Re:Stringers

[otaku]

If i recall correctly, i think even seasoned users of Delftship would not do that in DS, then again, i am looking in hte “Latest Model” column and see a sailboat glaring at me in defiance of my statement.

I think there is a thread in the forum suggesting that users employ their favorite CAD app for that level of detail mainly since in CAD you can do various nudging and finer moving. I saw in one of the sample drawings some tunnels for thrusters. In the Downloads section, one model of a naval cruiser has turrets and propellers and other details of the superstructure/upper works. Various boats have nice details. But, only if there is a significant penalty for NOT modeling in DS the superstructure and significant/heavy non-shell items will i go that far into detaily a model/hull.

In my case, i use the waterlines and nearby features for intersections to create stringers, girders, and other stiffeners parts that will faithfully intersect or remain tangent to the sideshell. I found that somewhat easier or more palatable than creating cutting planes and doing too much trimming. I create lines, sweep a surface or solid and assign material properties and get the CGs as tentative CGs. I do all that in Punch! ViaCAD. I won’t attempt to use AutoCAD for that. ViaCAD works more in tune with my brain than does ACAD for what i am doing.

But, your question forced me to respond since over the past few days i began wondering whether or not i should follow the example of some modelers who draw in the upperworks. If that greatly improves my stability and other calcs, i will feel forced to model the significant superstructure plate (due to the angles, altitudes, and irregular/non-symmetrical disposition of the superstructure).