29.12.2012 Views

Single pull macgregor type hatch cover.pdf - Cochin University of ...

Single pull macgregor type hatch cover.pdf - Cochin University of ...

Single pull macgregor type hatch cover.pdf - Cochin University of ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

leakage can cause cargo damage and, if over a prolonged period, damage to the<br />

ship’s internal structure. Long-term structural decline can lead to structural<br />

collapse and total loss.<br />

1.2 EARLY HATCH COVERS<br />

The upper deck <strong>hatch</strong>es <strong>of</strong> early steamships, in common with those <strong>of</strong> sailing<br />

ships, were small by present standards: four meters by two would not have been<br />

untypical <strong>hatch</strong>way dimensions, even for ocean going vessels in the mid-19 th<br />

century. Deck openings were bounded by vertical coamings and spanned by<br />

wooden boards usually laid athwart ships: water tightness was maintained by<br />

tarpaulins spread over the boards and secured by wedges and cleats at the<br />

coamings, an arrangement which had then been in use for centuries. Web beams<br />

were sometimes placed across the largest <strong>hatch</strong>ways but it was not until 1879 that<br />

their use became mandatory for all vessels classed with Lloyd’s Register <strong>of</strong><br />

Shipping having <strong>hatch</strong>ways more than 12 feet long. Coamings were required to be<br />

<strong>of</strong> iron constructions. No minimum height was specified and it was not until forty<br />

years later that they appeared in Lloyd’s Rules. Hatch boards were made <strong>of</strong> solid<br />

woods 63 mm thick and <strong>of</strong> such an overall size that they could be handled<br />

manually. Since they were laid transversely across the <strong>hatch</strong>way it was necessary<br />

to use ‘fore and afters’ to reduce their unsupported span. These were the heavy<br />

baulks <strong>of</strong> timber placed longitudinally across the <strong>hatch</strong>way, on the top <strong>of</strong> the<br />

transverse iron beams and supported at each end by brackets attached to the<br />

coamings. The <strong>hatch</strong> boards, in turn, were placed across the fore and after which<br />

were so spaced that the unsupported span <strong>of</strong> the boards did not exceed the<br />

maximum allowed.<br />

After the turn <strong>of</strong> the 20 th century, the practice <strong>of</strong> arranging <strong>hatch</strong> boards<br />

longitudinally began to be adopted. There were sound reasons for this change. A<br />

typical cargo ship <strong>hatch</strong>,7.5m(25 ft) long and 5 m(16 ft) wide, with athwart ship<br />

<strong>hatch</strong> boards, would have been fitted with two transverse web beams and three<br />

fore afters which, because <strong>of</strong> their overall length would each have been made up<br />

in three pieces, one for every beam space as shown in figure 1.1. With<br />

longitudinal <strong>hatch</strong> boards the same <strong>hatch</strong> would have required no more than four<br />

transverse beams space 1.5 m apart each <strong>of</strong> lighter construction than the two webs<br />

3

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!