Page 2 of 2
Posted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 5:29 am
by skidesmond
chrismp wrote:skidesmond wrote:Liberty can spell big words like quadaxial and but misspelled helps, heps.
I believe it's quadraxial
I'm probably the last person who should correct someones spelling/grammar. I found quadaxial and quadraxial used to specify the type of fiber glass, toss a coin.
Posted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 9:08 am
by MontuckyMadman
Its tough when you don't really know what you are building because your not building it and translating from chinese to engrish is difficult.
Posted: Tue Nov 19, 2013 5:43 am
by Richuk
Mattman,
Your results suggest it would be possible to attach the sidewall and machine from the bottom. Any forward/rear overhang of the durathane material could be pinned down to the planer sled, ideally stopping the sidewall being ripped off.
Posted: Fri Nov 22, 2013 5:05 am
by knightsofnii
my guess is they made the entire sidewall thinner than the core, as opposed to rabbeting.
And the question about "is it abs or uhmw" in the diagram.
They're talking about both, i guess depending on the ski it could have one or the other, if you look at the other material descriptions they describe different configurations there too.
so from what they said, the white sidewall is uhmw.
I bet the extra rubber or whatever sheet that is, is also helping keep the sidewall bonded. NS also uses rubber on top of the edge and also on both top and bottom of sidewall.. to prevent delams... I suppose due to thermal expansion/contraction/flex of the uhmw sidewall?
Posted: Mon Dec 02, 2013 4:27 am
by mattman
Wow, been busy and forgot to keep an eye on the thread. Knightsofnii, I was assuming it was for delam issues and the "smoothing out the ride" was just a line. Doesnt NS just use VDS though (for sidewall delam resistance), not this thick urethane layer? I just wonder how it is bonded in order to be an improvement over just going in the wet layup (it is stuck on well). As for quad glass, with a ski this wide I may actually see the point - the ski already convexes (sp?) from use. Though it seems that 0/60/-60 triax (of the same weight) would do the job better.
Falls and Skimann20, while the diagram makes it look like alternating bamboo strips, their "bamboo backbone" is really just three incredibly thin strips in a 90% poplar core. Also, there is no titanal and the rabbet seems to be built into the overall height of the sidewall strips. As requested:
