The Ship Model Forum

This is the viewing distance paradoxon. If a model was viewed always from the same distance, as in a true diorama, one could leave off details that would not be visible at the design viewing distance - just as a painting is normally designed to be viewed from a distance of about the diagonal of the canvas. However, we put our nose to it and then, of course, expect to see many more details. We have to compromise within what is possible with the materials.

wefalck wrote:Again� I don�t know where kit manufacturers got this idea of deeply incised deck seams from. Just look at the real think: deck seams are filled in with pitch and then scraped flat. Only in very cold weather they would be slightly depressed, perhaps a few millim�tres.

We're not talking scale fidelity. Models are representations of reality... there is some artistic license taken in representing wooden decks in scale models because they eye expects to see this type of detail...not because it's realistic. I wouldn't expect to see railings either...yet so many of us add them...

True.

But wooden decks are not featureless - the packed seams between planks are very obvious (I served on three ships with wooden decks). At least they are unless the decks are painted deck gray as they were in WWII.

The grooves in smaller scale ship model decks are an attempt - crude though it may be - to show the features of the wooden decks. It is a matter of opinion whether the exaggerated grooves to show that something was there is better than featureless flat decks that indicate incorrectly that nothing was there.

If you are really picky you could always paint the deck wood color, let it dry, and then rub in a darker color to fill the grooves between boards and wipe it off of the plank tops before it dries. It would be very hard to do this if the grooves were not there.

Phil

Again� I don�t know where kit manufacturers got this idea of deeply incised deck seams from. Just look at the real think: deck seams are filled in with pitch and then scraped flat. Only in very cold weather they would be slightly depressed, perhaps a few millim�tres.

I generated a deck design for a never-produced model of the USS Oklahoma City CLG-5 (the company went out of business before the kit was released).

For that they used the deck plan to create a high resolution "negative" photo etch pattern - the wooden planks were recessed and the grooves between them were raised. They then used this photo etch as part of a mold - when the resin hardened the deck pattern was molded in.

They got pretty good resolution in the deck patterns this way.

I have also heard of this technique being used to mold the sides of model railroad cars.

Phil

A flat surface. You don�t want to reproduce the furrows of kits don�t you?

Sorry, I guess I wasn't clear..I'm talking about printing in 3D on shapeways...so I was wondering what folks used for standards...similar to what we get in kits today...

First of all, what are you trying to model? What period? The dimensions of the planking varied depending upon ship type, nationality, year, etc.

In the US Navy in WWII planks on ships varied from 4 inches to 6 inches wide and 2 inches thick. They would be narrower on small boats.

Sometimes the planks were laminates - for example sometimes 1 inch teak was laminated over 1 inch Douglas fir.

Margin boards were typically wider. For example, on the Cleveland class cruisers the deck planks were 4 inches wide and the margin boards were a maximum of 9 inches and a minimum of 6 inches where the deck planks were nibbed into the margin boards. Also, the margin boards were 2.5 inches thick on sides up against bulkheads and 2 inches thick on the sides adjacent the 2 inch thick deck planks. This caused water to run away from the metal bulkheads.

Maximum plank length depended upon the type of ship and the deck beam spacing.

Plank ends were staggered to prevent two ends aligning in adjacent planks. There are many different staggering patterns, again depending upon nationality, year, ship type, etc. But mostly the plank ends were staggered so the there were two to four boards between planks with ends aligned.

On larger ships the planks were laid parallel to the center line and trimmed (nibbed, hooked or angled) along the curved sides of the ship. But on some smaller vessels and older wooden ships the planks were curved along the hull edges and trimmed to fit into a wide centerboard that ran along the centerline.

There were narrow gaps between plank edges. The gaps were packed with some stuffing and that was covered with a tar-like sealant. Actually, the planks were beveled on the sides to half the plank width to produce a gap at the top when the planks were jammed together. This gap was packed and filled with tar. The gaps and sealing were there to prevent water from getting under the planks.

Before the mid 1800s planks were "hooked" together where ends would narrow to a sharp point adjacent to a waterway board. After the mid 1800s the planks were nibbed onto a margin board.

So you need to be more specific about what you are trying to model.

Phil

I have some deck-pattern ramblings here: http://ontheslipway.com/?cat=14

I also enjoyed this link: http://www.titanic-model.com/db/db-02/b ... db-02.html

(doesn't respond at the moment...)

I would consult period literature from the respective country in order to see what size of planks were used where and when.

Deck planks normally where in the order of 15 cm to 20 cm in width, hardwood (e.g. teak) planks being wider thant softwood (e.g. yellow pine) planks. The width was partly dictated by the size of planks available and partly so that planks would not warp apreciably across their width with chaning humidity. Planks are usually cut tangentially from a stem and where laid out with the grain up and down alternating to further compensate the dimensional changes.

There also needed to be sufficient 'expansion joints', i.e. deck seams, to compensate for dimensional changes across the width of a deck. The visible part of seams would be between 5 mm and 10 mm wide.

The length of deck planks depended on the available length of the timber, but rarely exceed about 10 m to also facilitate handling.

Butt-end seams were distributed such that there were two planks between neighbouring seams. When laying out the deck pattern, one also tries to have full-length planks between decks-houses, hatches, etc. in order to minimise the number of butt-end seams.

If wooden planks are laid onto solid iron or steel decks, it does not matter too much, where the butt-end seams are. However, when the wooden deck is laid onto iron or steel deck beams, the butting would be arranged onto the beams.

I'm toying with trying something in 1/700. I use Fusion 360 and was interested in how you all my do wooden decks... what kind of depth and width do you use to create the pattern?