Shroud to Hull, why not?

[Pete]

The bulkheads in my 1978 27' have rotted. I have seen modifications where the primary shrouds are moved to the hull. This seems wise, the current design provides questionable support. The plywood is prone to rot and even if sound cannnot support the same stress loads. I was wondering if anyone has made such a modification and with what results. Of course, descent is always welcome. More than one has reminded me of my total lack of experience as a naval architect. Thanks

 

[Peter]

Bulkheads

I appreciate the concern you have. I changed the bulkheads on my c27 a couple of years ago. Assuming that you seal the ends with epoxy and that you rebed/reseal regularly I don't see why the bulkheads cannot last another 25 years, if not more. The connection as designed goes from chainplate to bulkead to the glassed in bulkead. This glassed bulkhead is likely one of the strongest areas on a c27. I don't see how you would have the same strength designed into the side of the hull. The c27 topsides are not very thick and strong.I realize that bulkeads cannot support all that great a stressload, but really, the only c27's that had issues were because of rotted bulkeads, not ones in good condition.To ease your concerns, have you considered redesigning the chainplate by elongating it such that it directly connects to the lower glassed bulkead? or how about attaching the chainplate to the lower bulkead with some short rigging?Peter

 

[Pete]

I Have Seen the Light

of your wisdom. Pulled out the port bulk head and cabinet. I discovered that the bulkhead screws into a fiberglassed bulkhead at the bottom. An enlongated chain plate came to mind. No doubt replacing the shrouds to their original location is the way to go, with a some reinforcement from the bottom. Thanks.Pete

 

[Peter]

Bulkead

I would also consider increasing the size of the bolts that hold the ply bulkhead to the small glassed bulkhead at the bottom. A little cheap insurance if you ask me.Peter