I actually digg the airplane analogy because it makes sense what you’re saying. Yes, surfcraft is where it is now because of tried and field-tested shapes and designs… but who has actually taken the time to analyze these characteristics and apply science to explain why it works? Who has actually put the money, effort and time into taking multiple different board designs and analizing them in a laboratory setting? The fact that science is finally starting to come into play is great, because it will not only show why what works does, but it will show things that could work better, or maybe have no effect at all.
Most recently think of the advances in fin design with honey-comb structuring that varies in diameter and thickness to allow the fin to flex a specific way under a specific load. That’s not something you just stumble upon, it’s something that comes from applying sound engineering principles and scientific method to surfcraft. Just imagine what we could do if we start bringing surface drag comparison on laminating materials, lift ratios on fins, and nano-fibers to substitute carbon fiber…
Shushka , the honeycomb in the fins is only used because its cheap and suits mass production…hand foiled with the right materials , leaves em for dead , mate…
We carry a specific HP honeycomb fin - carbon fiber honeycombs of varying size and thickness like I said, that way when the fin flexes it flexes along a specific axis or in a specific way - I think you and I are thinking of two different ones considering these fins cost almost $200 a set
We carry a specific HP honeycomb fin - carbon fiber honeycombs of varying size and thickness like I said, that way when the fin flexes it flexes along a specific axis or in a specific way - I think you and I are thinking of two different ones considering these fins cost almost $200 a set
There was an article on some engineering students from UCSD in La Jolla gathering data on Surfboard design. Can't find it now perhaps someone here has heard of their research. Then again what an excuse to surf Blacks claiming it all part of your education.
I can try to snap some when I go to work today. They’re made by a local shaper here in HI who used to be an engineer - the idea is that the carbon honeycomb pattern (he makes them with carbon triangles as well) are placed in a tighter configuration at the base of the fin and following the thickest part of the foil about halfway up the fin, behind that are larger-diameter combs with thinner walls that are less rigid than the base. The idea is that when you load the fin on a bottom turn or a cutback, the fin flexes in more of a twisting fashion along the vertical axis which directs the “whip” of the release outward towards the engaged rail - this results in bigger sprays on the lip and quicker acceleration on a bottom turn.
One of my buddies who uses them swears by them, but at that price point it’s not really something in my budget (keep in mind thats $200 per set - not much more expensive than a lot of the FCS glass-flex fins but still overpriced for something like fins)
Don't have any in stock of the specific brand I Was referring to, but here's something future is doing thats similar to it. The only difference is rather than using varying sizes in the honeycomb core they're either controling the flex of the fin with carbon "struts" in the laminate like so
While it isnt the same construction as the ones made here on Maui, the principle is still the same. Engineering is being applied to the fins in order to control where, when, and how much the fin flexes to achieve a specific goal.
I really wish I could get a photo of the ones this guy makes but I don't even know what brand he goes by - very few shops cary them and I think he only makes very small batches. They look SICK though with a very tight carbon weave on the honeycombs, and according to my buddy they work like a dream
I would actually love to see someone mount a gopro to their center FCS plug and catch some high-speed footage of fins like this in action compared to normal fins, that way we could actually see the difference in flex. Either way though, its a great example of what you get when you apply scientific method to surfcraft
Okay people, the film is a satirical take on shapers being “too experimental” but to try and say that applying science to surfcraft is “buffoonery” is just plain ignorant. Am I saying everyone should be using cad software and computer design to make boards? No way - but applying sound scientific principle to something that has so many variables and interacts with flowing water in such a dynamic way is more like “common sense” than “buffoonery”.
Up until the last couple decades shapers were nothing more than over-achieving carpenters - they would build boards with smooth, clean lines that were appealing to the eye and would surf wonderfully, but did they have any idea why the different shapes surfed the way they did? Did they understand lift-to-drag ratio for fins? Of course not! tom blake just slapped a keel from a boat onto his longboard because he knew they worked for boats - guess how boat builders figured out they needed a keel… SCIENCE! Someone finally started to foil them because they knew that foils worked better for airplanes (yet another gift of that apparent black-magic nonsense called engineering). They had no idea WHY different shapes of tails worked better or worse or WHY higher or lower rails would affect the stability of the board. They were just craftsmen using trial-and-error to figure out what worked.
The whole point here is now that science and engineering used to be something only the elite could afford to learn, but now they are such widley-known and used principals, they can be applied to every-day things like surfing, snowboarding, skateboarding etc… Now we can look at these designs on paper and understand why foiling a fin in a certain manner will make the board go faster or slower or turn sharper or wider. We can analyze the laminar flow of an existing surfboard shape, and use math and applied science to understand how a deeper fish tail or sharper points or a narrower nose will change the ride without wasting a blank on it…
as a matter of fact, this video shows exactly why science is so important in surfcraft - had this fictional shaper used science to test his designs, he wouldn’t have needed to improve shaping by showing the world “what didn’t work”
Now I’m not supporting the ridiculous random shapes people make. A surfboard shaped like a coffin? That’s just stupid and obviously won’t work in a beneficial manner, but those boards arend rooted in any kind of science. If you want a great example of a large departure from the norm that worked great and is rooted in science, why don’t you take a look at the twin-nosed guns that have come out in the last couple decades. That’s a design that was tried and tested on paper before someone finally shaped it and put it in the water, and big surprise when it made the board more stable in larger, choppy surf. Or how about the foil-boards Laird has been testing over here at Peahi?? Do you think thats a design someone just randomly decided to shape and see if it worked, or did someone actually put the time and effort into engineering and testing the hydrofoil before they strapped it to an air-chair that gave birth to the idea to put it on a surfboard?
Seriously, you guys all have a wonderful wealth of knowledge on this site, but you react to science and design as if it’s all just wizzards and fairies. This isn’t the dark ages, and the people applying these practices to board building shouldnt just be written off as “buffoons”
the movie portrayed the empirical/soul shaper as the buffoon
did you even watch it.
You are not a simpleton,you said peahi laird and science more than once.
dont be so insecure.the huntington contest just gave the brazillian kid a 10 for a twisty slaprentry on the state of the art pre formence computer design wow ghee whiz mother humper board
your side is winning girls glory and money
real- I can feel it therefore I exist- surfing is dieing
before your very eyes .There will be no credibility
Science may be able to assist us “over achieving carpenter” types but just because some kid quotes quantum physics and the universe and Greenough doesnt mean he undrrstands any of it, theyre just spouting words they think are impressive.
Considering most of your posts read like a Haiku (don’t get me wrong you have great knowledge and info in plenty of other threads), I’d say it’s pretty easy to miss the point you’re trying to get across. But then you go ahead and continue to rip on science and computers being involved in surfcraft, so what I said does in fact apply to you. You treat on-paper analysis of surf design as if it’s witchcraft - but you’re only perpetuating your own ignorance by insisting that it is better to just know that something works and use it, than it is to understand why it works. Like I said, shapers who shun scientific analysis of design are nothing more than over-glorified carpenters sanding smooth lines into something that someone else told them how to build in a particular manner, just “because it works”
I did watch the video and apparently you didn’t read my post, I understand that the character portrayed in the video is a “soul shaper” - that’s kinda why I made the point to say how it’s a great example of why science should be involved in board design
I mean think about it - for centuries they were building boats with smooth hulls, just because that’s how they’d been built forever. Then someone decided to apply engineering and science to the boat design and added a V to the hull, stepped it out, developed chines, strakes and threw on some sponsons (fins) and viola! Thanks to “the paper readouts” we’re now able to take a design that used to be no more advanced than a Boston Whaler, and turn it into the modern, high-performance wakeboard boats we have today.
To shun a sound understanding of your craft is to embrace complete ignorance
To shun a sound understanding of your craft is to embrace complete ignorance tonga aki…crab claw sail begat the fixed wing perhaps?
tongan craft was a Vee bottom we all know We would also like to pay homage to the great wisdom and knowledge of our forefathers who roamed the vast Pacific Ocean with phenomenal exactitude, dexterity and fearless cheer
the fijian creft blew by captain cook from horizon to horizon
and there was no computer validation and it only took two hundred an fifty years for euro written language man to validate the principles and INVENT the catamaran,such is achademia.
and such is the success of the K
notted string and plumb.
…ambrose…
you win
and now for the
electoral college
of design theory
please.
I’m gonna go eat an
homemade apple turnover
read it twice you’ll get it
I did.
oh yeah the guy in the video was an actor
playing a shaper , a comedian
making a satirical rendering
not the shaper
and gregory harrison was not ‘the bear’
nor was john millius
or billy hamilton.
history rewrites itself with the author as the origins.
surfing is more than a thousand years old and shaping was before that…
like I said the data base is the new god.
You win the girls and the gold and all the russian oligarks in the maldives.
Wow so you’re proving my point and trying to mask it as another jab at me? I’ve won the russian girls gold??? Please either lay off the drugs or use something a little better than google translate, you make no sense whatsoever. Like I said, they made things a certain way for centuries just because it worked. Thanks to design and science and engineering we can now understand WHY it works.
I mean seriously… what if they had made the wheel for millenia as a doedecagon with flat sides, but just enough angle to allow it to roll?? Sure the wheel woul’ve worked with that design, but it wouldn’t work as efficiently until someone understood WHY it worked, and then applied mathematics to realize that you could increase the efficiency by x% if you just changed the shape a little bit. Obviously that’s a big hypothetical but the point still stands - it’s foolish to make something “just because it works” and not have an understanding of the reason why it works.
I’m through responding to your posts ambrose, because aside from the fact that you make no grammatical sense you obviously are losing what is being said on here. Nobody is saying that “data is god” and that boards should all be shaped by computers, I’m saying that to laugh off an obviously benficial and time-tested tool as “buffoonery” is ignorant and that instead of intellectually attacking those who use it, you should embrace the thing that has provided you with so much of the day-to-day benefits you take for granted. I mean, I’m sure you would’ve been completely happy with your bathroom being a hole in the ground in the woods for you to deficate in, like man had done for thousands of years - I mean, why change it if it’s worked that whole time? Why would some buffoon come around and apply science and math to develop something as foolish as a toilet that flushes? The modern world must completely blow your mind.
Oh yeah, and thanks for clarifying that the movie was in fact fictional, and that the man being portrayed was not an actual shaper, but an actor pretending to be a shaper… You have opened my eyes to the sorcery of modern cinema - If only I had known you when the movie Independence Day came out - I could’ve avoided so much panic
I feel your pain, and I’ve been down this road before!
For what it is worth, many come here to discuss cutting edge ideas. However, there are many others that like the old ways, and harass others who try to advance. Take a look in the “Errors and Bugs” graveyard for examples.
So keep your spirits up, and remember that most like to learn a little something new. You aren’t alone.
maybe putting wheels