I have long enjoyed your various posts on Swaylocks about your measurement driven design methodology.
I would like to hear your your thoughts in general about scaling boards boards upwards or downwards lengthwise.
For example, I plan to scale down my one of my favorite guns from 9'2" to 8'6".
Existing dimensions are: 9'2" long x 20 3/4" wide x 11 1/2" nose width x 11/2" tail width x 3.5" thick, quad fins
Proposed dimensions are: 8'6" long x 3 3/8" thick (hopefully), width undecided, multi system fins (quad/tri).
I would like to keep about 3 3/8" of thickness to conserve as much volume as possible.
My existing 9'2" is right on the bulls-eye, to use your sniper metaphor. It's my go-to board for double overhead beach break and sand bottom points.
I also use it in head-high waves if it's crowded, otherwise I'm on a shortboard.
Conditions are often raw, choppy, sideshore windy, hollow, with strong currents and lots of paddling. Occasionally lined-up and firing.
I am 5'10 tall x 150 pounds. Average ability. 64 years old. Surf an average 10 to 12 times per month. Size 8 1/2 feet.
My quiver consists of variations of round pins from 6"6" to 10'0"
My objective with the 8'6" is to use it for the same conditions as the 9'2" - going shorter to increase manueverability, plus fit the curve of the wave better.
Predictable feel and "no surprises" when I spin around and take off are key for me.
What dimensions would you recommend for overall width, nose width and tail width and thickness for the new 8'6"?
I assume my friend and local gunsmith, using his CAD/CAM setup, can manage the proportions of the complex curves (template, rocker, rails, foil, etc.) as length is reduced.
Some dimensions for overall width, nose width, tail width and thickness would be a big help in keeping the design process on track.
Any suggestions and/or dimensions you can offer would be greatly appreciated.
Hi Bill,
A question on bottom rocker. How do you set up the various curves? What I mean is the nose rocker usually curves the most. Then you have the middle and tail rockers. Which of the two has a greater curve? For both short boards and step ups. And then what percentage of the board has entry or nose rocker, what percentage has the body, and what percentage is the tail rocker. And if I'm not going on too much, could you give your thoughts on rail compared to stringer rockers.
Thanks in advance!
Hi Bill, A question on bottom rocker. How do you set up the various curves? What I mean is the nose rocker usually curves the most. Then you have the middle and tail rockers. Which of the two has a greater curve? For both short boards and step ups. And then what percentage of the board has entry or nose rocker, what percentage has the body, and what percentage is the tail rocker. And if I'm not going on too much, could you give your thoughts on rail compared to stringer rockers. Thanks in advance!
Aloha everysurfer
Good question..... hard to answer. The reason is, is that over the years, I have come to learn that I often see things quite differently then other people and I form ways of doing things differenlty because of it. That said, I often get questions that are totally logical to ask but are phrased in ways that are hard for me to answer. Usually it is because the questions contain deep attachments to certain ways of thinking and perceiving things that are very familiar to the asker.
I try to always see things different and to frame them up in my mind in ways that are designed to break up habits, beliefs and presumptions. Since I am always beating myself up in these ways, it is often hard for me to reach in and express myself on a subject in a way that will be comfortable for the asker to hear.
I don't know how others view rockers. But I can tell by the way you have phrased your question, that you have a way of viewing rockers and you feel like maybe a majority of others do likewise.
I understand this view and don't disagree with it. But personally, I don't really break down rockers in that way. I don't design them so distinctively in 3 parts. I look at the whole curve and the total rocker amounts. All waves and riders require or desire certain kinds of rockers. Matching them up correctly is the challenge.
If we have to think in 3 parts..... Of the overall curve, the most important part is the middle as it governs the boards ability to plane well and move through the water comfortably. Without this the board will be an instant dog. The nose and tail are adjusted as needed to match waves and riders.
I don't think in terms of percentages or formulas that can be described easily. I view the flow, it is a more artistic approach. It can be described in numbers and needs to be for replecation, but it is the visualization that is the core creative process.
There is so much more to say about this and I have some great examples to clarify the importance of each. Maybe I can get back to each of these questions and further my comments to forthcoming questions or comments.
For now I have to run into Honolulu for errands and will post more tonight.
Sorry to everyone for being so out of touch the last few days. Shaun's board is now done and will packed and taken to the airport in a few minutes. When I get back in a few hours, I will be free to spend more time here and will answer questions more promptly and with better focus and time.
1. You've listed developing, and then watching others use your Measurement Control System as one of your greatest board-building accomplishments. But after a bit of Googling I can't turn up a full description of it. I've seen some descriptions (from others) of your rocker measurement at the stringer technique, but that's about it.
I'd really appreciate it if you could give us the full run-down on MCS as I believe it's still very relevant to backyarders these days; even though using software to get a pre-shape turned out on a machine has become fairly accessible nowadays for the DIY'er, if we come across a board we'd like to measure up, getting a board scanned or traced on a machine with a scribing tool is not as easy. Let alone trying to do it in the carpark after a surf and in the time it takes for the board's owner to go grab a coffee, drink it and come back again.
Mind you, if you've already described your system in full on Swaylocks and if anyone has a link to the thread it happened in, please post it so poor old Bill doesn't have to retype everything again.
2. You've managed to get out and play a lot over the course of your life (e.g. Surfing, MTB'ing, sailing, etc, etc), do you have any tips for others on how to accomplish this and still manage to keep the wife & kids happy(ish).
I asked Greg Loehr essentially the same thing while he was in the Hot Seat; his response was that getting out for a quick 30-minute surf most days (regardless of conditions) after work kept the surf-withdrawal symptoms in check.
But that just covers getting the minimum time in the water to deal with surf-withdrawal; most people want to get out and do as much as they possibly can (as it appears you've managed to do) and in as many different ways/sports/recreational past-times as they can. What tips have you got on how to accomplish that?
And y'know what, it'd be interesting to hear from Wendy on this topic too (a user-name like "Boss-o-Barnfield" might be the most accurate :) ) in order to hear their perspective on the matter, what they're willing to accept, or not, and most importantly, why. Sometimes the answers to that are surprising and allow you to figure out a way to accomplish what you were hoping to do and still manage to keep both parties happy (the key is you've got to ask in the first place).
On the other hand though, it might also be true that in some cases it would be better if the missus remained none-the-wiser as to some of the techniques you've figured out for playing with your various toys as much as possible; that info probably belongs in PM's to those interested, or perhaps posted in a "Secret Men's Business" forum (assuming Swaylocks has such a thing). I'll leave it up to you.
1. You've listed developing, and then watching others use your Measurement Control System as one of your greatest board-building accomplishments. But after a bit of Googling I can't turn up a full description of it. I've seen some descriptions (from others) of your rocker measurement at the stringer technique, but that's about it.
I'd really appreciate it if you could give us the full run-down on MCS as I believe it's still very relevant to backyarders these days; even though using software to get a pre-shape turned out on a machine has become fairly accessible nowadays for the DIY'er, if we come across a board we'd like to measure up, getting a board scanned or traced on a machine with a scribing tool is not as easy. Let alone trying to do it in the carpark after a surf and in the time it takes for the board's owner to go grab a coffee, drink it and come back again.
Mind you, if you've already described your system in full on Swaylocks and if anyone has a link to the thread it happened in, please post it so poor old Bill doesn't have to retype everything again.
Cheers!
Aloha L.I.T
I will answer your questions in a few separate replies. First some clarification and back story. I have past training and experience as a machinist. Everything in that world is machined to specific dimensions and tolerances. So, quite naturally, it was fairly normal for me to see surfboards in similar ways. Difficulte to do early on, due to hand and eye not being able to follow the blueprint that was in my head. As that improved, and it does quickly using MCS, I was able to shape to tighter and tighter tolerances and do so faster and faster.
Powerful as this was, the reasons for doing so weren't really necessary yet, nor was the need as obvious as it was soon to be.
Compared to today, design and shaping was more of a magic art and social endeavor. It was mostly a lot of guessing and shooting in the dark until real improvement was stumbled upon or one came up with a good marketing line to get them off the hook. Board dimensions were petty much limited to Length, Max Thickness and Template Widths. These original measurements, though important, were severely limiting compared to the full number sets needed to describle a board and hopefully predict its function through the use of the Scientific Method.
Have you ever noticed how certain things just can't happen until there is a complimentary convergence of several diverse factors. And once the "Thing" happens, all kinds of new offshoots to that thing also happen. GoPro is a classic example. It couldn't exist successfully without there first being ..... The removal of Social constraints against Narcissisim and Voyerism. YouTube and FaceBook being created. Digital imaging. Then Digital Video. Digital Compression allowing HD Video..... Then.... BINGO...... GoPro!
Similarily several factors converged to make MCS necessary. Not the least of which was Pro Surfing and the economics associated with it.
The limited data set that was known and compiled to describe boards before MCS was inadequate to solve the emerging needs of Pro Surfers who needed better ways to guarantee their boards performance so as to payback the investments of their sponsors with more consistent finishes on the podium........ BINGO....... MCS!
I was always a big fan of science and of course, the Scientific Method. For those not familiar with it, and as a contemporary shaper you must be....... You must.... Recognize a problem. Develop a Hypothesis as to why it exists. Test your Hypothesis via experiments. Analyze the results. Alter your Hypothesis if need be. Test again. Analyze. Alter Hypothesis. Test. Analyze. Continue until the results from your experiments and your Hypothesis form an accurate explaination for the Problem existing and strongly indicate or create a solution for the problem.
Without having a way to reasonably measure the complete board and the skills to shape accurately to detailed measurements. There was really no way to truly test one Hypothesis against another.
Aloha Bill
I have long enjoyed your various posts on Swaylocks about your measurement driven design methodology.
I would like to hear your your thoughts in general about scaling boards boards upwards or downwards lengthwise.
For example, I plan to scale down my one of my favorite guns from 9'2" to 8'6".
Existing dimensions are: 9'2" long x 20 3/4" wide x 11 1/2" nose width x 11/2" tail width x 3.5" thick, quad fins
Proposed dimensions are: 8'6" long x 3 3/8" thick (hopefully), width undecided, multi system fins (quad/tri).
I would like to keep about 3 3/8" of thickness to conserve as much volume as possible.
My existing 9'2" is right on the bulls-eye, to use your sniper metaphor. It's my go-to board for double overhead beach break and sand bottom points.
I also use it in head-high waves if it's crowded, otherwise I'm on a shortboard.
Conditions are often raw, choppy, sideshore windy, hollow, with strong currents and lots of paddling. Occasionally lined-up and firing.
I am 5'10 tall x 150 pounds. Average ability. 64 years old. Surf an average 10 to 12 times per month. Size 8 1/2 feet.
My quiver consists of variations of round pins from 6"6" to 10'0"
My objective with the 8'6" is to use it for the same conditions as the 9'2" - going shorter to increase manueverability, plus fit the curve of the wave better.
Predictable feel and "no surprises" when I spin around and take off are key for me.
What dimensions would you recommend for overall width, nose width and tail width and thickness for the new 8'6"?
I assume my friend and local gunsmith, using his CAD/CAM setup, can manage the proportions of the complex curves (template, rocker, rails, foil, etc.) as length is reduced.
Some dimensions for overall width, nose width, tail width and thickness would be a big help in keeping the design process on track.
Any suggestions and/or dimensions you can offer would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks in advance
Laky
Typo correction regarding tail width
Existing dimensions are: 9'2" long x 20 3/4" wide x 11 1/2" nose width x 11/2" tail width x 3.5" thick, quad fins
Should read
Existing dimensions are: 9'2" long x 20 3/4" wide x 11 1/2" nose width x 11 1/2" tail width x 3.5" thick, quad fins
Great thread....
One more hot seat rule: If you feel absolutely complelled to ask the guest about a specific shape you are working on, please keep it to ONE QUESTION.
Thank you!
Good rule.
Or maybe start a new thread. It would be best to focus your Hotseat questions on topics that many people prople can benefit from.
Personally I'm always ready to learn, although I do not always like being taught. - Winston Churchill
http://markmillerconstruction.com
Aloha everysurfer
Good question..... hard to answer. The reason is, is that over the years, I have come to learn that I often see things quite differently then other people and I form ways of doing things differenlty because of it. That said, I often get questions that are totally logical to ask but are phrased in ways that are hard for me to answer. Usually it is because the questions contain deep attachments to certain ways of thinking and perceiving things that are very familiar to the asker.
I try to always see things different and to frame them up in my mind in ways that are designed to break up habits, beliefs and presumptions. Since I am always beating myself up in these ways, it is often hard for me to reach in and express myself on a subject in a way that will be comfortable for the asker to hear.
I don't know how others view rockers. But I can tell by the way you have phrased your question, that you have a way of viewing rockers and you feel like maybe a majority of others do likewise.
I understand this view and don't disagree with it. But personally, I don't really break down rockers in that way. I don't design them so distinctively in 3 parts. I look at the whole curve and the total rocker amounts. All waves and riders require or desire certain kinds of rockers. Matching them up correctly is the challenge.
If we have to think in 3 parts..... Of the overall curve, the most important part is the middle as it governs the boards ability to plane well and move through the water comfortably. Without this the board will be an instant dog. The nose and tail are adjusted as needed to match waves and riders.
I don't think in terms of percentages or formulas that can be described easily. I view the flow, it is a more artistic approach. It can be described in numbers and needs to be for replecation, but it is the visualization that is the core creative process.
There is so much more to say about this and I have some great examples to clarify the importance of each. Maybe I can get back to each of these questions and further my comments to forthcoming questions or comments.
For now I have to run into Honolulu for errands and will post more tonight.
.
Sorry to everyone for being so out of touch the last few days. Shaun's board is now done and will packed and taken to the airport in a few minutes. When I get back in a few hours, I will be free to spend more time here and will answer questions more promptly and with better focus and time.
Hi Bill,
First of all, thanks for doing this.
1. You've listed developing, and then watching others use your Measurement Control System as one of your greatest board-building accomplishments. But after a bit of Googling I can't turn up a full description of it. I've seen some descriptions (from others) of your rocker measurement at the stringer technique, but that's about it.
I'd really appreciate it if you could give us the full run-down on MCS as I believe it's still very relevant to backyarders these days; even though using software to get a pre-shape turned out on a machine has become fairly accessible nowadays for the DIY'er, if we come across a board we'd like to measure up, getting a board scanned or traced on a machine with a scribing tool is not as easy. Let alone trying to do it in the carpark after a surf and in the time it takes for the board's owner to go grab a coffee, drink it and come back again.
Mind you, if you've already described your system in full on Swaylocks and if anyone has a link to the thread it happened in, please post it so poor old Bill doesn't have to retype everything again.
2. You've managed to get out and play a lot over the course of your life (e.g. Surfing, MTB'ing, sailing, etc, etc), do you have any tips for others on how to accomplish this and still manage to keep the wife & kids happy(ish).
I asked Greg Loehr essentially the same thing while he was in the Hot Seat; his response was that getting out for a quick 30-minute surf most days (regardless of conditions) after work kept the surf-withdrawal symptoms in check.
But that just covers getting the minimum time in the water to deal with surf-withdrawal; most people want to get out and do as much as they possibly can (as it appears you've managed to do) and in as many different ways/sports/recreational past-times as they can. What tips have you got on how to accomplish that?
And y'know what, it'd be interesting to hear from Wendy on this topic too (a user-name like "Boss-o-Barnfield" might be the most accurate :) ) in order to hear their perspective on the matter, what they're willing to accept, or not, and most importantly, why. Sometimes the answers to that are surprising and allow you to figure out a way to accomplish what you were hoping to do and still manage to keep both parties happy (the key is you've got to ask in the first place).
On the other hand though, it might also be true that in some cases it would be better if the missus remained none-the-wiser as to some of the techniques you've figured out for playing with your various toys as much as possible; that info probably belongs in PM's to those interested, or perhaps posted in a "Secret Men's Business" forum (assuming Swaylocks has such a thing). I'll leave it up to you.
Cheers!
Aloha L.I.T
I will answer your questions in a few separate replies. First some clarification and back story. I have past training and experience as a machinist. Everything in that world is machined to specific dimensions and tolerances. So, quite naturally, it was fairly normal for me to see surfboards in similar ways. Difficulte to do early on, due to hand and eye not being able to follow the blueprint that was in my head. As that improved, and it does quickly using MCS, I was able to shape to tighter and tighter tolerances and do so faster and faster.
Powerful as this was, the reasons for doing so weren't really necessary yet, nor was the need as obvious as it was soon to be.
Compared to today, design and shaping was more of a magic art and social endeavor. It was mostly a lot of guessing and shooting in the dark until real improvement was stumbled upon or one came up with a good marketing line to get them off the hook. Board dimensions were petty much limited to Length, Max Thickness and Template Widths. These original measurements, though important, were severely limiting compared to the full number sets needed to describle a board and hopefully predict its function through the use of the Scientific Method.
Have you ever noticed how certain things just can't happen until there is a complimentary convergence of several diverse factors. And once the "Thing" happens, all kinds of new offshoots to that thing also happen. GoPro is a classic example. It couldn't exist successfully without there first being ..... The removal of Social constraints against Narcissisim and Voyerism. YouTube and FaceBook being created. Digital imaging. Then Digital Video. Digital Compression allowing HD Video..... Then.... BINGO...... GoPro!
Similarily several factors converged to make MCS necessary. Not the least of which was Pro Surfing and the economics associated with it.
The limited data set that was known and compiled to describe boards before MCS was inadequate to solve the emerging needs of Pro Surfers who needed better ways to guarantee their boards performance so as to payback the investments of their sponsors with more consistent finishes on the podium........ BINGO....... MCS!
I was always a big fan of science and of course, the Scientific Method. For those not familiar with it, and as a contemporary shaper you must be....... You must.... Recognize a problem. Develop a Hypothesis as to why it exists. Test your Hypothesis via experiments. Analyze the results. Alter your Hypothesis if need be. Test again. Analyze. Alter Hypothesis. Test. Analyze. Continue until the results from your experiments and your Hypothesis form an accurate explaination for the Problem existing and strongly indicate or create a solution for the problem.
Without having a way to reasonably measure the complete board and the skills to shape accurately to detailed measurements. There was really no way to truly test one Hypothesis against another.
More Later.........
Pages