Re: Peel Ply
I have not experienced the outgassing phenomenon using MDO
plywood. I have used peelply only on the butt joints and consider
it well worth the expense. When I removed the clamping boards,
there was no filling or sanding required.
For pre-glassing or coating the large flat surfaces in the
horizontal position, peelply is too expensive and is unnecessary.
I use adhesive applicator roller covers. These are roller covers
with 1/8" nylon bristles rather than the nap found on paint rollers.
They are specifically designed for epoxy and other adhesives.
They are made by Linzer and I find them at Home Depot. I cut
them in half because I find it less tiring to use a 4" roller. Short
lengths of these roller covers, split on the bandsaw and wedged
into a saw kerf at the end of a stick, make great brushes.
Vince Chew
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "home" <boatbuilding@g...>
wrote:
plywood. I have used peelply only on the butt joints and consider
it well worth the expense. When I removed the clamping boards,
there was no filling or sanding required.
For pre-glassing or coating the large flat surfaces in the
horizontal position, peelply is too expensive and is unnecessary.
I use adhesive applicator roller covers. These are roller covers
with 1/8" nylon bristles rather than the nap found on paint rollers.
They are specifically designed for epoxy and other adhesives.
They are made by Linzer and I find them at Home Depot. I cut
them in half because I find it less tiring to use a 4" roller. Short
lengths of these roller covers, split on the bandsaw and wedged
into a saw kerf at the end of a stick, make great brushes.
Vince Chew
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "home" <boatbuilding@g...>
wrote:
> Probably all of the above. Out-gassing is a real problem withepoxy in some
> temperature environments where it can swing by largeamounts. I have a real
> problem with it here in CO where nights can be 55 - 60degrees and day time
Probably all of the above. Out-gassing is a real problem with epoxy in some
temperature environments where it can swing by large amounts. I have a real
problem with it here in CO where nights can be 55 - 60 degrees and day time
highs of 90 - 95. I don't use peel ply or vacuum bagging, just plain cloth
and epoxy on a flat surface if at all possible. I've had bubbles in excess
of 1/2" in size show up, especially if gluing cedar to plywood. They will
continue to show up until the epoxy sets. A quick scrape and a recoat helps
guarantee a water tight coating.
Best time for me to epoxy coat is after 7:00 PM so the wood is cooling off
and does the opposite and pulls epoxy into the grain. Second coats don't
seem to matter since I've never had out gassing on the second coat, only the
first.
Jeff
temperature environments where it can swing by large amounts. I have a real
problem with it here in CO where nights can be 55 - 60 degrees and day time
highs of 90 - 95. I don't use peel ply or vacuum bagging, just plain cloth
and epoxy on a flat surface if at all possible. I've had bubbles in excess
of 1/2" in size show up, especially if gluing cedar to plywood. They will
continue to show up until the epoxy sets. A quick scrape and a recoat helps
guarantee a water tight coating.
Best time for me to epoxy coat is after 7:00 PM so the wood is cooling off
and does the opposite and pulls epoxy into the grain. Second coats don't
seem to matter since I've never had out gassing on the second coat, only the
first.
Jeff
----- Original Message -----
From: "Doug Harrison" <prototype@...>
To: <bolger@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, February 03, 2003 7:16 PM
Subject: [bolger] Re: Peel Ply
> 2/3/2003 9:04:00 PM, Ford and Mary Ann Walton <waltons@...>
wrote:
>
> >The pits in the epoxy-under-plastic are not from out-gassing. They are
> >bubbles of air trapped under the plastic where there was a small
> >irregularity in the epoxysurface.
>
> Or possibly air that was entrained during the mixing process?
>
> Doug
>
2/3/2003 9:04:00 PM, Ford and Mary Ann Walton <waltons@...> wrote:
Doug
>The pits in the epoxy-under-plastic are not from out-gassing. They areOr possibly air that was entrained during the mixing process?
>bubbles of air trapped under the plastic where there was a small
>irregularity in the epoxysurface.
Doug
Dear Bill,
The pits in the epoxy-under-plastic are not from out-gassing. They are
bubbles of air trapped under the plastic where there was a small
irregularity in the epoxysurface.
Ford Walton
"wmrpage " wrote:
The pits in the epoxy-under-plastic are not from out-gassing. They are
bubbles of air trapped under the plastic where there was a small
irregularity in the epoxysurface.
Ford Walton
"wmrpage " wrote:
>(...snip...)
> --- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "proaconstrictor
> <proaconstrictor@y...>" <proaconstrictor@y...> wrote:
> >
> > For you simple experiment, I am not sure what improvement there
> would
> > be over standard flow coating. Strip canoe folks get perfect...
> For whatever reasons, the finish coat on the "over-easy" test sample
> re-distributed itself, resulting in quite evident variations in
> thickness and an number of pits in the surface. It would have
> required a lot of sanding and some filling to give an acceptable
> surface.
>
> Results on a waxed formica platen would probably be better, but if
> the pits were the result of out-gassing during the cure, it would
> still give a poorer surface finish than simply flow coating.
> The "over-easy" technique has the additional defect that there is no
> way of determining what your results will be or to take corrective
> action. You don't know what you'll get until you turn the cured piece
> over.
>
> So, all in all, this was not a good idea.
>
> Ciao for Niao,
>
> Bill in MN
>
> Bolger rules!!!
> - no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, or flogging dead horses
> - stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no 'Ed, thanks, Fred' posts
> - add your comments at the TOP and SIGN your posts and <snip> away
> - To order plans: Mr. Philip C. Bolger, P.O. Box 1209, Gloucester, MA, 01930, Fax: (978) 282-1349
> - Unsubscribe:bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> - Open discussion:bolger_coffee_lounge-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject tohttp://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "proaconstrictor
<proaconstrictor@y...>" <proaconstrictor@y...> wrote:
correct! Finish quality on my "epoxy-over-easy-on-poly" experiment
was much less satisfactory than simply flow coating. It's a pity in a
way, as, if it had worked, it would have enabled me to work in an
extra step or two for each weekend's epoxy session.
I was concerned about getting an even thickness of the thickened
finish coat. However, I found I could evenly spread a mayonnaise-like
mix of epoxy and fairing filler with a 1/16" notched trowel over the
curing glass/epoxy without any problem. The goop flowed to a nearly
uniform coat in several minutes. I had worried that the trowel would
tend to snag and drag the cloth, but this did not prove to be a
problem. I did wait 30 minutes or so after rolling out the glass to
give the epoxy time to get somewhat tacky before troweling.
For whatever reasons, the finish coat on the "over-easy" test sample
re-distributed itself, resulting in quite evident variations in
thickness and an number of pits in the surface. It would have
required a lot of sanding and some filling to give an acceptable
surface.
Results on a waxed formica platen would probably be better, but if
the pits were the result of out-gassing during the cure, it would
still give a poorer surface finish than simply flow coating.
The "over-easy" technique has the additional defect that there is no
way of determining what your results will be or to take corrective
action. You don't know what you'll get until you turn the cured piece
over.
So, all in all, this was not a good idea.
Ciao for Niao,
Bill in MN
<proaconstrictor@y...>" <proaconstrictor@y...> wrote:
>would
> For you simple experiment, I am not sure what improvement there
> be over standard flow coating. Strip canoe folks get perfectdown,
> finishes on smallish projecyts like canoes, and they don't monkey
> around, just spread it out. On the flat, it is easier. Upside
> I am not so sure. Let us know how it works out.You will probably not be surprised to learn that you are 150%
correct! Finish quality on my "epoxy-over-easy-on-poly" experiment
was much less satisfactory than simply flow coating. It's a pity in a
way, as, if it had worked, it would have enabled me to work in an
extra step or two for each weekend's epoxy session.
I was concerned about getting an even thickness of the thickened
finish coat. However, I found I could evenly spread a mayonnaise-like
mix of epoxy and fairing filler with a 1/16" notched trowel over the
curing glass/epoxy without any problem. The goop flowed to a nearly
uniform coat in several minutes. I had worried that the trowel would
tend to snag and drag the cloth, but this did not prove to be a
problem. I did wait 30 minutes or so after rolling out the glass to
give the epoxy time to get somewhat tacky before troweling.
For whatever reasons, the finish coat on the "over-easy" test sample
re-distributed itself, resulting in quite evident variations in
thickness and an number of pits in the surface. It would have
required a lot of sanding and some filling to give an acceptable
surface.
Results on a waxed formica platen would probably be better, but if
the pits were the result of out-gassing during the cure, it would
still give a poorer surface finish than simply flow coating.
The "over-easy" technique has the additional defect that there is no
way of determining what your results will be or to take corrective
action. You don't know what you'll get until you turn the cured piece
over.
So, all in all, this was not a good idea.
Ciao for Niao,
Bill in MN
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, wmrpage@a... wrote:
I think this is the hard way. With totaly level materials, I would
dry glass it spread the glass out, and pour epoxy on, it is much
easier to apply glass evenly this way, though I wouldn't shy from
putting the glue down first, it wouldn't be easier.. Though I
haven't bothered with flow coating much, you can just apply a thick
coat of epoxy and it will cure like a skating rink. If you try to
notch on bog, I think it will lift up the glass. If you wait until
it hardens off a little, it shouldn't be a problem, except that if
you flow coat it, you could already be finished. Since you are
creating a surface you intend to sand with the bog, why put poly over
it. It will distort the surface, and you will get shinny areas, but
not necesarily level, so your sanding anyway. Then you would have to
clear coat to prottect the bog anyway. Seems like you are adding
steps, that you could do anyway, but might not have to at all if you
flow coated.
That said, I never seem to have the perfect level surace to flow coat
on, and would probably just glass level to the surface of the glass,
and then add build coats as required
> sandable, reasonably smooth surface of fairly uniform thickness.Has anyone
> tried this before? Can anyone think of reasons this might be afiasco?
I think this is the hard way. With totaly level materials, I would
dry glass it spread the glass out, and pour epoxy on, it is much
easier to apply glass evenly this way, though I wouldn't shy from
putting the glue down first, it wouldn't be easier.. Though I
haven't bothered with flow coating much, you can just apply a thick
coat of epoxy and it will cure like a skating rink. If you try to
notch on bog, I think it will lift up the glass. If you wait until
it hardens off a little, it shouldn't be a problem, except that if
you flow coat it, you could already be finished. Since you are
creating a surface you intend to sand with the bog, why put poly over
it. It will distort the surface, and you will get shinny areas, but
not necesarily level, so your sanding anyway. Then you would have to
clear coat to prottect the bog anyway. Seems like you are adding
steps, that you could do anyway, but might not have to at all if you
flow coated.
That said, I never seem to have the perfect level surace to flow coat
on, and would probably just glass level to the surface of the glass,
and then add build coats as required
> However, the "masking film" is, I assume, impermeable, whilethe "release
> fabric" is porous. I've never done any vacuum bagging, so I don'tknow when
> and to what extent this porosity is necessary. I suppose it ishighly
> desirable if achieving the highest possible fiber/resin ratio, butperhaps
> not necessary if that is not a critical criteria? (e.g. buildingbackyard
> boats say, rather than stealth bombers or spars for America's Cupboats) Any
> thoughts?The risk with fabrics is that the abundance of wet and gooey stuff,
will either bond all you vacuum bagging equipment, which is an
expense, or vapor lock, and not get the vac everywhere. Since peel
ply protects the vac machinery from the part, and smooths out the
part, it is pretty economical for production builders.
I never used either a difusion membrane, or peel ply with vac over
wood, even on occaion cloth, never had any problems. I am not too
sure how the hughes guys are getting away with something
impermiable. They definetly want great resin ratios.
Over on the KSS site they have just reported the first success with a
resin infusion model for the home builder, at least that I have heard
of. Technology is marching ahead, and the time may come when quick
and clean boatbuilding is abtter than plywood.
For you simple experiment, I am not sure what improvement there would
be over standard flow coating. Strip canoe folks get perfect
finishes on smallish projecyts like canoes, and they don't monkey
around, just spread it out. On the flat, it is easier. Upside down,
I am not so sure. Let us know how it works out.
Bill:
My experience is the Luan won't check very badly, but Doug Fir will. Be careful with Birch - it rots readily, and often does not have exterior glue. To end up with a smooth and shiny surface, try a sheet of masonite that is coated with white melamine (it's used for bathrooms). Wax it first, then push your panels against that.
Chuck
To go OFF TOPIC - I have a small experiment planned for this weekend. My
current project involves the construction of a lot of light boat "furniture"
for an open boat. (i.e. exposed to the elements) I intend to use 1/4" fir ACX
for some of the panels and either that or 3/16" luan for others. (these seem
to be my options - no knowledge of any "5-ply Baltic Birch underlayment" at
my local Menards, unfortunately) In either case I think I need to glass the
exposed panel faces to discourage checking. My idea is to saturate the face
with epoxy, roll out the glass and using a notched trowel lay on a layer of
epoxy thickened with a light sandable filler. Before it cures, I propose to
tip the panel upside down on a surface covered with ordinary poly film,
weight it down and let it cure. The idea is that I might get a readily
sandable, reasonably smooth surface of fairly uniform thickness. Has anyone
tried this before? Can anyone think of reasons this might be a fiasco?
Ciao for Niao,
Bill in MN
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
My experience is the Luan won't check very badly, but Doug Fir will. Be careful with Birch - it rots readily, and often does not have exterior glue. To end up with a smooth and shiny surface, try a sheet of masonite that is coated with white melamine (it's used for bathrooms). Wax it first, then push your panels against that.
Chuck
To go OFF TOPIC - I have a small experiment planned for this weekend. My
current project involves the construction of a lot of light boat "furniture"
for an open boat. (i.e. exposed to the elements) I intend to use 1/4" fir ACX
for some of the panels and either that or 3/16" luan for others. (these seem
to be my options - no knowledge of any "5-ply Baltic Birch underlayment" at
my local Menards, unfortunately) In either case I think I need to glass the
exposed panel faces to discourage checking. My idea is to saturate the face
with epoxy, roll out the glass and using a notched trowel lay on a layer of
epoxy thickened with a light sandable filler. Before it cures, I propose to
tip the panel upside down on a surface covered with ordinary poly film,
weight it down and let it cure. The idea is that I might get a readily
sandable, reasonably smooth surface of fairly uniform thickness. Has anyone
tried this before? Can anyone think of reasons this might be a fiasco?
Ciao for Niao,
Bill in MN
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
for an open boat. (i.e. exposed to the elements) I intend to use 1/4" fir ACX
for some of the panels and either that or 3/16" luan for others.
The Luan will definietly benefit from the four ounce cloth. Make dang certain you sel it well.
with epoxy, roll out the glass and using a notched trowel lay on a layer of
epoxy thickened with a light sandable filler. Before it cures, I propose to
tip the panel upside down on a surface covered with ordinary poly film,
weight it down and let it cure. The idea is that I might get a readily
sandable, reasonably smooth surface of fairly uniform thickness. Has anyone
tried this before? Can anyone think of reasons this might be a fiasco?
I would use a finishing trowel or squeegee to smooth the top coat and lay the poly on top of it ( still right side up ) and then roll the poly into the top coat. I am afraid that your way will still leave the ridges from the notched trowel when it cured. You could use a stiffer mix this way also.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
Bolger rules!!!
- no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, or flogging dead horses
- stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no 'Ed, thanks, Fred' posts
- add your comments at the TOP and SIGN your posts and <snip> away
- To order plans: Mr. Philip C. Bolger, P.O. Box 1209, Gloucester, MA, 01930, Fax: (978) 282-1349
- Unsubscribe:bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
- Open discussion:bolger_coffee_lounge-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
for some of the panels and either that or 3/16" luan for others.
The Luan will definietly benefit from the four ounce cloth. Make dang certain you sel it well.
with epoxy, roll out the glass and using a notched trowel lay on a layer of
epoxy thickened with a light sandable filler. Before it cures, I propose to
tip the panel upside down on a surface covered with ordinary poly film,
weight it down and let it cure. The idea is that I might get a readily
sandable, reasonably smooth surface of fairly uniform thickness. Has anyone
tried this before? Can anyone think of reasons this might be a fiasco?
I would use a finishing trowel or squeegee to smooth the top coat and lay the poly on top of it ( still right side up ) and then roll the poly into the top coat. I am afraid that your way will still leave the ridges from the notched trowel when it cured. You could use a stiffer mix this way also.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
Bolger rules!!!
- no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, or flogging dead horses
- stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no 'Ed, thanks, Fred' posts
- add your comments at the TOP and SIGN your posts and <snip> away
- To order plans: Mr. Philip C. Bolger, P.O. Box 1209, Gloucester, MA, 01930, Fax: (978) 282-1349
- Unsubscribe:bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
- Open discussion:bolger_coffee_lounge-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
In a message dated 1/27/03 11:42:58 AM Central Standard Time,
proaconstrictor@...writes:
text only. Pictures and my inkjet printer don't get along very well.
The product is described as "3M masking film, West Marine #425512". Only one
side will release from the epoxy. My 2002 West Marine catalog describes this
stuff as "Prefolded Masking Film", suitable for "indoor extended masking", 3M
part #6848 - $22.99 + S&H for 4' X 180' - slightly over $.03/ft.^2. This
compares to approx. $.70/ft.^2 for Jamestown "879 Release Fabric" and approx.
$.44/ft.^2 for 4 oz. fiberglass cloth from the same source.
However, the "masking film" is, I assume, impermeable, while the "release
fabric" is porous. I've never done any vacuum bagging, so I don't know when
and to what extent this porosity is necessary. I suppose it is highly
desirable if achieving the highest possible fiber/resin ratio, but perhaps
not necessary if that is not a critical criteria? (e.g. building backyard
boats say, rather than stealth bombers or spars for America's Cup boats) Any
thoughts?
To go OFF TOPIC - I have a small experiment planned for this weekend. My
current project involves the construction of a lot of light boat "furniture"
for an open boat. (i.e. exposed to the elements) I intend to use 1/4" fir ACX
for some of the panels and either that or 3/16" luan for others. (these seem
to be my options - no knowledge of any "5-ply Baltic Birch underlayment" at
my local Menards, unfortunately) In either case I think I need to glass the
exposed panel faces to discourage checking. My idea is to saturate the face
with epoxy, roll out the glass and using a notched trowel lay on a layer of
epoxy thickened with a light sandable filler. Before it cures, I propose to
tip the panel upside down on a surface covered with ordinary poly film,
weight it down and let it cure. The idea is that I might get a readily
sandable, reasonably smooth surface of fairly uniform thickness. Has anyone
tried this before? Can anyone think of reasons this might be a fiasco?
Ciao for Niao,
Bill in MN
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
proaconstrictor@...writes:
> there is a substituteInteresting and useful site! I wish I could figure out how to print out the
> material suggested, it might be less expenseve, don't know.
text only. Pictures and my inkjet printer don't get along very well.
The product is described as "3M masking film, West Marine #425512". Only one
side will release from the epoxy. My 2002 West Marine catalog describes this
stuff as "Prefolded Masking Film", suitable for "indoor extended masking", 3M
part #6848 - $22.99 + S&H for 4' X 180' - slightly over $.03/ft.^2. This
compares to approx. $.70/ft.^2 for Jamestown "879 Release Fabric" and approx.
$.44/ft.^2 for 4 oz. fiberglass cloth from the same source.
However, the "masking film" is, I assume, impermeable, while the "release
fabric" is porous. I've never done any vacuum bagging, so I don't know when
and to what extent this porosity is necessary. I suppose it is highly
desirable if achieving the highest possible fiber/resin ratio, but perhaps
not necessary if that is not a critical criteria? (e.g. building backyard
boats say, rather than stealth bombers or spars for America's Cup boats) Any
thoughts?
To go OFF TOPIC - I have a small experiment planned for this weekend. My
current project involves the construction of a lot of light boat "furniture"
for an open boat. (i.e. exposed to the elements) I intend to use 1/4" fir ACX
for some of the panels and either that or 3/16" luan for others. (these seem
to be my options - no knowledge of any "5-ply Baltic Birch underlayment" at
my local Menards, unfortunately) In either case I think I need to glass the
exposed panel faces to discourage checking. My idea is to saturate the face
with epoxy, roll out the glass and using a notched trowel lay on a layer of
epoxy thickened with a light sandable filler. Before it cures, I propose to
tip the panel upside down on a surface covered with ordinary poly film,
weight it down and let it cure. The idea is that I might get a readily
sandable, reasonably smooth surface of fairly uniform thickness. Has anyone
tried this before? Can anyone think of reasons this might be a fiasco?
Ciao for Niao,
Bill in MN
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Check out this strip building manual, in there, there is a substitute
material suggested, it might be less expenseve, don't know. It is in
the glassing section, about 10 pages in, or you could search on "peel"
http://www.multihulldesigns.com/pdf/stripman4.pdf
-- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, Harry James <welshman@p...> wrote:
material suggested, it might be less expenseve, don't know. It is in
the glassing section, about 10 pages in, or you could search on "peel"
http://www.multihulldesigns.com/pdf/stripman4.pdf
-- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, Harry James <welshman@p...> wrote:
>puting it
> Yes and the price at Raka is higher than the fiberglass you are
> over.
>
>
>
> HJ
>
> > YOu realize it can't be reused?
> >
> >
Yes and the price at Raka is higher than the fiberglass you are puting it
over.
HJ
over.
HJ
> YOu realize it can't be reused?
>
>
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, Harry James <welshman@p...> wrote:
fabrics in its place, just regular polyester or dacron fabrics. My
recollection is that nylon absorbs too much moisture, and as a result
gets bonded to epoxy.
Results were only partialy satisfactory, since the thing is that
while the epoxy won't bond to these fabrics, it takes quite a bit of
force to separate it. Sometimes that was below the tear resistance
of the fabric, so it would only partially peel. Other problems
concern the cost unless you can find a desireable material that is
almost free, it may be too expensive. If you have a good very cheap
fabric store nearby, no worries.
Overall I gave up using it. It does smooth out the materials being
layed up, and it one step coats glass, holding the resin up above the
glass. But overall it is several additional steps, and some
additional cost.
Some shops use it everywhere, and if it cuts manhours, it might be a
good payoff, but it wosn't for me.
It is used extensively in vacuum bagging fabrics, and I can see the
point there, but I have never bagged fabrics, and the extra cost
would worry me. Also there the additional bonding pressure raises
the stakes on PP separation.
YOu realize it can't be reused?
> Any body in the group know about inexpensive substitutes for peelply?
>there any
> Any body used peel ply who would like to share experiences and are
> on line tutorials?I have used peel ply, and substitutes for it you can use a lot of
>
> HJ
fabrics in its place, just regular polyester or dacron fabrics. My
recollection is that nylon absorbs too much moisture, and as a result
gets bonded to epoxy.
Results were only partialy satisfactory, since the thing is that
while the epoxy won't bond to these fabrics, it takes quite a bit of
force to separate it. Sometimes that was below the tear resistance
of the fabric, so it would only partially peel. Other problems
concern the cost unless you can find a desireable material that is
almost free, it may be too expensive. If you have a good very cheap
fabric store nearby, no worries.
Overall I gave up using it. It does smooth out the materials being
layed up, and it one step coats glass, holding the resin up above the
glass. But overall it is several additional steps, and some
additional cost.
Some shops use it everywhere, and if it cuts manhours, it might be a
good payoff, but it wosn't for me.
It is used extensively in vacuum bagging fabrics, and I can see the
point there, but I have never bagged fabrics, and the extra cost
would worry me. Also there the additional bonding pressure raises
the stakes on PP separation.
YOu realize it can't be reused?
Any body in the group know about inexpensive substitutes for peel ply?
Any body used peel ply who would like to share experiences and are there any
on line tutorials?
HJ
Any body used peel ply who would like to share experiences and are there any
on line tutorials?
HJ
Hatz makes a 4 hp air cooled diesel that weighs in around 60 lbs model 1B20.
Northern Tools sells it on their web site. They also sell the slightly larger
1b30, but Hardy diesel has cheaper price. They are rope start.
There has been a shift in thinking over the last couple of years about
electric power generation on cruising boats. The requirement for lots of
electricity means an AC Generator turning at a constant speed, usually rather
large, heavy and because it has to turn at full RPM,rather noisy. The other
choices are wind power, solar power and starting the auxiliary. The modern
cruiser has gone way past simple and the power requirements are such, that
incredible battery banks are required driving an inverter.
The latest shift is get away from the AC Generator, go to low output, quiet
DC generation and leave it on a long time. Because it is unobtrusive, it
doesn't bother you or your neighbors. They ultimate in this concept is the
Whispergen, but it is very expensive. There are several manufacturers that
are using small Kubotas with a DC alternator turning slow and well silenced.
They use very little fuel and last a long time because of low load. I talked
to one manufacturer and he told me of a shore based unit in Yakataga that had
run 5 years at 800 RPM so far.
My thought was get a small Hatz (they are supposed to be quieter than normal
air cooled) combine it in a box with an alternator, Sound insulate it, two
layers with an airspace, baffled inbound air vent and well muffled exhaust
into the out vent. I think that you get a fairly small unit weighing in at
100-130 Lbs. This would get you away from the liquid cooling problems of the
Kubotas, and allow you to get the unit out of the engine room and under a
cockpit seat or whatever.
I thought of suggesting this to Jeff when he was discussing electric systems
for his Wyoming. I decided he didn't have the time to waste on several100 hrs
of development, but it is still cooking in my mind.
Northern Tools sells it on their web site. They also sell the slightly larger
1b30, but Hardy diesel has cheaper price. They are rope start.
There has been a shift in thinking over the last couple of years about
electric power generation on cruising boats. The requirement for lots of
electricity means an AC Generator turning at a constant speed, usually rather
large, heavy and because it has to turn at full RPM,rather noisy. The other
choices are wind power, solar power and starting the auxiliary. The modern
cruiser has gone way past simple and the power requirements are such, that
incredible battery banks are required driving an inverter.
The latest shift is get away from the AC Generator, go to low output, quiet
DC generation and leave it on a long time. Because it is unobtrusive, it
doesn't bother you or your neighbors. They ultimate in this concept is the
Whispergen, but it is very expensive. There are several manufacturers that
are using small Kubotas with a DC alternator turning slow and well silenced.
They use very little fuel and last a long time because of low load. I talked
to one manufacturer and he told me of a shore based unit in Yakataga that had
run 5 years at 800 RPM so far.
My thought was get a small Hatz (they are supposed to be quieter than normal
air cooled) combine it in a box with an alternator, Sound insulate it, two
layers with an airspace, baffled inbound air vent and well muffled exhaust
into the out vent. I think that you get a fairly small unit weighing in at
100-130 Lbs. This would get you away from the liquid cooling problems of the
Kubotas, and allow you to get the unit out of the engine room and under a
cockpit seat or whatever.
I thought of suggesting this to Jeff when he was discussing electric systems
for his Wyoming. I decided he didn't have the time to waste on several100 hrs
of development, but it is still cooking in my mind.
> what might be the smallest diesel made? have an idea of size and weight?
> robby
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From: "David Romasco" <dromasco@...>
>
> >Reply-To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
> >To: <bolger@yahoogroups.com>
> >Subject: RE: [bolger] Re: small added expense, was roofing tar
> >Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 18:01:11 -0500
> >
> >It's worth checking out farming magazines. I saw some surplus Deutz power
> >units last year that were priced to move..
> >
> >
> >
> >Only negative I can see is that every Deutz I've ever encountered is more
> >than a little noisy. LOTS of soundproofing, flexible mounts, and really
> >well designed air ducting, I think.
> >
> >
> >
> >David Romasco
> >
> >
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
>
> From: Bruce Hallman <brucehallman@...>
>
> >[mailto:brucehallman@...]
> >
> >Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 4:40 PM
> >To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
> >Subject: [bolger] Re: small added expense, was roofing tar
> >
> > > ...the old tractor to yank an engine, can that be done?
> > >
> > > > old tractor to yank an engine out of...
> >
> >The Deutz Diesel engine F3L-1011, which
> >PB&F have favored in several of their
> >'cruiser' designs recently is a very
> >common engine in construction equipment.
> >29hp, three cylinder and air cooled.
> >
> >Most common, I think, in the workhorse
> >welding machine, the Miller BigBlue 251D and
> >the Ditchwitch trenchers 3500 & 3610.
> >
> >Also it is common in vibratory compactors,
> >water pumps, generators. stump grinders,
> >compressors, forklifts, Bobcat loaders,
> >and scissor lifts. These pieces of equipment
> >commonly come up for sale in bankrupcy
> >auctions, etc..
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> >
> >
> >
> >ADVERTISEMENT
> >
> ><http://rd.yahoo.com/M=241773.2861420.4212388.1925585/D=egroupweb/S=170506
> >57
> > 91:HM/A=1394045/R=0/*http:/www.hgtv.com/hgtv/pac_ctnt/text/0,,HGTV_3936_5
> >802 ,FF.html> HGTV Dream Home Giveaway
> >
> >
> >
> ><http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=241773.2861420.4212388.1925585/D=egroupm
> >ai l/S=:HM/A=1394045/rand=552830797>
> >
> >
> >Bolger rules!!!
> >- no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, or flogging dead horses
> >- stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no 'Ed, thanks, Fred' posts
> >- add your comments at the TOP and SIGN your posts and <snip> away
> >- To order plans: Mr. Philip C. Bolger, P.O. Box 1209, Gloucester, MA,
> >01930, Fax: (978) 282-1349
> >- Unsubscribe:bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> >- Open discussion:bolger_coffee_lounge-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
> >
> >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
> ><http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Terms of Service.
> >
> >
> >
> >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8.
>http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
>
>
> Bolger rules!!!
> - no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, or flogging dead horses
> - stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no 'Ed, thanks, Fred' posts
> - add your comments at the TOP and SIGN your posts and <snip> away
> - To order plans: Mr. Philip C. Bolger, P.O. Box 1209, Gloucester, MA,
> 01930, Fax: (978) 282-1349 - Unsubscribe:
>bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> - Open discussion:bolger_coffee_lounge-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject tohttp://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
I don't know, but I just watched a show where they had air cooled
diesel engines that were rope startes and could be carried by one
person. They were powering go-carts. I would say the engine was less
than 50 lbs, from the way they were carrying it.
Steve
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "robby plunkett" <robbylplunkett@h...>
wrote:
diesel engines that were rope startes and could be carried by one
person. They were powering go-carts. I would say the engine was less
than 50 lbs, from the way they were carrying it.
Steve
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, "robby plunkett" <robbylplunkett@h...>
wrote:
> what might be the smallest diesel made? have an idea of size andweight?
> robbyDeutz power
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >From: "David Romasco" <dromasco@g...>
> >Reply-To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
> >To: <bolger@yahoogroups.com>
> >Subject: RE: [bolger] Re: small added expense, was roofing tar
> >Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 18:01:11 -0500
> >
> >It's worth checking out farming magazines. I saw some surplus
> >units last year that were priced to move..is more
> >
> >
> >
> >Only negative I can see is that every Deutz I've ever encountered
> >than a little noisy. LOTS of soundproofing, flexible mounts, andreally
> >well designed air ducting, I think.7050657
> >
> >
> >
> >David Romasco
> >
> >
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Bruce Hallman <brucehallman@y...>
> >[mailto:brucehallman@y...]
> >
> >Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 4:40 PM
> >To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
> >Subject: [bolger] Re: small added expense, was roofing tar
> >
> >
> >
> > > ...the old tractor to yank an engine, can that be done?
> > > > old tractor to yank an engine out of...
> >
> >The Deutz Diesel engine F3L-1011, which
> >PB&F have favored in several of their
> >'cruiser' designs recently is a very
> >common engine in construction equipment.
> >29hp, three cylinder and air cooled.
> >
> >Most common, I think, in the workhorse
> >welding machine, the Miller BigBlue 251D and
> >the Ditchwitch trenchers 3500 & 3610.
> >
> >Also it is common in vibratory compactors,
> >water pumps, generators. stump grinders,
> >compressors, forklifts, Bobcat loaders,
> >and scissor lifts. These pieces of equipment
> >commonly come up for sale in bankrupcy
> >auctions, etc..
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> >
> >
> >
> >ADVERTISEMENT
> >
>
><http://rd.yahoo.com/M=241773.2861420.4212388.1925585/D=egroupweb/S=1
>36_5802
>91:HM/A=1394045/R=0/*http:/www.hgtv.com/hgtv/pac_ctnt/text/0,,HGTV_39
> >,FF.html> HGTV Dream Home GiveawayM=241773.2861420.4212388.1925585/D=egroupmai
> >
> >
> >
> ><http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?
> >l/S=:HM/A=1394045/rand=552830797>posts
> >
> >
> >Bolger rules!!!
> >- no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, or flogging dead horses
> >- stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no 'Ed, thanks, Fred'
> >- add your comments at the TOP and SIGN your posts and<snip> away
> >- To order plans: Mr. Philip C. Bolger, P.O. Box 1209, Gloucester,MA,
> >01930, Fax: (978) 282-1349
> >- Unsubscribe:bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> >- Open discussion:bolger_coffee_lounge-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
> >
> >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
> ><http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Terms of Service.
> >
> >
> >
> >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8.
>http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
1/23/2003 12:30:09 AM, "robby plunkett" <robbylplunkett@...> wrote:
http://www.holcombandson.com/engines/deutz/diesel_engines.shtml
You will note that hp ratings are dependent upon duty cycle. That's another way of saying "how long do you want it to
last?"
Yanmar also makes engines in the 5hp range.
Doug
>what might be the smallest diesel made? have an idea of size and weight?Deutz Ruggerini has single cylinder models down to about 5hp. Try this url:
>robby
http://www.holcombandson.com/engines/deutz/diesel_engines.shtml
You will note that hp ratings are dependent upon duty cycle. That's another way of saying "how long do you want it to
last?"
Yanmar also makes engines in the 5hp range.
Doug
what might be the smallest diesel made? have an idea of size and weight?
robby
Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
robby
>From: "David Romasco" <dromasco@...>_________________________________________________________________
>Reply-To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
>To: <bolger@yahoogroups.com>
>Subject: RE: [bolger] Re: small added expense, was roofing tar
>Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2003 18:01:11 -0500
>
>It's worth checking out farming magazines. I saw some surplus Deutz power
>units last year that were priced to move..
>
>
>
>Only negative I can see is that every Deutz I've ever encountered is more
>than a little noisy. LOTS of soundproofing, flexible mounts, and really
>well designed air ducting, I think.
>
>
>
>David Romasco
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Bruce Hallman <brucehallman@...>
>[mailto:brucehallman@...]
>
>Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 4:40 PM
>To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: [bolger] Re: small added expense, was roofing tar
>
>
>
> > ...the old tractor to yank an engine, can that be done?
> > > old tractor to yank an engine out of...
>
>The Deutz Diesel engine F3L-1011, which
>PB&F have favored in several of their
>'cruiser' designs recently is a very
>common engine in construction equipment.
>29hp, three cylinder and air cooled.
>
>Most common, I think, in the workhorse
>welding machine, the Miller BigBlue 251D and
>the Ditchwitch trenchers 3500 & 3610.
>
>Also it is common in vibratory compactors,
>water pumps, generators. stump grinders,
>compressors, forklifts, Bobcat loaders,
>and scissor lifts. These pieces of equipment
>commonly come up for sale in bankrupcy
>auctions, etc..
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>
>
>
>ADVERTISEMENT
>
><http://rd.yahoo.com/M=241773.2861420.4212388.1925585/D=egroupweb/S=17050657
>91:HM/A=1394045/R=0/*http:/www.hgtv.com/hgtv/pac_ctnt/text/0,,HGTV_3936_5802
>,FF.html> HGTV Dream Home Giveaway
>
>
>
><http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=241773.2861420.4212388.1925585/D=egroupmai
>l/S=:HM/A=1394045/rand=552830797>
>
>
>Bolger rules!!!
>- no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, or flogging dead horses
>- stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no 'Ed, thanks, Fred' posts
>- add your comments at the TOP and SIGN your posts and <snip> away
>- To order plans: Mr. Philip C. Bolger, P.O. Box 1209, Gloucester, MA,
>01930, Fax: (978) 282-1349
>- Unsubscribe:bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>- Open discussion:bolger_coffee_lounge-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
><http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Terms of Service.
>
>
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
> The materials to build a big boat is the cheapest part of the finalproduct.
> Trust me!Too true!. I told a friend with whom I am discussing, and possibly
>
> Jeff
splitting epoxy, that the hull is 25% of the boat cost, the epoxy is
25% of that, and the savings for cheap brands are about 30% (varies,
but in our discusion). So the savings are 2-3% of the costs. On the
Intercoastal, where you can swim to shore baring gators, sharks, or
manatees gone bad, that's one thing. I don't like to think of the
mental anguish after a few days on the sea anchor though.
> The big cost on the 30-40' multis comes at hardware time even ifyou built a
> cheap hull, if you go for the standard modern rig. In the designpicking
> and planning stages it is good to look at the hardware catalogs.The
> sticker shock may cause a change of plans before it is too late.Agreed! That is where these simplified boats really pay off.
> Gary
>
Seaclippers come with a booklet of simple home built hardware and
rigging. Wharrams, areknown for the gaff wingsail, with the homemade
mast. And my current interest, the Harry proa, has the home made,
free standing, carbon fiber spar, and rig with zero winches, and as
you know, it isn't a really primative rig. How good i don't know.
1/22/2003 6:01:11 PM, "David Romasco" <dromasco@...> wrote:
cooling fins give off a deafening rattle. Add that to the inherent unbalance of a four cycle three cylinder engine that runs
at 3600rpm and you need more than a little sound proofing.
The Deutz is also short-lived (in terms of a diesel) because it is overloaded for it's size. That may not be an issue on a
pleasure boat though. Most high performance marine diesels are just overpowered for their size. The manufacturers
get away with it because corrosion and lack of maintenance always gets the engine first.
One could always de-power the Deutz for marine use. If it's rated at 29hp and 3600 rpm you could always run it at
2200rpm and load it to 12hp. Engine life would go up and noise would go down.
Doug
>Only negative I can see is that every Deutz I've ever encountered is moreThat's a big negative. Air cooled engines are inherently noisy and the Deutz is one of the worst offenders. The cylinder
>than a little noisy.
cooling fins give off a deafening rattle. Add that to the inherent unbalance of a four cycle three cylinder engine that runs
at 3600rpm and you need more than a little sound proofing.
The Deutz is also short-lived (in terms of a diesel) because it is overloaded for it's size. That may not be an issue on a
pleasure boat though. Most high performance marine diesels are just overpowered for their size. The manufacturers
get away with it because corrosion and lack of maintenance always gets the engine first.
One could always de-power the Deutz for marine use. If it's rated at 29hp and 3600 rpm you could always run it at
2200rpm and load it to 12hp. Engine life would go up and noise would go down.
Doug
It's worth checking out farming magazines. I saw some surplus Deutz power
units last year that were priced to move..
Only negative I can see is that every Deutz I've ever encountered is more
than a little noisy. LOTS of soundproofing, flexible mounts, and really
well designed air ducting, I think.
David Romasco
-----Original Message-----
From: Bruce Hallman <brucehallman@...> [mailto:brucehallman@...]
Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 4:40 PM
To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [bolger] Re: small added expense, was roofing tar
PB&F have favored in several of their
'cruiser' designs recently is a very
common engine in construction equipment.
29hp, three cylinder and air cooled.
Most common, I think, in the workhorse
welding machine, the Miller BigBlue 251D and
the Ditchwitch trenchers 3500 & 3610.
Also it is common in vibratory compactors,
water pumps, generators. stump grinders,
compressors, forklifts, Bobcat loaders,
and scissor lifts. These pieces of equipment
commonly come up for sale in bankrupcy
auctions, etc..
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=241773.2861420.4212388.1925585/D=egroupweb/S=17050657
91:HM/A=1394045/R=0/*http:/www.hgtv.com/hgtv/pac_ctnt/text/0,,HGTV_3936_5802
,FF.html> HGTV Dream Home Giveaway
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=241773.2861420.4212388.1925585/D=egroupmai
l/S=:HM/A=1394045/rand=552830797>
Bolger rules!!!
- no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, or flogging dead horses
- stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no 'Ed, thanks, Fred' posts
- add your comments at the TOP and SIGN your posts and <snip> away
- To order plans: Mr. Philip C. Bolger, P.O. Box 1209, Gloucester, MA,
01930, Fax: (978) 282-1349
- Unsubscribe:bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
- Open discussion:bolger_coffee_lounge-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Terms of Service.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
units last year that were priced to move..
Only negative I can see is that every Deutz I've ever encountered is more
than a little noisy. LOTS of soundproofing, flexible mounts, and really
well designed air ducting, I think.
David Romasco
-----Original Message-----
From: Bruce Hallman <brucehallman@...> [mailto:brucehallman@...]
Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 4:40 PM
To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [bolger] Re: small added expense, was roofing tar
> ...the old tractor to yank an engine, can that be done?The Deutz Diesel engine F3L-1011, which
> > old tractor to yank an engine out of...
PB&F have favored in several of their
'cruiser' designs recently is a very
common engine in construction equipment.
29hp, three cylinder and air cooled.
Most common, I think, in the workhorse
welding machine, the Miller BigBlue 251D and
the Ditchwitch trenchers 3500 & 3610.
Also it is common in vibratory compactors,
water pumps, generators. stump grinders,
compressors, forklifts, Bobcat loaders,
and scissor lifts. These pieces of equipment
commonly come up for sale in bankrupcy
auctions, etc..
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=241773.2861420.4212388.1925585/D=egroupweb/S=17050657
91:HM/A=1394045/R=0/*http:/www.hgtv.com/hgtv/pac_ctnt/text/0,,HGTV_3936_5802
,FF.html> HGTV Dream Home Giveaway
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=241773.2861420.4212388.1925585/D=egroupmai
l/S=:HM/A=1394045/rand=552830797>
Bolger rules!!!
- no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, or flogging dead horses
- stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no 'Ed, thanks, Fred' posts
- add your comments at the TOP and SIGN your posts and <snip> away
- To order plans: Mr. Philip C. Bolger, P.O. Box 1209, Gloucester, MA,
01930, Fax: (978) 282-1349
- Unsubscribe:bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
- Open discussion:bolger_coffee_lounge-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Terms of Service.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> ...the old tractor to yank an engine, can that be done?The Deutz Diesel engine F3L-1011, which
> > old tractor to yank an engine out of...
PB&F have favored in several of their
'cruiser' designs recently is a very
common engine in construction equipment.
29hp, three cylinder and air cooled.
Most common, I think, in the workhorse
welding machine, the Miller BigBlue 251D and
the Ditchwitch trenchers 3500 & 3610.
Also it is common in vibratory compactors,
water pumps, generators. stump grinders,
compressors, forklifts, Bobcat loaders,
and scissor lifts. These pieces of equipment
commonly come up for sale in bankrupcy
auctions, etc..
> The big cost on the 30-40' multis comes at hardware time even if you builta
> cheap hull, if you go for the standard modern rig. In the design pickingLike in the Wyo, when I was pricing the project out to get an estimate I was
> and planning stages it is good to look at the hardware catalogs. The
> sticker shock may cause a change of plans before it is too late.
amazed at the hardware cost. So far I've been very close to those
estimates.
Fuel tanks, engine(s), solar panels, tankage, anchor(s) & gear, gauges,
lights, electrical panels, etc., will add up to triple the hull cost in
materials.
The materials to build a big boat is the cheapest part of the final product.
Trust me!
Jeff
Good points. I've mostly gone for the cheap quickly built boat--plywood and
epoxy are great stuff.
Back on that MHBB list I would have been the one arguing for the cheap,
quick to build boat.
The big cost on the 30-40' multis comes at hardware time even if you built a
cheap hull, if you go for the standard modern rig. In the design picking
and planning stages it is good to look at the hardware catalogs. The
sticker shock may cause a change of plans before it is too late.
Gary
Original Message -----
From: <proaconstrictor@...>
To: <bolger@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 11:30 PM
Subject: [bolger] Re: small added expense, was roofing tar
epoxy are great stuff.
Back on that MHBB list I would have been the one arguing for the cheap,
quick to build boat.
The big cost on the 30-40' multis comes at hardware time even if you built a
cheap hull, if you go for the standard modern rig. In the design picking
and planning stages it is good to look at the hardware catalogs. The
sticker shock may cause a change of plans before it is too late.
Gary
Original Message -----
From: <proaconstrictor@...>
To: <bolger@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 11:30 PM
Subject: [bolger] Re: small added expense, was roofing tar
>01930, Fax: (978) 282-1349
> > The point is that each little addition adds to the overall cost.
> If I had built a cheap, crappy boat to start with I would be on
> > the water now instead of wondering what I'm gonna do with this huge
> pile of corecell and uni.
> >
> > Doug
>
> I totaly agree with your point, but if you look at all the simple
> multis, that really do cut into the cost escalation, like Wharram and
> Seaclipper, the thing they start with is epoxy. You can to some
> extent add to that from a list that starts with ply that isn't made
> with waterproof glue, and proceed to boat material with all the bells
> and whistles, like carbon and corecell. What makes all these options
> possible is the epoxy, so that isn't where I start cutitng costs.
>
> The biggest cost in the 100K multi ususaly isn't the materials
> (absolutely there though), as much as the "need" for a boat that is
> 40' plus long. There are a lot of designers these days who don't
> have plans for anything much under 40 feet.
>
> Like the 850 square foot home that evolved into 2400 square feet over
> the last few decades.
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> ADVERTISEMENT
>
>
>
>
> Bolger rules!!!
> - no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, or flogging dead horses
> - stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no 'Ed, thanks, Fred' posts
> - add your comments at the TOP and SIGN your posts and <snip> away
> - To order plans: Mr. Philip C. Bolger, P.O. Box 1209, Gloucester, MA,
> - Unsubscribe:bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> - Open discussion:bolger_coffee_lounge-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
>
>
> The point is that each little addition adds to the overall cost.If I had built a cheap, crappy boat to start with I would be on
> the water now instead of wondering what I'm gonna do with this hugepile of corecell and uni.
>I totaly agree with your point, but if you look at all the simple
> Doug
multis, that really do cut into the cost escalation, like Wharram and
Seaclipper, the thing they start with is epoxy. You can to some
extent add to that from a list that starts with ply that isn't made
with waterproof glue, and proceed to boat material with all the bells
and whistles, like carbon and corecell. What makes all these options
possible is the epoxy, so that isn't where I start cutitng costs.
The biggest cost in the 100K multi ususaly isn't the materials
(absolutely there though), as much as the "need" for a boat that is
40' plus long. There are a lot of designers these days who don't
have plans for anything much under 40 feet.
Like the 850 square foot home that evolved into 2400 square feet over
the last few decades.
Under what failure model, light pressure over weeks? or just the
over the knee special? There are numerous failure modes, are you
sure it's covered for all of them?
over the knee special? There are numerous failure modes, are you
sure it's covered for all of them?
> Any gluing technique that is stronger than the wood it's bonding,is plenty
> good enough. If the wood fails first, does it really matter how itwas
> glued?
>
> Jeff
>what you
> On the Wyo, from actual experience, it works out to almost double
> suggest.starting
>
> Maybe I'm doing it wrong but little squeezes out as I nail it down
> in the center on an inside edge working outwards. I think anythingless you
> could get a starved joint as the wood wicks up the epoxy.deal. My
>
> Saving $600.00 over all on a project like the Wyo is not a big
> only comment is why spend it if you don't have to, but then maybeI'm just
> cheap!From previous discusions, some may remember I am talking vacuum
>
> Jeff
bagging, in which case the figures given are pretty close, since no
cab is required, and you are saving a ton on nails. I don't know if
the technique I have in mind could flaten a wyo bottom, it certainly
could without any special tactics, the half that is flat. Getting
the curvy bits down is a little tougher, and requires either a real
pump, rather than a shop vac, or some continuity in the panels.
Since you are building in three pieces, you would have the vacuuming
devided up easily into nice little segments.
what better advantage does this have to say a four or six cylinder being yanked out of a car except for it is easier? and what does pulling a tractor engine have to do with boat building?
Aaron
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Aaron
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
The short answer is Yep, however:
There are differences in a marine engine and a diesel used in vehicles or a
generator. Many marine engines are just converted car engines. The first
problem is cooling, if you want to keep the radiator than, you need forced
air in and out of the engine compartment, If you want a heat exchanger than
you need the exchanger, through hulls for the water and a pump for the raw
water, you can forego the heat exchanger and use raw water through the block.
For a displacement hull you can use a keel cooler, which is just a pipe or
pipes along the bottom in lieu of the radiator, it needs protection of
course. Then you have to deal with the exhaust, You can lag it with a heat
barrier and put it up a stack for a dry exhaust or you can have a wet
exhaust. This usually takes a special exhaust manifold.
There used to be quite an after market in the US for wet exhausts for many
car engines, it has shrunk dramatically. Lancing Marine in England makes some
manifolds for small car diesels.
www.lancingmarine.com
Everything I know on this subject other than practical experience, I learned
from Ken Hankinson's "Inboard Motor Installation" an absolute must read if
you are thinking of installing a motor or converting a non marine motor. All
his books are superior as text books to learn from. Glen L Marine sells them
www.glen-l.com
There are differences in a marine engine and a diesel used in vehicles or a
generator. Many marine engines are just converted car engines. The first
problem is cooling, if you want to keep the radiator than, you need forced
air in and out of the engine compartment, If you want a heat exchanger than
you need the exchanger, through hulls for the water and a pump for the raw
water, you can forego the heat exchanger and use raw water through the block.
For a displacement hull you can use a keel cooler, which is just a pipe or
pipes along the bottom in lieu of the radiator, it needs protection of
course. Then you have to deal with the exhaust, You can lag it with a heat
barrier and put it up a stack for a dry exhaust or you can have a wet
exhaust. This usually takes a special exhaust manifold.
There used to be quite an after market in the US for wet exhausts for many
car engines, it has shrunk dramatically. Lancing Marine in England makes some
manifolds for small car diesels.
www.lancingmarine.com
Everything I know on this subject other than practical experience, I learned
from Ken Hankinson's "Inboard Motor Installation" an absolute must read if
you are thinking of installing a motor or converting a non marine motor. All
his books are superior as text books to learn from. Glen L Marine sells them
www.glen-l.com
> Tell me more about the old tractor to yank an engine, can that be done?
>
> Jeff
>
> > old tractor to yank an engine out of...
>
>
Jeff, just about any engine can be cobbled up into a 'marine' engine,
although some are more suitable than others. My list of 'good' features
to look for would be: size and weight suitable to intended location,
design speed, rotation(!), gear ratio (if tranny is worthwhile), make
and model of engine (good rep? parts availability?), etc. Price and
condition are slippery beasts to evaluate. I'd assume the engine might
need a total rebuild unless shown otherwise, and approach any question
of price accordingly.
Keep in mind that Perkins supplied many of the refrigerated shipping
container engines (it's the same block as their 4-108 50 hp engine);
good parts availability and a simple, reliable engine. Kubota makes a
lovely line of small diesel engines that can be marinized (Nanni Diesel
uses many Kubota blocks to build their marine engines). Forklifts are
another potential source of small engines.
This is a complex subject that certainly requires more detail than I'm
able to give here. Find a good diesel guy and explain what you have in
mind. After he gets through giggling, quietly and insistently say: "No,
really." If you're lucky, he'll finally give you some good guidance and
maybe help you find a block. Good luck!
David
-----Original Message-----
From: jeff [mailto:boatbuilding@...]
Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 2:46 PM
To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [bolger] Re: small added expense, was roofing tar
Tell me more about the old tractor to yank an engine, can that be done?
Jeff
ADVERTISEMENT
<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=241773.2861420.4212388.1925585/D=egroupweb/S=1705
065791:HM/A=1394044/R=0/*http://www.hgtv.com/hgtv/pac_ctnt/text/0,,HGTV_
3936_5802,FF.html> HGTV Dream Home Giveaway
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=241773.2861420.4212388.1925585/D=egrou
pmail/S=:HM/A=1394044/rand=198818458>
Bolger rules!!!
- no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, or flogging dead horses
- stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no 'Ed, thanks, Fred' posts
- add your comments at the TOP and SIGN your posts and <snip> away
- To order plans: Mr. Philip C. Bolger, P.O. Box 1209, Gloucester, MA,
01930, Fax: (978) 282-1349
- Unsubscribe:bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
- Open discussion:bolger_coffee_lounge-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
although some are more suitable than others. My list of 'good' features
to look for would be: size and weight suitable to intended location,
design speed, rotation(!), gear ratio (if tranny is worthwhile), make
and model of engine (good rep? parts availability?), etc. Price and
condition are slippery beasts to evaluate. I'd assume the engine might
need a total rebuild unless shown otherwise, and approach any question
of price accordingly.
Keep in mind that Perkins supplied many of the refrigerated shipping
container engines (it's the same block as their 4-108 50 hp engine);
good parts availability and a simple, reliable engine. Kubota makes a
lovely line of small diesel engines that can be marinized (Nanni Diesel
uses many Kubota blocks to build their marine engines). Forklifts are
another potential source of small engines.
This is a complex subject that certainly requires more detail than I'm
able to give here. Find a good diesel guy and explain what you have in
mind. After he gets through giggling, quietly and insistently say: "No,
really." If you're lucky, he'll finally give you some good guidance and
maybe help you find a block. Good luck!
David
-----Original Message-----
From: jeff [mailto:boatbuilding@...]
Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 2:46 PM
To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [bolger] Re: small added expense, was roofing tar
Tell me more about the old tractor to yank an engine, can that be done?
Jeff
> old tractor to yank an engine out of...Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=241773.2861420.4212388.1925585/D=egroupweb/S=1705
065791:HM/A=1394044/R=0/*http://www.hgtv.com/hgtv/pac_ctnt/text/0,,HGTV_
3936_5802,FF.html> HGTV Dream Home Giveaway
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=241773.2861420.4212388.1925585/D=egrou
pmail/S=:HM/A=1394044/rand=198818458>
Bolger rules!!!
- no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, or flogging dead horses
- stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no 'Ed, thanks, Fred' posts
- add your comments at the TOP and SIGN your posts and <snip> away
- To order plans: Mr. Philip C. Bolger, P.O. Box 1209, Gloucester, MA,
01930, Fax: (978) 282-1349
- Unsubscribe:bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
- Open discussion:bolger_coffee_lounge-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Tell me more about the old tractor to yank an engine, can that be done?
Jeff
Jeff
> old tractor to yank an engine out of...
Good point. Boat building (and maintenance!) are rife with choices:
cost-no-object or bargain, expedience vs gold-plate, and it's often a
sliding scale that depends on the eye of the guy that's actually doing
it. Do what works for you. Me, I'd use epoxy and keep watching for an
old tractor to yank an engine out of...
Sorry to hear about the pile, though.
David
-----Original Message-----
From: Doug Harrison [mailto:prototype@...]
Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 12:20 PM
To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [bolger] Re: small added expense, was roofing tar
1/21/2003 11:25:48 AM, "David Romasco" <dromasco@...> wrote:
Many discussions on MHBB centered around
the choice of materials. If it was wood the argument was that the
additional cost of okoume over construction plywood
was minimal in terms of the overall cost of the boat.
Kevlar was argued as a small investment for safety as compared to the
overall cost of the boat.
Marine diesels were argued over converted industrial engines as a small
investment for lower weight as compared to
the overall cost of the boat.
Corecell was argued as a small investment for resale value as compared
to the overall cost of the boat.
Vacuum bagging was argued as a small additional labor effort as compared
to the overall effort in building a boat.
These arguments went on ad nauseum for four years or so. By the time I
was convinced of all these arguments I
realized that all the small additional investments in time and effort
were going to result in a $100K boat that took 6000
hours to build.
The point is that each little addition adds to the overall cost. If I
had built a cheap, crappy boat to start with I would be on
the water now instead of wondering what I'm gonna do with this huge pile
of corecell and uni.
Doug
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=241773.2861422.4212389.1925585/D=egroupweb/S=1705
065791:HM/A=1394046/R=0/*http://www.hgtv.com/hgtv/pac_ctnt/text/0,,HGTV_
3936_5802,FF.html> HGTV Dream Home Giveaway
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=241773.2861422.4212389.1925585/D=egrou
pmail/S=:HM/A=1394046/rand=206266682>
Bolger rules!!!
- no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, or flogging dead horses
- stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no 'Ed, thanks, Fred' posts
- add your comments at the TOP and SIGN your posts and <snip> away
- To order plans: Mr. Philip C. Bolger, P.O. Box 1209, Gloucester, MA,
01930, Fax: (978) 282-1349
- Unsubscribe:bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
- Open discussion:bolger_coffee_lounge-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
cost-no-object or bargain, expedience vs gold-plate, and it's often a
sliding scale that depends on the eye of the guy that's actually doing
it. Do what works for you. Me, I'd use epoxy and keep watching for an
old tractor to yank an engine out of...
Sorry to hear about the pile, though.
David
-----Original Message-----
From: Doug Harrison [mailto:prototype@...]
Sent: Tuesday, January 21, 2003 12:20 PM
To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [bolger] Re: small added expense, was roofing tar
1/21/2003 11:25:48 AM, "David Romasco" <dromasco@...> wrote:
> Epoxy ain't cheap, but it's aBack when I had ambition the plan was to build a bluewater catamaran.
>small part of the whole project. Isn't it worth a few dollars to drop
>an item off the future worry checklist?
>
Many discussions on MHBB centered around
the choice of materials. If it was wood the argument was that the
additional cost of okoume over construction plywood
was minimal in terms of the overall cost of the boat.
Kevlar was argued as a small investment for safety as compared to the
overall cost of the boat.
Marine diesels were argued over converted industrial engines as a small
investment for lower weight as compared to
the overall cost of the boat.
Corecell was argued as a small investment for resale value as compared
to the overall cost of the boat.
Vacuum bagging was argued as a small additional labor effort as compared
to the overall effort in building a boat.
These arguments went on ad nauseum for four years or so. By the time I
was convinced of all these arguments I
realized that all the small additional investments in time and effort
were going to result in a $100K boat that took 6000
hours to build.
The point is that each little addition adds to the overall cost. If I
had built a cheap, crappy boat to start with I would be on
the water now instead of wondering what I'm gonna do with this huge pile
of corecell and uni.
Doug
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=241773.2861422.4212389.1925585/D=egroupweb/S=1705
065791:HM/A=1394046/R=0/*http://www.hgtv.com/hgtv/pac_ctnt/text/0,,HGTV_
3936_5802,FF.html> HGTV Dream Home Giveaway
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=241773.2861422.4212389.1925585/D=egrou
pmail/S=:HM/A=1394046/rand=206266682>
Bolger rules!!!
- no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, or flogging dead horses
- stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no 'Ed, thanks, Fred' posts
- add your comments at the TOP and SIGN your posts and <snip> away
- To order plans: Mr. Philip C. Bolger, P.O. Box 1209, Gloucester, MA,
01930, Fax: (978) 282-1349
- Unsubscribe:bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
- Open discussion:bolger_coffee_lounge-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
I spread some MMA on a 2x4 and a piece of OSB. It dried in less than an hour at 45F and has the appearance of semi-
gloss polyurethane. MMA does not spread as well as polyurethane or even latex paint but it can be brushed out to get
rid of brush streaks.
I spilled some on a painted steel surface so I brushed that out as well. This morning I was able to peel it with a
thumbnail, indicating that MMA does not adhere well to non-porous surfaces.
The 2x4 is up on the roof of the shop now for a uv test. That will take time.
MMA can be purchased from Douglas and Sturgess Art Supply in California ( www.artstuf.com ). They market it as Art
Medium Type A. D&S is the best place to get powdered metals such as copper (bottom paint) and zinc (prop shaft
coating). They have several items of interest to boatbuilders. Prices are the lowest I've found on most items.
Doug
gloss polyurethane. MMA does not spread as well as polyurethane or even latex paint but it can be brushed out to get
rid of brush streaks.
I spilled some on a painted steel surface so I brushed that out as well. This morning I was able to peel it with a
thumbnail, indicating that MMA does not adhere well to non-porous surfaces.
The 2x4 is up on the roof of the shop now for a uv test. That will take time.
MMA can be purchased from Douglas and Sturgess Art Supply in California ( www.artstuf.com ). They market it as Art
Medium Type A. D&S is the best place to get powdered metals such as copper (bottom paint) and zinc (prop shaft
coating). They have several items of interest to boatbuilders. Prices are the lowest I've found on most items.
Doug
1/21/2003 11:25:48 AM, "David Romasco" <dromasco@...> wrote:
the choice of materials. If it was wood the argument was that the additional cost of okoume over construction plywood
was minimal in terms of the overall cost of the boat.
Kevlar was argued as a small investment for safety as compared to the overall cost of the boat.
Marine diesels were argued over converted industrial engines as a small investment for lower weight as compared to
the overall cost of the boat.
Corecell was argued as a small investment for resale value as compared to the overall cost of the boat.
Vacuum bagging was argued as a small additional labor effort as compared to the overall effort in building a boat.
These arguments went on ad nauseum for four years or so. By the time I was convinced of all these arguments I
realized that all the small additional investments in time and effort were going to result in a $100K boat that took 6000
hours to build.
The point is that each little addition adds to the overall cost. If I had built a cheap, crappy boat to start with I would be on
the water now instead of wondering what I'm gonna do with this huge pile of corecell and uni.
Doug
> Epoxy ain't cheap, but it's aBack when I had ambition the plan was to build a bluewater catamaran. Many discussions on MHBB centered around
>small part of the whole project. Isn't it worth a few dollars to drop
>an item off the future worry checklist?
>
the choice of materials. If it was wood the argument was that the additional cost of okoume over construction plywood
was minimal in terms of the overall cost of the boat.
Kevlar was argued as a small investment for safety as compared to the overall cost of the boat.
Marine diesels were argued over converted industrial engines as a small investment for lower weight as compared to
the overall cost of the boat.
Corecell was argued as a small investment for resale value as compared to the overall cost of the boat.
Vacuum bagging was argued as a small additional labor effort as compared to the overall effort in building a boat.
These arguments went on ad nauseum for four years or so. By the time I was convinced of all these arguments I
realized that all the small additional investments in time and effort were going to result in a $100K boat that took 6000
hours to build.
The point is that each little addition adds to the overall cost. If I had built a cheap, crappy boat to start with I would be on
the water now instead of wondering what I'm gonna do with this huge pile of corecell and uni.
Doug
Sorry to have started this thread.
Just an old way versus new.
Ultimately I would doubt you can beat epoxy.
Any gluing technique that is stronger than the wood it's bonding, is plenty
good enough. If the wood fails first, does it really matter how it was
glued?
Jeff
Just an old way versus new.
Ultimately I would doubt you can beat epoxy.
Any gluing technique that is stronger than the wood it's bonding, is plenty
good enough. If the wood fails first, does it really matter how it was
glued?
Jeff
Guys, guys....
Reread what Buehler was talking about when he wrote about using this
stuff: he had a friend who was stuck with a lovely (but plank-sick)
vintage powerboat of imposing size (65', if memory serves). The guy was
faced with either figuring out how to fix a large area of sick bottom
cheap, or giving the boat to the yard. Buehler came up with applying
this gunk and nailing light ACX over the bottom. No fancy treatment of
the ply, just jigsaw-puzzled and nailed into place and bottom paint
applied over the result. Last word was the boat is just fine, thank you
very much.
HOWEVER.... this was a desperate fix based on the lesser evil, not
starting with a clean sheet of paper. Epoxy ain't cheap, but it's a
small part of the whole project. Isn't it worth a few dollars to drop
an item off the future worry checklist?
David Romasco
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Reread what Buehler was talking about when he wrote about using this
stuff: he had a friend who was stuck with a lovely (but plank-sick)
vintage powerboat of imposing size (65', if memory serves). The guy was
faced with either figuring out how to fix a large area of sick bottom
cheap, or giving the boat to the yard. Buehler came up with applying
this gunk and nailing light ACX over the bottom. No fancy treatment of
the ply, just jigsaw-puzzled and nailed into place and bottom paint
applied over the result. Last word was the boat is just fine, thank you
very much.
HOWEVER.... this was a desperate fix based on the lesser evil, not
starting with a clean sheet of paper. Epoxy ain't cheap, but it's a
small part of the whole project. Isn't it worth a few dollars to drop
an item off the future worry checklist?
David Romasco
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> If Wyo is 300-400 square feet on the bottom, and one needs about aSorry, hit the wrong button previously.
> pound of epoxy / 20 square feet. So you are talking about 2
> gallons. I'll allow that the service in this case might allow a
> cheaper brand, I have done that on several boats, and so far no
> problems just laminating the plywood skins. On a boat costing what?
> 20 grand? 10 grand? is 60 bucks too much to ensure that the bottom
> stays stuck on?
There are 3 layers on the Wyo so essentially you doing about 750 square
feet.
On the Wyo, from actual experience, it works out to almost double what you
suggest.
Maybe I'm doing it wrong but little squeezes out as I nail it down starting
in the center on an inside edge working outwards. I think anything less you
could get a starved joint as the wood wicks up the epoxy.
Saving $600.00 over all on a project like the Wyo is not a big deal. My
only comment is why spend it if you don't have to, but then maybe I'm just
cheap!
Jeff
1/21/2003 2:59:40 AM, "proaconstrictor <proaconstrictor@...>" <proaconstrictor@...> wrote:
20ft**2 per pound comes out to a glue line of about .015 if reduced 50% with cabosil. That's probably a reasonable
number for a lamination that isn't vac-bagged.
I think the Wyo requires three layers in the bottom so the epoxy would double. Still, 4-5 gallons is not that much. I'm
going to try the tar in my rowboat anyway. After all, the Bolgerian religion was founded on principles of frugality and
unconventional wisdom. ;)
Doug
>If Wyo is 300-400 square feet on the bottom, and one needs about aNow your argument has some merit. I had initially assumed substantially more epoxy would be required. Your figure of
>pound of epoxy / 20 square feet. So you are talking about 2
>gallons. I'll allow that the service in this case might allow a
>cheaper brand, I have done that on several boats, and so far no
>problems just laminating the plywood skins. On a boat costing what?
>20 grand? 10 grand? is 60 bucks too much to ensure that the bottom
>stays stuck on?
20ft**2 per pound comes out to a glue line of about .015 if reduced 50% with cabosil. That's probably a reasonable
number for a lamination that isn't vac-bagged.
I think the Wyo requires three layers in the bottom so the epoxy would double. Still, 4-5 gallons is not that much. I'm
going to try the tar in my rowboat anyway. After all, the Bolgerian religion was founded on principles of frugality and
unconventional wisdom. ;)
Doug
> If Wyo is 300-400 square feet on the bottom, and one needs about a
> pound of epoxy / 20 square feet. So you are talking about 2
> gallons. I'll allow that the service in this case might allow a
> cheaper brand, I have done that on several boats, and so far no
> problems just laminating the plywood skins. On a boat costing what?
> 20 grand? 10 grand? is 60 bucks too much to ensure that the bottom
> stays stuck on?
>lamination. Epoxy is a wonderful glue but I think it's overkill if
> >Basicaly look at it this way: If you could replace the nice hard
> >load transfering glues in all the lamination with tar, would you?
>
> Again, load transfer is a minor issue at the neutral axis of a
> tar will do the job for much less money. On a 50ft bottom such asthe Wyoming the savings could be significant.
>threads.
> I guess I need to look back in the archives for the previous
>If Wyo is 300-400 square feet on the bottom, and one needs about a
> Doug
pound of epoxy / 20 square feet. So you are talking about 2
gallons. I'll allow that the service in this case might allow a
cheaper brand, I have done that on several boats, and so far no
problems just laminating the plywood skins. On a boat costing what?
20 grand? 10 grand? is 60 bucks too much to ensure that the bottom
stays stuck on?
Neutral axis doesn't apply to all loading conditions, of course, so
one shouldn't get too excited on that count.
In a message dated 1/20/03 7:45:14 AM Central Standard Time,
prototype@...writes:
wasn't coal-tar epoxy. With blithe confidence, but no experience, I doubt
that either the solvent or melt-in-the-pot type of roofing tar forms any very
significant bond to wood and think their sheer strengths would be negligible.
I think one of the virtues of the material (in roofing applications) is that
it will "creep" (at least at elevated temperatures) which enhances its
sealing characteristics (such as they are - flat tarred roofs don't always
perform as well as desired in this regard).
I think that it was probably specified as a sealant between layers that rely
upon mechanical fasteners for structural rigidity. As such it would certainly
be much less expensive than marine caulking or bedding sealants, but I doubt
if it makes much sense as a substitute for epoxy.
What might be appropriate for a Buehler design using dimensional lumber might
NOT be appropriate for a Bolger design using sheet ply. I wouldn't dream of
substituting roofing tar for epoxy on a great big project like a "Wyoming",
at least not without first getting benediction for the substitution from Mr.
Bolger!
I don't know about the virtues of roofing tar as teredo protection - I would
doubt that it performs any better in this regard than the formaldahyde-based
glue lines in plywood laminations or epoxy. If the teredos penetrate to the
"neutral axis" and stop there, your outer layer would just be a sacrificial
meal for them, with a resultant loss of strength and stiffness. I don't think
anyone has advocated using roofing tar as bottom paint system.
Ciao for Niao,
Bill in MN
(P.S. - is anyone out there bold enough to try the "dishwasher test" on
plywood laminated with roofing tar of any description?)
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
prototype@...writes:
> As long as it's waterproof, fatigue resistant and forms a bond stronger thanI don't know what Buehler specified, but I'm reasonably confident that it
> the parent material then most anything could
> be used. This is a good argument for the roofing tar. Additionally, the
> tar should have greater resistance to toredo
> worms.
>
wasn't coal-tar epoxy. With blithe confidence, but no experience, I doubt
that either the solvent or melt-in-the-pot type of roofing tar forms any very
significant bond to wood and think their sheer strengths would be negligible.
I think one of the virtues of the material (in roofing applications) is that
it will "creep" (at least at elevated temperatures) which enhances its
sealing characteristics (such as they are - flat tarred roofs don't always
perform as well as desired in this regard).
I think that it was probably specified as a sealant between layers that rely
upon mechanical fasteners for structural rigidity. As such it would certainly
be much less expensive than marine caulking or bedding sealants, but I doubt
if it makes much sense as a substitute for epoxy.
What might be appropriate for a Buehler design using dimensional lumber might
NOT be appropriate for a Bolger design using sheet ply. I wouldn't dream of
substituting roofing tar for epoxy on a great big project like a "Wyoming",
at least not without first getting benediction for the substitution from Mr.
Bolger!
I don't know about the virtues of roofing tar as teredo protection - I would
doubt that it performs any better in this regard than the formaldahyde-based
glue lines in plywood laminations or epoxy. If the teredos penetrate to the
"neutral axis" and stop there, your outer layer would just be a sacrificial
meal for them, with a resultant loss of strength and stiffness. I don't think
anyone has advocated using roofing tar as bottom paint system.
Ciao for Niao,
Bill in MN
(P.S. - is anyone out there bold enough to try the "dishwasher test" on
plywood laminated with roofing tar of any description?)
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
I've never used it as a coating but I don't see a problem since MMA is basically latex paint without the pigment. It dries
clear, shiny and is a little rubbery. Probably not as waterproof as epoxy. One could always prime the wood with
reduced epoxy (home made CPES) and top coat it with MMA. Latex paint has good UV resistance. There are no
toxicity issues that I know of.
I'll wander out to the shop in a few minutes and spread some on a piece of plywood. After it dries I will comment on
appearance. At $12 a gallon it sure beats everything else on cost.
Doug
1/20/2003 4:19:04 PM, "robby plunkett" <robbylplunkett@...> wrote:
clear, shiny and is a little rubbery. Probably not as waterproof as epoxy. One could always prime the wood with
reduced epoxy (home made CPES) and top coat it with MMA. Latex paint has good UV resistance. There are no
toxicity issues that I know of.
I'll wander out to the shop in a few minutes and spread some on a piece of plywood. After it dries I will comment on
appearance. At $12 a gallon it sure beats everything else on cost.
Doug
1/20/2003 4:19:04 PM, "robby plunkett" <robbylplunkett@...> wrote:
>would it work as described? as a sealer? it does have a plastic type look
>to it. would it be harmful for prolonged contact(sitting on a seat/bench
>coated with it)after drying? robby
would it work as described? as a sealer? it does have a plastic type look
to it. would it be harmful for prolonged contact(sitting on a seat/bench
coated with it)after drying? robby
The new MSN 8 is here: Try it free* for 2 months
http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/dialup
to it. would it be harmful for prolonged contact(sitting on a seat/bench
coated with it)after drying? robby
>From: Doug Harrison <prototype@...>_________________________________________________________________
>Reply-To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
>To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Re: [bolger] Re: roofing tar for bottom lamination
>Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 14:15:36 -0500
>
>1/20/2003 11:22:34 AM, "robby plunkett" <robbylplunkett@...> wrote:
>
> >there used to be some stuff much like this that was said to be clear for
> >roof sealant,just pour and brush over all.
>
>Sounds like MMA (methylmethacrylate) which is the base resin in acrylic
>latex paint. It's another wonder goo like epoxy,
>though the applications are different. I use it as a plasticizer for
>concrete and masonry.
>
>Doug
>
>
The new MSN 8 is here: Try it free* for 2 months
http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/dialup
1/20/2003 11:22:34 AM, "robby plunkett" <robbylplunkett@...> wrote:
though the applications are different. I use it as a plasticizer for concrete and masonry.
Doug
>there used to be some stuff much like this that was said to be clear forSounds like MMA (methylmethacrylate) which is the base resin in acrylic latex paint. It's another wonder goo like epoxy,
>roof sealant,just pour and brush over all.
though the applications are different. I use it as a plasticizer for concrete and masonry.
Doug
Jeff;
This pretty much sums it up. The next step is to slop some black jack on a few scraps of plywood and put it through
some "Dave Carnell" testing. I'm building a scrap wood rowboat now so this looks like a perfect opportunity. Thanks
for the info.
Doug
1/20/2003 10:34:54 AM, "jeff" <boatbuilding@...> wrote:
This pretty much sums it up. The next step is to slop some black jack on a few scraps of plywood and put it through
some "Dave Carnell" testing. I'm building a scrap wood rowboat now so this looks like a perfect opportunity. Thanks
for the info.
Doug
1/20/2003 10:34:54 AM, "jeff" <boatbuilding@...> wrote:
>You can get a gallon of "Black Jack" roofing tar which can be spread cold.
>It has some basic mineral solvent in it so that eventually it'll setup.
>I've used it in the past on roof flashing and after a couple weeks it sets
>up. I believe this is what Buehler was speaking of in his book. At $8.99 /
>gal, it beats epoxy. With the ring shank nails, the laminated bottom would
>be solid at 1/4 the price.
>
>I don't advocate everyone switch by any means. In some applications epoxy
>will be better but if it's good enough for work boats being tossed around
>the North Pacific, it should be more than adequate for something like the
>Wyo.
>
there used to be some stuff much like this that was said to be clear for
roof sealant,just pour and brush over all. i've seen it though not exactly
clear,more of a smoky or transparent milky look. it seems to adhere well to
most anything,had thoughts that if it still exist using it to seal my entire
little skiff of 7'. i believe it would be paintable, but not sure,will
check. if so it could do all the above with no fuss no cuss. robby
Help STOP SPAM: Try the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
roof sealant,just pour and brush over all. i've seen it though not exactly
clear,more of a smoky or transparent milky look. it seems to adhere well to
most anything,had thoughts that if it still exist using it to seal my entire
little skiff of 7'. i believe it would be paintable, but not sure,will
check. if so it could do all the above with no fuss no cuss. robby
>From: "jeff" <boatbuilding@...>_________________________________________________________________
>Reply-To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
>To: <bolger@yahoogroups.com>
>Subject: Re: [bolger] Re: roofing tar for bottom lamination
>Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 08:34:54 -0700
>
>You can get a gallon of "Black Jack" roofing tar which can be spread cold.
>It has some basic mineral solvent in it so that eventually it'll setup.
>I've used it in the past on roof flashing and after a couple weeks it sets
>up. I believe this is what Buehler was speaking of in his book. At $8.99
>/
>gal, it beats epoxy. With the ring shank nails, the laminated bottom would
>be solid at 1/4 the price.
>
>I don't advocate everyone switch by any means. In some applications epoxy
>will be better but if it's good enough for work boats being tossed around
>the North Pacific, it should be more than adequate for something like the
>Wyo.
>
>Jeff
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Doug Harrison" <prototype@...>
>To: <bolger@yahoogroups.com>
>Sent: Monday, January 20, 2003 6:47 AM
>Subject: [bolger] Re: roofing tar for bottom lamination
>
>
> > 1/20/2003 1:47:22 AM, "proaconstrictor <proaconstrictor@...>"
>wrote:
> >
> > >I thought it was the cold tar saturation technique. If we are
> > >talking about the same thread.
> >
> > Could be. I am somewhat new to the group and thus missed those threads.
>My comments stem from reading Jeff's
> > webpage.
> >
> > >I remember responding to one of these threads before, and I don't see
> > >the point. Epoxy is very cheap, possibly cheaper even that the tar.
> >
> > Plain epoxy is cheaper than coal tar epoxy. Roofing tar is dirt cheap
>but, again, that may not be what was referenced.
> >
> > >At a neutral axis, you don't need to buy the best stuff, and I am
> > >usualy fussy on that point.
> >
> > As long as it's waterproof, fatigue resistant and forms a bond stronger
>than the parent material then most anything could
> > be used. This is a good arguement for the roofing tar. Additionally,
>the
>tar should have greater resistance to toredo
> > worms.
> >
> > >Basicaly look at it this way: If you could replace the nice hard
> > >load transfering glues in all the lamination with tar, would you?
> >
> > Again, load transfer is a minor issue at the neutral axis of a
>lamination.
>Epoxy is a wonderful glue but I think it's overkill if
> > tar will do the job for much less money. On a 50ft bottom such as the
>Wyoming the savings could be significant.
> >
> > I guess I need to look back in the archives for the previous threads.
> >
> > Doug
> >
> >
> >
> > Bolger rules!!!
> > - no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, or flogging dead horses
> > - stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no 'Ed, thanks, Fred' posts
> > - add your comments at the TOP and SIGN your posts and <snip> away
> > - To order plans: Mr. Philip C. Bolger, P.O. Box 1209, Gloucester, MA,
>01930, Fax: (978) 282-1349
> > - Unsubscribe:bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> > - Open discussion:bolger_coffee_lounge-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
>http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> >
> >
>
Help STOP SPAM: Try the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
You can get a gallon of "Black Jack" roofing tar which can be spread cold.
It has some basic mineral solvent in it so that eventually it'll setup.
I've used it in the past on roof flashing and after a couple weeks it sets
up. I believe this is what Buehler was speaking of in his book. At $8.99 /
gal, it beats epoxy. With the ring shank nails, the laminated bottom would
be solid at 1/4 the price.
I don't advocate everyone switch by any means. In some applications epoxy
will be better but if it's good enough for work boats being tossed around
the North Pacific, it should be more than adequate for something like the
Wyo.
Jeff
It has some basic mineral solvent in it so that eventually it'll setup.
I've used it in the past on roof flashing and after a couple weeks it sets
up. I believe this is what Buehler was speaking of in his book. At $8.99 /
gal, it beats epoxy. With the ring shank nails, the laminated bottom would
be solid at 1/4 the price.
I don't advocate everyone switch by any means. In some applications epoxy
will be better but if it's good enough for work boats being tossed around
the North Pacific, it should be more than adequate for something like the
Wyo.
Jeff
----- Original Message -----
From: "Doug Harrison" <prototype@...>
To: <bolger@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Monday, January 20, 2003 6:47 AM
Subject: [bolger] Re: roofing tar for bottom lamination
> 1/20/2003 1:47:22 AM, "proaconstrictor <proaconstrictor@...>" wrote:
>
> >I thought it was the cold tar saturation technique. If we are
> >talking about the same thread.
>
> Could be. I am somewhat new to the group and thus missed those threads.
My comments stem from reading Jeff's
> webpage.
>
> >I remember responding to one of these threads before, and I don't see
> >the point. Epoxy is very cheap, possibly cheaper even that the tar.
>
> Plain epoxy is cheaper than coal tar epoxy. Roofing tar is dirt cheap
but, again, that may not be what was referenced.
>
> >At a neutral axis, you don't need to buy the best stuff, and I am
> >usualy fussy on that point.
>
> As long as it's waterproof, fatigue resistant and forms a bond stronger
than the parent material then most anything could
> be used. This is a good arguement for the roofing tar. Additionally, the
tar should have greater resistance to toredo
> worms.
>
> >Basicaly look at it this way: If you could replace the nice hard
> >load transfering glues in all the lamination with tar, would you?
>
> Again, load transfer is a minor issue at the neutral axis of a lamination.
Epoxy is a wonderful glue but I think it's overkill if
> tar will do the job for much less money. On a 50ft bottom such as the
Wyoming the savings could be significant.
>
> I guess I need to look back in the archives for the previous threads.
>
> Doug
>
>
>
> Bolger rules!!!
> - no cursing, flaming, trolling, spamming, or flogging dead horses
> - stay on topic, stay on thread, punctuate, no 'Ed, thanks, Fred' posts
> - add your comments at the TOP and SIGN your posts and <snip> away
> - To order plans: Mr. Philip C. Bolger, P.O. Box 1209, Gloucester, MA,
01930, Fax: (978) 282-1349
> - Unsubscribe:bolger-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> - Open discussion:bolger_coffee_lounge-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject tohttp://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
1/20/2003 1:47:22 AM, "proaconstrictor <proaconstrictor@...>" wrote:
webpage.
be used. This is a good arguement for the roofing tar. Additionally, the tar should have greater resistance to toredo
worms.
tar will do the job for much less money. On a 50ft bottom such as the Wyoming the savings could be significant.
I guess I need to look back in the archives for the previous threads.
Doug
>I thought it was the cold tar saturation technique. If we areCould be. I am somewhat new to the group and thus missed those threads. My comments stem from reading Jeff's
>talking about the same thread.
webpage.
>I remember responding to one of these threads before, and I don't seePlain epoxy is cheaper than coal tar epoxy. Roofing tar is dirt cheap but, again, that may not be what was referenced.
>the point. Epoxy is very cheap, possibly cheaper even that the tar.
>At a neutral axis, you don't need to buy the best stuff, and I amAs long as it's waterproof, fatigue resistant and forms a bond stronger than the parent material then most anything could
>usualy fussy on that point.
be used. This is a good arguement for the roofing tar. Additionally, the tar should have greater resistance to toredo
worms.
>Basicaly look at it this way: If you could replace the nice hardAgain, load transfer is a minor issue at the neutral axis of a lamination. Epoxy is a wonderful glue but I think it's overkill if
>load transfering glues in all the lamination with tar, would you?
tar will do the job for much less money. On a 50ft bottom such as the Wyoming the savings could be significant.
I guess I need to look back in the archives for the previous threads.
Doug
for those of use not lucky enough to have a vw dealer near,i saw where
harbor freight catalog had 1.5w solar chargers for $9.99 . if the policy is
still the same after $50. shipping is free. site is haborfreight.com .
robby
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
harbor freight catalog had 1.5w solar chargers for $9.99 . if the policy is
still the same after $50. shipping is free. site is haborfreight.com .
robby
>From: AARON PRYOR <thnudrstrk@...>_________________________________________________________________
>Reply-To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
>To:bolger@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Re: [bolger] FYI on LED Lights
>Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2003 19:08:10 -0800 (PST)
>
>
>that's what I was talking about, but is it eficient. somebody was talking
>about the solar cells on VW's when they get shipped to the dealer. they
>say they just throw them out when they geet them and put the cars on the
>lot. maybe you can strike a deal with your local VW dealer.
>
>Aaron
>
>
>
>
>
>---------------------------------
>Do you Yahoo!?
>Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, Doug Harrison <prototype@c...> wrote:
talking about the same thread.
I remember responding to one of these threads before, and I don't see
the point. Epoxy is very cheap, possibly cheaper even that the tar.
At a neutral axis, you don't need to buy the best stuff, and I am
usualy fussy on that point.
Basicaly look at it this way: If you could replace the nice hard
load transfering glues in all the lamination with tar, would you? If
not, why would you do it on one of them? I am not suggesting someone
wouldn't answer yes to that question, as mentioned before, someone
sailed accross the Atlantic in a tar paper catamaran, so it has it's
place.
Another thought is, how do you feel about nailing it down with rubber
nails?
Or put differently, I am seriously interested in building a flat
roof, with epoxy rather than tar, just because the latter is only
rated for ten years.
> Jeff;bottoms per George Buehler. This sounds like a
>
> I noted your comments about using roofing tar to laminate hull
> sensible idea. Has anyone tried it? Comments? I presume this isthe roofing tar that must be heated prior to
> application.I thought it was the cold tar saturation technique. If we are
>
> Doug
talking about the same thread.
I remember responding to one of these threads before, and I don't see
the point. Epoxy is very cheap, possibly cheaper even that the tar.
At a neutral axis, you don't need to buy the best stuff, and I am
usualy fussy on that point.
Basicaly look at it this way: If you could replace the nice hard
load transfering glues in all the lamination with tar, would you? If
not, why would you do it on one of them? I am not suggesting someone
wouldn't answer yes to that question, as mentioned before, someone
sailed accross the Atlantic in a tar paper catamaran, so it has it's
place.
Another thought is, how do you feel about nailing it down with rubber
nails?
Or put differently, I am seriously interested in building a flat
roof, with epoxy rather than tar, just because the latter is only
rated for ten years.
Jeff;
I noted your comments about using roofing tar to laminate hull bottoms per George Buehler. This sounds like a
sensible idea. Has anyone tried it? Comments? I presume this is the roofing tar that must be heated prior to
application.
Doug
I noted your comments about using roofing tar to laminate hull bottoms per George Buehler. This sounds like a
sensible idea. Has anyone tried it? Comments? I presume this is the roofing tar that must be heated prior to
application.
Doug
Say you use six LEDs per light, you could place two at a 45 degree to the left to straight, and two 45 degrees to the right. Thats how our blinkers and side markers are placed, give or take a degree or to on the angle, but that would break up the spot light affect.
Aaron
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Aaron
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
that's what I was talking about, but is it eficient. somebody was talking about the solar cells on VW's when they get shipped to the dealer. they say they just throw them out when they geet them and put the cars on the lot. maybe you can strike a deal with your local VW dealer.
Aaron
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Aaron
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> batteries. I'll send the link when my wife gets back withI look forward to the links.
> the lap top. >
My only concern is getting enough light to light up the
interior well. To get the brightness of a good 5W xenon bulb
you have to have an amazing number of leds. LEDs are so
directional that you need to put them behind a nice lens to
diffuse it and that's where the problem begins. If you can
handle the harshness and spot light effect.
I will light up the interior with enough low power led lights
that you could have a nice quiet meal or visit at the sofas.
It's just getting enough to cook the meal with or read a map,
etc. I have a couple nifty power supplies that'll put out the
exact voltage I need and run some light duty wiring. One
switch and the entire boat can light up like the typical night
light in brightness. No stubbing the toes looking for the head
in the middle of the night.
Jeff
Jeff, I just saw your post but I have been working with white LED's
for some time now and the light bulbs alone put off no heat only
light. On my lap top I have a few sites that show how to build low
cost LED arrays that take hardly any voltage to run. I also have LED
flash light that run for months on end with just two double "A"
batteries. I'll send the link when my wife gets back with the lap
top. I plan on running a low voltage power light system on my boat
through a separate wiring harness's. And yes most of the charging for
that system will be from a solar array. I would like my perfect boat
to have a diesel drive engine and then a generator and large battery
bank low for ballast with an auxiliary electric motor drive system.
It would also have a safety sail plan for conserving diesel on long
passages. I can run 100 high output LED's on the same voltage that a
cars tail lights use.
Till my wife's lap top comes home.
John
for some time now and the light bulbs alone put off no heat only
light. On my lap top I have a few sites that show how to build low
cost LED arrays that take hardly any voltage to run. I also have LED
flash light that run for months on end with just two double "A"
batteries. I'll send the link when my wife gets back with the lap
top. I plan on running a low voltage power light system on my boat
through a separate wiring harness's. And yes most of the charging for
that system will be from a solar array. I would like my perfect boat
to have a diesel drive engine and then a generator and large battery
bank low for ballast with an auxiliary electric motor drive system.
It would also have a safety sail plan for conserving diesel on long
passages. I can run 100 high output LED's on the same voltage that a
cars tail lights use.
Till my wife's lap top comes home.
John
--- Inbolger@yahoogroups.com, <boatbuilding@g...> wrote:
> The last link on my main website page under Reality Check has
> the final design on a pulse modulated circuit. It's simple and
> can be used for any LED. The white leds typically have a 3.6
> volt drop across them but the Reds and Greens are about 1/2
> that at 1.6 Volts so you can put 4 leds where I show 2 in
> series. The key is to get close to 7 Volts so you can over
> drive them with the 12 volt source.
>
> Jeff
>
> > Ahh, I see. You are looking for sailboat lighting.
> > Switching regulation then is probably the best approach.
> > Back to Radio Shark.
> >
> > I would like to see your circuit. We purchased several
> > hundred red and green 20ma LED's for a job years ago and
> > have enough left to make our own lights. It would be nice
> > to finally use them.
> >
> The last link on my main website page under Reality CheckSorry, the link is: www.dreamwater.net/cosailor
> has
>
Jeff
The last link on my main website page under Reality Check has
the final design on a pulse modulated circuit. It's simple and
can be used for any LED. The white leds typically have a 3.6
volt drop across them but the Reds and Greens are about 1/2
that at 1.6 Volts so you can put 4 leds where I show 2 in
series. The key is to get close to 7 Volts so you can over
drive them with the 12 volt source.
Jeff
the final design on a pulse modulated circuit. It's simple and
can be used for any LED. The white leds typically have a 3.6
volt drop across them but the Reds and Greens are about 1/2
that at 1.6 Volts so you can put 4 leds where I show 2 in
series. The key is to get close to 7 Volts so you can over
drive them with the 12 volt source.
Jeff
> Ahh, I see. You are looking for sailboat lighting.
> Switching regulation then is probably the best approach.
> Back to Radio Shark.
>
> I would like to see your circuit. We purchased several
> hundred red and green 20ma LED's for a job years ago and
> have enough left to make our own lights. It would be nice
> to finally use them.
>
Ahh, I see. You are looking for sailboat lighting. Switching regulation then is probably the best approach. Back to
Radio Shark.
I would like to see your circuit. We purchased several hundred red and green 20ma LED's for a job years ago and
have enough left to make our own lights. It would be nice to finally use them.
Doug
1/19/2003 4:18:59 PM, <boatbuilding@...> wrote:
Radio Shark.
I would like to see your circuit. We purchased several hundred red and green 20ma LED's for a job years ago and
have enough left to make our own lights. It would be nice to finally use them.
Doug
1/19/2003 4:18:59 PM, <boatbuilding@...> wrote:
>These would work but they would not
>save much on energy. I disassembled one and found it full of
>resistors to control the current and voltage. These systems
>for vehicles don't have to consider energy draw.
>
Solar power!
But then I wouldn't need the LED efficiency. LOL
Jeff
But then I wouldn't need the LED efficiency. LOL
Jeff
>
> I see your point, so now we have to figure out how to get
> you an inexpensive charging system so that energy
> conservation wouldn't matter. haha
>
> Aaron
I see your point, so now we have to figure out how to get you an inexpensive charging system so that energy conservation wouldn't matter. haha
Aaron
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Aaron
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Most of these are Red or Amber. The replacement bulbs for tail
lights that are the white LEDs are fairly bright but they give
off a lot of heat and draw almost as much current as the
standard tail light bulb. These would work but they would not
save much on energy. I disassembled one and found it full of
resistors to control the current and voltage. These systems
for vehicles don't have to consider energy draw.
Anyone with an inboard engine and a nice charging system could
use these and know that you'd probably never have to change the
bulb in the life of the boat.
Jeff
lights that are the white LEDs are fairly bright but they give
off a lot of heat and draw almost as much current as the
standard tail light bulb. These would work but they would not
save much on energy. I disassembled one and found it full of
resistors to control the current and voltage. These systems
for vehicles don't have to consider energy draw.
Anyone with an inboard engine and a nice charging system could
use these and know that you'd probably never have to change the
bulb in the life of the boat.
Jeff
> Some examples:
>http://www.westfleet.com/lighting/led-lighting.html
>
>http://www.buytruckstuff.com/
I just e-mailed your site with the same Idea. It would do away with the hassle of trying to create one.
Aaron
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Aaron
---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Jeff;
Check out some of the big truck accessory houses. LED markers for OTR trucks have come down in price to where it's
cheaper to buy them if you can live with a stock configuration.
Some examples:
http://www.westfleet.com/lighting/led-lighting.html
http://www.buytruckstuff.com/
Doug
1/19/2003 1:01:13 PM, "Jeff <boatbuilding@...>" wrote:
Check out some of the big truck accessory houses. LED markers for OTR trucks have come down in price to where it's
cheaper to buy them if you can live with a stock configuration.
Some examples:
http://www.westfleet.com/lighting/led-lighting.html
http://www.buytruckstuff.com/
Doug
1/19/2003 1:01:13 PM, "Jeff <boatbuilding@...>" wrote:
>I have spent a lot of time over the last month trying to get LED
>lighting figured out for my Wyoming project but alas, same as Rich
>Spelling discovered, LEDs are not there yet.
>
I have spent a lot of time over the last month trying to get LED
lighting figured out for my Wyoming project but alas, same as Rich
Spelling discovered, LEDs are not there yet. But I did get a pulse
generator figured out that'll make LEDs much brighter and cheaper to
assemble an anchor light. The complete circuit less LEDs can be
assembled for about $8.00 in Radio Shack prices. I posted
schematics, theory, and my conclusions on my website. These are
just my thoughts and conclusions, if anyone can make if work better,
please, I'm all ears so to speak.
Jeff
www.dreamwater.net/cosailor
lighting figured out for my Wyoming project but alas, same as Rich
Spelling discovered, LEDs are not there yet. But I did get a pulse
generator figured out that'll make LEDs much brighter and cheaper to
assemble an anchor light. The complete circuit less LEDs can be
assembled for about $8.00 in Radio Shack prices. I posted
schematics, theory, and my conclusions on my website. These are
just my thoughts and conclusions, if anyone can make if work better,
please, I'm all ears so to speak.
Jeff
www.dreamwater.net/cosailor