«

»

Sep 19

LSS wakesurf board construction comparisons

Oh man we have some fun pictures to share with you today. In the last post where we introduced you to our new LSS wakesurf board construction technique, we showed the unlaminated blank supporting 200 pounds with virtually no deflection. The problem with that picture, of course, was that YOU as a consumer had no reference point. Was that good? Average? or maybe it was POOR, maybe an unlaminated piece of EPS foam would support 600 pounds! This is where so much hype is introduced in wakesurfing, folks just show something and then start spouting it is the most amazing thing ever! Hyped up spinmasters everywhere and you’ve heard some of the best of the best pull that crap on you, haven’t you? They know many folks will just drink the koolaid as happy believers! Folks that read the Flyboy Wakesurf blog, know better than to NOT apply a healthy dose of professional skepticism. Prove it sucker! and compare it to other similar stuff. :) Ok we will! and thanks for the challenge!

So we’ll start with some pictures to document the testing and comparisons. This is the picture of the LSS wakesurf board construction blank, for the reference point. This was shown yesterday, we just carried it forward for ease in comparing.

LSS unlaminated 002

What we wanted to do was give folks a benchmark, something that they could compare the LSS wakesurf board contsruction to. So we devised this plan to try the same “standing on it” test using various materials that are common in wakesurf board construction. We also wanted to also show the same test done on the original composite sandwich construction Flyboy Wakesurf board. If you are a long time reader you’ll remember that test from back in February 2011.

So the first test subject up is a section of 2 pound density EPS. This is a pretty common foam used in stringerless construction. We want to separate the good folks at Lakewakes. They use a higher density EPS in their construction, which is much harder to fins out here in California. Back to our test. This was an old core that we had lying around. It has no lamination, but is used in stringered and non-stringered blanks alike. Now we didn’t actually trim it to the outline of a wakesurf board, which would give this test sample a little bit of extra strength and bending resistance.

Testing 2 pound 012

In the process of applying the weight! It’s clear that the blank is bending pretty significantly. The amount of deflect is probably 10 or so times more than the LSS wakesurf board construction blank and we have yet to fully apply the 200 pound weight.

Money shot!

Testing 2 pound 014

Ok so some explanation is in order for this picture. If you look to either side of our “load” :) you’ll see half of the blank on each side. It snapped real good-like. We had hoped to capture the exact moment of the snap, but we were a little anxious and the picture caught the aftermath!

After our load volunteer picked himself up and hobbled over to the camera, here is the result of the carnage.

Testing 2 pound 015

Now we have two blanks! Ok, not, and you get the idea, the 2 pound EPS while a common material for wakesurf blanks has zip, zero, nada strength. And that should allow you to draw conclusions about a stringered blank. The foam surrounding a stringered blank doesn’t have the ability to support a 200 pound rider, so where is the strength coming from? That 1/8″ thick piece of basswood? Yep, that’s right! The vertical orientation of the stringer is where all of the strength in a stringered blank comes from. Is there any strength out at the rails? No way in hell! That is the rail twist off that we have mentioned before. If all of the strength of a stringered blank, itself, comes from the thin wooden stringer then the further away from that stringer the load is, the less strength there will be. In fact without lamination there is absolutely zero strength in the blank even just a few short inches from the stringer.

Ok, next test sample! This will be the unlaminated original Flyboy Wakesurf composite sandwich construction. As we mentioned, if you are a long time reader, you’ll remember back in February of 2011 that we slapped a fin in the unlaminated blank and wakesurfed it!

DSC09059

A few things we should note. There is no external lamination, so one of the great things about both the LSS wakesurf board construction and the original Flyboy Wakesurf composite sandwich construction is that they are truly water tight! The external foam is closed cell and impervious to water. For you that means a ding doesn’t stop your fun! You don’t event have to cover it, just be sre to get it fixed when you get off the lake.

This picture is of our load volunteer looking rather pensive after that first test! We wanted to save this blank and mentioned in yesterdays post that we’d not follow the test through to an obvious conclusion if the result was going to be breakage. For this test, we did move the sawhorses closer together and we didn’t leave the load on the old school Flyboy Wakesurf composite sandwich construction test blank. Again, no external lamination on this test blank, except for the carbon fiber wrapping the rails. As you can see in the picture there is significant deflection. Not like the 2 pound EPS which snapped, but it’s obvious from the picture that the blank is struggling to support that weight.

Testing 2 pound 016

We didn’t have a stringered blank that we could sacrifice for this test, but you saw the result with the unlaminated 2 pound density foam. We have one more test that we want to show you with a high density structural foam that you’d commonly find in high end skim style boards. We definately don;t want to break that, because it’s ridiculously expensive, but we’ll start applying some weight and let you see the results of that test. Be sure to check back tomorrow for more hijinx!

Thanks so much for follow along, we appreciate it!

Technorati Tags:

Share

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

go to ajlee
View in: Mobile | Standard