Evolution Cedrus

1

A lot to digest here, but looks pretty interesting.

I may have overlooked it, but I’m very curious how they can keep the drag increase relatively linear as more of the mast is submerged, given the unusual chord profile. Perhaps the chord and thickness both change in tandem to account for this? Can’t really tell in the photos. I know that the “drag curve” on a tapered mast is noticeable, and this is obviously much more dramatic.

Kudos to Kyle for thinking outside of the box and bringing this to the market. Would love to try one.

3 Likes
2

Man, I keep hearing this business about drag
being more related to chord length than thickness but I can’t for the life of me back it up with foil sim. What am I missing?

Also, real life tells me that skinny masts are more slippery.

Finally, sailboat design and racing literature has had a 10% thickness to chord ratio for wetted foils as the ideal since FOREVER! I get it it’s a different application but I can’t for the life of me wrap my head around 15% t/c being more slippery than 10%. What am I missing?

1 Like
3

@TooMuchEpoxy it sounds like you’re just confused by the differences between drag coefficient and drag force. I have already posted many resources on this forum and on my site addressing these, but I will offer one last example using my new masts as a point of reference.

Both masts are 16mm thick in the piercing region. Evolution wind has 130mm chord length, so the t/c is 12.3. Evolution surf has only 110mm chord length, so the t/c is higher at 14.5. The profile of Evolution Surf has a higher drag coefficient, but the mast itself has less total drag force, because there is less wetted area.

I really don’t know what else to say. I’m being honest and open when I say Evolution Wind has more drag than Evolution Surf. I’m not going to lie and say Evolution Wind is more ventilation resistant and also magically more slippery through the water due to a lower drag coefficient. It has more surface area, due to a longer chord length, and therefore more drag. But both masts have the same thickness.

Not going to address your comment on sailboat design, but I can tell you it’s a lot easier to design a 10% t/c foil when it’s 6’ long and non-structural.

7 Likes
4

Well done Kyle.
Your new masts look awesome.
Keep doing what you do to make foiling more cross compatible and sustainable.

5 Likes
5

I for one am on the Cedrus train. I haven’t tried the new masts, and I can’t make an opinion on whether it works. But more than anything else, I really appreciate the sustainable approach to building sporting equipment. He isn’t using cheap labor in countries with relaxed environmental regulations in order to cut costs. So many of the brands are putting out gear to hit price-points. Similar to what I am hearing about appletree - bringing production local with passionate well treated employees and modern environmentally conscious thinking. For me, this is worth a lot. When I can, I want to do every small thing I can do for the future of both the earth, but also humanity. Thank you Kyle.

10 Likes
6

Super interesting, Kudos @ProjectCedrus for doing something different, I like the idea of the prone mast a lot, and like what you did with the wing mast.

I reckon this is the better first thing to look at. Pretty dense reading in the other articles

The design intent article is super interesting, but honestly it is difficult to parse. I appreciate that no one else puts the level of detail to their design and engineering process, but the article is way too dense. Paragraphs, bullets, highlights etc will go a long way as I can barely follow despite some real interest. See this section, put it in hemingway and chop out some words.

TLDR? I started but then felt like I couldn’t get a straight number so gave up. For each mast, thickness and chord for each section, and why. Honestly a super interesting approach that is lost in the density.

(I wasn’t sure if you would be interested in this kind of feedback but honestly I feel like worthwhile to convince people of a pretty novel design)

1 Like
8

Agree, it was difficult for me figure out what was going on in the description. Maybe my attention span is just too short or I’m finally burnt out on the whole mast comparison thing.

The only real hope would be to ride it :nerd_face:

9

Speaking of riding, it seems like these have just been made, so have they not been ridden much yet?

10

They are being revealed today at AWSI in the Gorge and first public rides.
Interesting that wing& prone have almost opposite looking profile, the blog explanation makes sense but it’s like reading a philosophy book haha

1 Like
11

It all kind of makes intuitive sense with what Kyle has been preaching. The longer chord offers more drag/less glide but more ventilation resistance.

Wind - higher speed/power focus. Prioritize ventilation at the expense of glide. Longer chord.

Surf - lower speed/power focus. Prioritize glide at the expense of ventilation (not as much of a concern at surf speed). Shorter chord.

I still wonder how noticeable the ramp up in drag will be as you go above or below the areas where the chord changes. The difference between a tapered and non-tapered mast is noticeable in the ramp-up of drag, and this design kind of “concentrates” that taper into a few inches.

Also wish he would quantify the difference in drag above and below the chord taper. How much drag is the increased chord on the wind model adding and how does it compare to other masts (some of which don’t really have the ventilation issues this is solving)?

3 Likes
12

Another factor: when wave riding with a wing, the wing is by far the biggest drag factor IMHO.
Placed an order for the wing version (I don’t prone, just wing in wind powered waves)

13

Looks sick, @ProjectCedrus when you have a chance I would love to see the specs in each mast regarding there differing regions. Like the chords, thickness in each mid and top/bottom section. I could find some of the information on your long blog post but not all.

14

Hey Everyone, thanks for your interest. I appreciate the support. This being said, I’m probably going to take a step back from the forums for a bit. I get people telling me I write to much, then people asking for more, it’s a lot of [thankless] work. I will just let the masts speak for themselves, like all the other brands. I mean seriously try to google the mast sections for any other brand :sob:. It all kinda makes me wonder I should be so open and honest with my designs, especially when so much engineering, thought, and my savings goes into them.

The 75cm Evolution Surf went on a 20 mile downwinder today in the Gorge with the new Unifoil Nimitz board and Progression 200-rider loved it. I winged the 85cm Evolution Wind with the Spitfire 1030, it was amazing. What I realized riding today, was that if the mast is really good, you shouldn’t even feel it. And I didn’t. Maybe you all know that. It sliced the water like a butter knife, and tracked unlike anything I have ever felt. The Evolution Wind is by far the stiffest mast at the show, and the longer chord length down low is attributable to that. It was instantaneous feedback with the foil, critical for my beginner wing skills.

As for sections, the easy way to put it is that both masts are 16mm thick about 50mm from the bottom and 50mm from the top of the shortest length. That is constant thickness, no weird lofting or tapering. The surf is 110mm chord length, and the wind 130 in these regions. Above these points, the masts are 19 or 20mm thick x 120mm chord length, respectively, all the way to the mount. It leads to an incredibly stiff setup in the longer lengths, and an all around more progressive feel. As ride height increases, you don’t have a massive drop off in drag due less submerged length and less wetted area due to tapering. It’s a much shallower drag vs. length curve-which is something you may or may not want. I personally like it. I don’t like the drag changing dramatically depending on ride height. I’d rather have more consistent drag, even if it’s a little more, because that is more predictable and forgiving. The last thing I want when I’m foiling near the end of my mast is for speed to pick up and lift to increase. Also as I’ve discussed at length in other blogs, foiling to close the surface is not efficient for wings. They like to be around 1/2 span length from the surface for most efficient flight. That’s not my opinion, that’s from America’s Cup foil designers. The surface is not an efficient place to fly, it’s why dolphins completely exit the water and jump to breathe, and then swim well below the surface. Breathing and swimming near the surface is not efficient.

Anyway I’m super stoked with how today went. It was a great show, and there’s a lot of great gear here. Both masts showed well; people really loved the designs, but more importantly they rode really well. It was pretty cool to walk around the show and pull out an adapter for Unifoil and another for Axis and be foiling the latest designs. It was so great to meet Eric in person after his podcast largely got me into this whole market. Stay tuned for a new episode re: evolution designs! Thanks again to everyone who’s been supportive of me and the project, it really means a lot.

18 Likes
15

Saw an Evolution Cedrus out in the wild last weekend - and I gotta say, it looked awesome and very sleek! The varying profile/width was quite subtle, and the rider was giving good reviews - and dropped me on the downwind leg, so there’s a data-point, hahaha!

1 Like
16

Ya man, #1 rule in entrepreneurship is to take feedback from the customer but you will never please everyone. Forums are for keyboard jockeys. You don’t see the designer of Armstrong or Tesla trolling around in forums (with their real names/projects anyway). Too many know-it-alls. It’s a bottomless pit of energy drain and frustration. You have to set boundaries. Good on you for trying and thanks for everything you shared thus far. Enjoy stepping back. You earned it.

6 Likes
17

Should be a new award for next year