I imagine it looked more like a flatboat, and after the water receded it would have been dismantled for housing, pens, firewood.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I doubt much got dismantled.... Since it came to rest on the mountain, I would imagine that it also served as temporary quarters until the water receded to the point where they could get off the mountain. There might have been enough supplies onboard to look after them for years but besides, growing crops and other husbandry activities etc. isn’t that great on mountains.....and so I think it would be an objective to get off the mountain as soon as they could. Scriptures say that Noah was building it for 120 years and there is no record of how many others were employed in the effort. As a structure that large, I doubt that much of it would get disassembled since there really wasn’t any need to do that.
I got interested in this topic years ago and was fascinated by the amount of literature that was found concerning an expedition by the Russians in 1916... way too much literature and records for it to be an obvious hoax that they found the ark. If I had the time and resources to research anything, it would be to first get to the bottom of some of that bit of history to establish the veracity of it.
Your post is a breath of fresh air. Too many skeptics for my liking. The footprint of the ark is similar to the modern ocean-going barge. This is the most stable boat to be in under high seas, winds, storms etc.
From my research I’d conclude the 2 paired animals were juveniles or the youngest age chosen to survive a year+ in harsh conditions. Also most animals have defense mechanisms where under high stress many of them hibernate thereby reducing needs for added food and waste removal.
Here’s a link that explains the hydroplate theory (replaces plate-techtonics) authored by Dr. Walt Brown, a scientist who has spent over 4 decades refining this theory as well as all the reasons evolution does not work at creationscience.com.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xq6kUbLzYCc