The album of Ariel #422

[CapnK]

As you can see, I used some of the original trim to "clean up" the look of all those rough cuts. It is simply trimmed to fit the new arrangement, in order to make it look halfway decent.

In this shot and by looking closely, you can see the lines I penned onto the overhead which show the location of the mast base pad, and the outside dimensions of the new strongback. Edit: The original strongback/bulkhead provided support only about twice as wide as the dark area you can see here. The new one will be 3 times as wide.

I'll be cutting back the overhead liner so that it butts into the after edge of the new strongback. I considered leaving it in place, but it is just too different of a shape from the inner deck skin. Also, it was apparently trimmed (sloppily) in place at the factory, and so there are cuts into the inner skin along that line that I want to repair prior to inserting the strongback.

[CapnK]

Looking forward, you can see to port the first of the large compartments I am putting into the vberth area. I'd been thinking to leave a 20-24" wide "channel" inbetween matching cabinets up there, and having that channel serve as a bunk if ever needed. Now, and instead, the cabinet to port will have a 6' long, 24" wide flat surface on top which can be used as the same. Going this route should provide more storage (which equals more closed space for float), better round-the-body airflow whenever it is being slept on, and a nice wide working surface.

[CapnK]

A vertical composition showing what it looks like from the companionway/cockpit.

[CapnK]

And last, looking from starboard at the forward port storage compartment. Later today I'll be making and installing the last 2 internal dividers, and then putting the top onto it.

We have a hurricane headed this way, it looks like. I'll be busting hump to get in the strongback prior to evacuating, if I have to.

[ebb]

Kurt,
That asymetric open 'look' is great, ain't it!
Can understand your quest for a flatter beam. Wonder what you will come up with? If you are keeping the original lockers, would support s.s. 'pipes' at the corners be in the plan? Maybe inset a little (set off the corners outboard) the eye might accept them more as 'cosmetic' than structural - and keep that wonderful openness.

If I hadn't already committed 338 to its deep internal beam - your photos show implicitly how important no break in the cabin/deck line really is - I would seriously consider putting the beam ON THE OUTSIDE OF THE CABIN!!!
If one could engineer a flat beam and turn the corners down to the deck (where interior knees would pick up the load and take it to the hull) I think, with rounded Albergian corners, such a beam would hardly be noticed. Well. not exactly. But I'd mock up a model in foam to find out.

The eliptical round of the inside cabin is really great and helps to give the interior a larger feeling. One of the huge problems with the Ariel is gaining stowage. It looks like you are succeeding.

Never mentioned with enclosed 'watertite' lockers is the issue of moisture and mold. And actual watertightness in the event of a surprise holing or knock-down. How do you gasket the lids and doors? On another thread, just recalled Yves Galinas' A-30, that survived a 360 - and the reason it did, we might suppose, is that he isolated the four bulkheads. Opening up the interior makes locker waterproofing moist important. I'm here waiting for your calculations on the cubics!!!

[CapnK]

Ebb -

I ***love*** the openness. Before, this boat didn't seem any bigger than my old Com-Pac 23. Now, I know it is, and it feels "freer". It also seems a little cooler - I think that air is circulating better, being wide open like this.

Funny you should mention an exterior deck beam. When I was gazing at the underside of the strongback-less deck for the first time, I started giving thought to that space between the inner and outer deck skin...

Could be that it would be possible to remove the outer skin and coring in a wide configuration like I've been thinking, and replace it with something structurally stronger. If that structure could spread load across the cabin trunk top out to the sides, and was supported on the underside by the vertical poles, it would work nicely, and I don't think would have to be very visually noticeable at all from the exterior. On the inside, you could have an unbroken span. It would be pretty easy to bed a metal plate between many layers of glass inside that space. If, as you propose, that metal plate wrapped around and conformed to the whole cabin top shape, and was thick enough for the stresses, it might not even need any interior support. Bliss!

Hmmm... Gad, you got me started again...

Re: cubics and related such:

Moisture and mold: I don't think it will be much of a problem. Why? Because these are relatively small boats. There just _aren't_ any lockers which remain closed long enough for it to develop to any appreciable degree. I've found that I am constantly diving into every storage bin I have, because I only have aboard that which I *need*. Maybe on a larger boat lockers sit unopened long enough for mildew to be an issue, because you have places to put infrequently used "stuff" and forget about it, but I haven't found that to be the case on this boat or my last one. Even if I don't use something much, it still gets regular exposure to fresh air because it sits near something which I do use on a regular basis, and so its locker gets ventilated. Keep in mind that where I am, we have 6+ months of the year with temps regularly exceeding 80*, and humidity rarely drops below 70% - prime mildew country, and it just hasn't been a problem at all. The only place I've seen mildew develop is on the inside of the hull. The lockers will be finished with a slick surface on the inside, to make cleanup the matter of a few simple wipes.

Flotation: I'm picking it up wherever I can.

Right now, for this temporary structure of compartments, I am using scrap plywood I have gathered up (recycling ), but for the end product, I'll be using sheet foam instead. I'm leaning towards polyurethane foam and polyester resins, not epoxy, mostly because of price, and also because of ease-of-use (i'm very familiar with PU/PE construction). For the cabinet structures, they'll be a slab of foam skinned with glass, cut and used just like plywood, after they've cured hard (laid up outside of boat). For install, the side which faces into the boat may get a layer of formica or luan for impact resistance. Just the structure of the compartments I will be building in, made in this manner, will net several cubic feet of positive flotation, and be lighter than wood to boot.

I'll be stuffing glassed-over foam into all odd and difficult to reach places. I've been wanting to insulate the hull anyway, so I plan to put 2" of foam up against the hull throughout the interior of the boat - this will bring the inner wall of the hull level with the stringer which runs along it, and will give 8+ cubic feet of flotation by itself. I think I can get 10-15cu/ft into the cockpit lockers and under-cockpit area. I'm going to use bladders for water tanks, I may lay them into compartments where all the extra space around the bladder is foamed. The storage compartments up in the v-berth will give about 25 cu/ft of closed space. In the end, the closed-off and foamed spaces will total more than 65 cu/ft, because some of them will be partially filled with heavier-than-water substances.

The individual compartment lids will sit on gasketed lips, with pre-drilled holes for watertightly securing them to the compartment. All these holes will be the same size, so that they'll use the same size fasteners. Fasteners and a manual tool to put them in place quickly will be stowed handy in case they are needed, so that completely closing off a compartment where water is coming in can be done with minimal fuss. At sea, the compartments will stay closed, partly fastened already - not too hard to access if needed, easy to secure against ingress. I can pull out several days worth of stores, to be stowed in an easy-access compartment, every few days/as needed - kind of like "reefing early".

[ebb]

IF

The top core would be merely a surgery to remove the foam and replace with solid.

That's a pretty good curve to the top and a structure incorporating the side strut supports with the cross-beam into a single piece could be made very strong. And essentially non-deflecting. Too bad we don't have a resident engineer on the board! This may be a perfect project for carbon fiber. Or titanium (just kidding).

If one could take a bit of intrusion into the interior maybe laying in a tubular sectioned curve by cutting the top of the cabin completely out (and reconnecting it back up would get the bridge. Or putting 1/2 of the section outside and the other half in. It would create an deeper bump which might not be the clean look you want.

One could 'play' with the outside beam, designing in rigidity, by incorporating a tabernacle. Like a partial truss. I feel that interior posts and pipe that are built off the furniture are secondary. True support would be continuous (contiguous) to some load spreading floor/rib/contraption actually on the keel and hull.

Just noticed (working on the port V-berth tank in 338) that I doubled up on the tank end that is on the remnant of the compression bulkhead. End supports for the compression beam end on the V-berth as Pearson had it - but instead of depending on screws alone coming in thru the plywood, now there is SOME more solid support (1 1/2" plus frp) from the hull under those struts. Again, I feel you have to consider non continuous support as ACTIVE. Meaning: expect movement to occur.

External beam sounds too good to be true. Has it been too easy for builders to steal space from the accomadation to support the mast? Maybe it is time....

[mbd]

Hey Kurt, have you considered a simple Commander-like compression post under the mast?

A couple of options come to mind with this setup:

1. You could bring the half wall on the port side out to it. It would give you some interesting storage and counter possibilities in the forward portion of the cabin. For the starboard side, with all the surgery you're doing, you could revise or remove the hanging locker (or move it to somewhere more useful, like near the companionway). Then your access forward would be to starboard of the compression post. It would leave the starboard settee portion of your v-berth nice and open, and, I daresay, open up the interior even more.

2. Have your access forward to port of the post and shorten your port storage area for access forward. With this setup, you could even move your head to starboard to the foot of the v-berth, right behind the bulkhead. This would give at least a tiny bit of privacy for mixed company and more leg room in the v-berth area.

[CapnK]

Giving the above suggestions much thought as I prepare for a visit from Ernesto...

Ebb - Here's a thought to twist yer noodle: Whaddabout if the outer skin were removed, and a 2" beam of wood or composite were placed _both inside *and* out_?

Mike - I have considered it before, and the idea keeps coming back to me as the KISS way to get the mostest with the leastest. Thanks for the reminder, I'm rolling it around my brainpan again now...

Like this thought which just occurred: Why not make that support *removeable*? If the beam were made strong enough to support the (tensioned) rig at rest/anchor without deflecting, then the mast support could be removed when not needed, yet also be put in place prior to leaving port. That way it would only be 'in the way' at sea, where extra handholds are a boon anyway. If it had threaded bases, and was carefully made to the proper length, it could be tensioned up against the beam once in place.




OK - Gotta go get ready for Ernesto...

[ebb]

Kurt/Ernesto, guys,
Must admit to surprising self with the CUT OUT WHOLE CABINTOP /INSTALL BEAM /RECONNECT. That's what I meant, anyway. It allows a more substantial beam which my prejudice goes for. It's not an impossible scenario.

If the job was a frp layup it would be easy (and absolutely necessary) to key the cabin top right back into the new beam. The idea means that the internal truss part of the beam (if it can be called that) can use the whole depth of the beam (3 - 3 1/2") for stiffness. Maybe design it so it humps up outside as well as in. The mast would stand on it.

I can see the arch done this way, but I would not cut open the cabin sides. The side compression struts seem just as important as the beam to me but they don't have to have the same depth or thickness. Well, of course, maybe they do, I no engineer. If possible it would be smart to run this by one, tho. All interior, but cutting back the liner for more room and to paste them in, if necessary, for the width you want.*

If you agree with me that the side struts are necessary to support the beam even tho it is built in (I think the cabin sides should be beefed up to eliminate any bulging, or flex and the stuts anchored as far down in the boat as they can go.) then they could be constructed first and the box-form for the beam layup made to connect them as part of the beam layup. They should be very stiff, imco, to resist any torsioning of the bridge, changing of shape, that rig and mast pressure could produce.

Then, your keepers, the extra supports, pipes, whatever could be removed for convenience when the sails are not flying.
Then again, they may be totally unnecessary. That arch is less than 4' across - it should be a piece of cake to make a rigid curve that will take 2 1/2 sponberg tons of point load. H m m m m m . That IS a lot to ask.

__________________________________________________ ________________________________
* The cabin sides on the Ariel are flat, maybe around 1/8"+ thick layup. Tho the front curves so nicely around and also the sweet transition of sides to top - and is therefore a strong shape - the flat sides seem vulnerable to me to being deflected. I can't imagine how mast forces could do it, but anything is possible. Beam supports coming down the cabin sides as 338 has and being part of the remaining bulkhead under the deck ought to keep the sides from moving. They are kind of like arms and have a full lapjoint with the beam ends. If I did it over and became convinced a glass or carbon structure could be made strong enough (and perhaps it could be by tabbing and incorporating it totally into the cabin) I would do it. Because it is consistant with and a logical extension of the Ariel's monocque construction.
That wood beam is a left over from the past.

[mbd]

Mold: I think it's been mentioned by someone before, but I'm planning on having moldicide mixed into the paint when I redo the interiors of the lockers and cabin.

Flotation: I like your idea for getting every ounce of extra flotation on board with the glassed in foam.
With the recore, the whole foam sandwich has been on my mind a lot. I've been thinking I'll have some Corecell left over and wondering what I might be able to make using the same method - perhaps a little dink?

Mike - I have considered it before, and the idea keeps coming back to me as the KISS way to get the mostest with the leastest.

I'm a big fan of KISS (not the band). I've been thinking the compression post will someday be the key to adding an enclosed head...