epoxy vs. Poly

The Longboarders only forum.

Postby Roy Stewart » Thu Aug 03, 2006 6:49 am

Wow Doug, that's really fascinating. . . clearly the difference in acceleration between light and heavy boards is quite small, mainly due to the fact that the surfboard mass is typically a small part of the overall mass of board and rider. . . however, an advantage in acceleration is still an advantage. . . it's nice to see calculations after all these years of trying to explain in plain english that heavier boards accelerate faster (all else being equal)

The momentum calculations are also interesting. . . previously many people have claimed tht the momentum advantage of a heavier board is offset by slower acceleration. . . your calculations show that heavier boards have a momentum advantage and typically an acceleration advantage as well.

As expected, your calculations using real boards show that shape has a large effect on the figures.. . . so heavier boards are not always going to accelerate faster because there are design differences which play a large part in the equations. . . .however the heavier board does have an advantage all else being equal.


One comment regarding the tunnel fins. . . the tunnel fins, used correctly, actually reduce drag. . . they do this by providing lift at a better lift/drag ratio than that of the planing hull. .. . just the old 'hydrofoil' advantage which immersed foils have. . . it works. . .also I must point out that the tunnel configuration is a very low drag fin. . . . in fact the lowest drag fin shape possible, due to the fact that it produces no tip eddies and has an even pressure distribution inside the tunnel, amongst other reasons.

Thanks for all your careful thoughts and calculations, it's really a great relief in a way, and a nice change from fighting off the rabid wolf packs !

:D
User avatar
Roy Stewart
SW Pro
 
Posts: 800
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2005 8:41 am
Location: New Zealand

rider input

Postby Roy Stewart » Thu Aug 03, 2006 7:06 am

Oh, and by the way, there's the matter of muscular input from the rider. . . I am interested in how large or small a factor this is in the overall equation.

If, for example we know what the maximum sustained horsepower which a person can produce by repeatedly doing squats is (the 'pumping' motion), then, if we assume that this energy is transferred with an efficiency approaching that of an immersed propeller ( probably unlikely IMO except if driving an underwater foil like a tunnel fin, but a starting point anyway). ..then we should be able to calculate how much this will increase 'thrust' for any board and rider combination of a given mass. . . and how much it will increase acceleration and top speed. .. .I

I am particularly interested in (1) The efficiency of energy transfer, and (2) how much percentage wise the 'thrust' of the board and rider is increased by muscular pumping action. .. . . and I realise that all else being equal, a rider with a heavier board will be increasing the 'thrust' by a lower percentage than a rider with a lighter board. .. . however the rider is theoretically adding a fixed amount of thrust in both cases. . . . wondering how this might pan out.

Regards,

Roy
User avatar
Roy Stewart
SW Pro
 
Posts: 800
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2005 8:41 am
Location: New Zealand

Postby rich r » Fri Aug 04, 2006 9:07 pm

I think "muscular input" is a less concerning force.

The point that is missed in all of this is that the object (board plus rider) has a shifting center of gravity, as well as changing shape/density as the rider lays down, stands, squats, entends, etc.

Now, with a heavier board, the rider's weight will be less of an influencer in relation. Therefore, there is less ability to shift the center, which will effect momentum, velocity, etc...

And before you discount the importance of this, don't forget what happens when you sit too far back on your board or too far forward in relation to being able to catch the wave and how the board reacts.
rich r
SW Pro
 
Posts: 533
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 4:01 pm
Location: Middletown, NJ

Postby dougirwin13 » Mon Aug 07, 2006 3:53 am

Hi Roy,

Yeah, the difference in fall energy is a fraction of a km/h - but still there. I think it's obvious that a heavier board gets its' advantage from it's significantly greater momentum.

A heavier board needs more energy to get it to that same speed... But fortunately there's far more energy made available than any board can harness, thanks to the wave itself. What I *didnt* put in before was the contribution the forward motion of the wave makes to energy storage (and subsequent velocity). That is going to be in the same order as the air drop factor itself I reckon, but can be tapped repeatedly over a ride (assuming it is in a position to do so - velocity, weight, etc).

Perhaps the people who say the momentum advantage is neutralised dont understand the relationship between velocity and momentum? If you understand that and play with the equations (even a small bit) its pretty obvious, I think.

And yes, a heavier board (all else being equal) is always going to have a momentum advantage. I seem to recall mentioning this on Sways once... I forget and cant find the post :D I'll be happy to eat those words if someone can prove otherwise... But I can't see that happening.

IMO it's easy for novices to skip over the significant of design expressed by Cd. It's important to remember that the Vt equation is formed by two linker sub-equations. And that every component of those sub-equations is equally important... Almost! Most of the variables themselves are built from other equations, but luckily the desired result for each of those is already well established (like gravitic acceleration on earth or the density of air). The same isn't as true for Cd! The drag coefficient is very difficult to calculate and is usually obtained through testing, rather than calculation.

Cd is always a value between zero and one (at least on this planet ;) ). And because Vt is such a small number it has significant weight in the equation results. A small variance of Cd has a big impact. I used a constant value of 0.2 for this round of testing, which is a fairly low value and in the range a surfboard probably has.

Interesting comments re the tunnel fin. I suspect that tuning foil and careful mounting in relation to how the board travels/rides would be quite important.

RoyStewart wrote:Thanks for all your careful thoughts and calculations, it's really a great relief in a way, and a nice change from fighting off the rabid wolf packs !

No worries :) Physics is the search for truth. Not a wrestling match between individuals ;) ... Although sometimes you would think otherwise if you watch some physicists "debating".

Yeah, muscular input is interesting. It will, again, come down to energy transfer, storage and release I think. The more easily a board can be thrown around the more energy can be sent its way by the rider. Think of the difference between cutbacks on the two - very fast on the light board and more drawn out on the heavier. But a lighter board cannot hold on to potential energy like a heavier board can so it needs to recharge more often. A trade-off. Sometimes maybe a big one. Not sure how measurable it will prove tho.

Another design factor I'd like to discuss is the cooncept of "true area of contact"... Given two apparently identical surfcraft with the same surface area being wet they will not necessarily experience the same amount of drag. A good example is where one is highly polished on the bottom and one is not... This area can be counter-intuitive and I'm not sure anyone really has it nailed down yet - claims to the contrary. Obviously features like concaves also come into this too.


Hi Rich,
I don't think anyone is missing those points (at least, I hope not). But it sometimes helps to think about things in a static sense before adding more variables.

The calculations, etc discussed above necessairly simplify things a bit to identify the maximum effect of gravity, acceleration and momentum... And ideal situation, if you like. Because the wealth of physics available tells us there are certain basic truths about the world. And one of these is energy transfer, storage and release.

I think a good rider can use a really good cutback to to end high up on the face and reenter the curl. And they *are* using the potential energy in their body to store more energy in their board and boost it up there where they can then recharge using the wave enrgy (via gravity).


Anyway, just my 2c... Interesting discussion!

-doug
User avatar
dougirwin13
SW Pro
 
Posts: 867
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 6:46 am
Location: http://www.compsand.com/

Postby rich r » Mon Aug 07, 2006 8:11 pm

Oh, I understand thinking about the world in a static view makes it easier at first, but it may lead to some incorrect conclusions.

What's important is the interaction between the static realities and the dynamic nature of the surfer interacting with those static items.

Because all the benefits noted for the heavier board work against the performance of the surfer (I believe, just from some casual thought versus actual calculations), so in the end, the better performing board, given constants to shape, rail, concavity, length, etc, would be a lighter board.

Though, that would probably shift at a certain speed/wave height (I would think some sort of geometric curve that levels off or bends back based on speed/wave variables).
rich r
SW Pro
 
Posts: 533
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 4:01 pm
Location: Middletown, NJ

Postby dougirwin13 » Tue Aug 08, 2006 5:27 am

Hey Rich!

rich r wrote:Oh, I understand thinking about the world in a static view makes it easier at first, but it may lead to some incorrect conclusions.

Sure! Gotta be careful about what we assume, too.

The initial discussion (where we started talking about the realities of Vt and m) show the maximum impact of mass in terms of gravitic acceleration and momentum in certain "snapshots" of a craft in action, where all else is equal. And "all else" being equal is going to be comewhat... Unlikely :)

rich r wrote:What's important is the interaction between the static realities and the dynamic nature of the surfer interacting with those static items.

I don't think this is the only significant factor. But it's certainly right up there, IMHO. "What you ride means nothing, how you ride it is everything" takes on some new meaning :)

Exactly like you said - dropping your weight way back on the tail is going to have a certain impact (i.e., big stall). And that's why my acceleration/Vt calculations specified "air drop", you know? And a big air drop can be messed up pretty easily too :D But I think there is some benefit in looking at static calculations in certain scenarios... It's not going to be the whole picture of the act of surfing, tho.

rich r wrote:Because all the benefits noted for the heavier board work against the performance of the surfer (I believe, just from some casual thought versus actual calculations), so in the end, the better performing board, given constants to shape, rail, concavity, length, etc, would be a lighter board.

Do you think that can depend on what and how you ride? Like Roy and his big heavy boards are aiming at a style most shortboarders are simply going to hate... And, to be honest, isn't the way I prefer to ride - I generally prefer boards in the 9'-10' range that has a certain level of manueverability. Then SUP guys like Kokua are different again.

rich r wrote:Though, that would probably shift at a certain speed/wave height (I would think some sort of geometric curve that levels off or bends back based on speed/wave variables).

Yeah, I can picture that. Breaks like Shark Park spring to mind :D
Image

Like I said before, this is all my own assesment of some immutable facts. Plenty of people are better qualified than I in both areas. But open, ego-less discussion helps us find the truth.

-doug
User avatar
dougirwin13
SW Pro
 
Posts: 867
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 6:46 am
Location: http://www.compsand.com/

Postby libby » Tue Aug 08, 2006 2:33 pm

Just wondering Doug do you have formal education in physical science or are you just very clued up?
User avatar
libby
Big Wave Master
 
Posts: 2180
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 5:14 pm
Location: Southampton

Postby dougirwin13 » Tue Aug 08, 2006 4:54 pm

Hi shortstuff!

Glad to hear I impressed someone ;)

I finished year 12 A physics. And biology. And chemistry.

Didn't do any further formal studies on those... But continued reading the literature, where ever my interest lead me.

Also, the web is a fantastic place to research physical science... Just remember, wherever you read it you cant believe it all. You gotta crosscheck and do the experiments/calculations yourself :) That said the really big gov and edu sites are always a good start.

Hope it hasn't all bored you, tho.

Cheers,
-doug
User avatar
dougirwin13
SW Pro
 
Posts: 867
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 6:46 am
Location: http://www.compsand.com/

bouyant

Postby Baratacus » Wed Aug 09, 2006 5:08 pm

I rekindled this discussion about a month ago it seems. I was interested in whether or not there was a big enough difference in the bouyancey of a epoxy v.s. a poly. I ended up going with an epoxy board and the weight difference is enourmous. I wanted to go with a smaller board than my 10' 3 stringer, but wasn't sure one would float me enough to paddle into the smaller summer waves. I bought a 8'4 big boy stinger by Ben Aipa. Its almost 4"thick and weighs about 40 pounds less than my other board. The great reduction in volume is well compensated by the weight reduction and is significant enough for me to easily paddle it into any wave I want. The weight of the rider (me) is ample to give me the enertia that would be lacking from a smaller rider on such a cork of a board. The small mass of the board yet large volume (very light biger board) is going to take some time to get used to. Since the board itself lacks much innertia, the positioning of the rider is a lot more crutial than on a heavier board. I hadn't thought of this and it doesn't seem to be addressed in all of the information I've been reading. Everyone is always talking about the "flex" of the board and how "rigid" the epoxy's are... I think they're just grasping to find an explanation as to why the board feels different. I think what they are experiencing is the lack of inertia from the board. Just a thought.
Baratacus
New Member
 
Posts: 10
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Mon Jul 10, 2006 1:31 am
Location: San Diego, CA

Postby libby » Wed Aug 09, 2006 7:19 pm

Shortstuff is a new one, and i actually quite like it!

Coolio, was just wondering, I did physics till AS level (17) and bio and chem till A level (18) but i dont think i've ever read any real physics literature. Good on you, was just being nosy :D
User avatar
libby
Big Wave Master
 
Posts: 2180
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 5:14 pm
Location: Southampton

Postby dougirwin13 » Wed Aug 09, 2006 10:38 pm

No worries :)

For some reason it seems easy to transfer my usual banter with my georgeous wife ("M") to you... But then, she is also a waxed blonde hobbit :D OK, OK... I know. You aren't blonde anymore.

Take it as a compliment ;) What do you think of "shortcake"? M either giggles or slaps me. hehe!

As for the rest, dont mind the nosiness :) People have a right to know if I am full of shyte (yes, usually:) ) and why I *think* I know what I *think* I know.

Keep havin fun Libs!

-doug
User avatar
dougirwin13
SW Pro
 
Posts: 867
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 6:46 am
Location: http://www.compsand.com/

Postby libby » Thu Aug 10, 2006 8:00 am

Shortcake...hmm i think i could live with that I tend to get *little munchkin* or *shorty* but usually its just *I love you Libs....even if you're short*. Honestly the stuff that man gets away with :roll: :lol:

It's odd, Brent is the only person who has ever taken the piss out of me for being short, except for one mate from uni, Chris who used to call me *the short but brilliant one*

Now theres a nickname i could live with!

I think maybe i have a superiority complex- i'm short but i really dont feel like I am ha ha please nobody psychoanalyse me!
User avatar
libby
Big Wave Master
 
Posts: 2180
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 5:14 pm
Location: Southampton

Postby rich r » Thu Aug 10, 2006 5:02 pm

Sort of like those little dogs who, when seeing some monster Rottie or 120 lb Lab, they bark up a storm and seem to think they could take 'em without getting swallowed whole, eh?
rich r
SW Pro
 
Posts: 533
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 4:01 pm
Location: Middletown, NJ

Postby libby » Thu Aug 10, 2006 6:58 pm

Ha ha yep, i guess thats me, a Jack Russell with a superiority complex!
User avatar
libby
Big Wave Master
 
Posts: 2180
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 5:14 pm
Location: Southampton

Postby dougirwin13 » Thu Aug 10, 2006 11:34 pm

A short chick we know gets called "Oomp" by her boyfriend... Short for, you guessed it, Oompaloompah.

I tried it on M once but the red handmark on my face took days to go away!

As for little dogs. I reckon they truly believe that they are, in fact, big dogs.

-doug
User avatar
dougirwin13
SW Pro
 
Posts: 867
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2006 6:46 am
Location: http://www.compsand.com/

Postby Baratacus » Fri Aug 11, 2006 2:59 am

dougirwin13 wrote:A short chick we know gets called "Oomp" by her boyfriend... Short for, you guessed it, Oompaloompah.

I tried it on M once but the red handmark on my face took days to go away!

As for little dogs. I reckon they truly believe that they are, in fact, big dogs.

-doug


No, my JackRussel is certain he is a boy stuck in a dog suit. As for the superiority complex.. its not a complex. You are superior! The world just needs to come to grips with that.
Baratacus
New Member
 
Posts: 10
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Mon Jul 10, 2006 1:31 am
Location: San Diego, CA

Previous

Similar topics

Return to Longboarders Only