justanothersailboat
Active member
Thanks. Just read your thread - so sorry to hear about the problems you had in the summer! Still, I think when you're done you'll probably have the best Pionier 9 in the world.
Pioneer 9
- Thread starter Lawski
- Start date
pmnfernando
Member
insulation works
30mm thick cork sheets, some thickened epoxy and whatever at hand to apply pressure
30mm thick cork sheets, some thickened epoxy and whatever at hand to apply pressure
pmnfernando
Member
works in progress
for more info head up to
Introducing Katie-J - Plastic Classic Forum
tranfering the cad drawing into G10 sheets
this is just a sneak peak in to the future, lots of tinkering will need to happen to get the lids working the way i want
epoxy lining the inside of the water tank lids
glueing the suppporting lip for the fwd water tank lid
for more info head up to
Introducing Katie-J - Plastic Classic Forum
tranfering the cad drawing into G10 sheets
this is just a sneak peak in to the future, lots of tinkering will need to happen to get the lids working the way i want
epoxy lining the inside of the water tank lids
glueing the suppporting lip for the fwd water tank lid
pmnfernando
Member
closing the water tank
epoxy lining the fwd section
laminating the lids
epoxy lining the fwd section
laminating the lids
pmnfernando
Member
Zeehond2
New member
Great to see the updates on the all the work you are doing. My progress has slowed, mostly due to the weather, but also due to lack of time. For my Pionier 9 Zeehond I established some high level performance goals to help me focus on where to invest time and money. I chose a Pionier 9 for its basic hull shape, reputation for structural integrity and availability. My aim with the project is to restore and modernise the boat, with minimal changes to the original design while retaining the design intent. Thanks to Van de Stadt I have the orginal design and construction drawings to refer to.
Last edited:
Zeehond2
New member
The image posted above sets out the aspiration, based on a 10% weight reduction and a 10% sail area increase. The increased sail area with a new rig is an easy win. The weight reduction goal is more difficult. Removing the diesel engine, shaft, prop etc and replacing it with an electric pod drive makes a big contribution despite the weight of batteries, however realising the remaining 200kg savings will be tough.
pmnfernando
Member
2 different approaches at play here
you are going for a more light, racer version of it, whilst im going for a liveabord/cruising one.
My rig isnt the original its was actually made by a NZ company, Foster, which has been acquired by NZ rigging. i dont have plans to change it, its in good order and seems to be of a heavier scantling compared to the original. i wouldnt mind the 10% increase sail area though! i might get in touch with the owner who bought this rig to understand if any change was done to the sail area.
it was interesting readint your post about perfomance because the past week ive been thinking if anything could be done to the keel side of things, like having a new keel designed with a more modern and performance oriented outlook and also been done in lead and being encapsulated. the boat draws 1400 mm but a lead keel would enable a smaller draft (which i dont know if it would be beneficial performance wise) but it would make the boat even more river and canal friendlier.
About the weight reduction: my boat was regelcoated twice from new, meaning i had 3 layers of gelcoat on the hull and deck. i peeled it all back to bare grp and i can tell you i took at least 100 kg just on that. this might be an option for you. use a paint system which will be much lighter and easier to repair in the future.
having a small porta potty instead of a proper head will save you weight, less holes, hoses and clamps and the boat.
if you plan to sail te boat locally, 2 boat lengts of chain and then warp will be sufficent to anchor it. you might consider not having a windlass, that also saves some kg
i lost (it was stolen actually) the original backstay chromed bronze fitting, but i remember it weighted a lot, ive seen other Piooneer with 2 backstays anchored at the quarters by smaller chainplates, that also saves weight and improves performance i would think so.
Zeehond2
New member
I also thought about updating the keel, but looking into the work involved and the technical expertise needed, I have decided against making a change. Lowering the centre of gravity with a lead bulb could deliver the same righting moment with reduced draft or increased righting moment while retaining the existing draft. Any changes to the keel would need significant input from a naval architect. This is one part of the boat that needs more precise engineering calculations than I am confident to make.
With regard to other weight savings, like you I have removed all the layers of paint added to the hull over the years, scrapped the head, eliminated all through hull fittings and am replacing the beautiful but heavy bronze fittings from the bow and stern. I would avoid twin backstays as they add weight and windage aloft, there is a good argument for dividing the backstay into two a couple of metres above deck level to allow easy adjustment of the backstay tension. I will almost certainly use epoxy laminate chainplates for the backstay and forestay, but may retain the simple A-bolt `chainplates' from the original design for the shrouds and lowers.
With regard to other weight savings, like you I have removed all the layers of paint added to the hull over the years, scrapped the head, eliminated all through hull fittings and am replacing the beautiful but heavy bronze fittings from the bow and stern. I would avoid twin backstays as they add weight and windage aloft, there is a good argument for dividing the backstay into two a couple of metres above deck level to allow easy adjustment of the backstay tension. I will almost certainly use epoxy laminate chainplates for the backstay and forestay, but may retain the simple A-bolt `chainplates' from the original design for the shrouds and lowers.
pmnfernando
Member
i couldnt agree more. defo i would need a naval architect doing the calculations.
i could potentially see myself pouring the keel - having never done it before- but even that would entail serious research. hiring a professional to pour it would cost somewhere around 15k and that is just not worth it.
why dont you go for the laminate chainplates for the sidestays and lowers?!
maybe end up with something like what the guy that is refitting Duracell is doing. he laminatted the chainplates out of carbon fibre, and epoxied them onto the topsides
i redesigned the chainplates to be external (if you go to plasticclassic forum there is Cad drawings of it) because they are much easier to inspect and replace.
the original chainplate design its a clever solution but it promotes water ingress and the sheerclamp was rotted out exacly at those spots. same goes for the toerail, rubrail, stanchions, and even the genoa cars, originally they all bolt onto the sheerclamp, it took me days to remove all bolts and screws, drilling to both enlarge the hole and remove soft wood and then plug with thickened epoxy, virtually all of those fasteners were slowly promoting water ingress and thats something i decided i wanted to avoid, so im going to drill fill drill, then tap threads and use SS inserts to secure the rails im hoping this will provide the result i want.
pmnfernando
Member
a few more photos from the latest works being done
for more photos and info go to
Introducing Katie-J - Plastic Classic Forum
for more photos and info go to
Introducing Katie-J - Plastic Classic Forum
pmnfernando
Member
building the drawers
there is alot more photos and info at
Introducing Katie-J - Page 8 - Plastic Classic Forum
be sure to give it a flyby
getting the molded piece epoxied in
top drawer getting tabbed in situ making sure everything fits
lastly, epoxying a poltruded grp corner piece onto the stb side cabinet facade to enable mounting the lids
there is alot more photos and info at
Introducing Katie-J - Page 8 - Plastic Classic Forum
be sure to give it a flyby
getting the molded piece epoxied in
top drawer getting tabbed in situ making sure everything fits
lastly, epoxying a poltruded grp corner piece onto the stb side cabinet facade to enable mounting the lids
pmnfernando
Member
focusing on the mast compression solution.
this is indeed the achilles heel of this boat.
please go to
Introducing Katie-J - Plastic Classic Forum
and you will understand what was the previous arrangement, and what i expect to be the final solution to deal with this issue
in the meanwhile i leave you a few snippets to keep you interested,
hope you enjoy them!!
this is indeed the achilles heel of this boat.
please go to
Introducing Katie-J - Plastic Classic Forum
and you will understand what was the previous arrangement, and what i expect to be the final solution to deal with this issue
in the meanwhile i leave you a few snippets to keep you interested,
hope you enjoy them!!
Zeehond2
New member
Hi, very interesting to see your solution to reinforcing the main bulkhead to take the mast compression forces. Did you calculate the forces and design the reinforcement to support the load with a safety factor, or did you do a rule-of-thumb calculation. Also interested to understand your choice of material. You seem to have great access to G10 but choose to use metal (is that steel or alloy) is there any reason you ruled out G10 or a composite structure for the support. I have to make a decision on whether to replace the existing wooden supports to my main bulkhead with an alternative and was thinking about using composite
Zeehond2
New member
This sketch shows very roughly what I have in mind - the laminate schedule will have to taper from the top to the bottom and I might use uni-directional fibres sandwiched in bi-axial to maximise strength to weight.
pmnfernando
Member
Hi!
sorry to disappoint but there were no formulas/calculations for what i did.
its all educated guesses based on general experiences, experience with the chosen materials and what i would call an innate sense for scantlings (which is in itself innate and a child of experience)
i chose to go with a mix of materials for several reasons, one of them being availability and ease of use (the composites) and the knowledge of what metal can do. the metal pieces are all 316 stainless, 6 mm thick.
i see no reason why you couldnt achieve the same, or better result (the innate sense of scantlings is easily swayed into overbuilding things, and im aware of that).
i know that your approach is a more weight conscious one. this in itself entails more calculations to establish exactly the end result of x number of laminations with a carbon fibre twill weave of, say, 200gr/m2, as an example. and then having something like i did in metal but with 6mm G10.
i think that your goal of making the same reinforcement is totally achievable, whislt being lighter.
im refitting the boat as a go anywhere, "hard sailing whenever you have to" boat,
if it fails, its easier for me find metal workers that can rebuild the brackets even if that means double plating (to compensate for the failed G10). than getting epoxy and specialized cloths in the most remote locations of the planet
lastly, if i was going for a full composite solution i would definetely go the vacccum bagging (infusing or not) way. nothing substitutes that when it comes to sqweeze out the performance of those materials
all the best for your refit
do you jave any more photos?
cheers!
pmnfernando
Member
i was writing my reply as you posted this.
i like your solution, i think it works.
and you made sure you are dispersing the load onto the hull, that is smart.
the old arrangement i had on the boat was a metal goal post which dispersed the loads to the hull bottom, transforming a deck stepped mast into a "almost" keel steeped one.
i initially tought about following that route, but i also noticed that the failure occurred at the horizontal bit of the goal post. it was bent, not by much, but it was bent.
it was this that made me opt for reinforcing the mast step option, seeing how the bolts, which connected the bulkhead to the goal post were straight. this can only tell that the top section failed first, it cant really tell how, if any, load were being dispersed thru thw bulkhead.
this made me think that, whatever load created the failure, it wasnt all that of a mammoth one, given the boat was sailing for a decade with that failure in place (the last owner wasnt even aware of it).
with all of this in mind in opted for a more localized reinforcing solution
your solution has another positive, it brings the weight down. mine concentrates it at deck level which is first worst place to have it
yoda
Well-known member
When I had to rebuild the cross beam on Zeeforel I discovered that the bulkhead didn't actually meet the underside of the deck so I had to epoxy hardwood wedges in to the gap to prevent the deck sagging.
Zeehond2
New member
Hi Yoda,
The same situation on Zeehond, this seems to be how the bulkhead was designed.
The same situation on Zeehond, this seems to be how the bulkhead was designed.
Zeehond2
New member
Regarding the mast compression load on the bulkhead, Elements of Yachting Design by Skene provides a formula
