Epic thanks @FoilThis I love my progression mast as it’s just so solid and responsive. Sure a little slower but having been through many wobbly masts with multiple brands in the past I appreciate its direct feel. And it makes sense re much wider span wings as there’s always a threshold where the thinner masts seem to experience flex/wobble.
1 Like
yeah.
Take a quick look here at range of possible stiffness between high quality carbon fiber - you can get it with stiffness from around 40 to around 85 Msi. That’s a range of 2X as stiff for the highest ultra high modulus versus standard modulus carbon.
Now consider that bending and torsional stiffness of a mast will roughly track with thickness to the third power.
So carbon fiber properties could get you a mast that is as much as twice as stiff if you pay for the good stuff.
Thickness of the mast going from 12mm to 15mm gets you about twice as stiff with no change in material properties.
2 Likes
So if the race mast is stiffer, faster and more efficient than the Katana, why would anyone still buy a Katana? And what is the new recommended biggest wing for the Katana then?
And is it really the width of the foil or the weight of the rider?
1 Like
I’d guess a variety of things. I would bet weight of rider, width of board, style of riding…
Hi Patrick, thanks for the info.
So the T80 will be higher chord and thicker than the R83? So stiffer/also usable with the bigger wider span evos?
Or could a lighter rider below 70kg risk using the 83R with the Evo 235 in a tiny lake bump downwind scenariio?
Will they be lighter?
What about base plate screw distances, reduced like the Prog80 or two holes each corner like the no limits?
cheers
Well this made the decision easy for me. Eric Geiselman posted this of his snapped mast this morning
1 Like
For what it’s worth, he’s broken a No Limitz mast, too.
3 Likes
It also looks like he beat the living shit out of that mast on the video.
1 Like
I think it’s been sanded to repair it. I don’t know how you could do that kind of damage to a mast unless you’re riding through lava 
Yeah, needs context, MOI.
Yeah but it is sanded the entire length of the mast heavy in multiple spots. Idk, if it truly wasn’t beat up and broke then I understand the post by him. Buuuut if it had been slammed multiple times prior and then broke, kinda iffy post from someone who probably got that mast for free and recently announced he’s leaving uni.
Could be just the sand dust I’m seeing too, so who knows
You need context I have snapped masts, recently snapped a Nolimitz. Is all in the context and how did it happen what will tell if it was a quality, fabrication or other issues. A carbon masts will snape on certain cirmcustances no matter the brand. Now if you want something that will never snap no matter what, then go for an aluminum mast.
1 Like
I’m honestly surprised we haven’t seen more of this as we’ve gone to the really high modulus carbon - the tradeoff for that stiffness is greatly reduced strength and elongation - meaning brittle materials subject to impact failures. That said, the masts have so much carbon in them to get them stiff besides just the fiber modulus that they end up reasonably strong anyway.
2 Likes
In marketing terms the new mast to expect will be called the evolution mast.
In all seriousness why not just follow either code or axis . You have hm and you have uhm. That’s it. Everything else is bullsht. It’s not like people are asking for more different kind of mast options from those brands
2 Likes
The thing is you can design a carbon laminate either strength limited or stiffness limited, not both at the same level. It’s always a tradeoff, there’s no such thing as a free lunch.
The higher the modulus ( material property for stiffness) of a carbon fibre, the lower its ultimate tensile strength (the tension at which a material breaks, eg. steel will start deforming permamently earlier at its so called yield strength, carbon laminates will break without much warning, even more abruptly the higher the modulus)
Tensile Stress = Modulus x Strain = (Bending Moment / Sectional moment of Inertia) x 1/2 Thickness of section
Maximum calculated (assumed) tensile stress x factor of safety <= Ultimate tensile stress
(where Tensile Stress is in N/mm2, Modulus N/mm2, Strain in %, Moment Nm, Moment of Inertia N/mm4, Thickness mm, Ultimate tensile stress N/mm2, factor of safety unitless)
So for a given mast section and bending moment, if you increase the modulus it will strain/elongate less for the same stress in the section of the mast… But as the ultimate tensile strength of the fibre goes down and you need to confront this with the maximum possible tensile stress, it will be less strong, not much leeway around this.
Question is, do you have access to eg. military grade fibres with less decrease in strength, or were your former safety factors very high anyway so you can play with it to some extent… or are your improved production methods and resins used mitigating some of it, etc…
Granted, you will use a certain compromise of fibre layups and directions to at least increase torsional stiffness (fibres at 45deg used for torsional stiffness get stressed less in the long 0deg direction important for bending), but there’s a limit(z) to what is achievable bending stiffness-wise AND strength-wise at the same time…i’ts definitely not more of UHM is simply just better…
Obviously lighter riders or lower span foils will induce less bending moment…
just saw your post after posting mine below…just beware that strength goes down with stiffness