Simulating Hull Plating Methods

[Senkan]

Hi Senkan,

Your intention to use self adhesive foil is indeed a good one, show us some pictures when you're busy at!

Regards,

Laurent

I'm trying to put rivit marks on the tape but there is a lot of wrinkling when this is done. I might try to put the rivits through the paper backing and hope this will keep them smooth. Also need a better tool for making the rivit marks.

[Laurent]

Senkan,

at which scale are you working ?

rivets were only to be seen at a very short distance, the models I often have seen with rivets have the problem that those rivets most of the time are waaaay oversize.

I would let ditchle your rivet idea, put just the plating on, should be enough.

Regards,

Laurent

[Mike Reading]

Hull plating needs to be distinguished between the 1. "in and out" strakes of a rivetted hull, (and that raises yet another topic - the extent to which replication of rivets is attempted), 2. an all welded hull where typically the plates "shrink" back between the frames creating a "dished" look in certain lights and angles of looking at the vessel, 3. armour plating, and 4. the stiffening strakes that can be seen on some ships (the RN Type 21 frigates are a good example of this).

When you look at a good many models that try to depict plating the effect is often overdone and/or overscale. Always worth looking at the ship/vessel that is being modelled at a distance so that the size of the actual is about the same as the model. Very likely you will see the plating is not visible. So why go to the bother of doing something on the model that will not be right.

Personally I do not attempt showing plating below about 1:192 scale other than where there is pronounced "stepping" in the hull such as is created by armour plating or where there are strakes/the like. In other words the feature needs to be fairly defined.

When I do show plating I use litho. I glue it in position with UHU after roughening the surface of the litho. UHU is good because it allows for being able to move the plate/s in position and being able to easily squeeze out the surplus glue, roll it up into little balls and remove them cleanly.

Just a few thoughts, and will look forward to reading what others have to say.
Mike

[Senkan]

I'm working on a 1/200 Nichimo Yamato. And that ship had a whole lot of rivets...maybe the most rivets ever on a ship. Also the rivets were huge. Just about the whole hull was riveted. I like the look of the rivets. Gives it more of a metalic look...not just painted plastic.

I am using Japanese reference books to gauge the size of the plates. 2 rows of plates came to the height of the armored belt. This measured 5/16" on the model. I obtained 3 rolls of 3/8" foil tape. Haven't decided yet if Im going to tape over the hull detail (sand it) and add it back or just cut out holes in the tape. Anyone have any experience in this?

[Senkan]

Some findings on Hull plating of the 1/200 Yamato with foil tape. Best size tape is 5/16". I bought 3/8" and it's too big. You can put the foil tape over the detail and smooth out the tape and still get a good bit of detail. This might change after the paint but initially it looks fine.

I purchased a tracing wheel to make the rivets. The one I purchased made the rivets too big. So now I'm looking at buying a pounce wheel that makes 21 holes per inch (the tracing wheel made about 10 holes per inch.

[djandj]

I have to echo the comments of others said before. At 1/700 you WILL NOT see plating or weld lines. It's just too small. So why risk screwing up your ship to add a detail that is inaccurate? (other than b/c it looks cool)

I work exclusively in 1/700 and even the finest x-acto scribe would equate to a half a foot thick seam weld in 1:1 scale.

Seeing an 800 foot long battleship at 12 inches is the same as seeing that 800 ft BB from half a mile away (or thereabouts) so forget about the weld seams (and the deck planking while you're at it.)

On the other hand if we were content to only replicate details seen half a mile away, we'd carve the ships out of bars of soap and call it a day. . .so have at it!

[DrPR]

djandj is right. Even at 1:350 a 1" thick hull plate scales to less than 0.003" (about the thickness of a sheet of notebook paper), and on anything smaller than a battleship there probably were few, if any, any plates that thick. A 1/4" thick (10#) plate scales to 0.0007" thick at 1:350, less than the thickness of a coat of paint.

Here is some information about hull plating and strakes:

Plating thickness varied in accordance with the needs for hull strength and water pressure. Hull plating was thicker amidships than at the bow and stern. Plating was thickest close to the keel than at the main deck level.

Except on small boats plating was not applied in simple patterns, such as checkerboard pattern - this looks silly. Furthermore, it was not applied clinker style with each strake overlapping the one below it. Nor was it always applied in alternating strakes with every other one overlapping the strakes on either side. Some strakes may have overlapped both strakes above and below. Some strakes were under the strake above, and above the strake below (clinker style), and some strakes may have been overlapped above and below. Below the waterline strakes may be butted together with no overlap.

Not all strakes were the same height - in fact they may vary in height along the length of the ship. In some places amidships a strake may be split into two parallel strakes. The thing to remember is that hull plates generally were designed with a maximum weight in mind (the things had to be lifted with the cranes at hand), so thicker plating required smaller sized plates. For this reason, where the plate was thickest strakes were often split into two parallel strakes.

Not all strakes were horizontal. Some ships had vertical strakes at the bow, or at least part of the way up.

Hull plates were not always rectangular. They were cut to fit the framing of the ship, and often had cutouts and tapers. Typically the joint between strakes has longitudinal framing on the inside of the hull. The plates were welded or rivited to these longitudinals with watertight sealing. The vertical joints between plates had backing plates - sometimes outside above the waterline, but always inside below the waterline.

The "scalloping" or "dishing" seen on some ships has nothing to do with welding or riveting. It is the result of years of pounding by waves. It is more pronounced on older ships. It is also more evident near bow and stern where the plating is thinnest and the ship takes the worst pounding.

****

For an example of a Cleveland class cruiser hull plating pattern see:

http://www.okieboat.com/CAD%20hull.html

[Cliffy B]

The "scalloping" or "dishing" seen on some ships has nothing to do with welding or riveting. It is the result of years of pounding by waves. It is more pronounced on older ships. It is also more evident near bow and stern where the plating is thinnest and the ship takes the worst pounding.

Yet strangely its evident on almost all new construction ships now, even before they ever enter the water. How thin are we skinning our ships these days?!

[Laurent]

How thin are we skinning our ships these days?!

from 10 to 12 mm, about half an inch, on a nowadays frigate. We also are more working with longitudinal framing, instead of vertical framing as was the case 50 years ago. Strength remains the same, but is is more lightweight and easier to build...

Regards,

Laurent

[djandj]

Yep - I've debated hull lines for some time now, but since I specialize in 1/700, I find that (for me) simulated hull lines, (like trying to paint deck planks) is just not realistic. Given the scale of the ship, you would simply not be able to see hull seams on most ships given that scale. Since in real life a hull seam is about the thickness of a human hand, when converted to scale, the seam would simply be imperceptible to the human eye. Even the edge of your sharpest x=acto when converted to scale must be over half a foot wide. (right?)

So you have to ask yourself - are you making an authentic scale model - or a model that is out of scale but looks cool.

[MartinJQuinn]

So you have to ask yourself - are you making an authentic scale model - or a model that is out of scale but looks cool.

How absolutely authentic is any scale model? We are building representations of ships in miniature, and each modeler has to decide how much detail (or not) to add to his creation. A lot of what we do is for "effect" and out of scale regardless of our best efforts.

[commodore4]

I have seen some good ideas here.I use just a fine engraver for the lines on 1/350 if ,I choose to do them. On larger scale ships I use computer printer paper.I soak it in liquid plastic glue and put it on and burnish it down.Now this method is only for riveted ships with the in and out patterns. On smoothly welded ships I use .010 sheet cut and contoured to where the plate goes ,glue it in place with an extra measure of liquid glue, I let it sit for about five minutes and press it into the plate next to it. A little glue squeezes out.When dry(a couple of days)I sand it down with 600 grit (wet) and DO NOT remove all the line showing! I really,though, for the most part don,t worry about weld lines in the small scales.As far as the dished plates on ships,YES,a lot is done by the sea. A lot is also done by tugs and also when it happens,a large wake can ram the ship against the pier resulting in dents as well.There are dished plates that results from stress on a hull similar to the stress dents on C-130 AIRCRAFT! nuff said by me COMMODORE4

[Senkan]

I used copper foil tape on my 1/200 Yamato. It worked out well. It allows you to keep the hull detail (it's foil tape). I didn't include the raised plates but I am considering taking off a row of tape. The tape size I used was 3/8" for 1/200. Size for 1/250 would be about 5/16" and 7/32" for 1/350. I have some pics but my camera phone really sucks. One is in black and white since it seemed to come out better.

[Senkan]

I put a little bit of primer over the tape. I would say if you did use foil tape you might want to put a little glue on the ends. They like to fold back. I did the tape work early last year and should have painted over it right after. Primer, paint, and dull coat probably will keep the ends down.

[DrPR]

Did the foil tape have adhesive backing or did you glue it down? I would worry about an adhesive backing. The tape might start peeling after a while.

[Senkan]

It had adhesive on it. I used 2 types of type...foil tape and normal brass tape for the bottom (it was bigger and I got it cheap). The tape has been on the ship for almost a year and the foil tape is fine (minus the edges that like to peel back when they are bothered). The tape on the bottom is having issues. Im having to go back and glue the ends on a lot of them. Hopefully a couple coats of paint will keep the non foil tape down.

If the adhesive is worrisom then I say clue em all.

[PetrOs]

I used the tamiya masking tape cut to proper width and taped on the hull, some CA finely applied over the tape to soak it, and then sprayed over with modelmaster black and vertical lines scribed. Later some other paint and laquer layers applied. Worked well, and is still on, after 1.5 years.

you can see this method on the small freighter here
http://www.modelshipgallery.com/gallery ... index.html

[JC Woodman]

So you have to ask yourself - are you making an authentic scale model - or a model that is out of scale but looks cool.

Right on! Sure many of us build these ships as extensions (or materializations) of our research into the "how and why" of the originals. I build ship models but also aircraft and armored vehicles and have learned over the years that what may be historicly accurate and/or to scale may not be artisticly or assteticly pleasing pleasing to my eye.

Personaly I ALWAYS value the execution and techniqe over perfect accuracy. It's always great if you can have it all w/o compromise but really, with all the builds and all of great artists works here how often do we see the fabled "authentic scale model"... All is great but I want eyecatching cooool... It's all about the cool!

Oh, on the platting thing in 700th I go w/ VERY subtle paint & pencil shading/masking. 350th 75% scribing w/ styrene accents and 25% paint work. Not quite where I want to be yet, still to heavy but getting closer to what I'm hoping for. I think of the paint/pencil/mask method as more of an insinuation of plating, this helps it work for me on 700th especially after you layer the final weathering etc. on.

The current project is IJN Hiryu in 700th (Posting soon) and IJN Yamashiro & Mikasa right behind. I went with the same general base color schemes as a constant on all three so I could learn from my many mistakes and (I hope) get better on each. My mantra is now "finish it! dont sweat the errors. Do better on the next. Be cool...

[johndon]

I'm giving some thought to representing the plating on the hull of the Iowa class New Jersey and I'm going to try laying down strips of Tamiya Masking Tape and then spraying over the top of that - the tape should, I hope, give the plating effect...

John

[doog_k]

I've adapted a method used by others on my 1/144th scale RC ships. Card, IMpact Adhesive, lots of thinned cellulose dope and eventually automotive primer (after a lot of sanding). You can see this on a hull part way through the process- http://www.edinburghmodelboatclub.org.uk/projects.html.

I think even at RC scales people can over do the surface details such as plating, it can look like the hull's built from Lego sometimes.

The card I use is old business cards, fairly thin, high quality and partly cut to size (and free ).
It looks OK for stand-off models I think
http://www.edinburghmodelboatclub.org.u ... els/06.jpg
http://www.edinburghmodelboatclub.org.u ... els/02.jpg