Bulkhead radius good

Posted by Laszlo on Oct 26, 2004

For anyone who cares, the resolution is:

1. The CH16LT deck does have a slight fore/aft curve so the vertical gap over the forward bulkhead was an artifact of my flawed assumption that the deck would only be bent in one direction.

2. The forward bulkhead is not meant to have the same radius as the deckbeam or the planing guide, and side gaps are possible (from the CLC staff).

In addition, contrary to what the manual says, the sheer clamps need to be planed beyond the top of the side panels, up to 3/4" down at the cockpit (from the CLC staff).

Not knowing about the fore/aft curve and planing into the side panels explains the apparent problem I was chasing. Thanks for everyone's help.

Laszlo

In Response to: Bulkhead radius bad? by Laszlo on Oct 24, 2004

Replies:

• Re: Bulkhead radius good by LeeG on Oct 26, 2004
  • Re: Bulkhead radius good by Laszlo on Oct 26, 2004
    • Re: Bulkhead radius good by M Davis on Oct 26, 2004
      • Re: Bulkhead radius good by LeeG on Oct 26, 2004
      • Re: Bulkhead radius good by Laszlo on Oct 27, 2004
  • Re: Bulkhead radius good by mick allen on Oct 27, 2004
    • Re: Bulkhead radius good by LeeG on Oct 27, 2004
      • Re: Bulkhead radius good by mick allen on Oct 27, 2004
        • Re: Bulkhead radius good by LeeG on Oct 27, 2004
          • Re: Bulkhead radius good by Terry Mcadams on Oct 28, 2004