On Mon, 16 Jul 2007 18:29:17 -0700, David&Joan wrote:

I have only seen one deck repair job and that was on a Pacific Seacraft
31. The repair was done from above and was undetectable afterwards.

This is the only way I've ever seen it done, which was why I asked the
question. A seller claims that the work was done from the inside. I
can't imagine what kind of a mess that would create. As to the
keel/ballast question, the boat we're looking at has an ugly looking
joint. The asking price is so low as to make a sensible person go
hmmmm....Must consult the surveyor.

You might look in the Yellow Pages for industrial X-ray outfits. I've heard
of it being done and it will tell you a lot about the condition of the keel
bolts. Often, they are necked down to nearly nothing in the joint.

--
Roger Long

and, that's important not just for determining the necessity of the job but
also for guiding the repair. If the bolts are necked, you are probably not
going to be able to back them out without breaking them off and will need to
drill new holes. This is fairly easy in a lead keel but a big job in iron.

--
Roger Long

On Mon, 16 Jul 2007 22:43:29 -0400, "mr.b" wrote:

On Mon, 16 Jul 2007 18:29:17 -0700, David&Joan wrote:

I have only seen one deck repair job and that was on a Pacific Seacraft
31. The repair was done from above and was undetectable afterwards.

This is the only way I've ever seen it done, which was why I asked the
question. A seller claims that the work was done from the inside. I
can't imagine what kind of a mess that would create. As to the
keel/ballast question, the boat we're looking at has an ugly looking
joint. The asking price is so low as to make a sensible person go
hmmmm....Must consult the surveyor.

I don;t know what kind of a boat you have but I just replaced the deck
on a 35 ft. power boat. We replaced the deck core from the inside. The
boat was bought knowing that much of the interior would have to be
replaced so we initially literally gutted the boat. We then cut
through the interior deck skin and scrapped and sanded the rotten
plywood core out. Finally we replaced the core. due to the curvature
of the deck it was relatively easy to "plank" the core across the
width of the boat with a single support under the center. We also used
screws from the top to ensure that the fit between the core and the
upper skin was tight. The core planks were glued in with epoxy glue.
Once the glue was dry the screws were removed and the holes plugged.

After glueing in all the core a fairly small amount of fairing and
filling was needed to produce a smooth surface which was covered with
one layer of 400 Gm. chopped mat followed by a layer of 400 gm. woven
roving.

I had no problem laminating 400 gm cloth overhead by simply wetting
out the wood and then "sticking the cloth up against the wetted wood
and rolling out the cloth with a roller wet with resin. With one
helper I was easily able to put up 3 X 6 foot sections of cloth.

Having said all this please remember that the boat was literally a
hollow shell when we did the work. To try this with a boat filled with
bulkheads and cabinets, lockers, etc. would be nearly impossible, or
at least something I wouldn't want to attempt.


Bruce in Bangkok
(brucepaigeatgmaildotcom)

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

A long and detailed article about wet core can be found here. A
worthwhile read!

http://www.proboat-digital.com/proboat/200508/?pg=37

Gordon

On Mon, 16 Jul 2007 10:09:59 -0400, "mr.b" wrote:

2 questions.
Has anyone ever heard of this procedure being done from the interior
rather than the exterior of the boat?

Also, can anyone give a ballpark estimate as to the expected cost of
loosening the lead ballast on a fin-keel and re-sealing/repairing the
joint between the two?


I did extensive core replacement, but from above. Reasons:

1. Easier to work. Working fiberglass is hard enough without trying
to do it overhead.

2. My non skid areas were imbedded glass beads. Possible to repair
the non skid and blend it so the repaired areas were not obvious.

3. my boat was old enough to need a complete cat poly job anyway, so
no paint matching problems.

4. the heaviest structural part of the deck is the underside, that is
the heaviest glass thickness and heaviest woven roving. At least mine
was. I didn't want to disturb that.

5. when you put new core in, end grain balsa in my case, you want to
wet it in to both glass layers well and fully saturate it. Difficult
to do working over your head. But from the top, you can just lay it
in like slices of bread, cutting and trimming until you get it just
right, then begin the process of permanenetly installing.

6. I didn't want to cover or remove everything on the inside that
might be impacted by the work.

7. I didn't want to be enclosed with fumes, dust, etc.

8. In my case the core had gotten wet, and the water had frozen,
cracking the outer layer of glass and gel coat, so some repair from
the top was going to happen anyway.


On the second question, if the lead ballast is loose, it needs to be
adressed. If you have simply have a seam, but the lead keel is still
soundly in place, you don't need to remove it in my opinion. That was
the case with mine. I filled the crack with an elastic caulk at each
haulout, prior to painting. Did fine.

Frank

mr.b wrote:
2 questions.
Has anyone ever heard of this procedure being done from the interior
rather than the exterior of the boat?

Also, can anyone give a ballpark estimate as to the expected cost of
loosening the lead ballast on a fin-keel and re-sealing/repairing the
joint between the two?

I see you have many good replies, but let me add that duplicating the
non-skid is rather easy if you choose to do it from above. You make a
mold from the pre-repair non-skid and use that as a template for the new
gel coat. Were I do do it, I'd remove all non-skid left after the repair
and use the paint / sand route for the new non-skid.

Re-coring isn't simple or cheap so you need to evaluate the value of
your boat before and after the repair, but it's possible (like almost
anything marine).

I have also heard rumor of injections which will, in situ, repair
defective cores. I'd run those rumors down to earth before embarking on
such a task.

-paul

wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 17:51:05 -0600, Paul Cassel
wrote:

I have also heard rumor of injections which will, in situ, repair
defective cores. I'd run those rumors down to earth before embarking on
such a task.

-paul

Those mythical injections are sold in the same aisle at FairyMart as the pills
that you drop in your car's gas tank that do a ring job.


In theory an extremely low viscosity hygroscopic compound will do the
job, but as you can note from my OP, I'm skeptical that such a compound
exists.

On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 21:05:04 -0400, wrote:

On 19 Jul 2007 19:42:04 -0500, Dave wrote:

On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 20:35:27 -0400, said:

In theory an extremely low viscosity hygroscopic compound will do the
job, but as you can note from my OP, I'm skeptical that such a compound
exists.

Hoo boy! Are you just a little skeptical about the tooth fairy as well? How
about the Easter Bunny?

Really!

Just for openers - if the balsa is still wet, why would it absorb something as
thick or thicker than the water that is already saturating it?

Um.....I think you need to look up "hygroscopic."

Um, I think you need to look up a lot of other terms, including saturated, and
blind faith. Wet moldy rotted balsa is not going to accept much of anything,
regardless of how much you wish it would. This idea of a miracle potion is not
new, and it has been proven to be a complete waste of time money and effort. It
simply doesn't work. If it did, thousands of boats with soggy core would have
been saved from the chainsaw. Show me ONE that has been saved by this method.

The problem is that by the time the decks get soft you probably do not
have any structural material, to amount to anything, left between the
upper and lower deck skins. What you have is a mush of rotted core and
nothing is going to give it any structural integrity. Of course, if
you catch the problem before the core actually rots and is simply
saturated with water there are a number of methods of attempting to
dry out the wet wood.

One can apply a vacuum and I even read an article about someone who
took the door off a microwave oven, disabled the door disconnect, and
laid it face down on the deck. The problem is that none of these
methods are very successful and can result in additional damage to the
deck..

The only real answer is to remove the core and replace it with
something. Whether this be wood, foam, or even epoxy resin, makes no
difference you must, somehow, provide a bond between the upper and
lower deck skins or you do not have the original designed deck
strength.






Bruce in Bangkok
(brucepaigeatgmaildotcom)

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com