Re:Cal 29 Beam Replacement

Tim inquired: "Is there a thread on how to replace the beam in my boat with good details and hopefully pictures?" Been there, done that, saw the movie, bought the soundtrack, wear the t-shirt, and drink the beer. We replaced the beam on our 1969 Cal 29 "Pentaquod" (which we recently sold). One of the key factors in the replacement was the incredible generosity and talents of erstwhile Cal List member Roger Jones. He has been resurrecting "Swiss Navy", Cal 29 Hull #1, and was working in the Jensen plant when it was originally built. In the process, he replaced the beam, and provided mechanical drawings that he gave out freely so that others could have a replacement beam fabricated. (The Cal 29 and 2-29 hulls are identical; the differences are in cabin layout, tiller vs. wheel steering, and I believe Atomic 4 gas vs. diesel power plant.) David Owens and I were both early and fortunate beneficiaries of Roger's work. Fortunately, pictures of our project are still available on SailJazz: http://webftp.sailjazz.com/cal/cal_29/Pentaquod/. Here you'll find a "beam and bulkhead" directory with lots of photos and explanation. We had rot in all bulkheads, so we replaced them as part of the same renovation project. As a result, we gained access to the beam by cutting out the floor pan for head, and coming at it from that side. (David got at his from the saloon side, I believe.) I can provide you with a copy of the beam drawing, if you like. If you do use the drawings, you may want to try one change that we made. Instead of welding the top plate onto the beam, we had it created by simply bending the web over and then welding on the tabs. It's a straight line, and it saved some money in fabrication costs. The bottom plate is curved, so that was welded on as in the drawing. Let me know if I can be of any help or support. I had almost no fiberglass experience when we tackled this job, and it came out pretty well, so if you have the time and patience, it's a reasonable do-it-yourself project. Alfred Poor 1973 T34C #288, "Jambalaya"

> Been there, done that, saw the movie, bought the soundtrack, wear the > t-shirt, and drink the beer. We replaced the beam on our 1969 Cal 29 > "Pentaquod" (which we recently sold). One of the key factors in the > replacement was the incredible generosity and talents of erstwhile Cal List > member Roger Jones. He has been resurrecting "Swiss Navy", Cal 29 Hull #1, > and was working in the Jensen plant when it was originally built. In the > process, he replaced the beam, and provided mechanical drawings that he gave > out freely so that others could have a replacement beam fabricated. (The Cal > 29 and 2-29 hulls are identical; the differences are in cabin layout, tiller > vs. wheel steering, and I believe Atomic 4 gas vs. diesel power plant.) > David Owens and I were both early and fortunate beneficiaries of Roger's > work. > > > > Fortunately, pictures of our project are still available on SailJazz: > http://webftp.sailjazz.com/cal/cal_29/Pentaquod/. Here you'll find a "beam > and bulkhead" directory with lots of photos and explanation. We had rot in > all bulkheads, so we replaced them as part of the same renovation project. > As a result, we gained access to the beam by cutting out the floor pan for > head, and coming at it from that side. (David got at his from the saloon > side, I believe.) I can provide you with a copy of the beam drawing, if you > like. If you do use the drawings, you may want to try one change that we > made. Instead of welding the top plate onto the beam, we had it created by > simply bending the web over and then welding on the tabs. It's a straight > line, and it saved some money in fabrication costs. The bottom plate is > curved, so that was welded on as in the drawing. > > > > Let me know if I can be of any help or support. I had almost no fiberglass > experience when we tackled this job, and it came out pretty well, so if you > have the time and patience, it's a reasonable do-it-yourself project. > > > > Alfred Poor > > 1973 T34C #288, "Jambalaya" > Alfred, I recall seing "Pentaquod" for sale but I don't remember if it were on Craigslist, Yachtworld or just where. That sounds great! I like the idea of the bend rather than the welded top flange - makes perfect sense to me. Drawings of the beam would be fantastic if I could get a set. I will be going over the website that you show here (probably several times). I hope that you don't mind me pestering you some more here and there. Here is a link to a picture of our Cal 29 so far. ( I hope that it is ok to post a link)I am obviously still working on it: http://www.cruisersforum.com/gallery/showimage.php?i=3879&c=2 BTW - How would I find what hull number that I have? (I am sure that has been covered hundreds of times also :) ) Thanks, Tim Oregon

Tim wrote: "Drawings of the beam would be fantastic if I could get a set. I will be going over the website that you show here (probably several times). I hope that you don't mind me pestering you some more here and there." I have emailed you the drawings directly in a separate message. Feel free to pester all you want; I have received a treasure of advice from this list over the years, and I'm happy to do what I can to pay it back. As for the hull number, this may not be the easiest method, but it's most reliable. Since these boats were built before the requirement that the HIN be molded into the stern, you have to look elsewhere. On most (all?) Cals of this vintage, you can find the number by crawling into the starboard cockpit locker and inspecting the inside of the stern. You should find a number in magic marker on the wood core, glassed over. That's your hull number. You may or may not be able to find the number on the drawers or other furniture components in the cabin, but this information is less reliable as apparently pieces got tossed about between boats in the production line, and the numbers may not always match your hull number. Alfred Poor 1973 T34C #288, "Jambalaya"

Well, I went ahead and dug in today and the beam ( or what is left of it) has been removed. I followed the directions that everyone here has given me and that made the job much easier. There were a few minor variations that I found necessary though. I found that the compression post had been glued the main bulkhead and that I would not be able to separate the two without major damage so I decided to try to remove the beam with the compression post in place. It turned out to be no prob to remove the beam with the compression post in place. The beam had been bonded to the fiberglass step so I had to work at separating them some, but that was just a few minutes of prying the two apart. The next step will be having the new beam manufactured and installing it. Thanks for the drawing Alfred - that is great. I have already sent it to a friend of mine who does nothing but fab stainless 316 and 304. I think installing it will be pretty easy, but I will have a lot of questions on re-glassing it. More to come. --- In Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com, "Alfred Poor" <apoor@...> wrote: > > Tim wrote: > > > > "Drawings of the beam would be fantastic if I could get a set. I will be > going over the website that you show here (probably several times). I hope > that you don't mind me pestering you some more here and there." > > > > I have emailed you the drawings directly in a separate message. Feel free to > pester all you want; I have received a treasure of advice from this list > over the years, and I'm happy to do what I can to pay it back. > > > > As for the hull number, this may not be the easiest method, but it's most > reliable. Since these boats were built before the requirement that the HIN > be molded into the stern, you have to look elsewhere. On most (all?) Cals of > this vintage, you can find the number by crawling into the starboard cockpit > locker and inspecting the inside of the stern. You should find a number in > magic marker on the wood core, glassed over. That's your hull number. > > > > You may or may not be able to find the number on the drawers or other > furniture components in the cabin, but this information is less reliable as > apparently pieces got tossed about between boats in the production line, and > the numbers may not always match your hull number. > > > > Alfred Poor > > 1973 T34C #288, "Jambalaya" >

Ok, the beam had been removed, I have the drawing at the fab shop for a quote (I should know later today on that) and I am preparing to install the new beam when it is finished. My next question is regarding re-glassing the cabin sole. I have seen the pictures of the removal and a picture or two of the finished glass work. Does anyone have any input on the procedure for re-glassing the cabin sole? I intend to glass in the section that I removed but I am not sure of the finished strength and the strength requirements. Thanks again for all of the help in removing the original. There are pictures of the removal here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/62028190@N00/2156335615/ I still need to sweep up the old beam. or vacuum it out :) There was not much left of it. --- In Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com, "Alfred Poor" <apoor@...> wrote: > > Tim wrote: > > > > "Drawings of the beam would be fantastic if I could get a set. I will be > going over the website that you show here (probably several times). I hope > that you don't mind me pestering you some more here and there." > > > > I have emailed you the drawings directly in a separate message. Feel free to > pester all you want; I have received a treasure of advice from this list > over the years, and I'm happy to do what I can to pay it back. > > > > As for the hull number, this may not be the easiest method, but it's most > reliable. Since these boats were built before the requirement that the HIN > be molded into the stern, you have to look elsewhere. On most (all?) Cals of > this vintage, you can find the number by crawling into the starboard cockpit > locker and inspecting the inside of the stern. You should find a number in > magic marker on the wood core, glassed over. That's your hull number. > > > > You may or may not be able to find the number on the drawers or other > furniture components in the cabin, but this information is less reliable as > apparently pieces got tossed about between boats in the production line, and > the numbers may not always match your hull number. > > > > Alfred Poor > > 1973 T34C #288, "Jambalaya" >

clausont wrote: > > > Does anyone have any input on the procedure for re-glassing the cabin > sole? I intend to glass in the section that I removed but I am not > sure of the finished strength and the strength requirements. > I'm the list cheerleader for the Gougeon Brothers' West System Epoxies. One reason is their extensive R&D work involving composite structures and epoxy adhesives. Another reason is their extensive and useful publications about using epoxies for boat building and boat repair. If you have not done repair work on fiberglass boats, you should acquire their publications on proper techniques. They're really well written and based on their experience and testing. Even if you're fond of somebody else's epoxies, the West System publications are first-rate. There's another reason for my cheer-leading. I know several of their employees. all sailors, all bright people. I trust them and admire their business and their community activities (sailing and otherwise). Chris Campbell

Oh, do those photos ever look familiar! "Does anyone have any input on the procedure for re-glassing the cabin sole? I intend to glass in the section that I removed but I am not sure of the finished strength and the strength requirements." The floor pan is not structural, as far as I know. We just used a few layers of the same fiberglass tape that we used for tabbing, and put them over the seam in the floor pan. Something like that will probably be sufficient for your repairs. I note in the pictures that there are visible signs of moisture around the beam tabs on the bulkheads. Now would be a very good time to inspect the bulkheads thoroughly: at the tabs, at the chainplates, and below the mast. If there are signs of rot, you may want to sister or scarf in fresh wood. The chainplate and tab attach points are definitely structural, and it will never be as easy to make the repairs as it is now while you've got it partially disassembled. (Do you detect a slippery slope in this project?) Alfred Poor 1973 T34C #288, "Jambalaya"

I have done a cursory inspection of the bulkhead but still have to dig into the chainplate mounts although at first glance they look good. The fresh looking moisture in the pictures is because I did not cover the mast step very well with all of the rain that we are having. It ran down the wire channel before I pulled the channel. I do still need to finish the inspection of the bulkhead. Thanks for the info on the cabin sole. You answered my main concern - is it structural. As it is not, I will just bevel the edges good and start filling in with tape as you mention. Boy, the quotes that I received to build a new beam is right in line with what Roger said when he was building them plus inflation. Just buying the metal to build it myself will cost $180. Spendy stuff. But that will be done right that way. Thanks again for your help. And thanks to Chris for the comments on West system epoxy. The epipoxy that I have used on some things works great but goes off way too fast for any project of any size - even with the slow catalyst. --- In Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com, "Alfred Poor" <apoor@...> wrote: > > Oh, do those photos ever look familiar! > > > > "Does anyone have any input on the procedure for re-glassing the cabin > sole? I intend to glass in the section that I removed but I am not sure of > the finished strength and the strength requirements." > > > > The floor pan is not structural, as far as I know. We just used a few layers > of the same fiberglass tape that we used for tabbing, and put them over the > seam in the floor pan. Something like that will probably be sufficient for > your repairs. > > > > I note in the pictures that there are visible signs of moisture around the > beam tabs on the bulkheads. Now would be a very good time to inspect the > bulkheads thoroughly: at the tabs, at the chainplates, and below the mast. > If there are signs of rot, you may want to sister or scarf in fresh wood. > The chainplate and tab attach points are definitely structural, and it will > never be as easy to make the repairs as it is now while you've got it > partially disassembled. (Do you detect a slippery slope in this project?) > > > > Alfred Poor > > 1973 T34C #288, "Jambalaya" >

I recently replaced the transverse beam in my 29 Cal, but have not yet replaced the pan. When I had the new beam made, I had the top horizontal piece made 0.5" wider to support the aft end of the pan. I am glad to read that the pan is not structural. At this point my plan is to secure the pan, but not necessarily fiberglass it in place. --- In Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com, "Alfred Poor" <apoor@...> wrote: > > Oh, do those photos ever look familiar! > > > > "Does anyone have any input on the procedure for re-glassing the cabin > sole? I intend to glass in the section that I removed but I am not sure of > the finished strength and the strength requirements." > > > > The floor pan is not structural, as far as I know. We just used a few layers > of the same fiberglass tape that we used for tabbing, and put them over the > seam in the floor pan. Something like that will probably be sufficient for > your repairs. > > > > I note in the pictures that there are visible signs of moisture around the > beam tabs on the bulkheads. Now would be a very good time to inspect the > bulkheads thoroughly: at the tabs, at the chainplates, and below the mast. > If there are signs of rot, you may want to sister or scarf in fresh wood. > The chainplate and tab attach points are definitely structural, and it will > never be as easy to make the repairs as it is now while you've got it > partially disassembled. (Do you detect a slippery slope in this project?) > > > > Alfred Poor > > 1973 T34C #288, "Jambalaya" >

I've been down with the flu and just now chiming in. I think it would be a mistake to discount the structural element of the floor pan completely, although I think the bond of the beam to the main bulkhead is certainly the bulk of the rig load carrying mechanism. A channel of fiberglass makes a pretty good beam of it's own, and with your beam completely gone, it may have been carrying more load than you want to believe. I'm not an engineer, of course, so maybe you should just listen to Alfred. It's moot, anyway, as Dishing out the two pieces of pan and laying glass and epoxy was certainly just fine with Roger and you've heard his credentials. I am amazed at how far gone your beam was. Wow. Mine looked new by comparison, yet had failed to do it's duty completely. After replacement, I was amazed at how much stiffer the boat sailed. I bet your boat flexed like an inflatable. I also find it difficult to conceive of that much rust and damage to the beam without delamination of the plywood bulkhead. Water has obviously been streaming down your wiring for some time. It is essential to seal the wiring as it comes through the deck, and in the case that it's been obviously leaking -- I would check the core of the deck around the compression post and check the bulkhead thoroughly. It's a tough job to replace, but your rig won't have any stability without a solid bulkhead. Your beam replacement will be for not if the rest of it fails, and you can always scarf in some new ply or use a plate joiner and epoxy if it's just rotten at the compression post.. Your doing good work. Please consider my points an "encouragement" and keep the faith. Old Cals are great sailing boats and worth the TLC. David Wilkie Owen Cal 2-29 "Mariposa" Santa Barbara, CA http://www.mariposasailing.com <http://www.mariposasailing.com/> _____ From: Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com [mailto:Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of clausont Sent: Friday, January 04, 2008 3:12 PM To: Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com Subject: [Cal_Boats] Re:Cal 29 Beam Replacement I have done a cursory inspection of the bulkhead but still have to dig into the chainplate mounts although at first glance they look good. The fresh looking moisture in the pictures is because I did not cover the mast step very well with all of the rain that we are having. It ran down the wire channel before I pulled the channel. I do still need to finish the inspection of the bulkhead. Thanks for the info on the cabin sole. You answered my main concern - is it structural. As it is not, I will just bevel the edges good and start filling in with tape as you mention. Boy, the quotes that I received to build a new beam is right in line with what Roger said when he was building them plus inflation. Just buying the metal to build it myself will cost $180. Spendy stuff. But that will be done right that way. Thanks again for your help. And thanks to Chris for the comments on West system epoxy. The epipoxy that I have used on some things works great but goes off way too fast for any project of any size - even with the slow catalyst. --- In Cal_Boats@yahoogrou <mailto:Cal_Boats%40yahoogroups.com> ps.com, "Alfred Poor" <apoor@...> wrote: > > Oh, do those photos ever look familiar! > > > > "Does anyone have any input on the procedure for re-glassing the cabin > sole? I intend to glass in the section that I removed but I am not sure of > the finished strength and the strength requirements." > > > > The floor pan is not structural, as far as I know. We just used a few layers > of the same fiberglass tape that we used for tabbing, and put them over the > seam in the floor pan. Something like that will probably be sufficient for > your repairs. > > > > I note in the pictures that there are visible signs of moisture around the > beam tabs on the bulkheads. Now would be a very good time to inspect the > bulkheads thoroughly: at the tabs, at the chainplates, and below the mast. > If there are signs of rot, you may want to sister or scarf in fresh wood. > The chainplate and tab attach points are definitely structural, and it will > never be as easy to make the repairs as it is now while you've got it > partially disassembled. (Do you detect a slippery slope in this project?) > > > > Alfred Poor > > 1973 T34C #288, "Jambalaya" >

Sorry to hear that you have been down with the flu - that is miserable. I have just ordered the Stainless sheet to build a new beam (Wow! That stuff is expensive these days!) I will hopefully have it finished within a week or two and re-installed. I have now checked out the compression post, deck coring (again - I did when I bought the boat but I checked again just in case I missed anything.)and the bulkhead around the compression post. All in very good shape. The bulkhead where the tabs were bolted through is discolored but very sound. Even at that I will use a penetrating epoxy on all of those areas before I finish in that area. The main bulkhead in the chainplate area is good and sound also upon cursory inspection but I still need to pull the chainplates to be sure. As mentioned - now is the time to do it. This boat came up here from San Diego and I suspect that it may have sat for some time with salt water in the bilge as the wood up high is in excellent shape while I have found a small amount of water damaged wood at the bottom of a couple of lockers as though they had sat for a while in water. In checking things out I did find the bulkhead just aft of the galley stove is rotted under the tabbing so I will need to pull that apart and repair it and I am suspicious of one area near the forward bulkhead on the starboard side. I need to dig in there when I am finished with this beam. I will be beveling the glass on all of the cuts that I made in the cabin sole and reglassing it with layers of glass tape and epoxy. I agree that it could not hurt to have some strength there. I will keep everyone here posted on the progress. Incidentally, this boat was originally named, "Vagabond" with the home port as San Diego if anyone here happens to have ever seen it. --- In Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com, "Wilkie" <wilkie@...> wrote: > > > I've been down with the flu and just now chiming in. I think it would be a > mistake to discount the structural element of the floor pan completely, > although I think the bond of the beam to the main bulkhead is certainly the > bulk of the rig load carrying mechanism. A channel of fiberglass makes a > pretty good beam of it's own, and with your beam completely gone, it may > have been carrying more load than you want to believe. I'm not an engineer, > of course, so maybe you should just listen to Alfred. It's moot, anyway, as > Dishing out the two pieces of pan and laying glass and epoxy was certainly > just fine with Roger and you've heard his credentials. > > I am amazed at how far gone your beam was. Wow. Mine looked new by > comparison, yet had failed to do it's duty completely. After replacement, I > was amazed at how much stiffer the boat sailed. I bet your boat flexed like > an inflatable. > > I also find it difficult to conceive of that much rust and damage to the > beam without delamination of the plywood bulkhead. Water has obviously been > streaming down your wiring for some time. It is essential to seal the > wiring as it comes through the deck, and in the case that it's been > obviously leaking -- I would check the core of the deck around the > compression post and check the bulkhead thoroughly. It's a tough job to > replace, but your rig won't have any stability without a solid bulkhead. > Your beam replacement will be for not if the rest of it fails, and you can > always scarf in some new ply or use a plate joiner and epoxy if it's just > rotten at the compression post.. > > Your doing good work. Please consider my points an "encouragement" and keep > the faith. Old Cals are great sailing boats and worth the TLC. > > David Wilkie Owen > _________________ > Cal 2-29 "Mariposa" > Santa Barbara, CA > http://www.mariposasailing.com <http://www.mariposasailing.com/> > > > > _____ > > From: Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com [mailto:Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com] On Behalf > Of clausont > Sent: Friday, January 04, 2008 3:12 PM > To: Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com > Subject: [Cal_Boats] Re:Cal 29 Beam Replacement > > > > I have done a cursory inspection of the bulkhead but still have to dig > into the chainplate mounts although at first glance they look good. > The fresh looking moisture in the pictures is because I did not cover > the mast step very well with all of the rain that we are having. It > ran down the wire channel before I pulled the channel. I do still need > to finish the inspection of the bulkhead. Thanks for the info on the > cabin sole. You answered my main concern - is it structural. As it is > not, I will just bevel the edges good and start filling in with tape > as you mention. > Boy, the quotes that I received to build a new beam is right in line > with what Roger said when he was building them plus inflation. Just > buying the metal to build it myself will cost $180. Spendy stuff. > But that will be done right that way. > Thanks again for your help. > > And thanks to Chris for the comments on West system epoxy. The epipoxy > that I have used on some things works great but goes off way too fast > for any project of any size - even with the slow catalyst. > > --- In Cal_Boats@yahoogrou <mailto:Cal_Boats%40yahoogroups.com> ps.com, > "Alfred Poor" <apoor@> wrote: > > > > Oh, do those photos ever look familiar! > > > > > > > > "Does anyone have any input on the procedure for re-glassing the cabin > > sole? I intend to glass in the section that I removed but I am not > sure of > > the finished strength and the strength requirements." > > > > > > > > The floor pan is not structural, as far as I know. We just used a > few layers > > of the same fiberglass tape that we used for tabbing, and put them > over the > > seam in the floor pan. Something like that will probably be > sufficient for > > your repairs. > > > > > > > > I note in the pictures that there are visible signs of moisture > around the > > beam tabs on the bulkheads. Now would be a very good time to inspect the > > bulkheads thoroughly: at the tabs, at the chainplates, and below the > mast. > > If there are signs of rot, you may want to sister or scarf in fresh > wood. > > The chainplate and tab attach points are definitely structural, and > it will > > never be as easy to make the repairs as it is now while you've got it > > partially disassembled. (Do you detect a slippery slope in this > project?) > > > > > > > > Alfred Poor > > > > 1973 T34C #288, "Jambalaya" > > >

Tim, Flu Gone and ready for an Island Trip. Thanks for all of the updates on your beam project. It's fun to have all of that behind me. When I had my beam done, the supplier raised the price of stainless the day my guy ordered it. They gave him the old price on my chunk, since he was a good customer and had a bid out on it, but he said it was going up every few weeks. Good work on all fronts. Glad you're doing all of the deep investigation. I think your theory of the beam being submerged "holds water" so to speak considering the solid nature of your bulkheads. I forgot to close a 1 3/4" pump out hole that I made on the side-deck one weekend when the rain came and was absolutely amazed at how little time it took to fill the hull past the pan. Fortunately, I caught it and dried it all out pretty quick. The bulkhead tabbing and re-fairing is a job I won't ever do again. I'd saw the boat into chunks first. LOL. David Wilkie Owen Cal 2-29 "Mariposa" Santa Barbara, CA http://www.mariposasailing.com <http://www.mariposasailing.com/> _____ From: Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com [mailto:Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of clausont Sent: Monday, January 07, 2008 1:54 PM To: Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com Subject: [Cal_Boats] Re:Cal 29 Beam Replacement Sorry to hear that you have been down with the flu - that is miserable. I have just ordered the Stainless sheet to build a new beam (Wow! That stuff is expensive these days!) I will hopefully have it finished within a week or two and re-installed. I have now checked out the compression post, deck coring (again - I did when I bought the boat but I checked again just in case I missed anything.)and the bulkhead around the compression post. All in very good shape. The bulkhead where the tabs were bolted through is discolored but very sound. Even at that I will use a penetrating epoxy on all of those areas before I finish in that area. The main bulkhead in the chainplate area is good and sound also upon cursory inspection but I still need to pull the chainplates to be sure. As mentioned - now is the time to do it. This boat came up here from San Diego and I suspect that it may have sat for some time with salt water in the bilge as the wood up high is in excellent shape while I have found a small amount of water damaged wood at the bottom of a couple of lockers as though they had sat for a while in water. In checking things out I did find the bulkhead just aft of the galley stove is rotted under the tabbing so I will need to pull that apart and repair it and I am suspicious of one area near the forward bulkhead on the starboard side. I need to dig in there when I am finished with this beam. I will be beveling the glass on all of the cuts that I made in the cabin sole and reglassing it with layers of glass tape and epoxy. I agree that it could not hurt to have some strength there. I will keep everyone here posted on the progress. Incidentally, this boat was originally named, "Vagabond" with the home port as San Diego if anyone here happens to have ever seen it. --- In Cal_Boats@yahoogrou <mailto:Cal_Boats%40yahoogroups.com> ps.com, "Wilkie" <wilkie@...> wrote: > > > I've been down with the flu and just now chiming in. I think it would be a > mistake to discount the structural element of the floor pan completely, > although I think the bond of the beam to the main bulkhead is certainly the > bulk of the rig load carrying mechanism. A channel of fiberglass makes a > pretty good beam of it's own, and with your beam completely gone, it may > have been carrying more load than you want to believe. I'm not an engineer, > of course, so maybe you should just listen to Alfred. It's moot, anyway, as > Dishing out the two pieces of pan and laying glass and epoxy was certainly > just fine with Roger and you've heard his credentials. > > I am amazed at how far gone your beam was. Wow. Mine looked new by > comparison, yet had failed to do it's duty completely. After replacement, I > was amazed at how much stiffer the boat sailed. I bet your boat flexed like > an inflatable. > > I also find it difficult to conceive of that much rust and damage to the > beam without delamination of the plywood bulkhead. Water has obviously been > streaming down your wiring for some time. It is essential to seal the > wiring as it comes through the deck, and in the case that it's been > obviously leaking -- I would check the core of the deck around the > compression post and check the bulkhead thoroughly. It's a tough job to > replace, but your rig won't have any stability without a solid bulkhead. > Your beam replacement will be for not if the rest of it fails, and you can > always scarf in some new ply or use a plate joiner and epoxy if it's just > rotten at the compression post.. > > Your doing good work. Please consider my points an "encouragement" and keep > the faith. Old Cals are great sailing boats and worth the TLC. > > David Wilkie Owen > _________________ > Cal 2-29 "Mariposa" > Santa Barbara, CA > http://www.mariposa <http://www.mariposasailing.com> sailing.com <http://www.mariposa <http://www.mariposasailing.com/> sailing.com/> > > > > _____ > > From: Cal_Boats@yahoogrou <mailto:Cal_Boats%40yahoogroups.com> ps.com [mailto:Cal_Boats@yahoogrou <mailto:Cal_Boats%40yahoogroups.com> ps.com] On Behalf > Of clausont > Sent: Friday, January 04, 2008 3:12 PM > To: Cal_Boats@yahoogrou <mailto:Cal_Boats%40yahoogroups.com> ps.com > Subject: [Cal_Boats] Re:Cal 29 Beam Replacement > > > > I have done a cursory inspection of the bulkhead but still have to dig > into the chainplate mounts although at first glance they look good. > The fresh looking moisture in the pictures is because I did not cover > the mast step very well with all of the rain that we are having. It > ran down the wire channel before I pulled the channel. I do still need > to finish the inspection of the bulkhead. Thanks for the info on the > cabin sole. You answered my main concern - is it structural. As it is > not, I will just bevel the edges good and start filling in with tape > as you mention. > Boy, the quotes that I received to build a new beam is right in line > with what Roger said when he was building them plus inflation. Just > buying the metal to build it myself will cost $180. Spendy stuff. > But that will be done right that way. > Thanks again for your help. > > And thanks to Chris for the comments on West system epoxy. The epipoxy > that I have used on some things works great but goes off way too fast > for any project of any size - even with the slow catalyst. > > --- In Cal_Boats@yahoogrou <mailto:Cal_Boats%40yahoogroups.com> ps.com, > "Alfred Poor" <apoor@> wrote: > > > > Oh, do those photos ever look familiar! > > > > > > > > "Does anyone have any input on the procedure for re-glassing the cabin > > sole? I intend to glass in the section that I removed but I am not > sure of > > the finished strength and the strength requirements." > > > > > > > > The floor pan is not structural, as far as I know. We just used a > few layers > > of the same fiberglass tape that we used for tabbing, and put them > over the > > seam in the floor pan. Something like that will probably be > sufficient for > > your repairs. > > > > > > > > I note in the pictures that there are visible signs of moisture > around the > > beam tabs on the bulkheads. Now would be a very good time to inspect the > > bulkheads thoroughly: at the tabs, at the chainplates, and below the > mast. > > If there are signs of rot, you may want to sister or scarf in fresh > wood. > > The chainplate and tab attach points are definitely structural, and > it will > > never be as easy to make the repairs as it is now while you've got it > > partially disassembled. (Do you detect a slippery slope in this > project?) > > > > > > > > Alfred Poor > > > > 1973 T34C #288, "Jambalaya" > > >

Well, the beam has been build and re-installed. The glass work has been started and I should be nearly finished with the glass work tomorrow with the exception of some fairing. Just for information for anyone doing this project in the future: Apparently there has been a design change in the beam somewhere along the way. As I was verifying the drawings that Alfred had given me compared to my boat I noticed a few minor changes in my beam compared to the drawing. It is not a huge change but just some small changes in the web depth, tab spacing and flange width. I am very pleased that the beam went back in as easily as it did. A few hours of final fitting, adjusting, welding, grinding and drilling and it was completed. At one point during the installation, I was having a problem getting the beam to move as far forward as I thought it should be. After checking everything completely and carefully, I realized that the center tab on the beam that had corroded completely had allowed the compression post to move forward about 1/4". When everything was bolted up again, this was corrected. Well, next to tackle the one area that I am suspicious of near the galley stove. Tim --- In Ca… [at] yahoogroups.com, "Alfred Poor" <apoor@...> wrote: > > Oh, do those photos ever look familiar! > > > > "Does anyone have any input on the procedure for re-glassing the cabin > sole? I intend to glass in the section that I removed but I am not sure of > the finished strength and the strength requirements." > > > > The floor pan is not structural, as far as I know. We just used a few layers > of the same fiberglass tape that we used for tabbing, and put them over the > seam in the floor pan. Something like that will probably be sufficient for > your repairs. > > > > I note in the pictures that there are visible signs of moisture around the > beam tabs on the bulkheads. Now would be a very good time to inspect the > bulkheads thoroughly: at the tabs, at the chainplates, and below the mast. > If there are signs of rot, you may want to sister or scarf in fresh wood. > The chainplate and tab attach points are definitely structural, and it will > never be as easy to make the repairs as it is now while you've got it > partially disassembled. (Do you detect a slippery slope in this project?) > > > > Alfred Poor > > 1973 T34C #288, "Jambalaya" >