Question about filler

soeren_andresen · Post by **soeren_andresen** » 01 Sep 2007, 17:12

Dear all

In light of the Spektrum discussion, and with the risk of sticking my hand in a bees nest, I have a question.

Is it regal to use (on the out side of the hull) filler, f.ex. Plastic Padding, or epoxy with microballoons/microfibre.

I ask because I have build myself a new IOM, but after I have sailed her a couple of times, I am not quit happy with her. Therefore I would like to ad some filler, specially in the forship. I think I have made an error there, and would like to ad some volume.

But in light of the Spektrum discussion, I did a little reading of the rules.
And here come my problem.
The rules regarding hull materials is in part II, witch is closed rules, so anything not specifically permitted is prohibited. Looking at rule D2.1 filler is not listed, so it is prohibited.

One could argue that filler falls in under one of the listed materials (f.ex. adhesive or paint)
But am I right??

I think there are many boats around that has used filler, specially those that is homemade. So before I start making the changes I would like your opinion.

Best regards

SÃ¸ren Andresen
DEN 93+113

Andy Stevenson · Post by **Andy Stevenson** » 01 Sep 2007, 23:55

Hi SÃ¸ren

One could argue that filler falls in under one of the listed materials (f.ex. adhesive or paint)
But am I right??

I suspect you are. I regularly use Plastic Padding and similar fillers as adhesives, and they sure are sticky!

I think epoxy with a bulking agent will be ok too, assuming the bulking agent is a permitted material.

Just my opinion of course, Iâ€™d welcome others.

Cheers

Lester · Post by **Lester** » 02 Sep 2007, 01:52

An interpretation has largely addressed this issue. Not the easiest of reads, but in essence a filler is considered an adhesive, and is permitted.

Interpretation 2003-IOM-4 wrote: Interpretations requested by the MYA, GBR as follows:
1. HULL D.2.1 MATERIALS: Is it permitted to use fillers that contain micro balloons?
2. HULL D.2.1 MATERIALS: Is it permitted to use fillers that contain bulking materials such as slate, talc etc?
4. HULL D.2.1(b) (1), and (c) MATERIALS: Is it permitted to use epoxy gel coats that contain micro balloons?

Answers:
YES - in adhesives, NO - in glass reinforced plastic.
Discussion:
Fillers are permitted provided they are constituent parts of permitted materials listed in D.2.1. Fillers supplied as parts of a resin for laminating or/and gel coat are constituent parts of laminating resin and/or gel coat which are explicitly mentioned as parts of the glass fibre reinforced plastic. Another filler added by the builder to laminating resin and/or gel coat is not a constituent part of laminating resin and/or gel coat.

Fillers are a normal part of adhesives and therefore permitted.

Dick Carver · Post by **Dick Carver** » 02 Sep 2007, 20:18

Ah yes... one of my favorite interpretations.

http://www.radiosailing.org/pdf/Interpr ... -IOM-4.pdf

Thank God those 3 gnats that wound up in my hull layup weren't deemed to be additional crew members.

The "filler" interpretation is a very good example of the ambiguous language and convoluted logic that causes many of us to be a bit leary of the RSD.

Nowhere does it state that the filler must be added to the resin during the manufacturing process (not talking about gel coat here). As far as I know, manufacturers don't add filler because the amount of filler to be mixed in is something that varies with the application. The end used determines this.
However, the end user / builder is prohibited from adding filler to the laminating resin. No one else is, as the language simply states that the filler / resin mix must be "supplied" to the builder as a constitutent part of the resin.

"Constitutent part"..... ??? I guess that means the filler is one of the ingredients that make up the laminating resin.

So if someone up the supply chain adds a thickening agent to the resin and gives or sells or supplies it to the builder, that's legal. But if the builder adds it himself, that's illegal.

Perfectly clear to me.

Hiljoball · Post by **Hiljoball** » 02 Sep 2007, 22:10

I am not sure that the quoted interpretation validates this question. The question is about increasing displacement and using fillers. It is not part of the layup, nor is it for fairing and painting purposes.

Separate from the legality question, I don't think I would want to add fillers to bulk up the hull. I would be concerned about weight. I would look at adding some strip balsa to the area, and then refairing (with filler). Then the weight is minimized and the legality does not come up.

Interesting question.

Hiljoball · Post by **Hiljoball** » 02 Sep 2007, 22:19

Separate from the legality question, I don't think I would want to add fillers to bulk up the hull. I would be concerned about weight. I would look at adding some strip balsa to the area, and then refairing (with glue and filler). Then the weight is minimized and the legality does not come up.

Interesting question.

RoyL · Post by **RoyL** » 03 Sep 2007, 21:52

An interesting question. I don't think the interpretation clearly addresses the use of a big chunk of Bondo (auto body filler here in the US) to make a major change in hull shape or displacement. Practically, not very effective and more than a little brittle. Best way would seem to be to try the shape change with filler, see if it works, and then rebuild the hull.

Andy Stevenson · Post by **Andy Stevenson** » 03 Sep 2007, 23:52

I agree with Roy, in that itâ€™s probably not the best way to reshape a hull.

I don't think the interpretation clearly addresses the use of a big chunk of Bondo

If thatâ€™s the case then it would follow that any use of Bondo (or any car body filler product) is similarly unclear. Roy, is it your opinion that such materials are not class legal?

Cheers

RoyL · Post by **RoyL** » 04 Sep 2007, 00:48

Ain't life fun. From my understanding of the present state of the rules, fairing compounds (such as bondo) used for fairing or for minor repairs would be legal. However, building an entire boat out of bondo (if such a thing could be done) would probably not be legal. Of course now we are in the "how many angels can dance on the head of a pin" territory.

Hopefully, nobody out there is planning on using plastic body fillers for major parts of IOM hull construction and we won't have to confront this issue. And if anyone does, watch out! If it works on a boat like it does on a car, one good jolt and off it comes. I wonder if bondo floats.....

Andy Stevenson · Post by **Andy Stevenson** » 04 Sep 2007, 00:59

Hi Roy,

From my understanding of the present state of the rules, fairing compounds (such as bondo) used for fairing or for minor repairs would be legal. However, building an entire boat out of bondo (if such a thing could be done) would probably not be legal

I was under the impression that a hull material was class legal or it wasnâ€™t. If I can fair my hull with Bondo, but not use a large amount to reshape the hull, where is the line drawn?

I canâ€™t find reference to this in the Class Rules, would you clarify the position please?

Cheers

RoyL · Post by **RoyL** » 04 Sep 2007, 01:32

Hey Andy, when it comes down to it, I'm not sure if I really know all the things that are actually in "bondo" and I have a feeling I really don't want to know.....

Also, I kinda don't think this subject is worth going into much further, unless you are aware of some guys who are actually planning on building hulls out of "bondo".

Finally, (and hopefully not) if this is all about some kind of "gotcha", then lets spare the drama and just let me admit however you want, you "got me"

Andy Stevenson · Post by **Andy Stevenson** » 04 Sep 2007, 02:08

Hi Roy

Also, I kinda don't think this subject is worth going into much further, unless you are aware of some guys who are actually planning on building hulls out of "bondo".

Well, I know SÃ¸ren would like to use it, and I know several folk that use it for fairing purposes, If youâ€™re suggesting that such materials are not class legal I think the subject does warrant further discussion.

if this is all about some kind of "gotcha"

How discourteous of you to suggest I have such motives. It is my intention only to clarify your position on the subject.

Cheers

RoyL · Post by **RoyL** » 04 Sep 2007, 03:37

Respectfully, Andy, I do not have to "clarify" my "position" for you.

I was trying to put an end to this "discussion" in a light hearted manner. It leads to the kind of bickering that does the IOM class no good. Obviousy, I have failed.

Oh, and if you want to accuse me of being "discourteous", get the quote right so others can judge. I said: "Finally, (and hopefully not) if this is about some kind of "gotcha", then lets spare the drama and just let me admit however you want, you got me.

" (smiley face included)

Andy Stevenson · Post by **Andy Stevenson** » 04 Sep 2007, 03:47

Respectfully, Andy, I do not have to "clarify" my "position" for you.

Iâ€™m not suggesting you have to Roy, just asking if you will please? You said a little while ago:

From my understanding of the present state of the rules, fairing compounds (such as bondo) used for fairing or for minor repairs would be legal. However, building an entire boat out of bondo (if such a thing could be done) would probably not be legal

I donâ€™t understand this position and am asking you to clarify it.