Boat Building Forum

Find advice on all aspects of building your own kayak, canoe or any lightweight boats

a 3 piece wetsuit with two pr. pants? *Pic*
By:Paul G. Jacobson
Date: 2/14/2008, 10:40 pm
In Response To: Re: Why not a 3 piece wetsuit? (AaronH)

: . . .To solve the problem of maintaining the curvature of
: longitudinal components, why couldn't a kayak be designed to have the
: areas where it will be split do not have any curvature?

Sure thing. Make one that looks like a long slim box. Or a coffin.

There is a reason why boats flare outward in odd oval shapes. That reason is water pressure. The convex shape of the sides helps to resist the inward pressure. If you start with a straight side, then, unless you have a generous amount of bracing, that side is going to be pushed in by water pressure on the outside of the boat. Boats are not like rectangular boxes. they have very few straight parts or right-angle corners. Once you put them in water they are under pressure equal to their displacement. With SOF boats, you have to expect that their shapes are going to change.

: Maybe not the most
: efficient kayak hull shape, but I'm not going for a race boat and from
: what I understand that alone is unlikely to make a huge difference in
: resistance numbers anyway. I'll play with that theory and see if it offers
: any promise.

Sounds like you are looking for a reason to come up with a new paradigm. Go for it.

: Another solution might be to laminate the gunwales, but that
: gets one into the realm of "its not worth the trouble".

I'm not sure which of the several problems being juggled here would be dealt with by laminating the gunwales. If you have short pieces of materials and wish to make longer ones you can build those up from thin strips (lamina) or you can scarf more substantial boards. but then you end up with long wooden pieces--and I thought you wanted to end up with shorter ones.

If you want to make folding pieces for gunwales, for each gunwale take 4 pieces of wood and use simple strap hinges to connect pairs of them. When the hinges are on the outside, and the wood is bent around the bulkheads the parts are as stiff as a single solid part. Of course you have to attach ends to the bow and stern pieces, and then you need to make a connection between the front and the back halves. That's where you use a ferrule or similar coupling.

: Sure, its a lot of effort, but building any kayak requires a sizable amount
: of effort.

Well, the Shelter Systems 4 hour kayak made from willow branches and a blue tarp seems to be an exception. :)

: I have all materials except epoxy, so a wood frame (in this
: case) doesn't come at a huge expense. The thing about folders that has
: directed me away from them is that they don't really shorten the
: 'time-to-water' that I'm fixated on. It takes me a good 30 minutes to load
: up a kayak and gear, but if I exchange that for 30 minutes build time at
: the water access point I've really not accomplished much.

Actually, it is not a swap of 30 minutes. You'll need to add the load up time to the build time,(can't load the boat until after it is built) so your time to water might work out to nearly an hour.

: Tom's Sonnet makes a much more convincing argument in that respect.

Set up time on that is also going to be an issue, I think.

: There's also the
: possibility that I am just stubborn and have latched onto the idea of a
: 3-piece take-apart for no rational reason. :\

It's Valentines Day, so I won't comment on that. You're lucky :)

: Sure it helps! There are few locals with which I can have this sort of
: discussion about kayaks. :)

Hmm. Ever considered offering to buy the first round at the next kayakers convention? Or maybe starting a kayakers convention? Just a thought.

PGJ

Messages In This Thread

Skin-on-Frame: 3-piece take-apart?
Aaron H -- 2/11/2008, 3:55 pm
Why not a 3 piece wetsuit?
Paul G. Jacobson -- 2/14/2008, 2:51 pm
Re: Why not a 3 piece wetsuit?
Bill Hamm -- 2/17/2008, 2:34 am
Re: Why not a 3 piece wetsuit?
Dan Caouette (CSFW) -- 2/17/2008, 6:14 am
Re: Why not a 3 piece wetsuit?
Bill Hamm -- 2/18/2008, 2:23 am
Re: Awfully heavy seat attachments ? *Pic*
Tom Yost -- 2/20/2008, 10:08 am
Re: Awfully heavy seat attachments ?
Bill Hamm -- 2/20/2008, 11:37 am
Re: Awfully heavy seat attachments ?
Tom Yost -- 2/20/2008, 12:55 pm
Re: Awfully heavy seat attachments ?
Bill Hamm -- 2/21/2008, 1:15 am
Re: Awfully heavy seat attachments ?
Bill Hamm -- 2/21/2008, 1:17 am
Re: Awfully heavy seat attachments ?
Tom Yost -- 2/21/2008, 9:05 am
Re: Awfully heavy seat attachments ?
Bill Hamm -- 2/21/2008, 6:13 pm
Re: Why not a 3 piece wetsuit?
Bill Hamm -- 2/18/2008, 2:27 am
Re: Why not a 3 piece wetsuit? *NM*
Bill Hamm -- 2/17/2008, 2:28 am
Re: Why not a 3 piece wetsuit?
AaronH -- 2/14/2008, 8:42 pm
a 3 piece wetsuit with two pr. pants? *Pic*
Paul G. Jacobson -- 2/14/2008, 10:40 pm
Re: Skin-on-Frame: 3-piece take-apart?
HenkA -- 2/13/2008, 11:16 am
Re: Roof rack
Ric Moodie -- 2/13/2008, 1:13 pm
Re: Skin-on-Frame: 3-piece take-apart? *LINK* *Pic*
Etienne Muller - Ireland -- 2/13/2008, 8:25 am
Re: Skin-on-Frame: 3-piece take-apart? *LINK* *Pic*
Tom Yost -- 2/13/2008, 10:03 am
Re: Skin-on-Frame: 3-piece take-apart?
Etienne Muller - Ireland -- 2/16/2008, 9:28 am
Re: Skin-on-Frame: 3-piece take-apart? *Pic*
Tom Yost -- 2/17/2008, 12:05 pm
Re: Skin-on-Frame: 3-piece take-apart?
Etienne Muller - Ireland -- 2/18/2008, 9:22 am
Re: Skin-on-Frame: 3-piece take-apart? *Pic*
Tom Yost -- 2/18/2008, 9:50 am
Re: Skin-on-Frame: 3-piece take-apart? *Pic*
Etienne Muller - Ireland -- 2/19/2008, 10:26 am
Re: Skin-on-Frame: 3-piece take-apart?
Bill Hamm -- 2/20/2008, 2:04 am
Re: Skin-on-Frame: 3-piece take-apart? *Pic*
Etienne Muller - Ireland -- 2/20/2008, 7:55 am
Re: Skin-on-Frame: 3-piece take-apart? *Pic*
Tom Yost -- 2/19/2008, 12:51 pm
Re: Skin-on-Frame: 3-piece take-apart?
Bill Hamm -- 2/19/2008, 2:44 am
Re: Skin-on-Frame: 3-piece take-apart?
Bill Hamm -- 2/17/2008, 2:25 am
Re: Skin-on-Frame: 3-piece take-apart?
Sean -- 2/12/2008, 8:24 pm
Re: Skin-on-Frame: 3-piece take-apart?
Mike Scarborough -- 2/13/2008, 8:27 am
Re: Skin-on-Frame: 3-piece take-apart?
AaronH -- 2/12/2008, 11:34 pm
Re: Skin-on-Frame: 3-piece take-apart?
Bill Hamm -- 2/14/2008, 2:11 am
Re: Skin-on-Frame: 3-piece take-apart?
Aaron H -- 2/14/2008, 8:44 am
Re: Skin-on-Frame: 3-piece take-apart?
Bill Hamm -- 2/13/2008, 1:29 am
Re: Skin-on-Frame: 3-piece take-apart?
Aaron H -- 2/13/2008, 8:46 am
Re: Skin-on-Frame: 3-piece take-apart?
Bill Hamm -- 2/14/2008, 2:19 am
Re: Skin-on-Frame: 3-piece take-apart?
Bill Hamm -- 2/17/2008, 2:36 am
Re: Skin-on-Frame: 3-piece take-apart?
Bill Hamm -- 2/14/2008, 2:13 am
Re: Skin-on-Frame: 3-piece take-apart?
Scott Shurlow -- 2/12/2008, 7:33 am
Re: Skin-on-Frame: 3-piece take-apart?
Aaron H -- 2/12/2008, 2:41 pm
Re: Skin-on-Frame: 3-piece take-apart?
AaronH -- 2/12/2008, 10:51 pm
Re: Skin-on-Frame: 3-piece take-apart?
AaronH -- 2/12/2008, 11:23 pm
Re: Roof Rack
Mike Scarborough -- 2/13/2008, 8:31 am
Re: Roof Rack
Bill Hamm -- 2/14/2008, 2:08 am
Re: Roof Rack
Aaron H -- 2/13/2008, 8:44 am
Re: Skin-on-Frame: 3-piece take-apart?
Bill Hamm -- 2/12/2008, 2:17 am
Sonnet (excuse me) *NM* *LINK*
Thomas Ziegler -- 2/11/2008, 4:39 pm