34 Californian Floor Jack Supports

This is a continuation of a conversation we had in the Californian Section several years ago. Here's a link to the previous observations and remedy suggestions.

My 34 Californian LRC has issues with water collecting at the aft house corners and misaligned cabinet doors which I attributed to a sagging deck. The PO had to cut into the aft floor joists to remove the old fuel tanks, then lagged in with new joists in the reassembly process. When I bought the boat, there was a slight, but noticeable, sag causing a misalignment in the the aft cabinet doors. As the years have progressed, so has the sag and the doors were offset by approximately 1/2 to 5/8 inch at the top. The floor creaking and spring had also worsened along with the amount of water collecting at the corners. Something had to be done to resolve these issues.

I studied the construction of my boat and found that the stringers and joists aligned near the corners of my salon engine room hatch. Along the aft edge of the hatch is the area which was replaced by the PO following the tank replacement. I designed some floor jacks based upon Duvie's design illustrated in this post.

I was discussing this project at a gathering of fellow Trawler Forum members last month when Cpseudonym (Craig) offered to fabricate them for me. We got together at the beginning of this month for a morning at the local nautical swap meet and he presented me with the finished product. I took them home and painted them up.



I lined the saddles with rubber backed felt to cushion and silence it.



I mounted them in the ER at the 4 corners of the hatch as seen below. This shot is looking aft from the fwd ER door. The fwd port jack has been adjusted to a more vertical position.



Before extending the jacks, I marked the threaded rod with a red Sharpie to track the amount of lift. Over a week, I lifted the floor from 1 to 1 1/2 inches. My cabinet doors are now properly aligned and while water still collects at the house corners, it's not nearly as much as before. The salon floor is now rock solid with no creaks.

Another problem I was experiencing is that the stbd radiator cap is located directly below a joist. As the floor sagged, the cap became impossible to remove without leveraging the joist up. Now this cap is easily accessed for service.

I have also noticed a difference in the salon sound and vibration levels when cruising. The sound level seems lower with less resonance throughout the cabin. But the floor vibrations have increased due to the rigid connection now in place between the stringers where the engines are mounted and the floor joists.

I can't thank Craig enough for his assistance in making this long-awaited project a reality! Thanks so much, Craig!! You rock, buddy!!

Here's a short video of the supports in place.

Impressive work by Craig! Must be satisfying, as the fix works and things return to normal, as planned. Better now than when you bought.
Are the jacks permanent, or is a joist repair possible? The jack struts are so neat you might want to keep them.

My plan is to keep them and adjust as needed. It shouldn't need much more than a little tweaking. I won't get back to it for several weeks.

What an innovative and cost effective repair to what would have seemed like a boat dooming insurmountable problem. Congrats to you and Craig! "applaud, clap, whistle, applaud"!

Now what do we do about the floppy floor on the flybridge? (Please tell me all Californian 34s have springy flybridge)

Install a dance pole in the salon? Ask Brittania if he likes his in the fwd cabin on his KK.

looks great

Flywright, looks great! Before I supported my floor the counter tops had a visible sag in them. The jacks flattened them right out. I placed a third set of jacks on my boat just forward of the generator and about flush with the front of the fuel tanks in hopes of taking care of the puddling at the aft corners of the house but no luck.

Masterful! Now if you could find how to reduce the low-RPM-engine vibration!

markpierce said:

Masterful! Now if you could find how to reduce the low-RPM-engine vibration!

Click to expand...

That's easy Mark, let it run at high rpm.

CPseudonym said:

That's easy Mark, let it run at high rpm.

Click to expand...

Yes!, but I was thinking of better/improved engine mounts.

Nice job on identifying the problem, finding a solution, putting it to work and seeing the successes of your project.

Good job both of you!

Thanks guys - for the show and congrats on your success. Recently I've noted more creaking in our salon floor. Nothing as severe as mentioned in this thread. But, upon seeing this solution I will look at things differently regarding stopping the creaks and groans that occur while walking across the salon sole.

Again - Thanks for the process you undertook and views presented!

Art

Good fix FW and Nice work CP . A fabricating boat buddie can't be beat . Great work guys . Did Yall bust out some IPA 's when finished ?
A dance pole hmmm ? I've got room for one on the aft deck . Anchoring out has a whole new meaning .

Pack Mule said:

Good fix FW and Nice work CP . A fabricating boat buddie can't be beat . Great work guys . Did Yall bust out some IPA 's when finished ?

Click to expand...

Thanks guys. It's a fix I've been contemplating for years. Without Craig's help, I'd still be just thinking about it.

We probably would have broken out the IPAs but it was still morning when we finished at the swap meet, so I bought lunch instead. We had some great prime rib sandwiches at Foster's Bighorn in Rio Vista. The place is loaded with so many big game trophy mounts that my wife refuses to eat there. We thought it was very cool.

Mark, no need for new engine mounts just yet but thanks for thinking of new ways to spend my money!

Al,

A piece of Sylomar from Soundown under and over the mounts may reduce some of the refered vibration.

Rob

Datenight said:

Al,

A piece of Sylomar from Soundown under and over the mounts may reduce some of the refered vibration.

Rob

Click to expand...

Great thought, Rob. I found the specs here.

http://www.soundown.com/Product Line/Adobe/sylomerweb.pdf

It looks like the peak loading of both grades of Sylomar is 145 PSI for "rare and short-term loads".

I'll call the company to see if they have other potential materials for the job. I'm also considering the Soundown carpet pad to reduce noise. I'll talk to them about that, too.

Thanks!

a tweaking

FlyWright said:

My plan is to keep them and adjust as needed. It shouldn't need much more than a little tweaking. I won't get back to it for several weeks.

Click to expand...

Heck with a little tweaking you could jack a little rocker into the hull shape. Every action equal reaction. Side deck sag is more common in these old boats than you would think. I did a similar repair to a 57' Hatteras last year. I used a portapower to lift the salon side deck 2".

LI had a similar issue w my aft deck in the cockpit of Willy.

I removed the FG stern seat that was attached to the cockpit floor and sides. As a result the floor saged enough that I noticed a puddle on the cockpit deck. I cut two (one for each side) 2x4s and taped them in verticle w a hammer. Sounds crude but I don't think the'll ever move. They haven't in about 5 years.

Re the vibration issue;
A. You could try Poly Flex engine mounts. I think the're made out of plastic. I had them installed in Willy when we did the re-power and Willy seems to have less vibration that other boats .. Willard's included.
B. If rubber pads (or sim) under the jack stands don't do much good you may consider bolting or otherwise attaching them positively to the boat. Feel the member at the bottom of the stands and at the floor where they are located and see if there is more or less vibration above or below. Another solution could be to re-locate the jack stands fore and aft as the distance between the stands may cause resonance or exciting an otherwise not vibrating member. A spring fitted to the top of the Jack stand could help or even be a total solution. If everything in a boat was firmly attached to everything else there would be far less vibration.
A higher rpm engine and/or a gas engine may help too. You can take that as an intended joke as it was.

Question ..... Is the top part of the Jack stand free to be lifted out of the lower tube? If so that could very definitely be a problem re vibration. The connection must be 100% solid IMO.

Ok, I have a structural question about the fix....but first, as I said before, I admire the ingenuity and accomplishment of the way you fixed it. My question is: Have you now added a rigidity to the entire boat that wasn't meant to be there? Again, being new to this, I'm just curious how it affects the overall durability of the boat now that you've removed any designed in flexibility to the entire structure. Please don't take this as ANY type of criticism...I'm just on a learning curve here.
Thanks

Good question, Wyoboater.

I've seen some Californians with vertical supports spanning from the stringers to the joists that looked like original construction. It's tough to know for sure, but I suspect that the early boats were built without it and the later models had it incorporated into the original build. Mine is Hull #1 of the 34 LRCs and I know there were many refinements and improvements that were offered or built in on later hulls.

My boat's sagging may have been aggravated by the PO cutting into the joists to remove the fuel tanks. This boat has a reputation for having a very stout hull and structure. I seriously doubt the floor jacks will impart a load that the hull and stringers cannot adequately support.

I found this pic on my computer of another Californian owner who performed the same modification in his boat. I'd give credit to the poster if I could find the owner, but it's been lost in the years since I found it. Maybe he'll surface here to take credit for his handiwork.

Effectively retro-fitting a later manufacturer modification is more likely to rectify than create problems.

I would seriously doubt much if any stiffness issues where created and IMO if any deflection was imparted into the hull stringers it would have immediately manifest itself as prop shaft vibration.

All in all it was a painfully cheap and easy fabrication job. Less than 1 hour shop time and all material(except Al's hardware, paint and felt) was literally pulled out of the scrap metal bin.

Ok, thanks for the replies...Like I said, I was just curious. Since rigidity in a sky scraper makes them vulnerable to earthquakes, I was just thinking that since a boat is effectively in an "earthquake" all the time, excess rigidity could be a problem.

Good question and point wyoboater,

Rigidity in structures is an age old question and as you point out there are structures where flexibility is a good thing .. not bad. But even in your skyscraper example the goodness of flexibility is very limited.
It was said in the old days that flexibility was good when traditional wood and canvas canoes were starting to be replaced by canoes built of other materials. The old school paddlers and builders said a canoe paddles better when the bottom is allowed to flex between paddle strokes. Garbage talk IMO.

Most of the time flexing of structures is good only when it flexes instead of breaking .. as in the case of the skyscraper. If an earthquake was continuous a building would fail very soon but fortunately earthquakes only happen for very few minutes or more often only a few moments. So in this example designed-in flexibility is good.

The advantage of flexing is that at times it softens a force .. allows it to be applied over more time so the amplitude of the force is reduced. But the power of the force is not reduced. If you were to take a fairly sharp stick and push me out of the way by applying force to my body for several seconds I may not be damaged. But if the same force was applied w the same stick in one 50th of the time very serious damage to my body would probably result.

In a wood planked boat often forces are absorbed by allowing some small amount of movement. But over time that movement causes damage. Sheer loads are applied to sealers and caulking and eventually serious breakdown occurs. Fasteners like bolts and screws are installed in tight fitting holes and are very strong but over time and flexing from shock loads or just slowly working will crush or wear the holes larger and some strength will be lost and the same "working" will have wider limits. Eventually the boat will "wear out" .. it will become so flexible that failure of individual parts will render the boat unsafe. Refastening or/and rebuilding will restore much of the boats strength but she will never be as strong and durable as when new.

Different materials respond to flexing in very different ways. Wood props are great on airplanes as the wood flexes so gracefully it can absorb millions of cycles of flexing. But only along the blade .. not at the hub or it would become loose from it's mounting.

Re the OP the floor in the original boat was/is free to move up and down a small amount as it is attached to the sides and decks of the hull. And the hulls flexing is limited only by its bottom structures like the longitudinal stringers. When we add the struts as in the OP the flexing of the floors is greatly reduced as the weight of the floors and everything on them is now applied to the bottom not through the sides of the boat but directly to the bottom and the sea .. through the struts.

My own opinion is that some undesirable flexing on the outboard areas of the floor is greatly reduced and the bottom will (to a great extent) have reduced flexing as the load from above is applied directly to the part of the bottom most likely to flex.

Looks like a win win situation to me and the boat is better off w the struts than w/o. Just a theory of course and anybody is welcome to blow me and my theory out of the water. I think it's a good modification. Some transfer of engine vibration applied to the hull bottom would be transferred to the floor above and to the feet of those standing on it through the struts. If the struts were solidly attached some reduction in hull vibration would result from the load and mass on the floor being added to the total mass the vibrator (the engine) had to work on. But people don't stand on the hull of trawlers .. they stand on the floor. But the original intent was to keep the floor from sagging and that part of the mod is 100% good IMO. Whether to soft attach or hard attach the struts is another question .. IMO.

IMHO - If a pleasure boat's stringers and/or hull integrity becomes too jeopardized by simple floor supports intended to limit/stop floor creaking... then the boat was not built sturdy enough and should be scraped; before some other instance of stress sinks her and endangers lives..


BTW, and as an aside: In regard to Eric's mention of building flex in earthquakes...


In areas having too often advent of earthquakes it is best to have many of main structural components attached by Hot Dipped galvanized nails in applicable d size. And, not with screws that are so often used in today's fast paced (make it quick/easy) home building market. Reason - HD galvy nails offer considerable (the best general fastener) flexing capability before fatigue could break them. Screws are ridged and snap with little to no flex capability. A mix of both type fasteners can also provide good results for many reasons during building.

Screws are probably higher carbon steel or stronger for some other reason. If you had a nail long enough you could probably tie a knot w it. In an earthquake nails could pull half of the way out and then still be holding something together. But the house could be a twisted mangled mess.

Aircraft bolts are not as strong as many bolts found on cars. But if put in a vise a hammer won't break it. They just bend. That ability to bend and not break could keep an airplane from falling out of the sky.

Screws in building houses? Never even heard of screws in houses except for hanging doors.

My boat had a sagging afterdeck problem and I hope you don't think I should have scraped it. Never entered my mind. And I don't think it occurred to Craig or FlyWright.

Ok Eric, thanks for the explanation...what I've actually gotten out of it is that the engineering side of boat building AND earthquake proof building design is incredibly complex and better left to engineers than laymen like myself. As I stated in my original question, I was in no way criticizing the repair, in fact, I think it's ingenious!. It just brought that question of rigidity to mind and I knew if I asked it here on the Forum, I'd get an explanation. I now understand better than I did, so again, thanks!

manyboats said:

Good question and point wyoboater,

Looks like a win win situation to me and the boat is better off w the struts than w/o. Just a theory of course and anybody is welcome to blow me and my theory out of the water. I think it's a good modification. Some transfer of engine vibration applied to the hull bottom would be transferred to the floor above and to the feet of those standing on it through the struts. If the struts were solidly attached some reduction in hull vibration would result from the load and mass on the floor being added to the total mass the vibrator (the engine) had to work on. But people don't stand on the hull of trawlers .. they stand on the floor. But the original intent was to keep the floor from sagging and that part of the mod is 100% good IMO. Whether to soft attach or hard attach the struts is another question .. IMO.

Click to expand...

My experience bracing up my salon floor was consistent with your theory. Californian built a box floor system without solid horizontal floor joists side-to-side and no vertical bracing. This allowed for two large removable floor sections for engine removal and major maintenance access. As you point out overtime everything loosens up and now you have floor sag.
Adding additional bracing did indeed restore the level and rigidity of the floor. But I noted that one of the vertical braces I added between the main stringer and the floor joist (and just a few inches ahead of the starboard engine mount), transferred an unbelievable amount of engine vibration and noise to the salon floor, to the extent I finally removed it. Unfortunately it's the ideal brace location to plumb the floor. Until I come up with a shock absorbing mount I can live without it though.

Interesting analysis, Larry. I added one exactly where you describe and kind of figured that was the one most likely to be transferring the vibrations to the lower helm floor. It's also the one that raises that corner enough to clear the coolant cap.

I had not thought of removing it but maybe that's the best solution. I'll try releasing the jack a bit to see if it reduces the vibes.

Why not attenuate the vibrations?

http://m.grainger.com/mobile/product/GRAINGER-APPROVED-Vibration-Isolator-2NPD9

Just one example.