaiian have remarked that they see a significant concave section on the inner surface of the port hull. This photo can be found in post #1865. I have closely examined the photograph and since it was taken the area of the hull discussed. While the lines of the hull are not fair and the surface could be described as wavy, the large depression described by some does not exist. It is a photographic anomaly produced by the light and the angle of the photo relative to the intersection between a chine and a flat surface of the hull.

5) There has been much discussion of the carriage bolt attachment of the bridge deck support beams. I have enjoyed reading it. However, I do want to make one bigger picture comment that some might find relevant. While I could find no beams in the boat that span the entire distance between the port and starboard hulls there are other “structural elements” that appear designed to hold the hulls together and preserve the “integrity” of the boat. I was thinking of drawing and posting for discussion a cross section through amidships to illustrate the complete structure. Again, my saying this doesn’t say anything about the adequacy of the additional structure, just that it’s there.

6) I made a recent post, #2150 that discussed some hoses exiting the port hull. Several people have picked up on this and at least one other poster observed a hose discharging water from the Hawaiian. Indeed this could be discharge from a bilge(s) pump, but I have no reliable information to indicate that the port hull is actually leaking or that it is awash as some have suggested. I haven’t observed a regular discharge from this hose(s). I suspect we would all be curious to hear from anyone who has recently been below deck in the port hull of the Flyin Hawaiian. The boat does list a bit to port, but this could be due to the fact that there is more weight on this side with the galley, head, batteries and holding tank all located port of the centerline.

New photos promised with my next post.

 
154
0
Time for a new pole:

Who's fault will it be when the "yacht" sinks.

1, Timber supplier for providing sub-standard timber?

2, Bolt manufacture for bolt's not withstanding rated load?

3, Fibreglass and or resin manufacture for the leaks?

4, The galv screw manufacture for not applying enough zinc to their product?

5, His calculator for not allowing him to calculate loads correctly?

6, the eventual tow vessel, for not going around those waves?

7, a random kid with a toy boat that accidentally bumps into it?

8, and only to keep the pole balanced, Himself.
You forgot one used by you know who:

Bush's Fault

 

clamslapper

Anarchist
Guys, completely out of curiosity, what about Romex wire makes it unsuitable for marine use? I ask this out of ignorance as our little J24 has no electrical system and I never looked too closely at the wiring on bigger boats I've been on. It would seem to me that this is the least of HR's problems, but I'm just curious why the type of wiring has been brought up several times.

 

Rasputin22

Rasputin22
14,120
3,665
Can you saw a penciled line... apply glue ... drive screws? Could you build a box? If so, you can build your own INSTANT BOAT. But it won't be a box. The genius of Phil Bolger guarantees that your completed craft will boast a pleasing sheer and graceful flare. Both looks and performance are designed right into these highly efficient rowing and sailing craft.

Why is it so easy? For one thing, all the complex drudgery of lofting lines and building a jig have been designed right out of every INSTANT BOAT. The lofting has been done for you. Nor will you have to build two boats to get one, which is just about what making a jig turns boat building into.

You start right in cutting readily available plywood sheets to pre-computed patterns, and before you know it you will be fastening them together ... all your basic assembly virtually complete. If you are just "average handy" with tools, you can beat the 40-hour schedule mentioned above . . . and be on the water in five working days or less.

Which of the INSTANT BOATS will be yours?

First, write or call for the catalogue. Look over the photos. Each has been built and tested by professional builder Harold H. Payson. In fact, Payson and Bolger teamed up from the start in order to ensure sound craftsmanship along with ease of construction. Not one INSTANT BOAT plan has been released until both these perfectionists declared themselves satisfied. These men have put their reputations and personal pride right on the line.

Late in the season? Suppose you start on the first available weekend. Four or five days later you can start putting paint on your new craft .... a day or two more and you'll be getting compliments from admiring pierside critics.

Take your time if you want to . . . but start NOW. Your INSTANT BOAT will grow so fast under your hands that your progress will astound you. Just as soon as you write or telephone, your INSTANT BOAT is really on the way. The special satisfaction of commanding your own handywork on the water, and being proud of it, will be yours when you wish.

 

Bugsy

Super Anarchist
2,554
861
Canada
Wind loading

I understand the plan is to install one 10hp outboard on the back of each hull. The question "is 20 hp enough for this 'boat'?" has been asked a number of times and no one has answered.

This is a little outside my area of practice (I am an engineer) but here are some thoughts.

I have an engineering textbook that says "wind pressures on a wall of building should be assumed at 15 lb/sq ft." A boat is not a building but in this case, let's assume it is (not as far off as one might think).

That is an upper design limit: so let's assume a "breeze" is 1/20 that amount. So let's go with 0.75 lbs/sq ft.

I think it reasonable that, if you held up a 1' x 1' piece of plywood in a breeze, you might feel 0.75 lbs of force.

So far, so good.

What is the area of this 'boat'? I will assume the wind is on the beam. Let's go with a length of 65 feet and a height of 15 feet. That is 975 sq feet. I will round that to 1000 sq feet to make the math easy.

0.75 lbs/sq ft X 1000 sq feet = 750 lbs.

I found on the Internet, someone who claims his 20 hp outboard has a force of 300 lbs. Let's go with that. Converting hp to force depends on a number of factors, but let's just go with that.

So if the wind force is 750 lbs of force and the outboards produce 300 lbs, it is pretty clear the engines are undersized for use in what I call a breeze.

If anyone wants to improve on this very approximate, back-of-the-envelope calculation, please go ahead. But someone had to make the first estimate.

Note that a Gunboat 60 (I checked their website) has 2 x 18 kW propulsion motors (total 36 kW of propulsion). 36 kW = 47 hp.

 

Just A Skosh

Super Anarchist
1,387
67
New Hampshire
If the wind is on his beam he won't be motoring into it... Granted, gut check says 20 hp isn't nearly enough but you'd have to do the calcs for the front of the boat if you're assuming he's powering into it.

 

Sand crab

Member
307
1
Montana
It is confusing but the exposure 1 ply is called CDX by everyone. Just to make it complicated there is also an exterior grade which isn't as common. And an interior grade of CD which must be real shitty. The standard CDX exposure 1 is by far the most prevalent and you will find it everywhere.

It's all here from the APA.....American Plywood Institute.

And 19/32" ply is called 5/8". They rip you off of that extra 1/32".

I remember reading about some guy that had an OSB or Oriented Strand Board mill in Canada. He had a large power yacht built out of the stuff. I wonder how it held up? Keep up the good work Lilmurray.

What is the difference between Exterior and Exposure 1?

Exterior panels are suitable for applications subject to long-term exposure to weather or moisture.

Exposure 1 panels may be used for applications where construction delays may be expected prior to providing protection. Exposure 1 panels are made with the same exterior adhesives used in Exterior panels. However, because other compositional factors may affect bond performance, only Exterior panels should be used for long-term exposure to weather.

Note: APA Rated Plywood Sheathing Exposure 1, commonly called “CDX” in the trade, is sometimes mistaken as an Exterior panel and erroneously used in applications for which it does not possess the required resistance to weather. “CDX” should only be used for applications as outlined under Exposure 1 above. For sheathing grade panels that will be exposed long-term to weather, specify APA Rated Sheathing Exterior (C-C Exterior plywood under PS 1).

For more information, please refer to Technical Topics: Bond Classification, Form TT-009, available for free PDF download from the APA Publications Library.

http://www.performancepanels.com/single.cfm?content=app_pp_faqs#trademark

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Examination of the brand on one of the plywood sheets shows it as having a code of 24/0, but it is also stamped NOT FOR WALLS. Other sheets have different brands.

Typical sheathing and Structural I sheathing have a two-number span rating (e.g., 24/0, 24/16,

32/16, 48/24, etc). For a two-number span rating, the number on the left identifies the span

rating (truss or rafter spacing) if the panel is used in a roof application and the number on the

right identifies the span rating (joist spacing) if the panel is used in a subfloor application. Panels

with the number zero on the right are not allowed to be used in subfloor applications.

http://www.tecotested.com/techtips/pdf/tt_gradestampps1ps2

So if the plywood is not for walls, and its not for subfloors, then its only use is trusses and roofing. Some of them are branded clearly as construction grade c-x.

It looks as though he has either bought a whole lot of miscellaneous sheets as a job lot, or collected a motley collection as leftovers from building jobs...

Why am I left with the feeling that a divorce settlement has meant that Rod had to empty out his shed .?
Most of what you say is spot on, but you do make a lot of assumptions.

Most obvious is about timber. 4 by 2's are not planed without drying in a kiln first, they are NOT planed wet, and wrapped up to dry.

Knot's are not always a week point in timber, wood is denser around the knots and can be a strong point. You have to run the dried, planed timber through a stress grader to find out, Here stress graded timber has die markings on it showing the stress-graders results (different colours).

MMM, none of HR's timbers are die-marked

Also a lot about what you said about water intrusion is probably 100% correct, but is also biased on you assumptions that nothing was water proofed before assembly.

If we are going to have a fair punt at how long this "yacht" will last, we need assessment’s biased on fact, not 'what TTT think's about it could have been built'

It's lasted days so far!

So are the bet's on week's, months or is someone going to go years?

Ummmmmmmm sum 2 X 4's (how we in the US call em) are dried in a kiln

they are called kiln dried and are called out and priced as such

Building plans that I'v had to work with (of my own jobs as well as others) call for Green Doug Fir #2 & Btr

​Sum of those MoFo's weigh a TON and I swear you can hold em at a 45 and water will run out the end (slight exzackturation)

FYI

http://www.roseburg.com/Product/lumber-and-timbers/


OVERVIEW DOUGLAS FIR HEMLOCK WHITE FIR SUSTAINABILITY
Roseburg produces KD and green lumber products from Douglas Fir, White Fir, and Hemlock at our Dillard, Oregon plant, one of the largest stud production facilities in North America. Every part of the plant is designed to Roseburg’s rigid quality standards. Our seamless manufacturing process allows for a large volume of studs (nearly 400 million board feet annually) to be produced cost effectively. The entire manufacturing process is state-of-the-art, using the most advanced technology which maximizes the use of wood fiber in the production process. Our premium quality studs provide excellent structural strength to any construction project.

Key features include:

  • Produced from Roseburg’s excellent stands of timber in Oregon and California.
  • All standard PET lengths plus many more.
  • Custom grades and products, appearance grade premier available in all product.
  • Mixed product shipments.
  • Lumber and Timber Grading agencies: American Lumber Standards (A.L.S.) and Pacific Lumber & Inspection Bureau (P.L.I.B.)
  • Heat Treated (HT) Certificates available for kiln dried lumber.
Lumber Grades:

  • Green Douglas Fir Select Structural
  • Green Douglas Fir #2&Btr
  • KD Douglas Fir 2&Btr
  • KD Hemlock #2&Btr
  • KD White Fir #2&Btr
  • Appearance Grade Premier Products
When And Where You Need It

Roseburg Studs are available throughout North America at some of the largest and most respected wholesale distributors, retail building material dealers and home improvement centers. We encourage you to contact one today to get more information on Roseburg's studs.

usa.jpg


Manufactur

 
Last edited by a moderator:

dyslexic dog

Super Anarchist
3,916
363
Michigan
Guys, completely out of curiosity, what about Romex wire makes it unsuitable for marine use? I ask this out of ignorance as our little J24 has no electrical system and I never looked too closely at the wiring on bigger boats I've been on. It would seem to me that this is the least of HR's problems, but I'm just curious why the type of wiring has been brought up several times.
Romex, or NM rating is not moisture proof. If it had a UF rating, then it would suffice. NM has a paper center.

 
Guys, completely out of curiosity, what about Romex wire makes it unsuitable for marine use? I ask this out of ignorance as our little J24 has no electrical system and I never looked too closely at the wiring on bigger boats I've been on. It would seem to me that this is the least of HR's problems, but I'm just curious why the type of wiring has been brought up several times.
Boats usually have separate 110VAC and 12VDC circuits... but you knew that - I wonder if HR does? I expect the boat's always had 'shore power', and no thought's been given to what happens when the extension cord no longer reaches. Or what happens when he arrives somewhere that has 240VAC/50Hz power [Ha!]. I haven't heard word of a gas powered generator, but that's probably in the works - or an inverter from Harbor Freight (cheapest imported crap) if he can find $100. And maybe he'll grab the battery out of his truck when he leaves the dock for good.

For a true bluewater boat, the AC circuit is relatively unimportant, but the DC stuff is. For a dockside condo, reverse that.

Bare copper doesn't do well in the marine environment. For marine grade wire, they coat the conductors with solder (called 'tinning') before the insulation is applied; but that's expensive, so it's not commonly done. And 'Marine Grade' anything isn't Hot Rod's style.

But, like the galvanizing of the bolts, it's a thoroughly moot point, the boat will sink due to leaks or structural failure long before corrosion can do its job.

 
It is confusing but the exposure 1 ply is called CDX by everyone. Just to make it complicated there is also an exterior grade which isn't as common. And an interior grade of CD which must be real shitty. The standard CDX exposure 1 is by far the most prevalent and you will find it everywhere.

It's all here from the APA.....American Plywood Institute.

And 19/32" ply is called 5/8". They rip you off of that extra 1/32".

I remember reading about some guy that had an OSB or Oriented Strand Board mill in Canada. He had a large power yacht built out of the stuff. I wonder how it held up? Keep up the good work Lilmurray.

What is the difference between Exterior and Exposure 1?

Exterior panels are suitable for applications subject to long-term exposure to weather or moisture.

Exposure 1 panels may be used for applications where construction delays may be expected prior to providing protection. Exposure 1 panels are made with the same exterior adhesives used in Exterior panels. However, because other compositional factors may affect bond performance, only Exterior panels should be used for long-term exposure to weather.

Note: APA Rated Plywood Sheathing Exposure 1, commonly called “CDX” in the trade, is sometimes mistaken as an Exterior panel and erroneously used in applications for which it does not possess the required resistance to weather. “CDX” should only be used for applications as outlined under Exposure 1 above. For sheathing grade panels that will be exposed long-term to weather, specify APA Rated Sheathing Exterior (C-C Exterior plywood under PS 1).

For more information, please refer to Technical Topics: Bond Classification, Form TT-009, available for free PDF download from the APA Publications Library.

http://www.performancepanels.com/single.cfm?content=app_pp_faqs#trademark

Sand Crab is absolutely correct (also thanks for the encouragement).

The main reason all this lumber and plywood grading stuff is so confusing is that the identification system is designed in part to insure that those specifying, buying and using the material can be assured that it is appropriate for it's common usage. The material seen in this case is produced for and is intended to be used in “Light Construction”. This connotes a general standard for buildings not boats. Lumber and plywood produced for use in the marine industry is variously graded and marked differently. In some cases the underlying specifications for determining light construction and marine grades can be similar or overlap. However in general, and with some materials overall, the marine graded materials meet higher specifications for strength and durability because they are designed to do different things in a more challenging environment. To add an additional layer of complexity (not that we need it), but it is not unusual around here to see buildings with exterior plywood decks overlaid with a multi-part urethane deck system where the plywood is specified as “Marine Grade”.

 

Raz'r

Super Anarchist
63,127
5,850
De Nile
I had a flash of insight this morning. HR must've read one of many books on boatbuilding, and he thought "why do they build a boat, then put that frozen snot shit stuff all over it? Wood Floats?"

He's basically trying to sail a male plug of a boat(which can work if build like a boat)… with all the weaknesses already described….

 

bluenosejr

New member
23
0
Guys, completely out of curiosity, what about Romex wire makes it unsuitable for marine use? I ask this out of ignorance as our little J24 has no electrical system and I never looked too closely at the wiring on bigger boats I've been on. It would seem to me that this is the least of HR's problems, but I'm just curious why the type of wiring has been brought up several times.
Other than what has already been stated (not tinned, not water proof) Romex is also a solid conductor, only stranded conductors should be used on a boat.

 

Raz'r

Super Anarchist
63,127
5,850
De Nile
so - should he pull her back on land, let her dry out a bit, and then cover her with 3/8" glass and polyester? (I'd say epoxy as it's wood, but we know that's not in the budget)

say he builds a "pan" up to about 6" above the WL, and then uses waterproofing paint above that. Will it keep the water out long enough to go "full taco"?

 
Well, even with all the deadly spiders, snakes, jellyfish, stonefish, poison octopus and <shudder> Foster's Lager, I still think its probably more dangerous to spend a day on the Flyin' Hawaiian than on Australia.

 
so - should he pull her back on land, let her dry out a bit, and then cover her with 3/8" glass and polyester? (I'd say epoxy as it's wood, but we know that's not in the budget)

say he builds a "pan" up to about 6" above the WL, and then uses waterproofing paint above that. Will it keep the water out long enough to go "full taco"?
I was started down that thought path, but the continuing string of 'shoulda-woulda-coulda's made my head hurt.

Yes, nice thick coat of glass/resin over the whole outside might make it waterproof.

A nice thick coat on the inside of the hulls might turn that frame/stringer mess strong enough to hold up to a few bumps

And if he glassed all the around the connections between hull and bridgedeck...

And if he did this... and that... and a few other things...

He'd still have an worthless pile of shit.

 




Top