Visit our Popular Forums

hejapofa · 23-02-2011, 03:18

Very interesting reply from Boatman61. If the partition doesn't go through to the hull it probably isn't doing anything structural. Anybody with a 393 2 aft cabin care to take a peek.

FraidNot · 23-02-2011, 03:28

If it is structural, then it would be needed for the 2-cabin version I would think!
I don't believe the fore-aft centre divider has any load bearing duty. Happy to be contradicted!

Troubadour52993 · 23-02-2011, 04:38

Some of the newer charter boats had this partition so it could be easily removed. On the older boats like mine, it helped stiffen the deck and was tabbed to the deck on the top. Leaving some of the bulkhead works like an I beam, and elminates the nasty work of how to grind down the tabs and how to trim out the headliner.

On my conversion (twin forward cabins) I copied another boat conversion whose owner was happy with it, and left about 10" of the bulkhead under the deck and then covered it with a teak cap. I used a thin piece of door skin to cover the gap under the bunks, I set a router to the thickness and trimmed the ply to that depth so it would be the same height as the bunk boards. New mattress foam, and voila, a centerline cabin.

MarkJ · 24-02-2011, 09:12

If its structural then you could put in a frame to take the load. Just like they do in houses.

Do we have any architects here?

2 solid pylons and a cross member (not angry forum member...) would do the trick, wouldn't it?

CarlF · 24-02-2011, 09:46

I agree with Boatman - Beneteau has no incentive and plenty of risk if they say "yes".

The good news is to consider the possible load is relatively low. This isn't a rig load. The heaviest weight would probably be a bunch of fat friends standing in the cockpit. If you have no fat friends, you may not have a problem. I guess a large wave landing in the cockpit would also be heavy - but maybe not more so than the fat friends.

The span is less than seven feet and can be well supported at each end by the bulkheads. The easiest thing might be to cut some plywood into four 3" or 4" wide strips and epoxy them together to form a laminated beam. Paint the exposed sides white and put a teak strip on the rough bottom edge - or just wrap with padded white vinyl headliner material.

Magnifique!

MarkJ · 24-02-2011, 10:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by CarlF

The easiest thing might be to cut some plywood into four 3" or 4" wide strips and epoxy them together to form a laminated beam.

Sounds like a good idea.

The fiberglass groove where the wall is mounted to the ceiling (bottom of the cockpit) is about 5/8ths inch thick and 1 inch deep. Could the laminate, or a carbon fibre strut (etc) go in there?

hejapofa · 24-02-2011, 10:15

We have an answer from Beneteau. You can remove a section of the partition leaving 15cm all around to support the cockpit sole. Here is the correspondence:

Question
I wish to join the two aft cabins of a Beneteau 393 by the removal of the partition indicated by the arrow marked A in the picture below. I do not propose to remove the structural bulkhead that runs athwartships from B to B. Can you please advise me if the partition marked A is structural or if it can be safely removed.
Answer
Regarding your question, you can't get away of a support for cockpit sole (see drawings)
Our recomendation will be to make a big rectangular cut off with round corner in the longit bulkhead leaving at least 15cm of wood around it

Question

On your drawing you show a 393 two cabin version. My question was about a 393 three cabin version. Does your answer apply to both boats?

There is a blue line showing on the drawing from fore to aft and the partition is on this line in the aft cabins. It is this partition we wish to remove. Is your suggestion that we remove a part of this partition leaving 15 cm of wood all the way around? I do not have a sectional internal drawing but I have drawn a blank rectangle on the attached profile of the yacht to show approximately where it would go.

Thank you for your answer. When I get you response can I have your permission to publish it on the Cruisers Forum website as there are many people who would be interested.

Answer
1) the 2 cab version drawing supplied was to show you the fact that cockpit sole as to be supported by a bulkhead
this apply also to 3 cab version
2) yes you must leave at minimum 15 cm of wood around the cut off in the central longitudinal bulkhead
hope it will help

So it is possible and I would assume that replacing the partition with a welded metal frame would work as well and may be neater.

plato-gb · 01-03-2011, 09:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by boatman61

I did not have the 3 cabin on my Bene but.... the bulkhead/partition in my aft cabin dividing the cabin from the cockpit locker did not go all the way to the hull.
If you look under the bunks if the space under is through to the other side its removable without consequence...
Bene will adivse no changes as a matter of course as a precaution against any future claims... Bene said I could so I did and the boat sank... that sorta thing..lol

boatman61 when you say you did not have the 3 cabin bene, did you have the 2 cabin 393? Are you saying that the bulkhead partition in the 2 cabin did not go all the way to the hull?
tks for clarification - cheers

Sail KiKa · 05-08-2019, 23:34

I had exactly the same question so was wondering if you ended up doing it?

Could you share some pics perhaps?

I am considering buying a 343 and want to do the same.

Greetings

Marius

hejapofa · 06-08-2019, 02:00

Ultimately I didn't proceed other issues stopped me from buying a yacht. But I did get a reply from Benetau about structural integrity and considered replacing the partition with a custom made steel frame that would mirror the shape of the partition. I also stopped to consider the issue of head height above the double bunk if it was situate directly below the cockpit. It seemed to me that this might be very low and not entirely comfortable if I sat up suddenly in the night. Good luck