Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 11-29-2014, 06:19 PM   #41
Guru
 
City: Venice Louisiana
Country: United States
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,097
I would send my welders packing if I found that kind of welding on my job. The photos of the "bar" welds are sub par even for an apprentice. The sole supports are a dead give away to other less visible defects. Theres a reason things are cheaper in China. Browning had the A5 built in Belgium, not because they were better at it, but because it was cheaper. I will agree that Asian wood workers are absolute CRAFTSMEN, they can cover up pure $hit and make it look beautifull. Caveat Emptor.
__________________
Advertisement

kulas44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2014, 09:54 AM   #42
Senior Member
 
City: Hong Kong
Country: Hong Kong
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 210
Quote:
Originally Posted by kulas44 View Post
I would send my welders packing if I found that kind of welding on my job. The photos of the "bar" welds are sub par even for an apprentice. The sole supports are a dead give away to other less visible defects. Theres a reason things are cheaper in China. Browning had the A5 built in Belgium, not because they were better at it, but because it was cheaper. I will agree that Asian wood workers are absolute CRAFTSMEN, they can cover up pure $hit and make it look beautifull. Caveat Emptor.
No, they are not pretty. These rugged weldings are merely fillings according to two surveyors - meaning that the structural "bar welding" was ok - it was also X-rayed by the yard- and that it was better not to grind down the fillings since this would create sharp edges which would prevent a correct DFT (too thin layer on the edges).

So if you have these kinds of fillings or weldings then it's better to leave it as it is and then apply a fairing compound before the next primer layers are applied.

Welding splatters should be removed and undercuts should be re-welded before priming.

Asian workers made the Nordhaven's, Selene's and Berings too....to name a few.
__________________

Searios is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2014, 11:54 AM   #43
Guru
 
hollywood8118's Avatar
 
City: Port Townsend Washington
Country: USA
Vessel Name: " OTTER "
Vessel Model: Ocean Alexander Europa 40
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,482
Quote:
Originally Posted by Searios View Post
Asian workers made the Nordhaven's, Selene's and Berings too....to name a few.
It is true today with Chinese boats as it was 30 years ago with Taiwan built boats..

It is all about quality control of the yard.

If one spends time crawling around the bilge of a Nordhavn the build quality is apparent.. they make the boat proper even in the areas where the average person never looks.

Just because you can cover a shoddy weld with filler and it looks good (for the time being) doesn't make it right or good.

That "weld" invites crevice corrosion.

Most of the time.. in boats you get what you pay for.

HOLLYWOOD
hollywood8118 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2014, 03:20 PM   #44
Senior Member
 
Diesel Duck's Avatar
 
City: discomfort.reactants.peanuts
Country: Colombia, South America and Huatulco, Mexico
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 466
Quote:
Originally Posted by hollywood8118 View Post
It is true today with Chinese boats as it was 30 years ago with Taiwan built boats..

It is all about quality control of the yard.

If one spends time crawling around the bilge of a Nordhavn the build quality is apparent.. they make the boat proper even in the areas where the average person never looks.

Just because you can cover a shoddy weld with filler and it looks good (for the time being) doesn't make it right or good.

That "weld" invites crevice corrosion.

Most of the time.. in boats you get what you pay for.

HOLLYWOOD

As someone who has welded professionally, and can still run a pretty good looking bead, I can say beyond a doubt that the overall quality of the welds I inspected first hand during my two week visit to the SHM shipyard last month were well within the limits of acceptability. True, some were not the the stacked dimes most welders strive to attain but they all appeared to be solid welds that would pass inspection.

For those not aware, along with you naysayers out there, all SHM Diesel Ducks are welded to meet China Classification Society (CCS) standards. In addition, as someone else has already mentioned here on TF, all welding on SHM boats is X-rayed as well as being CCS certified.


About CCS: http://www.ccs.org.cn/ccswzen/font/f...39ebcf090b0004
Diesel Duck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2014, 03:46 PM   #45
Senior Member
 
Diesel Duck's Avatar
 
City: discomfort.reactants.peanuts
Country: Colombia, South America and Huatulco, Mexico
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 466
Addendum...

As an addendum to my post above I wanted to provide some additional information/support furthering the testimony of the quality of boats (Diesel Ducks) that come out of the SHM shipyard.

As I stated above, all welding on the SHM boats are CCS certified but I realize that means nothing to most of you so, with the hopes of educating those not in the know along with you naysayers, here is a copy and paste from the CCS web site that might be of some interest:

"CCS is a full member of the International Association of Classification Societies (IACS) and one of major international classification societies. Its highest class notation has been included in the Classification Clauses of the Institute of London Underwriters (ILU) to enjoy the preferential treatment in insurance premium. Up to now, CCS has been authorized by the administrations of more than 32 countries or regions to perform statutory surveys for the ships flying their flags, and recognized by the United States Coast Guard (USCG) and the European Union (EU), which demonstrates her qualification and competence to the international community."

For those who like to read technical data, specifically about CCS's welding certification, I can email you the CCS "Rules for Materials and Welding". PM me your email address and I'll gladly forward you a PDF copy.
Diesel Duck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2014, 06:17 PM   #46
Senior Member
 
City: Hong Kong
Country: Hong Kong
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 210
Quote:
Originally Posted by hollywood8118 View Post

It is all about quality control of the yard.

That "weld" invites crevice corrosion.

HOLLYWOOD
The first statement: I agree with.

The second statement : It depends if the steel was correctly prepared before the primer AND if the primer DFT was correctly applied. I cannot judge that from a picture unless it shows rust - and these weldings does not show any rust.

I will agree that it would have been best to not make these kinds of ugly welds at all since they invite all these kinds of questions,
Searios is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2014, 06:57 PM   #47
Guru
 
City: NC
Country: US
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 636
This weekend I found an interesting set of videos on YouTube about a Roberts designed, home built, steel hulled boat called Emerald Steel. A couple built the boat in the mid 80's with the wife doing the welding and the husband doing the cutting and grinding of the metal plates. Unfortunately, they do not have a blog that I can find but they answer questions pretty quickly on the YouTube channel.

https://www.youtube.com/user/sujules/featured

They have videos of them visiting a variety of Pacific islands going back to the 90's. The videos show them building a new mast and bow sprint from 2x bought at HD. Very impressive work.

I asked them about how they prepped and painted the hull and how it has held up.

Quote:
First we sandblasted then one coat of zinc spray followed by 2 coats of Proline epoxy primer plus polyurethane in the bilges. You always need to fix any nicks or scratches otherwise the plating is almost like new after almost 30 years. 
They mentioned in another post they have two inches of closed cell insulation covering the hull paint.

Later,
Dan
dannc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2014, 07:23 PM   #48
Guru
 
City: NC
Country: US
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 636
To stern thrust or not to stern thrust, that is the question...

Boats are all about compromises....

I think there is only one DD 462 built with a stern thruster. The problem with the stern thruster is that that it forces you to make some compromises....

Bill Kimley, the coowner of SHM, had the idea of adding the swim step to Buehler's designs and it is a great design change. Not only do you get a swim step, you can get an extra 400 gallons of fuel tankage and a collision zone in the stern.

The problem with the stern thruster on the DD 462, is that it takes up space in the swim step which then removes fuel storage and takes out the stern collision zone. Extra fuel tankage was added forward to replace the "missing" fuel storage but that slightly impacts the boat's trim and uses up some storage space.

So, are the compromises required to add the stern thruster worth having the stern thruster?

This is what the thruster looks like from inside the DD. You can see the split fuel tanks. Below, the thruster is the steering mechanisms. I could have sworn I took several photos of the steering setup but I will be danged if I can find them or missing image numbers. It is one of the things I really wanted to photograph.



This is what the stern thruster looks like from the stern.



I don't like the thruster configuration per say but I will be danged if I can figure out a better solution.

I suspect we would order the stern thruster since its usefulness to a short handed crew has a higher priority than the design compromises.

Later,
Dan
dannc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2014, 07:44 PM   #49
Guru
 
N4712's Avatar
 
City: South FL
Country: U.S.A
Vessel Name: Oliver
Vessel Model: Nordhavn 47 Hull# 12
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 3,613
I would, they make life much easier.
__________________
Thanks, Oliver
M/V Oliver
Nordhavn 47 Hull #12
N4712 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2014, 07:52 PM   #50
Guru
 
City: Venice Louisiana
Country: United States
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,097
I would pass on the stern thruster. Use that money for a Variable pitch prop setup. Then you can use the prop walk in either direction, and get maximum efficiency from your engine while cruising. JM2CW. The welds are still horrible. Fairing is not an acceptable substitute. Grind and reweld is. They are not xraying that crap, if they are they are seeing voids and cavities that our yards would never accept. Maybe the Chinese have there own set of standards (apparently) that can pass those welds. I would expect a second year apprentice to do WAY better. My children could do better at 15 years old. However, I started them welding young. Thick, heavy stuff is easier to weld good (readretty) than thin stuff. I am not ragging on the strength of the weld, just the look. I would have them ground out and cap welded with a 3/16 7018 rod, at high amperage. JMO.
kulas44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2014, 07:54 PM   #51
Guru
 
City: NC
Country: US
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 636
Quote:
Originally Posted by N4712 View Post
I would, they make life much easier.
Yeppers, I think you are right, most especially if short handed.

Later,
Dan
dannc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2014, 08:52 PM   #52
Senior Member
 
City: Hong Kong
Country: Hong Kong
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 210
You could consider an articulated rudder. Less complex and cheaper.

During cruise it reduces the load on the autopilots, due to smaller movements.

You can apparently turn on a dime with one of these, combined with a CPP you have a wining combination.

Care must be taken during reversing though.
Searios is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-30-2014, 09:51 PM   #53
Senior Member
 
Diesel Duck's Avatar
 
City: discomfort.reactants.peanuts
Country: Colombia, South America and Huatulco, Mexico
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 466
For clarification... The most recent exterior photo that was posted above showing a stern thruster on a DD462 was not the same boat in the photo of the stern thruster showing the interior with the split fuel tanks. The interior photo was that of the recently completed DD462-14 and the exterior was that of a stern thruster being installed on a highly modified DD462 Sedan that has yet to be completed.

I'd also point out that Mr. Bill Kimley, one of the owners of SHM, disapproves of stern thrusters all together, especially on the DD with the sugar scoop stern/swim platforms. He thinks they are completely unnecessary and more importantly he says that it compromises the seaworthiness of the DD design. It compromises the design by removing the watertight bulkhead (the full width full tank) when you split the stern tank into two section to accommodate the horizontally mounted stern thruster.

Below is an exterior photo of the same DD462, DD462-14, with the interior photo posted above by dannc:




Note: The propeller in this photo is a temporary one. The owner has installed a MAX PROP Whisper 5-blade propeller.
Diesel Duck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2014, 08:41 PM   #54
Guru
 
City: NC
Country: US
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 636
Quote:
Originally Posted by Searios View Post
You could consider an articulated rudder. Less complex and cheaper.

During cruise it reduces the load on the autopilots, due to smaller movements.

You can apparently turn on a dime with one of these, combined with a CPP you have a wining combination.

Care must be taken during reversing though.
Using an articulated rudder is a great idea. I have always like the idea of an articulated rudder but liked the simplicity of a "regular" rudder. Given the compromises needed for a stern thruster on a DD, an articulated rudder is a very interesting idea that minimizes compromises.

A CCP is really the way to go for a DD, if the price is not too great. Kasten has a great article on CCP vs FPP but his cost numbers are a years old. I wish he would update his article.

Later,
Dan
dannc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-01-2014, 08:59 PM   #55
Guru
 
City: NC
Country: US
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 636
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diesel Duck 492 View Post
For clarification... The most recent exterior photo that was posted above showing a stern thruster on a DD462 was not the same boat in the photo of the stern thruster showing the interior with the split fuel tanks. The interior photo was that of the recently completed DD462-14 and the exterior was that of a stern thruster being installed on a highly modified DD462 Sedan that has yet to be completed.
Correct. It is very likely that any future stern thrusters will look similar to the photo I posted of the DD 462 Sedan since the DD 4620-14 has a very unique grate extending from the swim platform. DD 492's photo is interesting in that you can see how the stern thruster is jutting off the stern, which I don't really like, but I can't think of a better installation/design.

Searios's idea of using an articulated rudder is a good one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diesel Duck 492 View Post
I'd also point out that Mr. Bill Kimley, one of the owners of SHM, disapproves of stern thrusters all together, especially on the DD with the sugar scoop stern/swim platforms. He thinks they are completely unnecessary and more importantly he says that it compromises the seaworthiness of the DD design. It compromises the design by removing the watertight bulkhead (the full width full tank) when you split the stern tank into two section to accommodate the horizontally mounted stern thruster.
Saying Bill disapproves of the stern thruster is an understatement. Bill is right about the compromises needed to add the stern thruster and it really gets down to what the owner thinks is most important. Bill will give you his opinion and build what the Customer wants if the request is reasonable/doable.

My two cents is that the design of the DD 462 and 492 are pretty danged perfect as is and the slight owner design tweeks are to satisfy owner's particular needs. There are some tweeks we would want, but when you get right down to it, we would be happy with a DD 462 or 492 as designed.

Later,
Dan
dannc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2014, 03:43 PM   #56
Senior Member
 
Diesel Duck's Avatar
 
City: discomfort.reactants.peanuts
Country: Colombia, South America and Huatulco, Mexico
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 466
Some thoughts about compromising the design of the DD's...

When George Buehler designed the "original" Diesel Duck (not SHM's new and greatly improved version) there was no sugar scoop stern on them and, I'm assuming here, there was no stern fuel tank acting as a watertight crash bulkhead.

So, what I'm getting at here is that, although splitting the stern fuel tank on a SHM version of the DD removes one of the five watertight bulkheads, is it really "unsafe"? Me thinks not. How many oceangoing trawlers out there have a watertight bulkhead at the stern? Me thinks very few. Nordhavn's definitely don't have one and they're considered very safe bluewater passagemakers. So it's my opinion that Mr. Bill Kimley is simply not happy about some of us messin' with his new and improved version of George Buehler's Diesel Duck and Bill has every right to voice his objections but when it comes down to it we, as buyers, should be able to have changes made as long as they don't compromise the structural integrity or overall safety of the vessel. Just Sayin'
Diesel Duck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2014, 09:49 PM   #57
Guru
 
City: NC
Country: US
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 636
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diesel Duck 492 View Post
When George Buehler designed the "original" Diesel Duck (not SHM's new and greatly improved version) there was no sugar scoop stern on them and, I'm assuming here, there was no stern fuel tank acting as a watertight crash bulkhead.
I don't think the stern fuel tank showed up until later in the DD 462 line. The DD that was the base for the 462 just had the stern plating as best I can tell which is certainly strong enough.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diesel Duck 492 View Post
So, what I'm getting at here is that, although splitting the stern fuel tank on a SHM version of the DD removes one of the five watertight bulkheads, is it really "unsafe"? Me thinks not. How many oceangoing trawlers out there have a watertight bulkhead at the stern? Me thinks very few. Nordhavn's definitely don't have one and they're considered very safe bluewater passagemakers.
SHM's design, minus the stern thruster is safer but I certainly would not argue it is unsafe, just less safe. It is just one of those things the owner needs to prioritize. Flip side is that a good part of the stern is still double hulled as one can see in the photo. Only a small part is no longer double hulled. From a safety perspective, the differences is pretty close to zero that is for sure. What does bother me about the stern thruster is it hanging off the stern in a stern tie situation. I think that is the more likely vulnerability compared with someone running another boat into the stern of the DD and poking a hole into the hull.

I do think it would be very nice to have a stern thruster and the overall usefulness of the stern thruster is a worthwhile compromise. Having said that, I do wonder if the articulated rudder would provide most of the usefulness of the stern thruster with none of the thruster's build compromises?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diesel Duck 492 View Post
So it's my opinion that Mr. Bill Kimley is simply not happy about some of us messin' with his new and improved version of George Buehler's Diesel Duck and Bill has every right to voice his objections but when it comes down to it we, as buyers, should be able to have changes made as long as they don't compromise the structural integrity or overall safety of the vessel. Just Sayin'
As someone who has designed stuff for many years and whose job responsibilities involve criticizing other people's designs and then breaking those designs and implementations, I have noticed it can be hard to not take comments/changes about a design personally. George seems to argue over design changes to a point but I think he does see the value in other people's updates and how they have improved the DD's over the years. Certainly, Bill's changes have greatly improved the DDs and I think George openly admits that others have improved his designs over the years. Bill's swim step and side galley passage is a really great design idea.

I would guess people looking at the 462/492 designs are really only talking about changing maybe 5% of the design? We are not even at the 90/10 rule, meaning 90% of the work goes into the last 10%. I think we are more like 95/5.

I have spent hours looking at the various DD deck plans, especially the 462/492 layout, and when I think maybe I have found a better idea, usually I am wrong. The current design is the best possible layout when you start realizing the implications of design changes. Now, I do see where some slight changes to the PH and forward stateroom would better meet OUR needs but they are really nits. Ok the PH changes might not be a nit but we are the only people who want a copilot seat.

The Customer should get what they want, within reason. One problem with design, or material changes, is that if the production team is used to doing things a certain way, changing the process can cause problems. The employees get efficient at doing things a certain way, with certain materials, and a change can cost them time and decrease their quality of installation.

When I was designing our house, I ***REALLY *** wanted to use ICF(Insulated Concrete Forms) because they build a really tight, energy efficient and STRONG house. After talking to a number of builders, some of whom I would not let build a dog house, we found a builder who was a PE, had decades of building experience, we got along with him very well, he was trustworthy and honest....

But he had never worked with ICF's before but he was willing to try. Course, not many builders had or have used ICF's and getting the right builder was far more important than using a given house material. I had read up on ICF 10-20 years and letting go of the idea of using ICFs was not easy but after looking at my design that poked quite a huge holes in the ICF walls for large windows and doors it seemed a bit silly to continue with ICFs. It was also far more important to have the right builder vs the "right" material. We wanted a builder who would build the best house irregardless of the material. There is more than one way to skin a cat, so to speak. We made the right decision. Our builder and his family became friends. Not many people can say that about their house builder.

We had some issues with the build but nothing is perfect, and to be honest, very few people would noticed the nits that piss me off. It pisses me off because I know how *** I *** wanted things done and a certain contractor did not do it right and by the time I and the builder caught the issue it was too late to change. We are talking about something happening in a day or two and it is about the way the HVAC was installed in the attic. To be fair it really is a Who Gives a Sh...t but it still pisses me off.

Later,
Dan
dannc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2014, 10:24 PM   #58
Guru
 
City: Venice Louisiana
Country: United States
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 1,097
I would have gone with the ICF, but I live in Oklahoma. I would have adopted plans that suited my prefered build. My builder would have been well versed in my selected type of construction, not the other way around. I can just see that stern thruster stuck under the dock on a rising tide when a big sporty comes in. Not purty.
kulas44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2014, 10:32 PM   #59
Guru
 
hollywood8118's Avatar
 
City: Port Townsend Washington
Country: USA
Vessel Name: " OTTER "
Vessel Model: Ocean Alexander Europa 40
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,482
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diesel Duck 492 View Post
How many oceangoing trawlers out there have a watertight bulkhead at the stern? Me thinks very few. Nordhavn's definitely don't have one and they're considered very safe bluewater passagemakers. '
I believe the 47,50,57,64 all have rear "collision" bulkheads that are watertight.

HOLLYWOOD
hollywood8118 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-02-2014, 10:33 PM   #60
Guru
 
N4712's Avatar
 
City: South FL
Country: U.S.A
Vessel Name: Oliver
Vessel Model: Nordhavn 47 Hull# 12
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 3,613
Quote:
Originally Posted by hollywood8118 View Post
I believe the 47,50,57,64 all have rear "collision" bulkheads that are watertight.

HOLLYWOOD
Yep, what he said!
__________________

__________________
Thanks, Oliver
M/V Oliver
Nordhavn 47 Hull #12
N4712 is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off





All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:29 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2006 - 2012