Use the 'measure' tool on your pdf reader and compare the same distance with the actual print out in your hand for two perpendicular large distances. If they are different [outside a percent or so - there can be paper stretch] or if they differ proportionally [either or both can happen], ask for the print to be redone and maybe your money back as well - as it could cause problems.

   On the Ch16LT plans, the outside fore to aft measurement is 34" and the inside measurement is 30.5".  

   Thanks, guys.  I think the best plan is to get CLC on the line tomorrow to get some clarity.  Need numbers from this precise set of plans. There aren't many "known" measurements on the plans and those that exist are sort of short.  I'm almost positive OfficeMax did a "fit to page" and screwed it up.

 

Toss your positivity onto the heap unless you've run wide-format printers yourself before. Even if the OM crew didn't "fit to page" your PDF file there will be errors in printed dimensions if they were never trained or don't bother to calibrate their print software to what the printers can actually deliver.

The most common error is along the X axis, the long length of the media being used to print on as it gets run under the print heads, advancing incrementally with each pass. Less common but still important is the X-axis, the distance those print heads travel along the rails the carriage runs on back and forth while your file is being imaged.

All high-end RIPS (Raster Image Processor, the software that generates the signals fed to the printer that then becomes your printed material) have functions built in that can adjust for how a printer behaves. It's not a particularly difficult operation to calibrate a printer then apply correction factors in the RIP configuration to correct for errors, but if it's never been done (or not checked regularly if it was done only once at intital set-up) the 24" specified in your file isn't going to end up beling printed as 24.000" on your print.

Trust me on this. I set up then managaged a display print facility for a design firm in Chicago for twelve years servicing the real estate industry. Printing custom murals for demanding clients that would cover walls 16' high & 60' wide, with printers than print only 59.25" wide, means having your output calibrated properly. Murals designed to fit 60' have to come out measuring 60' when it's time for the installers 2,000 miles away to put them up.  

   @spclark - I don't doubt the truth of what you've said, but surely countless downloadable plans-builders have gotten this worked out one way or the other, no?

In the end I'm building a kayak, not the Space Shuttle, so an eighth here or there isn't going to sink it - but it appears my print is off by nearly a full inch.
 

"...but it appears my print is off by nearly a full inch."

Is there a scale on the file that would serve as a check for length?

Were I to have access to that same original file I'd be able to answer this question myself. If you want to e-mail it to me I'd be willing to review it, maybe get some numbers off so you can verify... but an inch off?

Errors in RIP calibration wouldn't be responsible for that degree of error unless the print was maybe 10' long or more.

Or perhaps printed out-of-scale if it was rotated 90° to better fit an aggregated print run along with other customer files.

TM me your e-mail address if you want; my #'s three.one.two, two.eight.five, four.nine.four.zero.

I'm in no way looking to use the file you bought and paid for to build a C-16! I have a Waterlust I'm getting close to launch date, no room - or desire - for another project.   

@spclark -

There are two scales on page one of the plans.  One is a 3":1' scale that is 6 inches long.  The other is a 1.5":1' scale that is 3 inches long.  Both of these measure somewhat short across their full length but I don't recall how much.  Fractions of an inch.

There are obly a few parts on the plan that are depicted full size.  The coaming and its spacers are one such group of parts, which is why I wanted known-good measurements so I can compare with my printed plans.  These also have the advantage of being relatively large (30+ inches) so errors will be magnified compared to those short little scales.  It is these parts that I said appear to be almost an inch short on my printouts.

I've got a call in to CLC and I'm reasonably sure I'll get the answer I'm looking for from them.  I'll ping you if I need your help.

Thanks!

Matt




 

I should have mentioned that all the Chesapeake's use the exact same cockpit parts, so the measurements I provided above from 16LT plans are applicable to your 16.  Based upon those measurements, you have less than a 2% scaling error.

Looking through the plans, the only full sized parts are coaming, hatches, deckbeams and bulkheads.  A 2% error in size of comaing and hatch parts won't even be noticed since exact size is not important.  It is unlikely that the deckbeams will be a problem either because they are trimmed to fit.  Bulkheads are the only thing that might be a bit of a problem.  I'd cut them a little big then trim to fit when you install.

If you have not already found the Chesapeake bulkhead fit discussions on this forum, it would be wouth doing a search.  The BHs don't fit well unless you remove the spreader stick.

As a side note, I always buy printed plans from the designer to avoid the whole scaling issue.

Hope that this helps.

In one of the (many) e-mail exchanges I've had with Dillon M. he allowed that in stitch'n'glue kit-building, "1/8" +/- is close enough" for pretty much everything.

My experience with this Waterlust project tends to support that. As you said MDR you're not building a Space Shuttle.... And from what Mark_N adds above, seems the C-16 isn't critically dependent on parts being dimensioned with precision, as long as they fit their purpose.

You need my help, my offer stands. Otherwise, carry on!

@spclark - thanks!

@Mark N - thank you, too.  CLC told me the inside dimension is 30-3/4".  Either way I'm not going to worry too much.

While we're at it, I have another question.  On the plans where it depicts the coaming and spacers laminated together, it mentions that they'll "slip" into a jaggedy arrangement.  This seems undesirable as they all have the same inside perimeter.   Is this by design somehow - or the inevitable result of gluing two parts face-to-face?  

If the latter, I've learned in making cutting boards that a tiny sprinkle of salt (or sand) between the pieces will totally prevent such slippage.

 ".......  PDF version of the plans for the Chesapeake 16......."

Are you working off the 8.5 x 11 PDF Study Plans?    Or are they the plans and manual? 

The stepping is caused by stacking identical parts onto a curved surface. The radius increases as the stack grows, causing the perimeter to increase proportionally but the layers of the stack stay the same size.

To not form the steps, the layers would have to get larger as they go up from the deck.

Laszlo

What Lazlo said regarding the stacked parts.

Another way to visualize is to take a paperback book and hold binding in left hand and bent the book with your right.  The free edges of the pages do not stay vertical, but are staggered.  Same thing happend when you bend the plywood parts of the coaming. 

A more advanced technique to address this issue is to first glue up the coaming without gluing to the deck.  That way it can be removed for easier cleanup/sanding off of the boat.  Here is the sequence from my Mystery.

Tape off kayak deck, glue coaming parts together and clamp to the deck.

Remove clamps

Lift coaming assembly off of deck.

Clean up edges and sand away the stepped inner/outer surfaces so that they are smooth.  I use my belt sander secured to the top of a toolbox.

Remove tape from deck and glue coaming assembly to deck.

Clean up inside edge.  I use a flapwheel.

Glass coaming as desired.  IIRC, the Chesapeaks do not call for glass but it will make the lip more abrasion resistant.

   @Mark N:  That's a great idea.  Looks like it makes cleaning up the edges immensely easier - and makes smoothing under the coaming lip possible.

@Grumpy:  I have the full plans and manual.