Lester,Lester wrote: ↑27 Nov 2020, 13:10Just to be a little academic (smile), this phrase must be understood to be talking about what the material *is*, not how it is processed. We are thinking that we ignore all matters about processing, that is, construction techniques, and we focus only upon material properties, so that is how this phrase must be interpreted.
If we do not ignore matters about processing, then this phrase can be interpreted to mean two things -- what the material is, and also how it may be processed. In this case, all my thought experiments fail, because they were exactly intended to take a material and expand, foam, and honeycomb it.
Well, I suggested to make consensus about the meaning of the phrases used in the IOM Class Rules in order to better understand each others. So, my understanding is that it is prohibited to use foamed, expanded and honeycombed materials and to construct such features like honeycombed constructions. Voids, cavities etc as side effects of manufacturing imperfections should be tolerated just as they are -> imperfections.
This reminds me on my favourite interpretation (now Q&A) asked by GBR NCA regarding insects, bubbles, etc:
Is workshop dust and other accidentally moulded in small bits like insects, air bubbles, bristles, hairs etc permitted in a moulded hull?
Reference to the old interpretation issued before year 2017
Interpretation 2003-IOM-4 on the IOM CR – edition 2002
Having in mind IOM class rule D.2.1, we may presume that it is normal to have some imperfections in mouldings and it is not necessary to explicitly mention this in the class rules. Their presence should be noted by an official measurer if he feels it appropriate. However this would not normally prevent the Certification Authority from issuing a certificate. The presence of particles of foreign materials not permitted by the class rules but reported on a measurement form would not be a reason for the certification authority to decline to issue a certificate.
All the best