padding out a side deck
- This topic has 21 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 3 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Hi,
My own boat is a Hoare composite (GBR 2015) but I spent the winter sailing GBR1917. The flat side deck on 1917 seemed a LOT comfier to hike.
Is it legit to pad up the Hoare side deck to be essentially flat, particularly by filling in the place where it drops down at the gunwhale? I was thinking of making semirigid pussy pads to flatten out the deck shape where I hike.
Here’s what it looks like today.
Interested in some advice/thoughts.
H
The 10mm limit is only if it adds to the width of the boat at the sheerguard, right? That’s how I read it. Can’t i put more padding on inner pieces of the deck?
Or do I have to make the whole thing rigid?
H
As I read it 10mm max at the shearline which on my boat was 35mm inboard from the gunwhale.
Due to the construction of the deck it would have needed well over 10mm at the shearline to achieve a flat side deck.
As I read it the hiking pad needs to comply with the 8(viii) so it is included in the 35mm shearguard.However……if it is part of the deck rather than a hiking pad, I think it could be built up vertically from the gunwhale.
Hi Hugh,
Another ‘grey’ area I’m afraid.
From having our boats measured recently, it seems anything outside the ‘sheerline’, as defined, (topsides intersection with the sheerline) is regarded as a gunnel, and should not exeed 35mm vertically.
It is obvious that some boats, historically, have exeeded that. It looks like yours does, so the only way out is to lower the horizontal part of the sidedeck (to get to the 35mm measurement).
The rules’ wording could be better here I think, to define more exactly what is required, because you could interpret the rules to have a sidedeck ’40mm above the sheerline’, which should really read ‘above and inside’ the sheerline horizontally. If that’s what is really required.Cheers, Bob
Hugh,
P.S. The ‘measurement diagram’ gives a better explanation than I can.
I can understand the measurers problem, if the ‘sheerline’ is INSIDE the sideck-gunnel assembly, it becomes a bit difficult to measure from;- (to get the sidedeck ‘hight’ – ‘width’ – ‘depth’ measurements) for instance.
Again, if the ‘sheerline’ is inside a lump of wood (the sidecks), thus not knowing where it is, it could be regarded as being ‘convex’, which is illegal, or ‘straight’ which isn’t.
It come down to a matter of opinion, which is bad rules.Bob
Looking at the diagram on page 7, I would suggest the 35mm vertical dimension on the outboard side of the diagram relates to that which is BELOW the shearline while the 40mm vertical dimension in the inboard side of the diagram relates to that which is ABOVE the shearline.
Altering the diagram to show both dimensions on the outboard side of the diagram would make it clearer.
The upper most part of the deck on my boat was exactly 40mm above the shearline and dropped about 20mm below the shearline outboard of the shearline (35mm max dimension). So, if the deck buildup on Hugh’s boat is the same as mine was, then I’d suggest it does comply with the class rules.
Agreed, measuring to the shearline is almost impossible.
But if what I actually want is a flat (or nearly flat) surface across the width of the side deck, particularly at the outboard part, then it’s not easy to get there without ripping off my current side deck.
If I built up the dropped section that’s above/outside the sheerline (the outward facing sloped section of deck) then it’ll be too thick and high and wouldn’t comply with the rule.. I guess I could add foam to flatten the inboard section of the side deck as long as it’s no more than 40mm above the sheerline, but it still gives me a drooping butt because of that “comfy” profile.
H
Hugh,
This is how I see it…..
If you change the deck (ie permanently attach a piece of wood etc) and square the shearguard off vertically from the gunwhale, it will be high (and not very pretty IMHO) but will comply with class rules.
This is where I ended up:
[attachment=0:1drzmynv] 2014-03-01 12.09.32-small.jpg [/attachment:1drzmynv]
And haven’t looked back.
Hugh,
Finns sidedecks look very legal, but going back to your original post about ‘semi rigid’ pussy pads, some glass decked boats have fitted these (ahum, ‘easily removable’) things and although they are regarded as non structual, they change the fore and aft (visible) sheerline into what could be regarded as ‘convex’.
If you were to do this in wood, (non removeable) I don’t think it would pass the rule as it would be convex.
I was just wondering what one of these ‘carbon pads’ would be viewed as, if it were placed on the outer part of your deck.
You can’t do it in wood, but can you do it in carbon…….oo-er…..that don’t sound right.Bob.
The side deck rules have always caused difficulties – but – at the risk of getting it wrong , here is the way I think it works. Please would measurers correct me if I am totally wrong.
The Sheerline is the intersection between the deck and side panel – not including the rubbing strake around the outside. Between stn 1 and 2 you should be able to locate this line on the deck. By the bulkheads you can find this spot at each end of the side-deck and the line should carry on round the side deck and not be concave ( you are supposed to be able to find the sheerline on the deck and follow it round in a fair curve ) . Then the deck rules for rubbing strake/gunwhale sizes outside the sheerline are easy to measure and similarly by putting a straight edge across the boat you can see if the side decks are outside the permitted range from the sheerline – up/down and into the cockpit.
I think Hughs boat was built with the height probably at the highest allowed.
If you alter it, you should still be able to draw the sheerline on the actual deck – not on an imaginary deck in space.
The conflict that then arises is to do with the pads. Once upon a time you had to have pads and everything inside the dims for side decks, now you can have an extra 10mm above the sheerline – the rest of the pad has to be measured as if it was side deck. These were assuming that people were putting soft padding on to make it more comfortable.
This idea has been blown out by people putting on pads that are rigid! Thereby getting extra leverage. These pads have to be removable(??) so you can still measure the sheerline and side decks. My own feeling is that this is cheating but we are still discussing it.Thanks Bill,
This is the kind of problem caused by ‘tacking on’ extra bits to an existing rule.
The question is I suppose, how high and or wide will people go with these ‘extra’ solid pads. In fitting them to glass boats, which have ‘rubbing strakes’ of only some 6mm deep does it not contravene the ‘no convex’ sheerline between stn1 and 2 rule. or are they exempt. If they are exempt, why is wood not exempt.
Can I have ‘removable’ wooden pads………silly idea.
Can I trim my ‘wooden’ gunnls to 6mm deep and make them 29mm high at the side decks.. of course not, it’s illegal!Bob.
Any pads can only be outside the side-deck dimensions by 10mm upwards on the sheerline as I see it. This is because if you didn’t allow anything over the sheerline – you couldn’t put any kind of material over the side deck.
If the sheeline is located as a line on the deck, then measuring the rubbing strake outside the sheerline and the side deck dimensions inside the sheerline is fairly easy. The rubbing strake/gunwhale assembly outside the sheerline can be scalloped away or built up as long as it is within the given measurements and the sheerline itself is still there on the deck.
As I understand it – but I can be corrected – the sheerline is not allowed to rise up between the stations (be convex). This is the control line for measuring the side decks.The issue with the pads is just that the use of a rigid padding material effectively allows you to sit 10 mm higher – although I have seen some where the 10mm is carried over to the gunwhale which is out side the rules for side decks.
Yes Biil,
I’d agree with all of that, you measurers have my sympathy!
I think as Class we do need to define more clearly what a 10mm thick ‘hiking pad’ can be made of, along the lines of ‘compressable by hand- to 50%’ thickness’ perhaps.
The risk of allowing ‘rigid’ carbon (or anything else) might have some unforseen consequences and undesireable building techniques (I’ve already thought of some….!).
Better by far to stick with what we have as ‘sidedeck measurement’ rules, and legislate seperately for pads (you know, the really ‘removeable’ ones).Cheers, Bob.
- The forum ‘Technical – View only’ is closed to new topics and replies.
