So "flexible torsion box" does not refer to torsion flex. A little confusing, but ok... I think flexing robs speed by wasting energy. Boards need to flex for other reasons, but gaining speed is not one of them. Added weight makes sense to me for some of your design goals... greater momentum to drive through sections being a big one. But what you state as a "simple matter of physics" is, in my opinion, based on my design theories, is an oversimplification. I do not overemphasize gravitational potential energy in design theory based on the idea that the wave itself... the movement of water... determines to a large degree what design features will work best. And here I am referring to boards of light weight and relatively small size when compared to yours. Concaves, fins, rail edges, template... all come together for the purpose of managing wave energy and the movement of water up the face of the wave and toward the beach. Gravity is a constant force, and easily dealt with from a design perspective. All the other factors that relate to energy input into the board/wave/rider "system" (for lack of a better term) mean much more to me than you... or so it seems to me at this point in our conversation. And I agree that rider input, aside from weighting and unweighting, is a relatively small component in the equation. Where does "lift," in the vernacular of surfboard design, come into play in your designs?
http://www.exo.net/~pauld/activities/surfing/physicsofsurfing.html Roy gives gravity too much credit. Hydrodynamic forces are just as important.
It needs to br done correctly, the main mistake I see is making shortboards flex when it is really the province of long boards which are ridden from a central position. The load positions and fulcrum don't allow it to be effective for shortboards and mals and flex can indeed slow them down. Of course surfboard shape and hydrodynamic forces are vitally important, I was merely making the simple but often misunderstood point that the wave imparts energy to board and rider by lifting them, this lifting action imparts gravitational potential energy to the board and rider in proportion to their mass.... the wave does more work when lifting heavier objects. Since the vast majority of the energy which drives board and rider is applied through gravity, there is no acceleration disadvantage for a heavier board and rider. It's not a matter of gravity OR hydrodynamic forces. That's a huge topic, where would you like to start? Surfboards use buoyant ( displacement based ) and planing ( dynamic) lift. We go to great lengths to tailor the distribution of both kinds of lift as required. High dynamic lift areas act as fulcrums, this needs to be understood when designing for flex, I haven't seen anyone else ever use this approach, but it is vital. http://www.roystuart.biz/2009/10/buoyant-lift-and-planing-lift.html http://www.roystuart.biz/2013/01/the-displacement-tail-title-on-video.html http://www.roystuart.biz/2010/12/surfboard-flex-and-pressure.html http://www.roystuart.biz/2010/12/surfboard-flex-and-pressure_04.html
That's a ridiculous comment, and much of the information on the site is below par, for example this old chestnut of a myth: "You savor the rush of acceleration as tons of moving water push you faster and faster. " In reality the wave lifts the surfboard and rider, hydrodynamic forces are required for this to happen ( otherwise the board and rider would not lift, the wave would simply move over them) ... this lifting action imparts gravitational potential energy to board and rider, and it is this energy which moves the board as it is transferred into kinetic energy. When up and riding, the wave can directly push board and rider horizontally only when the rider is on the throwing lip, or when being pushed by whitewater. .
No, actually you have no concept of physics. There are multiple forces from the wave, and the speed of the wave is important for surfing speed. http://www.rodndtube.com/surf/info/info_images/SfrMagV10N3-69-07.pdf But I am sure you know more than someone with a PhD in physics.
In the videos you have posted of you surfing, I can see that you do gain a decent amount of speed and the added weight of the board actually looks like it helps to keep that momentum. Have you ever considered linking up with a surf shop on the east coast and maybe having a board there that people could demo, maybe pay like the cost of a board rental for a day, so that some of us could try it out...'cause i highly doubt any of us can afford one. Here is the website for one of the local shops around here, they would probably be more than happy to store and demo your board...http://www.chaunceyssurfshop.com/Tweets.htm
I disagree with this last statement completely. Typical modern surfboards move fastest on the face of the wave where the water is moving the fastest... and they do so because they are able to tap into that kinetic energy with design features I do not believe are present in your boards... nor should they. Roy... I'm convinced now more than ever, based on just your past few posts... that your boards work exactly the way you want them to, at least for now. I think I understand at least some of the principles upon which your designs are focused, and I think you have a solid understanding about how/why they work the way they do. And anyone who wishes to surf the way you do... the way your designs are intended to be ridden... would find your boards a lot of fun. Personally, I'm not interested. My surfing goals... what feels good to me when I'm up and riding... are very different from what I see in your videos. Whether your style of surfing... and the performance of your boards... is popular or not matters little to me. What the value of your boards are and who buys them matter even less. (People have spent obscene amounts of money on stranger things than what you have to offer the marketplace.)
I know Terry quite well, and have read that paper before. There's nothing there regarding the forces which drive board and rider which contradicts what I've said, and in fact the issue is not directly addressed there at all. When you refer to the 'speed of the wave' I assume that you are referring to the speed of the wave front towards the shore. Of course this speed affects the speed potential of board and rider, for the simple reason that increasing the speed also increases the rate at which the wave lifts ( all else being equal). This increases the rate at which the board and rider can acquire gravitationalpotential energy, and this allows board and rider to convert the potential energy into kinetic energy at a faster sustainable rate. This leads to greater speed ( again, all else being equal). The interaction between the surfboard and the water ( hydrodynamic forces) create necessary lift and allows control of the direction and trim angle of the board (and thus also the fall line as well) all of which is required for the acquiring and conversion of gravitational potential energy into kinetic energy. Hydrodynamic forces are also created via muscular input from the rider, these can be used to propel the board also. Please address your comments to the subject matter, without making spurious and illogical ad hominem and 'from authority' arguments. The argument from authority is particularly hopeless when it misinterprets what the information from the source actually implies.. as you have done.
That is true of all surfboards, and it is not only compatible with what i have said so far but is a necessary condition for it. The reason why surfboards can move fastest in the part of the wave where the water is moving the fastest is due to the fact that the water lifts board and rider there, in addition the steeper slope allows reduction of wetted surface area. That is correct.. and that kinetic energy is primarily a lifting force, which is transferred into gravitational potential energy and back into kinetic energy, this time of board and rider. .
There's a 13 foot 'Ghost' model in San Francisco at present which is bound to make its way to the East Coast, it's a good all round board which isn't as fast as the 12-9 tunnel finned board in the latest video but still has a good turn of speed. .
Here is my own gross oversimplification... Wind pushes laterally across the beam of a sailboat. The sails catch the wind, which applies a lateral force upon the boat. The mast transfers that force to the keel and hull, which pushes laterally against the water. The water pushes back on the keel with an unbalanced but opposite force. The result is forward motion. Water is the medium under a surfboard. The water moving up the face and toward the beach applies a lateral force against the fins and hull. Gravity pulls the rider down, applying an opposite but unbalanced force back against the fins and hull. The result is forward motion. And that's where your theory stops. I would continue, suggesting that modern surfboards surfed rail-to-rail can gain speed by turning, because turning requires rider input of energy into the system, which is used to change the angles of attack of the fins and bottom, tapping into the energy of the moving water within the wave. This applies in small waves moreso than large waves, when the wave supplies plenty of energy for speed. It also applies only to certain kinds of turns... not all turns... dependent upon a number of factors including fin foil, radius of turn, and bottom contours. Just as a sailboat can sail against the wind, surfboards can increase speed by adding wave energy to gravitational potential energy. This can only happen at certain angles of attack, not reached on your boards, and is more effective when the board/rider mass is reduced. This means modern shortboards may not have the momentum of your boards, and can't drive through sections like yours, but they can accelerate briefly.... attaining shortlived bursts of speed... through turning. It might attribute to what shortboarders refer to as "squirt?"
Roy, that's too much money to ask for for a surf board. It is insulting that you even post those ridiculous prices and I am appalled. Forgive me for not reading through the entire thread but what exactly would one get for that sum of money, what makes the boards so expensive, and how many have you sold?
He's not going to tell you. I also would like to know what material or design element or fabrication methods require the price to be so High.
Halftime. Here is your sponsored ad. When we return, huundreds of more posts about this mystical man and his half surf half art..... things (that are worth 3.5 billion each, or some other such ridiculous figure). [video=youtube;C4d4yZtMmmg]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C4d4yZtMmmg[/video]
I mean with a few hand tools and a garage i could replicate what your doing. You cant charge hundreds of thousands of dollars for something i can make myself. Lets take cars for example. I cannot build a Ferrari in my garage. A Mclaren F1 is a million dollar car. Space age technology at your fingertips, 0-60 faster than you can blink, and the ***** you would get in the car is unreal. Thats what a millionaire wants for a million bucks, not a peice of wood that does nothing. This guy cant grasp the concept. Hes going to use fancy words to make it seem like his boards are groundbreaking. His boards are super fast though? The next time i get challenged to a surf race ill think of gool ol' roy
Roy, Does it at least come with a leash? Is this Nigerian money? Whats a quarter size ding repair cost? $20,000.00? 500k and you can't go from 0-60 in under 4 seconds, AND you can't noseride? If you sell at least one you can buy that dream house on Mars. You smoke crack. Good luck.
It's not insulting. You are stupid for feeling that way. You get a wood board that is the best... Because I say so. You did not read the thread because you are not intelligent. I work on a wealth redistribution program. I sell to the super rich and make them the best surfers in the world. And if you can walk a longboard you're a kook. Go straight. It's the coolest. That cover it Roy?
sounds like you can't grasp the concept. anyone can charge anything they want for anything. price and value are not the same thing (and value does not equal cost of production). think about a painting that costs a million dollars that "does nothing" and only cost a few bucks to produce. who's to say what a millionaire wants and is willing to pay for?