Slater's Teahupoo quiver
And here we have shaper Greg Webber with seven fresh sleds for Kelly to ride in Tahiti. They include a 5'10", 5'11", 6'1", and a 6'3" in case the back end of the waiting period starts to bomb.
They all classify as Banana Boards however Greg says the rocker has generally been reduced. "The rocker isn't extreme, but it's more than a standard board," says Greg.
That said, there's a 6'1" amongst them that's "maybe the most rockered board I've made for Kelly." The same board is just 18 1/4 wide which puts Kelly's heel closer to the rail for increased sensitivity. There are no flyers on that one. "It's too narrow," explains Greg.
"I have a feeling that'll be the board for him."
All the boards are PU construction, however Greg has reversed the usual glassing plan so the heavier glass is on the bottom. So rather than a 6 ounce deck with 4 ounce bottom, these have 4 ounce decks with 6 ounce bottoms.
"I want the boards to resist flex," says Greg by way of explanation. "I want them to be firm underfoot. For the boards to work correctly they shouldn't flex too much."
Check the Billabong Pro Tahiti early forecast.
Comments
"All the boards are PU construction, however Greg has reversed the usual glassing plan so the heavier glass is on the bottom. So rather than a 6 ounce deck with 4 ounce bottom, these have 4 ounce decks with 6 ounce bottoms."
Hmm, ok ... so NOT using Firewire construction technology then? Interesting.
"reversed" the glassing schedule ... Hmm. Let's think about this. "MOST" boards these days are glassed in the standard 4x4x4 schedule, so two layers of 4oz on the deck and one layer of 4oz on the bottom. Heavier on the deck, lighter on the top. But, what's just been told to us here is that Kelly has been getting his boards with a 6oz deck and 4 oz bottom. Interesting.
Now, the swap around ... so, 6oz bottom and 4 oz deck for them "to resist flex" and "feel firm underfoot" ... because? "for the boards to work correctly they shouldn't flex too much". So this begs the questions, in my kook designer mind:
1. What was the glassing schedule on the 'old' banana boards from years ago?
2. Was flex just as much of the design as rocker, that I for one never realised?
3. Or, is that a wave specific issue due to the power, shape and type of wave at chopes?
4. What about the average board, should we all be swapping the glass schedule?
5. With 'less flex' will they be more likely to break?
Fuck, it's too much for my kook designer brain at this time of day. I'm going to need more coffee to fire up the cells ...
Gotta hand it to Greg, he's continuing to use design elements to good use in differentiating himself and his boards / his brand from other shapers / designers / brands.
I do wonder though, with all the cross branding and marketing of "webber" and "slater designs" and "firewire" too for that matter, whether the average surfer knows who to contact for a board, or whether what the average joe gets is anywhere near what say slater or for that matter, Stu, were or are riding?
Wingnut , you are spot on , not much sense out of GW on this one .
All stepup boards go to a 6oz on the bottom from all 4oz , and having 2 oz extra on the bottom does very little to the flex , what stringers is he using , the poly propylene , which is just high density foam and not very stiff , now this has a real affect on flex!
Would be nice when GW says he still uses more rocker than a normal board , and actually know the numbers, does he know?
are they glassed in Polyester or Epoxy?
OK to start of with Firewire are totally happy for me to develop any new shape or modification to the banana in PU first and then Kelly, the technical guys at Firewire and I discuss how to do it in their tech. I'm toying with sets of kindergarten 'blocks' when using the standard layups in Polyester and glass and PU foam, while they have an almost infinite range of sandwich structures, timber materials, and all manner of fibres all vacuumed together in epoxy. Nevertheless sometimes simple things like putting the single six on the bottom and the single four on top have enough of an effect on flex to steer a shift in what we might do next, using their methods.
The key thing that's being left out of this discussion is that the banana, with its curved deck-line is effectively ruining the rigidity of even a standard glassing layup purely due to the geometry of the sandwich structure. If a very flat rockered board is bent by putting a force or a weight on the deck at it's centre (just to keep it easy to imagine) then the load is trying to stretch the bottom (which the glass doesn't like) and so it will be transferred to compressing the deck. If the rocker is zero (like a door) then the sandwich structure will resist to the maximum of the materials being used. If the structure is curved already, using the exact same materials, then the transfer of force from stretching of the bottom glass to compressing of the deck will still happen, but the curved deck will have far less capacity to rest that inwards compression force since it's already bent. The shape is totally influencing the flex, vastly more than the materials that are being used in surfboards today. And with the centre of surfboards being thicker and wider than the ends then this stiffness at centre is accentuated. So the banana is already weakening the structure so much that they flex almost too much and when you already have a lot of curve, that additional twang can lead to an overly responsive ride. That's why I put the 6 on the bottom to resist the flex, and dropped the rocker a bit. Both things added up to probably the best combination or resistance and response. Which leads to a free and loose board that still has hold and drive.
So GW , Kellys boards are PU/Polyester?
Do you glass kellys board with only a 4 oz on the deck and a 6 oz bottom?
Do any other shapers ,eg Hawaii use Banana rockers?
Do you always lower the rocker when you use a 6 oz bottom?
So you drop the rocker in Kellys surfboards which leads to a "free and Loose board that still has hold and drive," all because add 2oz extra on the bottom of a board,really?
Yes.
Only recently , the ones he used in Fiji were the first.
Probably not full bananas but I did a semi banana for Corey Lopez for teahupoo about ten years ago and he said he liked it. Or maybe it was Shea actually.
Nope the drop in rocker isn't linked to the 6oz bottomed a rule of course, it's just to decrease the flex since the board is already responsive just due to shape.
The slight drop in rocker and the slightly stiffer bottom glass and the slight increase in rail volume all combined to add the stable certain solid feel to the free loose qualities that bananas have in excess. It's mental as well of course. Once a surfer gets that solid feeling on their board then they sometimes jump up a level. There's no need at all to have twang when waves are hollow and solid and fast and demanding.
Wingnut you will need the opposite to coffee with that much going on. Maybe the STFD approach for the brain.
Does that mean one 4oz on deck & one 6 oz bottom ? Calling it reverse glassing is a big claim for nothing much by the sounds of it . Reverse glassing moreso means you glass the deck first then the bottom , now that might be interesting
Caml you are dead right that the term 'reverse glassing' is probably overstating the significance of the change, but what's been pretty sillyfor decades is that we have glassed the decks stronger purely to resist denting for aesthetic and retaining dollar value reasons, as against anything to do with it's influence on flex.
In addition we a always try to cut the bare minimum off the deck to keep the foam as strong as possible while chewing the crap out of the bottom foam and add to weakness by glassing it with a pathetic little 4! This combo works best with low rockers, (which need some help flexing) while the same level of glass both side works with moderate rockers and then the reverse applies best for high rockered boards.
Im not sure exactly how the flex would change to much reversing the glassing schedule?
Id actually would have thought the opposite glassing schedule would be a little stiffer.
But id have thought flex would be influenced mostly by the stringer and thickness of glass on the rails.
But i guess to a surfer of his level, the most tiny variable can make a difference.
The thing you have to remember is these boards are most likely just built for this one wave which is unique and for the best surfer to ever live and there purpose is just to win or get as far as possible in a comp.
While for an everyday average surfer like myself I'm looking for very different things in a board, a board that can perform in a variety of conditions and one that is going to last.
I guess with the wave being all about just making the drop holding a line and gunning for the exit a stiff board may have and advantage in regard to helping get speed, while if it was a banana board made for top to bottom surfing in the pocket a board would benefit from more flex from the coil type action and be more forgiving, bumps and lumps, landing airs etc.
strengthening the deck with more glass to resist compression nose to tail ( i don't mean denting from feet downwards but compression nose to tail from flexing the board ) doesn't resist that force since the glass can just concertina which is what happens when a board creases. It's the foam which needs to resist compression. So when we hardly cut anything off the deck then the foam resists compression nicely but the curve of the deck rocker ruins whatever transfer of forces there would be made into the foam since the shape of the deck dominates. Sorry guys but there is no way this is going to be easy to explain and it's only estimations of mine based on decades of trial and error not any scientific testing on boards in the lab. Although one year in Hawaii all boards we made at Insight had exactly the same amount of foam cut off the deck and bottom when machining, and exactly the same glass deck and bottom (6 and 6, or 2x4 and 2 x4) and not one board broke, so even though it's only one year, that hints at how much can be influenced by changing the priority between deck and bottom. ( i.e. either deck biased, balanced both sides, or bottom biased)
Upside down Kelly.Its easier to do air reverses with reverse glassing .
I'd rather steal one if his boards and pull it apart to see what they are actually doing . This sounds like ruse . You know how much people tend to speculate on what Kelly is doing . This way Greg gets to spruik revolutionary change / cutting edge design change , and Kelly gets to play mind games with his opposition as per usual .
What's the bet it's simple stuff . Imagine how hard to do or finish , the Lapps would have to be altered !? Obviously the foam could be adjusted to allow for this , I still think they are actually looking for flex , ie less is more . Or perhaps camel you are again influencing everyone , if they are going stiffer underneath then that's going to mimick esky lid esque feel response . Camel being a bit of a booger officianado , what's your thoughts on this ?
Southey - thedingshop insta last pic ....scifi ..hmm
that's no 18mm wide aerospace composite stringer ?
https://www.google.com.au/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=...
Udo do you mean the one of Kellys broken in two floating in......looks like a normal stringer?
Udes.
I don't want to look at the outside , only way to look at it properly is to rip it up .
Those dark lines can hide a lot . If they can just be a bit of a visual . If it just a carbon fiber strip then it's too narrow to be of worth . What's under it might be another thing .
If it all could be just like this
" https://www.facebook.com/groups/1068159989882540/permalink/1198290416869...
Well I reckon that after simon A made the thrusters people would tell simon how they have begun using 3 fins & its working well and simon would nod his head and say yep . Any board that has one 4oz deck is promoting disposable surf product . Stringers have huge effect on flex . I dunno southey im going to sleep
Looking from the forecast, i think maybe a few flatter boards would suffice considering swell direction i.e . Point teahupoo.
Personally i feel the surfboard industry needs to become a more professional, educated, industry. I sometimes cringe at the goobly gook i read from really well known shapers, not so much from greg ( even though i am posting my opinion here). it's just hard to stomach some of the marketing hyperbole i read from these people.
No matter how well you glass a surfboard, if you sand it , finish coat it , install accessories (fin boxes) even resin tint it. YOU ARE REDUCING THE STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY OF THE PRODUCT.
There are set mathematical equations for resin to catalyst.
Any sanding will weaken the structural integrity.
Any board shaped under a certain thickness will flex and under perform.
Any board glassed in two stages will be significantly WEAKER.
I sometimes feel the surfboard industry lives in the dark ages on purpose!
Nice post Lanky Dean, not sure if anyone's doing it but a full board vac bag would do the trick,is that possible? Agree soon as the sander touches the cloth you've lost integrity, there must be a better way!
For starters I don't think "reverse" glassing is going to do shit except compress the deck everytime he stands up. If you think about it, theres a 6 and a 4 lapping on the rail no matter which way its glassed, so that's not going to affect the flex of the board. You're absolutely right, surfboards have worked brilliantly for ages, they've got the formula down pat, so if it ain't broke don't try and fucken fix it. I'm all for improvements in technology in design and construction, but only if it's going to work. And this clearly is a step in the wrong direction. (was that too much?)
As for the sanding part of it, spider, they usually put a hot coat of filler resin to cover the weave of the glass. Any sander worth his salt shouldn't even touch the glass, and this is where you can tell how shit those chinese boards are because apart from the crap glass and resin they use, there're burn throughs all over the place, because they just simply don't give a shit.
Reverse glassing is just getting a reaction due to perception of the term "reverse" which highlights something novel, but guess what it is novel, since it's very rarely done.
The deck compression is being traded off for changing the flex of the board that's already very responsive.
The glassing 'formula' that's been working for ages is purely based on making a board last longer on the deck but not to resist flexing or snapping. Reverse glassing might lead to more dents but will certainly reduce the chance of snapping a board to some degree. So if this ever gets into mainstream production then the customer can then use their own brain and choose which way they want to steer their glassing, more dents and less flex and snapping, or less dents and more flex and snapping. The more rocker in the centre of the board (as against nose and tail flips) the more you want to strengthen the bottom.
There's a lot of hocus pocus out there regarding board design and construction. I wasn't really expecting you to entertain plebs like us who have no idea. I guess that kelly could ride a table at chopes and make it look good (He's done it, not at chopes tho, I have the video). My opinion for what its worth is that in order for there to be development we need to try new things. Only then can we see the crap that doesn't work and this goes to the scrap pile. In the end we as kooks can all be the beneficiaries of the things that DO work. Keep up the good work and never stop pushing the limits because thats the only way that we can possibly know where the limits are.
PS I'm not backpeddling............. Ok maybe a bit. And besides why would Kelly care if he breaks a board, he'll just get another one. As long as it doesn't break in the middle of a perfect 10
What about 4x4 on the deck and 6 on the bottom? Good strong board for the average punter in bigger waves.
4x4 deck is your standard light glassing. Unless it's a particularly dense blank, they get pressure dings pretty easy.
Think about this if you got a sheet of flat 6oz fibreglass/resin and a sheet of 4oz fibreglass/resin the length of a board would there be much difference between the two in flex?
The majority of strength (residence to flex) in a surfboard is in the rail and the stringer and even the rail shape probably has a bearing on flex.
yes indo you are so right, but only in the first phase of the flex. The stringer and the rail structure are what resist flex initially when a force is applied since their shapes (an 'I' beam for the stringer, and a half 'box section' for each rail) resist the forces more than the materials, but it's the entire bottom of the board which resists flex in the last part of the flexing moment. This is because the entire bottom of the board is being stretched and the heavier glass is resisting this flex the more it progresses.
seems like you know a lot about flex in surfboards , so where does the surfboard flex most , in the middle ,or the nose and tail because they are thinner , is the flex even all over the board?
God knows Sharkman. It's not the usual way a beam or engineered structure might be flexed with the two ends held firm and a force applied at the centre, since the surfer is putting his feet somewhere either side of a point which is about a third up from the tail. And of course the width of the surfer's stance will accentuate the flex if his feet are close together. But overall the flex is pretty even despite the thinner ends. I made a board with concave deck and bottom that was about an inch thick at the stringer and even though the nose was paper thin the board still flexed normally. But I did ride an early Salomon which could flex about 10mm at either end just by leaning it against something and pushing it, and while surfing it, it flexed radically from my back foot backwards actually slowing the board hugely during tight turns but the board also dug in like crazy at the same moment so there's potential for more grip due to flex so long as it's dampened and doesn't return to original curve too quickly just as you unweight. Tom Curren rode a super flexy Maurice Cole at Haleiwa once (yellow board or rails and no stickers) and that thing flexed enough that you could see it springing out of turns and most of the time it was a big advantage. But I don't think any of us have a super clear idea on what's happening at those transition moments.
yeah flex is a very hard thing to measure , what are your ideas on Torque and Torsion as opposed to flex?
Not sure yet with torsion and I don't see much happening torque wise in a whole board except for the bending of raked fins with a narrow base. I don't think it's of great help allowing a board to twist on its stringer axis though. It'd lose grip. But so hard to get a feel for it since I've never ridden a board that flexed that way. Once our weight goes to the inside rail on a hard turn I'm pretty sure the flex is even from rail to rail. Or not twisting the board throughout its length.
If you could hypothetically get a 4 and 2 and resin and compare this with a 6 and resin the difference is a lot due to the fact that the lighter glass has a tighter weave and you end up with more glass to resin ratio which makes it stronger and lighter and presumably would also have different flex characteristics. PS I'm not an expert but I love discussing this shit coz I love learning
PPS Hey Greg here's an idea for Kelly's next board......LOL
The lighter glass is stronger?? Really?
You actually can get a smaller weave 4, Watched a glasser use it as an experiment on a standard board.
Said person had a little trouble with cloth saturation.A larger amount of unsaturated cloth was discovered. Increased labour was also needed to properly glass the board. (Which was surprising given he had extensive experience in the surfboard and boat building industry.)
Cloth saturation, cloth weave direction, outside temperature, all play deciding factors....on the strength of any board. Glass weave should not run perpendicular + parallel to the stringer.
Yeah ok, that's interesting.
Good stuff LD
yeah for sure the ratio between the glass and resin influences everything and the higher the glass to resin ratio the more twangy the feel. A heavily resin loaded twisted weave glassed at room temp and pressure will always feel softer or duller underfoot than a vacuum bagged high fibre to resin matrix of the same thickness.
Do Stringers have any affect the twang , or the thickness of the board , or the blank ( think varial or Geo) ?
Glass ,
Top 4x4
Bottom 6
?
or
Top 4 (single layer)
Bottom 6
?
The idea with the single six bottom is to actually not have the fibre to resin ratio be quite high but the other way around. A firm but doughy feel that would offset the responsiveness of the high rocker and deep concave. The more twisted the weave the more resin gets in the gaps and the softer the feel underfoot like a shock absorber verses a spring.
The boards are glassed
Single 6 bottom, single 4 top .
Most strength gained from laps on rails then.
Interesting, hope your boards do well !
Keep up the good work PIONEER !
GW mentions above that the decks were glassed heavier more or less from an aesthetic standpoint and for resale. In the past I've had a couple of lightly glassed magic boards that had nice big compressions from my front foot and I liked it. Like the sweetspot in a tennis racket or a nice pair of sneakers worn in, if my foot was in the compression I was in the zone- ha ha!
Thanks Zenagain, that saves me mentioning it. Those dents get you closer to the water too which doesn't hurt. and yep they are in exactly the right spot since that's exactly where your feet are when you're putting down your hardest turns.
the foot dents on the deck are like scars on our bodies. it's a record of something significant that's happened. In surfing it's from hundreds of hard turns. I don't think we should worry so much about them.
Fascinating reading Greg.
im glassing my next board in sikaflex
SN, get rid of the other opinionated forum chats. This is the chat we should be having. Great reading and feedback.
Thanks GregW, great info. Now I will have some info to pass on to my young bloke. He will learn something.
I like this video to demonstrate flex, particularly the landing/impact with lip at 0.38
I'm not sure if the rails resist flex more than the entire section of board between them, even with the double glass on the rails. Yes the rails are stronger than a square section of similar width and thickness glassed top and bottom only, but if you look at this sketch its hard to believe that the two rails would resist force even more than the much wider beam. I've taken the curves and the stringer out to simplify the comparison. There is a huge amount of load spreading with the much greater surface area between the rails, deck and bottom, and so this is where the bulk of the resistance is. It's just that the rails were ignored as half box sections for a while and so they get mentioned as though they are some hidden factor.
Fiberglass strength ,
One layer of glass has X amount of strength.
two layers of glass are X +Y .
two layers are said to have 5 x X + Y in strength.
Two layers have superior bond adhesion.
Thus resulting in 5 x more strength in rails of board, in single 6(X) x 4(y) Glass schedule.
Not really.
Sure the glass thickness helps but its the rail shape the gives it strength.
It's like trying to break a wooden ruler, put it flat and horizontal ad try to snap it, it will bend and break easily, turn it on its side thin side up and try to snap it and it would be impossible using only downwards force.
Exactly the same as a stringer it gives it strength because of the way it sits, not because of its thickness.
Actually, ..........really
this post is to explain the difference in strength between single layer and multiple layer glass schedule . bond adhesion >
please re read post indo .
Fair enough then, sorry i read it wrong.
PS. Great to see the reply from Greg.
OK, cheers Greg for your comments. As others have said, this 'discussion' is great. Sheesh, I'd rather be sitting around having a beer discussing board design than listening to the usual topics of how hard done some bloke was at the footy tribunal. If the chance arouse, I'd relish the opportunity to chew that fat with someone like Greg.
Just back to a couple of finer details ...
LankyDean wrote:
"Fiberglass strength ,
One layer of glass has X amount of strength.
two layers of glass are X +Y .
two layers are said to have 5 x X + Y in strength.
Two layers have superior bond adhesion.
Thus resulting in 5 x more strength in rails of board, in single 6(X) x 4(y) Glass schedule."
Which is also my kook understanding of 'how' cloth and resin works. It's why, as I understand, pool builders and boat builders use layers of chopped cloth.
So, back to what I wrote in my initial comment to this article:
"... "MOST" boards these days are glassed in the standard 4x4x4 schedule, so two layers of 4oz on the deck and one layer of 4oz on the bottom. Heavier on the deck, lighter on the top. But, what's just been told to us here is that Kelly has been getting his boards with a 6oz deck and 4 oz bottom. Interesting."
The key 'difference' being Kelly is riding boards with only one layer of cloth (deck or bottom), and hence a few different factors come into play:
1. As LankyDean notes about the bond strength, and
2. The rails will have one less layer of cloth
I'd love the budget, time and facilities at ready hand to test some idea's.
Good stuff Greg. Thanks for the informative discussion.
One of the boards seemed to get Kelly out of a tight spot at chopes. How'd he make it through that end section?
EDIT - nope, sorry - looks like it wasn't one of Greg's boards at all. No "W" logo on it.
Wow Kellys surfing soooo good on those boards well done GW if its yours hes on ,that heat where he scored the double 10 is vintage Slater.
Kelly is looking so on point with these boards. That last turn out of the barrel was so vertical and critical but also so on rail and perfect!
Kelly on fire
Kelly you're a freak.
John John- awesome.
Medina surfed well.
Glad it din't come down to a punt-off.
Give Kelly a wildcard entry to chopes for the rest of his life.
Looks like Kelly wasn't riding the Webbers.
On more conventional equipment, and rode a thruster in the Final.
Was wondering that, they didn't have the same W logo on.
Yep, definitely no "w" logo on the boards Kelly rode. Very obvious in the post final footage when he is on the jetski heading to the interview with PM. And, yep, a thruster too ... maybe, Kelly has worked out the quad's are what's holding him back from winning the events?
Yep, definitely no "w" logo on the boards Kelly rode. Very obvious in the post final footage when he is on the jetski heading to the interview with PM. And, yep, a thruster too ... maybe, Kelly has worked out the quad's are what's holding him back from winning the events?
pretty sure he rode a quad for some heats.
Not on finals day from what I could see
you're right, he rode the thruster all finals day.
And now I'm curious about the fins he used ... ???
Looked almost manageable for mere mortals out there. No doubt pretty terrifying if you were actually in the water there.
Freeride - I remember from previous articles of yours that you've given it a crack at that size - possibly a bit bigger - how tricky is it to read/position etc?
Anyone else surfed Chopes in similar conditions to what the comp was run in?
the south ones are doable.....anything near that W bowl is just terrifying, even at 3ft.
Cheers.
Do they hit different parts of the reef or do you find out whether it's a 'South' or 'West' wave once you're well and truly under the ledge?
I could imagine it'd be like surfing any other slabby reef.
Can tell the thick wide ones coming in, walled up down the reef before you even take off, while the more south ones don't have that and come in from deeper down the reef.
The SW ones are the worst...they look south and run along the reef nicely then bend and lump at the end coming back at you waaaay too deep on the south line...but yes totally heavy pound for pound at even 3 ft!!
What are the fins he used?
http://imgur.com/a/sFjSA